Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
A study of California public school district superintendents and their implementation of 21st century skills
(USC Thesis Other)
A study of California public school district superintendents and their implementation of 21st century skills
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Running head: A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL i
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENTS AND
THEIR IMPLEMENTATION OF 21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS
by
Scheherazade Mohazab
_____________________________________________________________________
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2014
Copyright 2014 Scheherazade Mohazab
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
ii
Dedication
Completing a dissertation while you have a teenager at home is not an easy task. I admire
my daughter, Soraya, for putting up with me during a time when I was mostly glued to the
computer writing papers or reading articles. Her unconditional understanding and patience are
beyond admirable and gave me the support I needed.
Secondly, I thank my mother who took care of Soraya on my cohort nights. She fought
the horrendous, evening traffic on the 2-mile stretch from her home to Soraya’s school to pick
her up and bring her back to her home so that Soraya would have dinner, a place to do her
homework, and a place to stay overnight while I was at USC. Without this selfless support I
would not have been able to pursue this degree and finish it in the amount of time I did.
Lastly, I deeply thank my friend Katy, whose encouragement helped me join the program
when I was confronted with doubt and who never ceased to point out the progress I had made
along the way.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL iii
Acknowledgments
I would like to express my sincerest thanks to all individuals who motivated, encouraged,
supported, and challenged me throughout the dissertations process. First, I would like to
recognize the significant contribution of my dissertation chair, Dr. Pedro Garcia, and my
committee members Dr. Rudy Castruita and Dr. Allison Nordyke who provided invaluable
feedback. Dr. Garcia provided me with insight into district leadership in ways I could not have
imagined and thus provided me with the knowledge and motivation to be able to venture out and
be a leader in ways that would benefit and include all children.
I also thank the superintendents who participated in this study and who gave me valuable
time out of their busy schedules to provide insight into their districts. Their immediate
willingness and their generous contribution of time and information constituted an unanticipated
and true act of kindness.
Lastly, I would like to thank my dissertation group members George Cheung, Patrick
Gittisriboongul, Crystal Turner, and Suzy Kim Zeitler for making the process much more
enjoyable and easier than it would have been had we each written a dissertation on our own. In
the process we established deep friendships and kept each other motivated and held each other
accountable in keeping that end goal in mind.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL iv
Table of Contents
Dedication ii
Acknowledgments iii
List of Tables vii
Abstract viii
Preface ix
Chapter One - Overview of the Study 1
Introduction 1
Statement of the Problem 4
Purpose of the Study 5
Research Questions 5
Significance of the Study 5
Summary of Methodology 6
Assumptions 6
Limitations 6
Delimitations 7
Definitions of Related Terms 7
Chapter Two - Literature Review 10
Overview 10
Globalization 10
Globalization and Education 11
Implications of Globalization on American Education 12
Economic and Business Impact 13
21
st
Century Skills 18
Access and Analysis 20
Problem Solving and Critical Thinking Skills 23
Communications (Written and Oral) 25
Collaboration Across Networks and Leading by Influence, 28
Curiosity, and Imagination
Agility and Adaptability 31
Initiative and Entrepreneurship 33
Superintendents as Instructional Leaders 36
Chapter Three - Methodology 41
Introduction 41
Research Design 43
Sample and Population 43
Instrument Validity 44
Instrumentation 44
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
ix
Qualitative Data 45
Quantitative Data 45
Data Collection 46
Qualitative Data 46
Quantitative Data 47
Data Analysis Procedures 47
Ethical Considerations 49
Chapter Four - Findings 50
Introduction 50
Purpose 51
Methodology, Qualitative, and Quantitative Data 51
Response Rate 51
Responses to Research Question 1 54
A Clear and Simple Definition of 21
st
Century Skills with the 55
Board as a Catalyst
Discussion 57
Responses to Research Question 2 58
The Role of Writing and Technology in 21
st
Century Learning 58
Professional Learning Communities 60
Communication to Increase Buy-in 63
Discussion 64
Responses to Research Question 3 65
Involving the Five Top Stakeholders in Meaningful Ways 66
Teachers 67
School-based Administrators 68
District-level Personnel 68
School Boards 69
Parents and the Community 70
Discussion 72
Responses to Research Question 4 72
Monitor Reporting and Formal Assessment 73
Informal Evaluation and Formative Assessment 74
Discussion 75
Emerging Themes 76
A Clear and Simple Definition of 21
st
Century Skills with the 76
Board as a Catalyst
The Role of Writing and Technology in 21
st
Century Learning 76
Communication to Increase Buy-in 77
The Role of Professional Learning Communities and Professional 77
Development
Involving the Five Top Stakeholders in Meaningful Ways 78
Evaluation Strategies in Sustaining the Change Process 78
Chapter Five – Conclusions 79
Introduction 79
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
ix
Summary of Findings 80
Limitations 83
Implications for Practice 83
Recommendations for Future Research 84
Conclusion 85
References 86
Appendices
Appendix A: Interview Protocol 94
Appendix B: Survey Instrument 95
Appendix C: Interview Cover Letter 97
Appendix D: Audio Recording Consent Form 98
Appendix E: Survey Cover Letter 99
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL vii
List of Tables
Table 1: Quantitative Survey: Response Rate
Table 2: Quantitative Survey: Highest Educational Attainment
Table 3: Quantitative Survey: Superintendent Experience in Current District
Table 4: Qualitative Interview: Characteristics for Superintendents and Districts
Table 5: Factors Influencing Implementation of Reform with a Focus on 21
st
Century Learning
Table 6: Superintendent Rating of Stakeholder Importance to 21
st
Century Skill Implementation
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL viii
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to provide direction and intellectual resources to superintendents
and other district leaders to plan the implementation of 21
st
Century skills based on Wagner’s
(2008) definition of these skills. More specifically, this study set out to determine: 1) how CA
superintendents define 21
st
Century skills, 2) how CA superintendents implement 21
st
Century
skills, 3) who the key stakeholders are that superintendents need to implement 21
st
Century
skills, and 4) what strategies CA superintendents use to evaluate the effectiveness of the
implementation. This study implemented a mixed-methods approach in which 35 CA
superintendents completed a survey. Additionally, 10 other superintendents participated in a
structured interview. Through the process of triangulation, the study’s findings indicated that
Californian superintendents whose districts have implemented 21
st
Century learning have
brought about the transition through a collaborative, hands-on, and empowering leadership style
where 21
st
Century skills have been defined in a clear and simple manner, backed by their board,
and which involve multiple stakeholders. Furthermore, these superintendents also made it a
priority to provide their staff with the resources and professional development needed to
implement 21
st
Century learning. Under their leadership, these urban superintendents have set the
stage to access all curricular areas through literacy, specifically writing, to be able to access the
other standards currently being developed. The superintendents also reported that they regularly
assess, evaluate, and report the progress of their programs. Overall, this study provides many
excellent pointers and strategies for superintendents looking to implement 21
st
Century learning
in their districts.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
ix
Preface
Some of the chapters of this dissertation were coauthored and have been identified as
such. While jointly authored dissertations are not the norm of most doctoral programs, a
collaborative effort is reflective of real-world practices. To meet their objective of developing
highly skilled practitioners equipped to take on real-world challenges, the USC Graduate School
and the USC Rossier School of Education have permitted our inquiry team to carry out this
shared venture.
This dissertation is part of a collaborative project with four other doctoral candidates,
Susie Chow, George Cheung, Patrick Gittisriboongul, and Crystal Turner. We five doctoral
students met various superintendents in an effort to provide direction and intellectual resources
to other superintendents and district leaders to plan the implementation of 21
st
Century skills,
which are in high demand for today’s workforce. Employers are currently facing the challenges
of employees who do not possess these 21
st
Century Skills. However, the process of collecting
and analyzing the data was too large for a single dissertation. As a result, we each interviewed
several superintendents and collectively analyzed our data.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
1
Chapter One
Overview of the Study
Authors: Susie Chow, George Cheung, Patrick Gittisriboongul, Scheherazade Mohazab,
Crystal Turner
1
“The illiterate of the 21
st
Century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those
who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn.” – Alvin Toffler, 2006
Introduction
The United States has long since viewed its schooling system and the students
who are produced from it as a sign of national excellence. Most parents feel positively
about their child’s school and believe that any issues that may exist with schools must be
in different areas than their own. School employees, from the Superintendent to the
teachers, believe that they are all working hard to provide students with the best possible
education.
However, the public’s view of education is not always positive. Twenty years ago
Gardner (1983) released an open paper, A Nation at Risk, to the American people stating
that the nation was at risk because the once unchallenged preeminence in commerce,
industry, science, and technological innovation was being overtaken by competitors
throughout the world. This report was concerned with only one of the many causes and
dimensions of the problem, but it was the one that undergirded American prosperity,
security, and civility. The report further stated to the people that while the United States
could take justifiable pride in what its schools and colleges had historically accomplished
1
This chapter was jointly written by the authors listed, reflecting the team approach to this project. The
authors are listed alphabetically, reflecting the equal amount of work by all those listed.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
2
and contributed to the country and the well-being of its people, the educational
foundations of its society were being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatened
the very future of this Nation and its people. What was unimaginable a generation ago
had begun to occur - others were matching and surpassing American educational
experiences.
Almost thirty years later, Gurría, (2010), Organisation for Economic Co-operation
and development (OECD) Secretary-General, reports that the U.S. still comes out as an
average performer in reading (rank 14 in OECD) and science (rank 17) but the United
States has dropped below the OECD average in mathematics (rank 25). It is not so much
that American students are slipping but rather that other countries are surpassing us.
Furthermore, Gurria reports, there is a wide gap between the top 10% and the bottom
10% of 15-year olds in the U.S, similar to that observed between top and bottom
performing Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) countries.
Thus, a combination of the failure to meet No Child Left Behind (NCLB) goal of
100 percent proficiency in both Math and English Language Arts for all students, the
United States’ inadequate ranking against other countries on international tests such as
PISA (2013), and the encouragement from the business community provided an impetus
to the education community to reconsider their educational practices. Wagner (2010)
cites that only 70 percent of the United States’ high school seniors are graduating from
the K-12 system and when compared to Denmark, who boasts a 96 percent rate, and
Japan with 93 percent, the American statistics are found lacking. The students produced
from American schools are not college and career ready. As a result of the deficient
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
3
statistics, the term “21
st
Century skills” has become a requisite part of the K-12
educator’s vocabulary. Replacing the current Standardized Testing and Reporting
(STAR) test with a Next Generation assessment based on the new Common Core State
Standards has forced districts to reexamine current practices. School districts are
grappling with how to train their administrators and teaching staffs to implement
practices to prepare students for the new assessments beginning in the 2014-15 school
year.
21
st
Century skills are also be essential as the students of our educational system
are increasingly competing against students from the outside global community for jobs.
Dede (2010) describes the main difference between 20
th
Century skills and 21
st
Century
skills as primarily due to the new technology and information available to the general
public. Students are required to not only use technology in their careers but also be able
to mine through the massive amounts of information available on the Internet. Another
need for 21
st
Century skills is the increasing number of jobs currently being assumed by
computers and other technologies, replacing humans (Jerald, 2009). This explains the
need for graduating students to be prepared for different types of careers.
Jerald (2009) explains how globalization breaks down the barriers between
nations and the potential jobs in America are no longer limited to Americans. This
increases the level of competition for available jobs. Businesses surveyed said that if
students do graduate from college, only 50 percent of college graduates are prepared for
the workforce (Wagner, 2010). This statistic encourages businesses to look outside of the
United States to fill positions. These are just a few of the deficiencies listed in the
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
4
research and all combine to suggest that changes need to be made within the schooling
system.
Wagner (2010) claims that when observing classrooms, that students are not
necessarily receiving a poor education, just that it is the same education that was received
by students 50 to 100 years ago. While the world around students has changed, the
environment inside the classroom has remained the same. All of these factors combine to
require different educational practices.
Thus, in order to ensure the economic security and success of our students,
districts and schools need to adjust to provide students with a more relevant education.
As such, reforms that fall under the 21
st
Century skills umbrella such as the Common
Core State Standards, the four C’s (Communication, Collaboration, Creativity, and
Critical Thinking), and STEAM initiatives (Science, Technology, Engineering, the Arts,
and Mathematics), are in need of implementation at the K-12 level.
Statement of the Problem
While there have been many studies on 21
st
Century education—its necessity to
compete in the global economy, building up critical thinking skills, sparking curiosity,
and encouraging innovation—little is known about the characteristics and strategies of
superintendents who implement 21
st
Century skills in their respective school districts.
The following study will examine several California superintendents’ implementation of
21
st
Century skills in the K-12 public school system.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
5
Purpose of the Study
The findings from the research will provide superintendents and other district
leaders with the direction and intellectual resources to plan their own implementation of
21
st
Century skills as defined by Wagner (2008). Key stakeholders and their roles for
implementation will be identified. Evaluation of the 21
st
Century skills implementation
will also be provided in this report.
Research Questions
The following questions guided the study:
1. How do CA Superintendents define 21st Century skills?
2. How do CA Superintendents implement 21
st
Century skills?
3. Who are the key stakeholders needed for Superintendents to implement 21st Century
skills in a California K-12 system?
4. What strategies do California Superintendents use to evaluate the effectiveness of the
implementation?
Significance of the Study
This study adds to the current body of scholarly literature identifying how
California superintendents implement 21
st
Century skills, as defined by Wagner (2008),
into their districts. This will provide the support and ideas necessary for other
superintendents who are trying to implement 21
st
Century teaching and learning into their
school districts. These findings may also provide useful information to Curriculum and
Instruction departments as they look to support the vision of their own superintendent.
The goal of reporting the implementation process of these skills will also potentially lead
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
6
to student success in the global marketplace.
Summary of Methodology
A mixed-methods design was used to examine the proposed research questions.
A case study format was used to collect the qualitative data. Interviews were conducted
with five superintendents to provide in depth responses to the research questions. The
interview protocol included (Appendix A). Quantitative data was collected in the form of
a survey with 21 questions (Appendix B). The questionnaire was sent to superintendents
of public school districts in California. The multiple superintendents and their responses
form the triangulation required for research (Merriam, 2009).
Assumptions
The study assumed the following:
1. Superintendent leadership is essential to the implementation of new initiatives.
2. Superintendents will be able to identify and communicate how they are implementing
21
st
Century skills.
3. The chosen procedures and methods are appropriate.
4. The information gathered will sufficiently address the research questions.
Limitations
The study included the following limitations:
1. The validity of the data was reliant upon the chose instruments of the measurement.
2. The ability to gain access to superintendents.
3. The ability or willingness of superintendents to provide accurate responses.
4. With so little scholarly research on the implementation of 21
st
Century skills, it is
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
7
difficult to find a shared, narrow definition.
5. The ability to gain access to superintendents.
6. The ability or willingness of superintendents to provide accurate responses.
7. Only interviewing superintendents in Southern California.
Delimitations
The delimitations of this study were:
1. Interviews were limited to ten superintendents who have been in the position for more
than two years.
2. The many varied definitions of 21
st
Century skills required the research from this
dissertation to select one main definition. The research will focus on the definition of
21
st
Century skills provided by Wagner (2008).
Definitions of Related Terms
• 21
st
Century skills: The skills needed by students in order to compete in the global
workforce and economy and include topics like, critical thinking, collaboration,
adaptability, initiative, effective written and oral communication, accessing and
analyzing information, and curiosity and imagination (Wagner, 2006)
• Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP): Statewide accountability system mandates by NCLB
which requires every state to ensure AYP percentages to make district and school wide
AYP.
• Common Core State Standards (CCSS): These standards were designed to be adopted
nationally so that all states are teaching the same standards. Instead of focusing on
objective-based learning, CCSS focuses on learning less standards, but developing a
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
8
much deeper understanding of the content. Fewer standards will allow for more
thorough instruction.
• Elementary and Secondary Act (ESEA): originally passed in 1965 and emphasizes
equality in education with high standards and accountability (Dept. of Ed. Website)
• Globalization: Countries become more integrated in goods, capital, ideas, and labor
• Next Generation Assessments (NGA): This test will replace the STAR in California.
California has chosen Smarter Balanced as the company who will create the NGA.
This test will be a predictive assessment, giving students the test on the computer,
which will allow for different levels of questions based on the student’s answers.
• No Child Left Behind (NCLB): - The federal government’s current reauthorization of
ESEA which for the purpose of this research, holds schools accountable for the scores
of subgroup AYP scores with a goal of 100 percent proficient for all students by 2014
(Dept. of Ed. Website)
• OECD – The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development is a group of
30 countries whose mission is to promote policies that will improve the economic and
social well-being of people around the world. The OECD provides a forum in which
governments can work together to share experiences and seek solutions to common
problems. The OECD’s importance for this study is that it administers and analyzes
the PISA tests every four years (OECD, 2013).
• Partnership for 21
st
Century Skill (P21): An organization focused on bringing together
a network of major businesses and community leaders, policymakers, and educators to
change educational practice
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
9
• Program for International Student Assessment-International (PISA): assessment of 15
year olds reading, math, and science skills. It is conducted every three years.
• Project based learning (PBL): a student-driven yet teacher-facilitated approach to
learning (Bell, 2010)
• Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC): A state-led consortium developing
the assessments aligned with the CCSS.
• Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR): California’s statewide standardized
assessment. This test fulfills the requirements of NCLB and provides the AYP and
API scores.
• The Four Cs - Collaboration, Critical Thinking, Creativity, and Communication:
Students need to learn more than the “3 Rs”- Reading, Writing, and Arithmetic to be
successful in the global community. The Four Cs were added to enhance instruction to
make students competitive in the global marketplace
• Wagner’s 21
st
Century skills: These skills describe what will be needed for students to
be competitive in the global workforce. These skills extend beyond the California
State Standards and include problem-solving and critical thinking, collaboration across
networks and leading by influence, agility and adaptability, initiative and
entrepreneurship, effective written and oral communication, accessing and analyzing
information, and curiosity and imagination.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
10
Chapter Two
Literature Review
Authors: Susie Chow, George Cheung, Patrick Gittisriboongul, Scheherazade Mohazab,
Crystal Turner
2
Overview
In investigating the research related to this case study, a review of literature was
conducted to explore the availability of supporting resources related to the leadership
practices of K-12 superintendents’ implementation and use of 21
st
Century skills in
California public schools. For the sake of definition, Wagner’s definition of 21
st
Century
skills will be used for discussion (2008). In reviewing the literature, information was
analyzed to better support understanding of the six following areas related to the three
research questions: (1) globalization; (2) history of education; (3) focus on California
education; (4) economic and business impact; (5) 21
st
Century skills frameworks and; (6)
leadership for reform.
Globalization
The concept of globalization, “the process whereby countries become more
integrated via movement of goods, capital, labor, and ideas,” is not a new phenomenon
(Bloom, 2004). The ongoing process of globalization varies in different regions around
the world (Bloom, 2004). Guillen (2001) described globalization as process in which
stakeholders “converge towards a homogeneous organizational pattern of ‘best practice’
or ‘optimal efficiency’.” Coe et al. (2007) described globalization as the agent that
2
This chapter was jointly written by the authors listed, reflecting the team approach to this project. The
authors are listed alphabetically, reflecting the equal amount of work by all those listed.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
11
“makes the world a smaller place,” where distance is no longer an obstacle in obtaining
goods, services, and ideas (p. 32).
Globalization and Education
Bloom (2004) linked educational globalization to the global economy. The three
main channels in which globalization works in conjunction with education are: economy,
“cross-national communication,” and the speed of change (Bloom, 2004). Bloom (2004)
argued that the global economy thrives when global education is on the rise. As much as
this true, it is recognized too that however “globalized” education is, there are many
inequities in terms of quality and access for certain countries, particularly third world
countries. Though higher education facilities in third world countries may utilize current
and relevant curricula, local classrooms in primary and secondary education facilities
continue to utilize outdated curricula. This showed that though globalization has
permeated education, the actual classroom has remained under the radar (Carnoy &
Rohten, 2002). In order to truly assess globalization’s impact on education, research
must be done on globalization’s relationship to the “overall delivery of school, from
transnational paradigms, to national policies, to local practices,” not a single institution or
a certain population’s test scores (Carnoy & Rohten, 2002, p. 2).
The “cross-national communication” (2004) referred to “bringing nations
together” (p. 68) through international trade, commerce, mobility, and education. Bloom
(2004) described “good education” to be one that promotes inclusivity and encourages
students to develop knowledge and skills that are applicable beyond their own culture or
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
12
country’s needs. As students are exposed to this type of education, the process of
globalization quickens.
Migration and immigration are also key assets of globalization to both the home
country and the new country. As immigrants settle in a new country, they bring their
own ideals, customs, and traditions. In return, a wealth of new knowledge is also sent
back to their home countries. This too, speeds up the process of globalization (Levitt,
1996). Levitt would most probably agree that California is at an advantage being an
immigrant state and thus globalization should happen faster in this state.
The goal of globalization is to create a more connected world through various
avenues, ultimately to affect change in different capacities. Bloom (2004) argued that
faster globalization will result in quicker and greater change. The largest impact on the
speed of globalization is education. This is not to be mistaken with the fact that
education cannot function alone to further globalization, but that education is necessary
and vital to the process (Bloom, 2004).
Implications of Globalization on American Education
Globalization places growing pressure on American workers (Freeman, 2007).
Approximately 85% of middle class jobs and 90% of “fastest-growing, high-paying” jobs
require a postsecondary degree (Wagner, 2008). Bottery (2006) asserted that American
globalism is a strong force around the world, yet according to PISA, the US trails behind
education nations such as Korea, Finland, and Japan. In order for the US to be
competitive in the global market, proficiency in basic knowledge and skills, such as math,
reading, writing, and foreign languages do not suffice. The emphasis is no longer on
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
13
what students know, rather, what students can do with the information, otherwise known
as, “applied skills” or 21
st
Century skills (Silva, 2008). The integration of 21
st
Century
skills to core curriculum is vital for students looking to see success in postsecondary
education and the workforce both at home and abroad (Silva, 2008).
Economic and Business Impact
To meet the demands of the new global economy, 21
st
Century skills have become
a necessity for students today. Technological innovation and new requirements posed by
the global economy have created a world that is more interconnected and diverse, where
information is readily available from anywhere in the world. Superintendents must lead
and develop their schools in ways that reflect understanding of a rapidly changing and
developing economy. This thinking challenges traditional school leadership to rapidly
reform teaching and learning to keep current with global, societal and economic needs.
Businesses and industry have clearly indicated that they need employees that are
well prepared in order to be a productive part of a global workforce in the knowledge
economy. Black and Lynch (2004) and Zoghi, Mohr, and Meyer (2007) detailed how
organizations have changed their approach to doing business and how employees have
increased responsibility and contribution in order to meet the demands of today’s
competitive economy. The Partnership for 21
st
Century Skills (2008), an organization
focused on bringing together a network of major businesses and community leaders,
policymakers, and educators to change educational practice, indicated that about 54
percent of the United States economy was centered on the production of material goods
and services in 1967. In contrast, about 63 percent of the United States economy had
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
14
moved to an information-based service economy thirty years later in 1997 (Partnership
for 21st Century Skills, 2008). From 1995 to 2005, 17 million service-sector jobs were
created, and over 3 million manufacturing jobs were lost (Partnership for 21st Century
Skills, 2008).
In a report published by the Partnership for 21st Century Skills and titled 21st
Century Knowledge and Skills in Educator Preparation, Greenhill (2010) outlined the
importance of developing 21st Century skills to support students’ preparation in an
increasingly competitive global market. In this report, Greenhill (2010) identified three
issues that drove the need for change in the American educational system. These three
issues were identified as the following: (1) the dual achievement gap; (2) shifting
economy and labor market and; (3) shifting labor demands.
Greenhill (2010) also explained how the shift from an industrial economy to a
service-based economy has created a labor market demand for individuals who are
knowledgeable and creative in thought. As a result, Greenhill (2010) advocated that
American schools promote the understanding of the 21st Century interdisciplinary
themes, which he identified as global awareness, economic literacy, civic literacy, health
literacy and environmental literacy. Greenhill (2010) suggested that educators take the
following actions to better support this learning by all students: (1) integrate technology
to support academic content; (2) establish standards based instruction; (3) utilize varied
methods of instructional delivery; (4) coach and mentor peers and: (5) differentiate
student assessment strategies.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
15
Three major business surveys were also identified in the literature that itemized
the work skills important for employment in the 21st Century. A survey of employers by
the Partnership for 21st Century Skills (2008), found the top skills employers sought were
professionalism, teamwork, oral communication, ethics and social responsibility, and
reading comprehension. Its report determined that community and business leaders,
policymakers, and educators needed to work together so future workers would have the
workplace skills necessary to succeed.
Koc and Koncz (2009) performed the second survey as part of their work with the
National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE). Their survey supported the
previous study in its 2009 NACE Research Report: Job Outlook 2010. As they explained,
businesses and employers have increased their expectations for potential employees,
hiring fewer people and expecting them to do more. However, businesses do continue to
seek employees with specific and specialized skills. Koc and Koncz (2009) indicated that
the top skills sought by employers included analytical, teamwork, communication and
technical skills with strong work ethics.
In 2006, the New Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce—a group
of business leaders, governors, school chancellors, and former secretaries of labor and
education—released a follow-up to its 1990 report on the nation’s educational and
economic challenges. The message of the 2006 report indicated that basic skills were
necessary but not sufficient (National Center on Education, 2007). The commission’s
report described how global competition and technology have changed the game for
American workers. The commission asserted that students needed a strong foundation of
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
16
basic skills but that alone was no longer enough for economic and job security. As they
explained, job security could only exist in a world where ideas and abstractions are the
path to a job, where creativity and innovation are crucial for a good life, and where high
levels of education are offered (National Center on Education, 2007).
Numerous studies on the global economy and the “flat” world documented that
tomorrow’s workers must be ready to change jobs and careers more frequently, to be
adaptable in acquiring job skills, and to incorporate job-embedded and education-
acquired knowledge on business processes and problems (Friedman, 2007). Friedman
(2007) indicated that the global labor force has doubled from what it was when China and
India first opened their economies to the world. He explained that the application of
information technology to the very core of business operations has caused a profound
shift in the needed skills of workers. The global market, he explained, is rewarding those
who have high educational achievement and technical skills. The worker of the 21st
Century must have science and mathematics skills, creativity, fluency in information and
communication technologies, and the ability to solve complex problems. As the global
economy continues to evolve, studies have shown that workers will change jobs and
careers seven or eight times. To be competitive, Friedman (2007) asserted, Americans
will have to engage in lifelong learning to update their education and job skills and think
of themselves as competing with everyone in the world. Clearly, Friedman further
contends, the future economic security and well-being of American workers seems to be
tied to educational achievement.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
17
The other concerns centered on the downward trend of student test scores
educated in America and the general lack of preparation for living and working in the
21st Century (Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2007). It has been widely documented
that students, especially urban students, graduating from public schools in the United
States are not prepared for work in an increasingly more global society.
Globalization has contributed to increased communications regarding students’
educational achievements and student data on an international level that has resulted in
comparative data. United States students’ mediocre to low performance on international
tests is often cited as the reason that students should be globally competitive and that
education should ensure that students have superior advantage in the global economy.
In 1983, A Nation at Risk announced a crisis in American public education due to
the mediocrity of public schools. According to Wagner (2008), America’s economic
security was threatened by a labor force that was no longer competitive in the global
marketplace. Global competition in the United States continues to be linked to the global
economy and to concerns that students in the US are being outscored and surpassed in
other countries, especially India and China in the areas of math and science (Wagner,
2008).
International testing data can add to public concern that America’s students rank
low relative to those from other countries. Both government and university officials
warned that American schools must do more to prepare students for careers in science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), and develop broader perspectives on
culture, language, and geography. Thus, much of the impetus that makes global education
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
18
a topic of conversation today derives from economic, political and security concerns
(Wagner, 2008).
Schools are called to be more accountable for students’ success especially in the
areas of math and science. Stronger alliances with business communities are often forged
out of the mutual interest to produce students better prepared to work and compete in the
global economy (Wagner, 2008). 21
st
Century children in the United States need 21
st
Century skills to thrive as successful citizens, workers and leaders. There is a large gap
between the knowledge and skills most students learn in school and the knowledge and
skills that are needed to be successful in a global workplace or community (Partnership
for 21
st
Century skills, 2009). To bridge this gap, Partnership for 21
st
Century skills
(P21) has partnered with several states, including California, to reform education and
align classroom environments with contemporary standards. Hence, the new Common
Core State Standards have been created to address these 21
st
Century needs for students.
21
st
Century Skills
“Developing students who are independent enough to think critically about academic
subject matter and real-life problems is an educational objective of paramount importance
to our educational system as well as greater society.” Tsui (1999, p. 185)
In reviewing the literature on 21
st
Century skills, many definitions surfaced. Some
of these include, Wagner’s (2008) seven skills, the Partnership For 21
st
Century skills
(2010), and Rotherham and Willingham’s definition, (2010) to name a few. For the
purposes of this study, an in-depth review of Wagner’s (2008) seven skills was conducted
to further analyze the essential skills that students require to be successful.
In a report published by the National Association of Independent Schools (NAIS),
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
19
Witt (2010) reported that Wagner, from the Harvard Graduate School of Education, had
interviewed over 800 CEOs and asked them the essential question, “Which qualities will
our graduates need in the 21
st
Century for success in college, careers, and citizenship?”
The seven 21st Century skills Wagner (2008) defined that are needed to be competitive in
this global knowledge economy are a distillation of these hundreds of interviews. The
skills, which he claims only few American schools are nurturing, include, accessing and
analyzing information, problem-solving and critical thinking, effective written and oral
communication, collaboration across networks and leading by influence, and curiosity
and imagination, agility and adaptability, and initiative and entrepreneurship.
Simultaneously, U.S. Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan (2009) stated, “21
st
Century
skills are skills that increasingly demand creativity, perseverance and problem solving
combined with performing well as part of a team.” An important question, however, is
whether NCLB and 21st Century skills are contradictory or complementary. John Bailey,
Director of the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Educational Technology in the
Bush administration suggested that, “standardized tests can measure only a few of the
critical skills that we hope students will learn” (Salpeter, 2008). ISTE president Van
Dam concurred that, “Many districts are so overwhelmed and concerned about the NCLB
requirements and potential financial repercussions of not complying, that for most of
them the safest route is the back-to-basics approach focusing entirely on 20
th
Century
skills at the expense of 21st Century ones” (Salpeter, 2008). So, what are the strategies
and tools needed for students to be 21
st
Century ready?
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
20
Access and Analysis
According to Prensky (2001) commentators on education discussed the new
generation of learners that is entering our educational system. This new generation has
grown up with Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in their everyday
lives, differentiating them from previous generations and from their teachers and
educational institutions. Educational institutions must redesign themselves to
accommodate these “digital natives,” says Prensky (2001). Prensky defined the digital
natives as people who are immersed in technology, surrounded by video games, music,
smart phones, computers, and many other technology toys. Social researchers Howe and
Strauss (2000) defined this group as one with distinctive characteristics that sets them
apart from previous generations. These team-oriented achievers are talented with
technology and claim they will be America’s next great generation. Prensky also asserted
that this generation learns differently. They are active experiential learners, proficient in
multitasking, and dependent on communication technologies for accessing information
and for interacting with others. Furthermore, Prensky coined the people born before 1980
as “digital immigrants” who are radically different from the digital natives and many lack
the technological fluency the natives possess. Prensky claimed most teachers belong to
the digital immigrant group. Bennett, Maton, Kervin (2008) argued that although there
are calls for major changes in education, they have been subjected to little critical
scrutiny, are under-theorized, and lack a sound empirical basis. There is thus a pressing
need for theoretically informed research on how to use the potential of these “digital
natives” and prepare them through institutions and teachers who are 21
st
Century ready.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
21
According to Wagner (2008), with the advent of the 21
st
Century, media and
technology have exploded. Wagner further contends that the ability to analyze this
information and discern what is important and what is not is essential. Furthermore,
access to this information is no longer reserved for the elite in American society
(Wagner, 2010).
Future generations must have these basic skills as they compete against a global
community for employment (Wagner, 2010). Though global competition has existed for
centuries, the 21
st
Century has introduced many technologies that have propelled more
nations into global competitiveness. To maintain its status as a leading nation, the United
States must teach basic skills that include data analysis (Darling-Hammond, 2010). The
challenge for employers is the sheer amount of data that they must analyze in order to
help their organization grow. Employees must be ready to take the challenge of
collecting information and then have the skills to distinguish what is pertinent (Wagner,
2010). Wagner contends that companies are searching for individuals who have these
analysis skills (2010).
Though distinctly different from analysis, creativity and analysis actually work
together (Wagner, 2010). People must be able to think creatively to open up the
possibility of analyzing data in a variety of ways. This inquisitive mindset allows for
new solutions to be discovered. 21
st
Century employees will need to have the ability to
analyze data and information in order to identify new avenues, opportunities, and
challenges (Wagner, 2010). It is no longer a luxury but a necessity for individuals to be
able to reason, analyze, weigh evidence, and problem solve. These skills must be
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
22
mastered to be effective in the work place (Wagner, 2010). Companies have moved from
a top-down approach to management to a more collaborative model. Analysis of data has
become even more important in this process as employees need to decipher which
information needs to be shared with their team (Wagner, 2010).
Robinson (1999) claimed that these analytical skills must be taught within the K-
12 education system while students must learn to be inquisitive and analyze information.
Wagner (2010) further pointed out that, unfortunately, as students continue through the
education system, they become less and less inquisitive, ask fewer questions and exhibit
apathy towards learning. This poses a dilemma in the 21
st
Century where the skills of
analysis are necessary to survive in a highly competitive and global market. Students
need to be engaged in learning and education should stimulate and nurture an atmosphere
of creativity and inquiry (Robinson, 1999). Students need to be challenged and given
other innovative learning methods in preparation for the workforce (Wagner, 2010).
School standards continue to impede students’ ability to master analysis skills. Heavy
emphasis has been placed on state standards that do not focus on analysis but on
memorization. Standardized testing must also be revisited regarding its effectiveness in
helping students achieve an understanding for analysis (Robinson, 1999). High-stakes
testing must assess whether students can apply knowledge to new problems and situations
(Wagner, 2010). Yet, Wagner asserts, schools have not changed fundamentally for
decades.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
23
Problem solving and critical thinking skills
Critical thinking (CT), or “the ability to engage in 5ful, self-regulatory judgment,”
is widely recognized as an important, even essential, skill (Abrami, et al., 2008). Abrami
et al. further insisted that most educators would agree that critical thinking is one of the
most desirable outcomes of formal schooling. CT involves thinking about important
problems in all academic areas as well as thinking about social, political, and ethical
challenges in our complex and multifaceted global world. Tsui (1991) avowed that to
safeguard a democratic society with an able thinking citizenry and to ensure a competent
workforce it is essential to foster critical thinking skills. A short-term advantage of a
critical thinker is that it improves the quality of the student. Through critical thinking,
students become problem solvers.
Abrami et al.’s analysis findings supported the idea that how CT instruction is
provided affects the improved CT skills (2008). CT requirements must be a clear and
important part of the course design. Furthermore, CT skills must be developed separately
and then applied to courses. Collaborative learning seemed to make a difference in the
attainment of the CT skills. The least effective method found was immersing students in
thought provoking material without explicit use of CT principles (Abrami et al, 2008).
Abrami et al. discuss that it is important to understand and know how to master 21
st
Century components, one being CT, to be 21
st
Century ready.
Pedagogy was another area that was found critical in Abrami et al.’s analysis of
21
st
Century skills (2008). Many studies showed the impact of the interventions were the
greatest when special advanced training in preparation for teaching CT skills were given
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
24
to instructors (e.g. Martin et al., 2001; Zohar et al. 1994; Zohar & Tamir, 1993;
VanTassel-Baska et al., 2002). Furthermore, the impact of the interventions was greatest
when observations on the CT teaching practices of instructors and their course
administration were reported. Contrary to these findings, the impacts of CT were
smallest when the intention to improve CT skills was only listed among the course
objectives and no effort was shown to actually incorporate CT in the course design and
implementation. Therefore, better results can be achieved through purposeful and active
training and teacher support. It is clear from the findings that an improvement in
students’ CT skills must occur through explicit instruction.
Tsui (1994) found that the greatest gains in critical thinking occurred in general
education courses. These courses focused on a synthesis of knowledge rather than on
specific information. Consequently, institutions that offered more humanities courses
and interdisciplinary courses showed higher gains in CT skills with their students. Active
learning techniques (e.g. student participation in small discussion groups, class
presentations, discussions and disagreements, debates, independent study, writing and
rewriting based on feedback) versus lecture style teaching showed increases in CT skills
as well. Students who had papers critiqued by their instructors and their peers, worked
on independent research projects, took essay exams, worked on group projects, and gave
class presentations showed the most gains in critical thinking skills as they were able to
think critically about what they or others had written (Tsui, 1999). Furthermore, taking
multiple-choice exams appeared to detract from nurturing students’ ability to think
critically. A critical thinker constructs responses and answers to questions, challenges
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
25
rather than memorizes, and recognizes from a list of possible answers then that student is
a higher order thinker (Tsui, 2002). Tsui further asserted that course content and
instructional methods both contribute to the growth in CT skills in students. It is
important to note that some faculty do not actively engage in fostering CT skills because
they see it as time consuming and risky (Haas & Keeley, 1998). Altering commonplace
teaching techniques would thus seem more appropriate than radically replacing them.
Faculty and teachers must skillfully guide discussions and facilitate student participation
to cultivate useful discussion (Pascarella & Teranzini, 1991). Finally, writing and
rewriting must be incorporated into all coursework.
Communication (written and oral)
In a global economy that has been infused with technology as a primary means of
communication, the value and importance of effective communication through all
methods was reiterated (Bennis, 2003). For example, Wagner reported 87% of teenagers
can be found communicating online, approximately two to three hours a day (2010).
Wagner further reported that it was estimated that there were 188 billion text messages
sent in 2010 as compared to just 14 billion text messages sent ten years prior. Text
messaging was reported as just one way people are communicating (Kluger, 2012).
Wagner (2010) contended that internet-ready technologies being used for communicating
were not specific to texting and span from computers and gaming systems, to portable
devices and smartphones. These various avenues have pushed the boundaries of
communication, yet have also impeded individuals’ abilities to communicate in person
(Wagner, 2010). Wagner’s interview of more than 800 CEOs indicates that employers
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
26
look for individuals who are effective communicators. Sharkey (2010) though,
contended that today’s students, unfortunately, are becoming less and less adept at in-
person communication and that written and verbal person-to-person communication is
challenging for today’s youth.
Wagner attributed the declining communication skills of today’s generation to the
work environments of the last few decades (2010). Wagner pointed out that people in the
workforce are increasingly working in virtual offices thus replacing face-to-face
communication with emails. Wagner explored further into the subject and contended that
the prevalence of email has led to the necessity of training their employees on appropriate
methods of communication. Sharkey (2010) viewed effective communication in relation
to other skills such as persistence, clarity, persuasion, and inquiry. Wagner (2010) argued
that strengthening written communication skills must begin prior to leaving college.
Companies aim to hire individuals who can engage in a rapidly changing environment
and are able to effectively communicate within the realm of the business and the variety
of communication methods that takes course within a single day (Wagner, 2010). The
environment is no longer a top-down hierarchal management with employees specializing
in singular skills. The work place has become a flattened hierarchy whereby teams
network on specific projects (Wagner, 2010). This change in the work place only
highlights that communication skills are more vital for employees as they communicate
more widely rather than simply follow directions from management (Wagner, 2010).
The skill sets that students need in order to succeed in the university are no
different than those in the workforce (Ireh & Bailey, 1999). Effective communication
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
27
skills are required throughout college and are considered a basic skill necessary to be
successful in the academia and in the workplace.
Wagner (2010) attributed students’ ineffective communication skills to an ever-
changing environment. Wagner further described the short, abrupt, and informal modes
of communication such as texting and Facebook, which are widely used by students, as
ineffective for communication purposes in many work environments. Entering into a
computer literate era, it is essential for everyone to have certain basic skills (Stuart &
Dahm, 1999), which include the ability to communicate. Students must employ a new
system of understanding for the 21
st
Century, which according to Stuart and Dahm (1999)
includes communication and interpersonal skills, analytical and problem-solving skills,
creative thinking, and negotiating and persuasion skills. In collaboration, students will
need to communicate orally and in writing and without this, Wagner (2010) contended,
collaboration could not occur. Students need to not only be able to read, write and speak
proficiently, but also be able to understand their audience, listen and use a variety of
technology and artistic mediums to be prepared for the 21
st
Century (Wagner, 2010).
An investigation into methods appropriate for strengthening communication skills
while using technology, revealed that when the students see information and
communication technologies, particularly the Internet, as an instructional instrument,
their learning increases (Yilnaz & Orhan, 2010). Cheung and Huang (2005) agree based
on the results from a study conducted at the university level; students’ Internet usage
correlated positively with general learning. Thus, one way to get surface learners,
individuals who use the Internet simply as a leisure time activity, is by assigning work
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
28
that allows them to use Internet. Another method, Yilnaz and Orhan (2010) contended, is
for teachers to give assignments, which require the use of the Internet as a source. A deep
learning approach requires the use of skills such as integration, synthesis, and reflection
(Yilnaz & Orhan, 2010).
For these reasons, when setting assignments, teachers should direct their students
to a variety of sources that suggest different perspectives to the same topic. They can
provide alternative information and thereby strengthen their written communication skills
while presentations and collaboration with peers solidifies their verbal communication
skills. This, over the course of time, will inevitably encourage students to adopt these
learning strategies and deep learning might be achieved (Yilnaz & Orhan, 2010).
Collaboration across networks and leading by influence, curiosity and imagination
Other skills students will need to keep up with the challenges of the era, Kafai
(2002) contended, are collaboration and communication skills, the need for students to
express themselves, share their ideas and thoughts, and be able to help each other.
Furthermore, in today’s global economy, the work style has shifted from document-
focused to people-focused. The AMA survey (2010) cited working in teams as a key
factor in how corporations choose managers next to their ability to communicate.
Therefore, the AMA survey concluded, that being able to work collaboratively with a
diverse group of people is an essential skill in the 21
st
Century economy. According to
Roschelle and Teasley (1995), collaboration can be defined broadly as building and
effectively utilizing relationships, which ultimately helps people build on each other’s
ideas, which in turn leads to innovation. Innovation, consequently, fosters learning and
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
29
productivity (Jarboe, 1996). In some countries such as the US, Israel, and Canada,
collaborative learning is highly valued starting as early as preschool and continuing
through graduate school (Webb & Mastergeorge, 2003). Pink (2005, p. 51) stated, "in the
Conceptual Age, what we need is a whole new mind - one that incorporates both right
brain and left brain directed aptitudes.”
Knight and Bohlmeyer (1990) insisted that simply asking students to work
together in small groups would not promote collaboration. Instead, collaboration skills
must be taught. They contended that the skills students need to effectively collaborate
would include management of group dynamics, problem-solving processes, and
interpersonal communication skills (Webb & Farivar, 1994). Three types of
communication skills were found in effective collaborative groups: group members who
provided explanations, asked questions, and engaged in argumentative discussions (Chan,
2001).
As learning involves the construction of knowledge in one form or another and is
thus constructivist by nature, researchers such as Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006)
questioned what kind of instructional approaches best promote these types of sought after
skills. The instructional approaches must provide direct instructional guidance. One
such approach is Project Based Learning (PBL). Bell (2010) defined PBL as a student-
driven yet teacher-facilitated approach to learning. Learners ask questions about topics
that have aroused their curiosity. The teacher guides students through their research and
oversees each step of the process. Students create projects individually or cooperatively.
PBL is not supplementary to instruction – it is the basis for the curriculum delivery.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
30
Greater understanding of topics, deeper learning, higher-level reading and increased
motivation to learn are some outcomes of PBL. Geier et al. (2008) showed that students
engaged in PBL outscored their traditionally educated peers. Although 21
st
Century
skills are not evaluated on current standardized tests, Boaler (1999) found that over a
period of three years, three times as many PBL students achieved the highest possible
scores as compared to their traditionally taught peers who scored much lower. Learning
responsibility, independence, and discipline are three outcomes of PBL (Bell, 2010). As
students become more proficient in PBL, they create blueprints for themselves to stay on-
task and stay focused, they self-monitor their progress through daily agenda setting, they
report their progress, and set goals thus managing their own time. The teacher regularly
meets with the students to ensure that they are on track. In this process, students are
learning socially as well; they are becoming proficient at communication, negotiation,
and collaboration. Students must brainstorm and act as good listeners. Lastly, the
element of choice is crucial to student success. Technology is often used as a means, not
an end. An authentic use of technology for PBL work makes use of the fluency the
digital natives of today possess. Gultekin (2005) provided evidence that through PBL,
students become better researchers, problem solvers, and higher-order thinkers.
To address the standardized testing that currently does not encourage
collaboration and innovation, Tom Torlakson, California’s State Superintendent of Public
Instruction, explained that the Smarter Balance Testing is scheduled to begin in 2014-
2015 and it will support 21
st
Century skills (Torlakson, 2013). Torlakson stated, "It's time
for California to move forward with assessments that measure the real-world skills our
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
31
students need to be ready for a career and for college” (p. 1).
Agility and Adaptability
Since having entered the 21
st
Century, the United States and most nations have
seen a societal and an economic shift (Wagner, 2010). The speed of media and
technology has grown exponentially in its sophistication and influence and has even
infiltrated how people are learning, experiencing the world, and interacting with one
another (Wagner, 2008). Wagner pointed out that some people are adapting and
embracing change, while others have not or will not adapt.
Sharkey (2010) claimed that the growth curve for technology continues to double
every year and a half. Furthermore, Sharkey asserted that these changes are extremely
powerful and if society is not able to, the United States’ future will remain uncertain.
Wagner (2010) discussed that businesses are rapidly changing in the 21
st
Century.
Employers are able to train employees for the technical aspects of a job, however the
workers need to be able to adjust and be capable of adapting to situations in order to
resolve currently unknown problems. Wagner also argued that companies in the 20th
Century are vastly different from companies in the 21
st
Century. Within the past two
decades, companies have restructured their organizational practices. 21
st
Century teams in
the workplace collaborate and adapt to different projects rather employing a hierarchal
management style as was previously commonplace (Wagner, 2010). Jobs are not defined
by a specific talent or ability, but rather centered around specific problems or tasks that
need to be accomplished by a team. Individuals within the team must be able to adapt and
conclude what the best alternative is to solve or reach the intended goal. Moreover, what
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
32
was once deemed as blue-collared work has also felt the inevitable changes of the 21
st
Century. The workplace demands that individuals are able to adapt to the changing
landscape of the work environment, as companies try to stay relevant and competitive in
a global economy (Wagner, 2010).
Wagner (2010) elaborated on the variety of skill sets that workers must have
across many industries. His first example, Karen Bruett of Dell Computers, manages the
K-12 education strategic business development. Bruett explained that her job has
changed dramatically over her employment. Skills that were important five years ago
have morphed into something entirely different. She attributed her success to flexibility
and adaptability. Wagner explained that the reality is that some individuals are not
adapting. It is so challenging that some companies have provided professional
development and coaching to assist their employees in learning how to be adaptable
(Wagner, 2010).
Employers search for candidates who can adapt to the work environment
(Wagner, 2010). Increasingly, companies reiterate that future employees must be flexible
and adaptable. When someone is hired, adaptability and learning skills are more
important than technical skills (Wagner, 2008). Companies seek individuals with these
traits and they know that ultimately employees will have to adapt to changing job
expectations (Wagner, 2010). In the 21
st
Century, businesses are required to be
adaptable, which is essential to their sustainability.
Interestingly enough, education is no exception, Wagner (2010) further argued.
People who work today must be able to think, be flexible, change, and use a variety of
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
33
tools. Each year, thousands of students enter into the universities and community
colleges. As students prepare to enroll in college courses, however, many are unprepared
or cannot adapt to the rigor. Students must learn to adapt not only academically, but also
socially, to the university environment. They will encounter individuals from a plethora
of cultures and must learn to interact, engage, and adapt to every new situation.
Wagner claimed that classrooms have remained the same for over half a decade
(2010). Wagner added that teachers, however, are unable to deviate from a prescribed set
curriculum. Due to the mounting governmental pressures of statewide, high-stakes
testing, teachers are forced to teach to the test (Wagner, 2010). Adaptability, Stuart and
Dahm argued, entails that superintendents employ a new system of leadership to lead in
the 21st Century.
Initiative and Entrepreneurship
In the past years, interest in education and training in enterprise has increased
especially in Finland, and other European countries as well as in the US and China
(Seikkula-Leino, 2011). The European Union places importance on developing an
entrepreneurial culture by cultivating the appropriate mindset, entrepreneurship skills,
and awareness of career opportunities (Commission of the European Communities,
2006). However, the basic question of how entrepreneurship development can be
immersed into the American school curriculum remains unanswered.
According to Seikkula-Elino (2010), entrepreneurship education involved such
terms as “enterprising” (general education and learning processes) and “entrepreneurial”
(business context). For younger students, she further asserted, enterprise education is
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
34
more appropriate as students learn to take more responsibility for their learning and
themselves and are able to cope in this complex society. Students learn to deal with
higher levels of complexity and uncertainty to make organizations more effective and
they are fulfilled personally. This type of education develops behaviors, skills, and
attributes to create innovative practices to cope with change. Enterprising education is
the process where these behaviors are learned and supported and requires a shift in
pedagogy. Cooperative learning, PBL, group and peer work, teamwork, learning by
doing, pedagogical drama, and learning diaries are a part of the process. Knowledge is
gained and mistakes are considered a part of the approach.
Leffler & Svedberg (2005) revealed teacher interviews that included their views
on what enterprise and entrepreneurship means. A primary school teacher said,
“Children can see how much money they can make from a theatre, where they can see
that they are doing a job that is rewarded.” Another upper secondary teacher said, “It
doesn’t really mean that they should be entrepreneurs, but rather that they should be
enterprising, that is, creative, be able to imbibe knowledge, be able to utilize the channels
they have for getting knowledge in every different way. Well, to have the ability to put
together and then carry out things.” The empirical studies Leffler and Svedberg
performed on school practice indicated a multifaceted practice for entrepreneurship. The
organization and implementation of such classroom activities seemed, however, to rest on
assumptions that teaching and learning are primarily a collective undertaking, and that
learning and acting are two sides of the same coin. This is, however, not unique to
enterprise learning. Furthermore, Yan and Yu (2007) provided empirical evidence for the
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
35
importance of social interactions affecting students’ learning experience in enterprise
learning. Collaboration and shared problem solving (e.g. partnerships with local
companies), as well as learning in action by reproducing, transforming, and producing
(e.g. running the school cafeteria once a week), and apprenticeships are examples of
social interactions together with elements of enterprising and entrepreneurship (Leffler &
Svedberg, 2005). Yan and Yun (2007) further implied that interpersonal skills and
opportunities for guidance and interaction with various people should be developed for
the effective implementation of these enterprise programs.
Although entrepreneurial training has been infused into the curriculum, mainly
through extra-curricular activities and in some cases by being explicitly included in the
curriculum, most entrepreneurial programs agreed that teacher training was a very
important factor in the success of the programs (European Commission, 2004). Nordic
countries and Great Britain are front-runners in this area, yet, an extensive lack of
teaching materials and teachers’ knowledge is still evident (Lundström, 2005).
Finland, in particular, has actively promoted entrepreneurship education in
general education and all levels and has been supported administratively by the Ministry
of Education. Furthermore, the Finnish National Board of Education (NBE) introduced
the National Core Curriculum for Basic Education, which includes entrepreneurship
education. Finland underwent a curriculum reform during 2004-2006 and based its
reform on Macdonald’s (2003) partnership model. This “bottom-up” model draws
attention to the teachers’ roles as change agents (Fullan, 1999). Teachers thus develop
their own abilities underpinning the importance of teachers’ beliefs about aims and
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
36
contents. Parents, administrative bodies, curriculum reformers, researcher and parents
became partners to the teachers in reforming the curriculum.
In summary, Wagner (2010) would agree that superintendents need to come
together with principals, teachers, students, and the community to build and strengthen
the 21
st
Century skills so desperately needed to remain competitive in the global
economy.
Superintendents as Instructional Leaders
When implementing new initiatives, for example, 21
st
Century skills, the
superintendent must supply the clear expectation of success for that vision (Edsource,
2006). Fullan (2002) stated that if entities want to achieve sustainable reform, then the
leaders of those groups must create a radical change in the learning culture of the district
and schools. Without the vision from the leader of the district, the superintendent, long
lasting reform is impossible. Petersen (1999) agreed, stating that educational reform is
impossible without a strong vision from the superintendent. Fullan (2005) claimed that
one of the most important parts of an instructional leader’s job is to create a relationship
between the initiatives, which provides the principals and teachers with a clear direction
or path to guide their schools and students. Fullan (2003) also stated that educational
transformation is impossible without good, solid leadership at all levels. If 21
st
Century
skills are to be implemented, strong leadership at all levels, district and site, is essential.
Petersen (2002) showed the need for superintendents to articulate the specific
goals for the district and establish the standards required to meet those goals. He
continued that the superintendent must also have the visionary leadership, organizational
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
37
skills, planning, and evaluations in place to ensure the success of the stated goals. Waters
(2006) concurred with this finding saying that there was a statistically significant
correlation with setting goals for teaching and learning and student achievement. Key
stakeholders must understand the vision and goals created by the superintendent for the
district to be successful.
One of the superintendent’s roles is to use messaging to communicate the vision
or create systems by which he/she can create trainings and strategies to ensure the success
of the vision (Grogran & Andrews, 2002). To accomplish this type of instructional
leadership by superintendents, Hoyle (1989) called for a different model by which they
were trained. He asked for professional training that would include being comfortable
with “ambiguity and uncertainty.” Datnow (2000) showed an example in Memphis, TN,
where the superintendent’s initiative was one of the single factors that encouraged
schools to adopt the proposed reform. The research showed that if the superintendent put
his/her full support behind a reform, then it was more likely to happen. Datnow (2000)
went as far as to say that even if the teachers did not believe in the reform wholly, they
still committed to it because the superintendent supported the reform.
Ely (1990a) suggested that for the implementation to be successful, the
stakeholders must have voice in the change process. The administration shows its
commitment to the change by asking key stakeholders for their input. Kowalski (2006)
said that superintendents cannot use top-down communication strategies to inform staff
of changes, but rather they must build relationships to have the opportunity to create
change. Datnow (2000) suggested that increasing the amount of teacher involvement in a
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
38
true and genuine way increases the potential success of the reform. Shuldman (2004)
supported teacher involvement by claiming that teachers would ultimately decide if the
superintendent is supportive of the new initiative and that this can be shown through time
and attention to the desired implementation task. Shuldman (2004) continued that the
superintendent’s policies create the culture of the district and the school. Johnson (1996)
discussed the value of moving away from a top down approach to a team approach.
Elmore (1999) concurred that collaborative team approaches are much more successful
than a manager-style top down approach. Elmore used the term “distributed leadership”
to emphasize the point that a team is require to make sustainable changes to the
instructional program (1999). Creating a shared vision is the only way to successfully
engage stakeholders to transform learning for the 21
st
Century (Dede et al., 2005).
Petersen (2002) also found that if there is a strong relationship between the
superintendent and the major stakeholders that may include district leaders, principals,
and the school board, then the vision of the superintendent and the ability of the district to
become successful is more likely. Without the support of the superintendent, it is
unlikely that the initiatives will become part of the culture of the district.
Datnow (2000) said that when district officials begin a reform process that
teachers tend to receive the initiative with hesitation. Teachers may implement the
change due to compliance but not necessarily because it is the best reform for their
school. Petersen, Sayre, and Kelly (2007) explained that the teachers’ perception is that
the superintendent’s role is critical in creating an instructional vision for the district.
Without this vision, reform may not be possible. Principals reported that if they have
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
39
clear direction from the district office, with the superintendent guiding the direction, that
the initiative is much more likely to be successful (Edsource, 2006). Without the solid
backing of the district office, it will be more difficult to implement new initiatives. The
role of the superintendent must include the assessment and the development of the
teachers’ knowledge and the potential of what the teachers can accomplish in the
classroom (Grogran & Andrews, 2002). This suggested that inventory must be taken as
to where the teachers are at with the implementation of 21
st
Century skills and what needs
to be developed explicitly to assist the teacher’s individual growth towards
implementation. Sergiovanni (1998) stated that if the teachers’ capital is developed, then
the instructional leaders have increased the value of education in general. Rotherham and
Willingham (2009) discussed that the reforms of the past have been unsuccessful because
a focus has not been place on teacher training, curriculum development, and assessment.
They continued that taking on an implementation task of this magnitude would include a
need for a large professional development for teachers. Rotherham (2010) discussed the
need for developing human capital among district teachers. This can only be
accomplished with methodical and deep professional development of teachers and
administrators.
Superintendents cannot possibly solve all of the problems in a school district by
themselves (Childress, Elmore, & Grossman, 2006). Childress Elmore, and Grossman
further claimed that superintendents need the support of community members in the form
of businesses, local universities, and families. Hoyle (1989) continued that
superintendents need to work in concert with the leaders of industry and politics to create
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
40
schools that will prepare students for the future jobs. If the instructional leader is
successful in creating this system, with the support of the staff and community, then their
vision will be implemented. Districts may choose to elicit input by creating a
superintendent advisory committee (Edsource, 2006). Monthly meetings can be held to
gather input from the stakeholders to improve the district’s understanding of how the
strategies and implementation was going from the perspective of the individual
stakeholder groups. Johnson (1996) stressed the importance of the superintendent’s
meaningful collaboration with stakeholders within the district to achieve lasting reform.
Studying successful innovations has shown that these innovations include certain
elements. Ely (1990a) identified the following elements of resources, current knowledge
and skills, the inadequacy of the status quo, time rewards, participation, commitment and
leadership as essential to the successful implantation of innovation. All of these factors
may be important to the implementation of 21
st
Century skills. Earle (2002) cited that the
preparation of the teacher is also essential. Building relationships, differentiated
professional development opportunities at the teacher’s correct level of proficiency in an
area like technology, commitment to the program and follow-up training are all essential
to the implementation of a new reform. Earle (2002) wrote that these key elements
would lead to a successful, integrated model of implementation. Earle also encouraged
this model as a method to create additional teacher leaders to carry the message forward.
He claimed that there are three levels of learning, confidence, competence, and creativity
or put another way, learner to adopter to leader. For a reform effort like 21
st
Century
skills to become fully integrated, these levels of learning must be addressed (Earle, 2002).
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
41
Chapter Three
Methodology
Authors: Susie Chow, George Cheung, Patrick Gittisriboongul, Scheherazade Mohazab,
Crystal Turner
3
Introduction
The previous literature review revealed that businesses and industry have
indicated the need for well-prepared employees to be a part of the global workforce in
today’s knowledge economy. It has been widely documented by the downward trend of
student test scores. The lack of preparation for living and working in the 21
st
Century
leaves students, especially urban students, graduating from public schools in the United
States unprepared for employment in an increasingly global society. Globalization itself
has contributed to the increased communication regarding student achievements on an
international level. Schools are held accountable for preparing students to being college
and career ready. Stronger alliances with business communities are often formed to create
students who are prepared to work and compete in the global economy. Today’s students,
employees of the future, need 21
st
Century skills to thrive as successful citizens, workers,
and leaders.
Leadership plays an important role in reform. Superintendents must lead and
develop their districts to keep up with the rapidly changing economy. To create
sustainable reform, superintendents must create a radical change in the learning culture.
For that, district leadership must present a strong vision and a clear expectation of
3
This chapter was jointly written by the authors listed, reflecting the team approach to this project. The
authors are listed alphabetically, reflecting the equal amount of work by all those listed.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
42
success. Furthermore, a superintendent must have the organizational skills, planning and
evaluations in place to ensure the success of the stated goals. Other factors that ensure
success of implementation include strong relationships with major stakeholders, teacher
training and preparation, community member support, and the solid backing from the
district office.
While there have been many studies on 21
st
Century education—its necessity to
compete in the global economy, building up critical thinking skills, sparking curiosity,
and encouraging innovation—little is known about the characteristics and strategies of
superintendents who implement 21
st
Century skills in their respective school
districts. The purpose of this study is to examine California superintendents’
implementation of 21
st
Century skills in the K-12 public school system. This study is
guided by the following four research questions:
1. How do CA Superintendents define 21st Century skills?
2. How do CA Superintendents implement 21
st
Century skills?
3. Who are the key stakeholders needed for Superintendents to implement 21st Century
skills in a California K-12 system?
4. What strategies do California Superintendents use to evaluate the effectiveness of the
implementation?
The answers to these questions will provide a frame from which current and
future superintendents can create and sustain a 21
st
Century teaching and learning reform
that will produce citizens who meet the needs of the global economy.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
43
Research Design
Creswell (2009) defines qualitative research as an approach to examine and
understand the meaning individuals associate with social or human problems.
Conversely, quantitative research is a method for testing objective theories by analyzing
the relationship between variables. Creswell further defines the mixed method approach
to be a mixture of both qualitative and quantitative. It involves philosophical
assumptions, the use of both qualitative and quantitative measures, and the mixture of
both approaches. He contends that the strength of a mixed methods approach is greater
than either the qualitative or quantitative research by itself. As such, this research will
utilized a mixed methods approach.
In this research the in-depth interviews with superintendents provided the
qualitative data to answer the four research questions. Questionnaires were also emailed
to a superintendent’s pool. Surveys were used to reach a wider group of superintendents.
All data was collected, and reported using the mixed methods approach so as to
strengthen the research conducted.
Sample and Population
Purposeful sampling was used to select at least ten superintendents for the
interview and 35 questionnaires will be sent out to superintendents. Purposeful sampling
allows for the identification of superintendents with certain criterion (Patton, 2002). The
quantitative sampling criterion included 1) superintendents in California and 2),
superintendents who have been in their current position for two or more years. The
requirements for the study were identical with the exception of the two years of service
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
44
requirement in the interview portion of the study. The two years of service requirement
is required to receive answers in the interview that show an implementation over time in
one district, whereas the survey includes any willing superintendent respondents.
35 Superintendents who are identified on the California Department of Education
website with the aforementioned criteria will receive a letter with a description of the
study with a request for participation and its purpose as well as a Institutional Review
Board (IRB) protocol description regarding the participation of human subjects. The
questionnaire will also be included for the superintendents to complete.
The research is limited to the state of California as each state has different
requirements for the new Common Core State Standards (CCSS) as well varied testing
procedures, both of which will affect the implementation of 21
st
Century skills.
Instrument Validity
The validity of the survey was determined by the similarity of the chosen
instrument to the instruments used in prior studies. Questions were developed based on
the body of research on superintendents, 21
st
Century skills and how leaders implement
reform. The instruments are gender neutral and were field tested on principals to ensure
that the questions were clear and also allowed the investigator to ensure the amount of
time that each interview would require.
Instrumentation
The instrumentation selected for this study is a mixed method and includes both
interviews of sitting superintendents and questionnaires given to superintendents.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
45
Qualitative Data
This section is a qualitative case study with basic research implications.
Interviews of superintendents were chosen as a method to draw out the information
regarding the implementation of 21
st
Century skills in his/her district (Appendix A).
Interviews are also chosen because it may be necessary for the principal investigator to
probe for deeper answers to the complex questions (Merriam, 2009). Value, opinion, and
knowledge questions were included in the protocol. During the interviews, the
superintendents will be asked questions related to the following topics: (1) globalization;
(2) focus on California education; (3) economic and business impact; (4) 21
st
century
skills frameworks and; (5) leadership for reform. Also, questioning how the reform
implementation will be delivered to staff and the monitoring of its success. The protocol
will be implemented consistently to all interviewees. In addition to the standard, open-
ended questions, follow-up questions will be used to clarify or give opportunity for
elaboration. Due to the fact that there is not a large body of research around the topic of
superintendents and their implementation of 21
st
Century skills, the questions were
broken down into the steps that will be required to achieve a large scale reform.
Quantitative Data
Questionnaires were selected for their ability to reach additional participants and
allow the investigator to gather information about how superintendents fell and describe
their knowledge about implementing 21
st
Century skills into their district (Fink, 2013). A
Likert scale with 4-points was selected to provide a forced- choice response without the
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
46
neutral response of neither agree or disagree so that the investigator can determine a
definite response (Fink, 2013).
The importance of this study may have implications for other districts as they
embark on their process of implementation of 21
st
Century skills. This interview may
produce successes and challenges, the types of professional development that are most
successful for teachers and which monitoring tools have worked to sustain this reform.
Finally, the interviews may produce leadership qualities needed to implement a large-
scale reform.
Data Collection
A mixed methods approach, qualitative and quantitative, will be used when
collecting data. Qualitative data will be collected in the form of interviews and
quantitative data will be collected using surveys. All researchers will receive approval by
the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the University of Southern California prior to
conducting any interviews or sending out surveys to participating parties. Data that is
collected from this study will be secured and only be used by the approved researchers.
All parties’ identities will remain confidential throughout the course of this study.
Qualitative Data
A series of interviews with various superintendents will be conducted during the
summer of 2013. In order to maximize the time appropriated for the interview, an
interview protocol was formulated based on the four research questions of the study
(Weiss, 1994).
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
47
Researchers will each interview three to five California superintendents. All
interviews will be audio recorded, transcribed, and coded to use for the study. All
participating superintendents will be given a chance to receive a copy of the completed
dissertation.
Quantitative Data
Qualitative data will be collected using electronic surveys. Researchers will
design a survey that uses a likert scale on a web-based survey tool, Survey Monkey.
Researchers will contact approximately 50 California superintendents to participate in the
survey in the summer of 2013. Participating superintendents will have a timeframe of
one month to complete the online survey. A team of researchers will code all received
survey data to use for the study. All survey data will be confidential and will only be
accessible to the team of researchers who are part of this study.
Data Analysis Procedures
In qualitative studies, data may be derived from the content of interviews,
observations notes, and documents analyzed (Merriam, 2009), and such was the case in
this study. Merriam (2009) indicates that data analysis involves consolidating and
interpreting what people have said and how the researcher uses the data to answer the
research questions. The process of qualitative data analysis used in this study follows
Merriam’s (2009) step by step process of analysis.
Interviews with each of the superintendents were digitally recorded and were
transcribed verbatim. All transcripts were carefully reviewed to allow the researcher to
obtain a general idea of the data and to reflect on its overall meaning (Creswell, 2008).
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
48
Because interviews were the primary source of data collection for this study, the
researcher employed a coding strategy by segmenting responses into certain categories
and labeling categories with a code or theme (Merriam, 2009; Creswell, 2008). Codes
were determined based on commonalities, themes, and patterns found in the responses.
The codes that were developed included technology, accountability, communication,
creativity, critical thinking, collaboration, instruction, leadership, rigor, relationships,
finance, and miscellaneous. Data collected in the form of interview transcripts were
coded and then analyzed for the purposes of transforming the collected data into findings
(Merriam, 2009).
The coding process was also applied to documents analyzed based on the relevant
characteristics of the content. The constant comparative method was used to analyze data
gathered from documents, observations, and interviews. Merriam (2009) indicates that
the constant comparative method compares one segment of data with another to
determine similarities and differences.
Results from the survey questions generated through Survey Monkey, an online
survey tool, provided data for the quantitative portion of the study. Survey Monkey
provided the necessary online security and data analysis capability, including the ability
to analyze open-ended results and the ability to create comparison reports, use cross-
tabulations, and use filters. Responses from the superintendent survey were analyzed
using descriptive statistics, such as percentages, and frequency to determine alignment
and correlation to the results of two or more research questions and to compare how
different groups of respondents answer survey questions. In analyzing the data in this
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
49
way, the four research questions were addressed and the questions regarding 21
st
Century
skills were identified and compared.
The use of multiple sources of evidence is critical to qualitative research to ensure
the accuracy and trustworthiness of the study. Data from the transcribed interviews,
observation notes, and documentation were triangulated and analyzed in order to develop
themes and subthemes that describe a broader picture of the research conducted.
Merriam (2009) indicates that the final step of the data analysis involves a period
of intensive analysis with findings that are substantiated, revised, or reconfigured.
Furthermore, Creswell (2008) indicates that the final step of the data analysis process
involves interpreting the meaning of the data. Using data collected and coded in addition
to the literature review and theoretical framework, the researcher was able to cross
reference and triangulate to determine if each set of findings supported the other and to
further align the findings with the research questions.
Ethical considerations
The research study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the
University of Southern California, conducted with written consent from each
participating superintendent. To ensure the rights of the superintendents, safeguards were
put into place so that each participants’ anonymity was guaranteed, and any request to
withdraw from the study at any time was honored.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
50
Chapter Four
Findings
Introduction
Research from Wagner (2008) has shown that approximately 85% of middle
class jobs and 90% of “fastest-growing, high-paying” jobs require a postsecondary
degree. Bottery (2006) further asserts that American globalism is a strong force
around the world, yet according to PISA, in education the US trails behind nations
such as Korea, Finland, and Japan. In order for the US to be competitive in the
global market, proficiency in basic knowledge and skills, such as math, reading,
writing, and foreign languages do not suffice. The emphasis is no longer on what
students know, rather, what students can do with the information, otherwise known
as, “applied skills” or 21
st
Century skills (Silva, 2008). The integration of 21
st
Century skills to core curriculum is vital for students looking to see success in
postsecondary education and the workforce both at home and abroad (Silva, 2008).
Therefore, to meet the demands of the new global economy, 21
st
Century skills have
become a necessity for students today. Wagner, further reported interviewing over
800 CEOs asking them the essential question, “Which qualities will our graduates
need in the 21
st
Century for success in college, careers, and citizenship?” Wagner
(2008) defined the seven 21st Century skills needed to be competitive in this global
knowledge economy based on these interviews. These skills include, accessing and
analyzing information, problem-solving and critical thinking, effective written and
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
51
oral communication, collaboration across networks, leading by influence, curiosity
and imagination, agility and adaptability, and initiative and entrepreneurship.
Purpose
The findings from this research will provide superintendents and other district
leaders with the direction and the intellectual resources to plan their own implementation
of 21
st
Century skills as defined by Wagner (2008). Key stakeholders and their roles for
implementation will be identified. Evaluation of the 21
st
Century skills implementation
will also be provided in this report.
Methodology, Qualitative, and Quantitative Data
Data analysis from this mixed method study led to the discovery of several key
themes and findings regarding how the districts implemented 21
st
Century skills.
Interviews were taped and transcribed verbatim in order to capture all aspects of the
conversation. The raw data from the transcribed interviews were coded and analyzed.
Additionally, the researchers in this study sent out surveys, which the researcher
compiled and analyzed. Both the qualitative (interviews) and the quantitative (surveys)
data were analyzed following Creswell’s (2003) framework for data analysis and
interpretation so that the data could be triangulated for consistency and emerging themes.
The process used by the researchers in this study lends reliability and validity to the
findings.
Response Rate
The selection criteria for the surveys required that superintendents be located in
the state of California. The survey was sent out to 112 superintendents. Table 1 shows
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
52
that 35 superintendents elected to respond. This results in a 31.25% response rate. This
response rate satisfied the researcher’s goal of 35 completed surveys.
Table 1
Quantitative Survey: Response Rate
Measure No. Invited to Respond No. Participated % Participated
Superintendents 112 35 31.25
As shown in Table 2, 40% of the superintendents surveyed hold a Master’s
Degree. 57.1% of superintendents have earned a Doctoral Degree, and 2.9% hold
another unspecified professional degree.
Table 2
Quantitative Survey: Highest Educational Attainment
Measure Bachelor’s Master’s Other Doctoral Total
Degree Degree Professional Degree
Degree
Superintendents 0 14 1 20 35
% of 0 40 2.9 57.1 100
Superintendents
Kowalski et al. (2010) reported that in their survey participation of 1,867
superintendents that 45.3% had doctoral degrees. The finding from this survey showed a
doctoral degree rate of 57.1%, a difference of 11.8% above the national rate (2010).
Table 3 documents the years of experience that superintendents have in their
current district. All 35 respondents answered this question.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
53
Table 3
Quantitative Survey: Superintendent Experience in Current District
Measure Fewer than 2-4 5-7 8-10 11-13 Total
2 years
Superintendents 7 13 8 5 2 35
% of 20 37.1 22.9 14.3 5.7 100
Superintendents
Superintendents have an average of 4.48 years of experience in their current
position at their current district. This adds relevance to the research as the Common Core
State Standards and the new accountability system, Smarter Balanced Assessment
Consortium (SBAC), will be implemented in the 2014-2015 school year which means
that the superintendents who responded are most likely working to implement 21st
Century skills, a large part of the SBAC testing system (Porter, McMaken, Hwang, &
Yang, 2010).
The researchers’ selection of the district superintendents interviewed was
predicated on three factors linked to the purpose of the study: a) districts located in
California b) superintendents who had served in this capacity for a minimum of two years
c) special interest was given to superintendents whose stated mission and strategic plan
showed a strong emphasis on 21
st
Century learning. Each of the two superintendents was
formally interviewed and taped. Anonymity was guaranteed allowing them to respond
freely. The demographic data presented (Table 4) will provide an overview of each
district and lend context to the responses.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
54
Table 4
Qualitative Interview: Characteristics for Superintendents and Districts
Superintendent Profile District
A Gender: Female Enrollment: almost 29,000
Education: Doctoral Candidate Free and Reduced meals: 2,750
Years as superintendent: 3 Minority: 5,278
Years in current position: 3 EL population: 1,015
B Gender: Male Enrollment: about 7,000
Education: Doctoral Degree Free and Reduced meals:
Years as superintendent: 3 Minority: 2,100
Years in current position: 3 EL: 49
One of the superintendents interviewed was male and one was female.
Superintendent A is a doctoral candidate in a prestigious Ed.D. program and
Superintendent B has already attained his Ed.D. degree. The superintendents both have
three years of experience in their current districts and it is the first superintendent
experience for both. Both districts are high-performing districts in California.
Responses to Research Question One
The first research question that guided this study was: How do CA
Superintendents define 21st Century Skills?
I feel so strongly that if we're not doing 21st Century skills, then we're really doing 19th
century education. It isn't the difference between 20th and 21st. It's rote 19th century
education and we're so far beyond that and - so, it's something that I really do feel
strongly about. I'm known to be a little impatient with it and it is - I think it's difficult in
every place. Even the Common Core assessments - I mean at the heart of it - it's got to be
literacy. We know it will be. And teachers are still so heightened - the awareness is so
heightened about test scores that it's hard to let go of that 19th century education.
(Superintendent B, interview, June 14, 2013).
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
55
A Clear and Simple Definition of 21
st
Century Skills with the Board as a
Catalyst
It was clear that the districts interviewed had already embarked on a path
infusing 21
st
Century skills into the curriculum. In District B the board had listed
the goals prior to the superintendent’s arrival. “It's in our board goals listed by those
Four Cs (critical thinking, creativity, communication, and collaboration) as well and
the board actually evaluates me partially on how well we're implementing those in
the district.” Superintendent B further emphasized how close he was with the board
only having had a non 5-0 vote once in the three years he had been there.
Additionally, Superintendent B stressed the necessity for a clear and simple vision ,
which is one that all stakeholders could easily recite.
A part of this vision includes the 21
st
Century elements and Superintendent
B demonstrated that he could “just rattle off the Four Cs for you very easily.”
We have kept it very simple. We have focused only on the traditional 4 Cs
(communication, collaboration, critical thinking, creativity). Those 4. Other places
have added others like global citizenship. Some have 6 Cs but we've kept it just to
those 4 and pushing it hard. That's how we define it. It's in our board goals listed by
those 4 as well.
(Superintendent B, interview, June 14, 2013).
Similarly Superintendent A stated:
The goals - so those are communication, collaboration, creativity and critical
thinking - and the goal is to have students writing by the time they graduate from
college to be ready for careers. We actually have 5 strategic goals in our district and
the last one is student achievement. That is a strategic goal and the Common Core
implementation is the sub-goal.
Superintendent B acknowledged other 21
st
Century skills but was adamant
about keeping things simple. “The global citizenship part is very attractive to me.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
56
There are parts of it that I love. We have some teachers doing 21
st
Century skills
even though we aren't pushing that but I like the consistency and just the simplicity
of it.”
This superintendent communicates with the board quarterly and discusses
progress to date and next steps with them. Superintendent A describes the board as:
Cohesive in wanting to support the district’s goal, then focusing on the goal and not
getting side tracked. They are willing to provide funding that is necessary. They are
respectful. They have been there for a big chunk of years so we've been be able to build a
plan and execute the plan - a multiyear plan.
Superintendent A further describes the board as:
very, very, very accessible – intentionally and otherwise. They're also very smart and
they're very knowledgeable. We involve them as much as possible and use strategic
leadership - again - so that we are all on the same page. And when they interact with
parents or community members it is important for them to be able to advocate for the
importance of the Common Core.
Table 5 depicts what factors superintendents believed influenced implementation
of reform with a focus on 21
st
Century skills. 52.8% agreed and 44.4% strongly agreed
that a 21
st
Century framework influences the implementation supporting what
Superintendents A and B had stated. A closer look at Table 6 illustrates that these same
superintendents ranked the importance of school boards in the implementation as either
very high (62.2%) or high (37.5%). Superintendents were asked to indicate their level of
agreement using a Likert-type scale with choices anywhere from strongly disagree to
strongly agree.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
57
Table 5
Factors Influencing Implementation of Reform with a Focus on 21
st
Century Learning
Strongly Disagree Agree Strongly Rating Rating
Disagree Agree Average Count
Globalization 0.0% 5.6% (2) 38.9% (14) 55.6% (20) 3.50 36
Focus on CA 2.7% (1) 8.1% (3) 64.9% (24) 24.3% (9) 3.11 37
Education
Economic and 0.0% 0.0% 35.1% (13) 64.9% (9) 3.65 37
Business Impact
21
st
Century 0.0% 2.8% (1) 52.8% (19) 44.4% (16) 3.42 37
Skills Framework
Leadership for 0.0% 5.4% (2) 51.4% (19) 43.2% (10) 3.38 37
Reform
And finally, Superintendent B enthusiastically show-cased the district’s high
school programs demonstrating 21
st
Century learning and skills:
Our sports teams are in championships all the time, the orchestra performed at Disney
Hall last weekend, all these things that we have that they all love, and many of those - the
United Nations team, which is one of the top five in the world, and is the epitome of 21st
Century learning because it's all about applying, which you have, communicating,
collaborating, and so we do have pockets of it but where you don't you have the
traditional lecture based curriculum and often really strong teachers doing that and, you
know what, they're pretty happy with it.
Discussion
Schools are being coerced to change because they are not meeting
expectations set for them by national and international demands. Fuller et. al (2003)
assert that superintendents are exposed on multiple fronts by the pressure to
increase student achievement. Schools are expected to educate students that have
met the 21
st
Century criteria through excellent educational opportunities.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
58
Globalization has set the tone for the characteristics of the future employee.
Ultimately, there is little tolerance for a lack of adherence to produce.
Responses to Research Question Two
The second research question that guided this study was: How do CA
Superintendents implement 21st Century Skills?
Even the Common Core assessments - I mean at the heart of it - it's got to be literacy. We
know it will be. (Superintendent B, interview, June 14, 2013).
The Role of Writing and Technology in 21
st
Century Learning
Both superintendents were very clear on how they would implement 21
st
Century skills for the entire curriculum given that the Common Core standards only
include language arts and mathematics standards. Superintendent A spoke of,
“Focusing on literacy across the curriculum and that will be something we can hit
on in each area so we can hit on them and be fine in areas like social studies.” This
superintendent further felt, “Over time as each of the standards gets through, that
will be fine - and I think that's good that it's stage based because it would be
overwhelming to try to do it all.” In the same way, Superintendent B indicated,
“The main two ways we've implemented 21
st
Century skills are through our writing
program (Columbia Letters Project) and through the use of technology.”
Superintendent B further asserted, “What teachers do is a great example - they don't
teach technology. They teach 21st Century skills using technology. The creativity
going on there is fantastic. The thinking going on there is amazing. Just, all
technology is, is a tool to help them get there. It does provide some very cool ways
for teachers to teach with.” Superintendent B eagerly told me about the middle
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
59
school one-to-one iPad program. In overcoming the possibility that all students
might not have iPads, he went on to say, “Every student has an iPad available to
take home and what we do is we ask the parents to either buy an iPad or to lease
one from us for $27 a month and if you can't or if you don't want to, we loan one to
you like we loan you a textbook.” He further reported that the high school teachers,
where the union was very strong, were somewhat oppositional to the use of
technology yet he has passed the “bring your own device to school policy” for the
next school year. “Now you can bring your device for classwork without asking the
teacher and it doesn’t matter if the teacher is on board with technology or not.” This
policy accentuated technology as a tool regardless of any opposition.
Table 5 represents the percentage of superintendents surveyed who agreed
(51.4%) or who highly agreed ( 43.2%) that leadership for reform is an influencing
factor in the implementation of the 21
st
Century skills. Both superintendents made
it clear that their leadership and passion were key to the direction their district
would take. Superintendent B reiterated his passion for writing:
I'm a huge fan of writing. I taught AP History for many, many years. When I taught
AP History I was really teaching an advanced writing course using history - that's
how I viewed it and show me a person who can write well and I will show you an
educated person because, again, you're not regurgitating facts. You are analyzing
and synthesizing, and you're communicating - you're doing all those things so now I
have one way teachers are teaching and it's all based on introspective stuff that the
student gathered themselves and report out and it's coaching and revising. It's more
coaching, it's constant - never done - and it's the opposite of the drill and kill stuff I
was talking about before. So, those are our two main mechanisms we're pushing.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
60
Professional Learning Communities and Professional Development
High expectations for student achievement, preparing students who are
college and career ready who can collaborate, communicate, be creative, and think
critically is a part of the vision and mission of both districts interviewed. To ensure
students are ready for careers by the time they graduate from college, teachers in
particular must be trained on the what and the how of the reform and since
superintendents have reported their most important stakeholder as the teachers, they
state, “Teachers have to be invested in it and knowledgeable and skilled and they
need the training and the resources and they have to engage students in the
learning.” Superintendent A further explained the process, ”Right now we are
embarking on the Common Core, as you know most districts are, and we are
providing training for our teachers and we're doing various activities.” She further
reported that in the past three years their staff development had been focused on
walk-throughs between the two curriculums, best practices, best teaching practices,
student engagement strategies, and training in Cognitively Guided Instruction.
Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) are strong across the district and
teachers have time built in to meet in their PLCs weekly. “That time is used to delve
into these topics and they get to examine student achievement and have dialog
about how to modify instruction or programs.” Superintendent A reiterated the
importance of her role in assuring the staff has been trained well:
I feel like I need to be very instrumental in making sure we have the discussions
about it, we plan it out carefully, we plan our staff developments, we check with our
constituency, our stakeholders, mostly our teachers, on staff development and we
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
61
make sure we are doing it well. It is important to do it well from the beginning and
not start down the path and have it be ineffective and have people be cynical.
At the end Superintendent A added that training had so far consisted of staff
development and getting people acquainted with the Common Core standards. To
augment this training she has planned:
to bring in a teacher, full-time, a release teacher to be a coach and go out and lead
discussions and work with PLCs at each of the school sites. And we're also going to
bring in a consulting group to help us do some very focused training and coaching,
you know, teacher coaching, and model lessons and observational coaching and so I
think we're really wrapping it up for next year and the following year.
Superintendent B had the same idea in his district. He has two full-time
Teachers on Special Assignment (TOSAs) working in the district office. One is the
21
st
Century Teaching and Learning specialist and the other is the Reading and
Literacy specialist. He also reported having created positions for 15 mentors who
will be leading the way in professional development. To make the process more
believable and reliable, “We do as much internally as we can. I think our own
people have great credibility.” Both interviewed superintendents are accessing 21
st
Century skills through writing and by using technology as a tool. However, he was
quick to point out that not all teachers are on board, ”You have to persuade people.”
There are a number of prerequisites for training to occur for it to transpire
effectively. One very important obstacle that both superintendents reported was
funding. Superintendent A reported that, “Thanks to the governor and the influx of
dollars into the state budget we have funding to prepare for the Common Core
implementation by having staff development or finding instructional materials,”
while Superintendent B excitedly reported a million dollar California budget for
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
62
professional development in the next two years. Superintendent B sighed while
stating, “There are so many challenges.” “I think that whenever you talk to teachers
about this kind of thing, what they always ask for is more time, more collaboration
time, and yet those same teachers are such professionals they don't want to leave
their classrooms to get that. And so, how do we handle this? We've had summer
workshops, we've paid teachers to attend in the summer but some have child care
responsibilities and so, there have been a few early adopters that do great and others
have been struggling and some that don't want to go.” Superintendent A spoke of
finding “meaningful professional development” and pointed out that it was
sometimes impossible to compel some teachers to participate in training.
Superintendent A’s statements confirmed previous statements about accessing the
new 21
st
Century curriculum not with textbooks, as she felt they are not the
curriculum anyway. Superintendent A stated:
Instructional materials, I think textbooks for the most part, are really not up to the
standards yet. They are being marketed as if they are but they are not really and
that's ok because the textbook is not the curriculum - it's a tool but in the absence of
a textbook we need to compile resources (primary documents, etc.) so that we have
materials for the teachers to use easily.
Being that District B is a high performing district, Superintendent B
expressed concern for the students that are not reached – the silent groups. He stated
his concern, “I know that traditional methods turns off some students.” This
superintendent often fights for these groups. He stated that they are usually
students whose parents are not highly involved. He understands that it is the right
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
63
thing to do but he points out that in a high performing district such as his people are
not always pushing for these groups.
Superintendent B divulged that his district had been a pilot for the new Smarter
Balanced testing. “There were tears because our students are used to knowing what's
asked of them, be ready for it and just slap your pen down and say, Done. 100%. And the
test was not that easy.”
Lastly it might not be easy to sustain 21
st
Century learning as
Superintendent A pointed out:
I think where it might get difficult for all districts and in the nation - as we try to
balance having standards - the Common Core Standards and then giving ourselves,
our teachers, the latitude to teach creatively themselves and come up with ideas and
have kids do discovery type learning or inquiry learning or very self driven learning
because it's not as compact as here's the standard, I'll teach it and make sure the kids
learn it and have tests on it. This is much deeper learning, much more engaging
learning, but I think it's harder to push that in a straight forward way. You kind of
have to continually massage it and move it and revisit it to make sure you're on
track.
Communication to Increase Buy-in
Throughout the interviews both superintendents spoke of the importance and
the degree of communication occurring in their districts evidenced by the value they
place on the flow of information in their organizations that facilitates the transfer of
knowledge and information as well as ideas. The primary goal of this
communication flow is to provide support and resources and to promote best
practices while empowering the various stakeholders to advocate for 21
st
Century
learning. Superintendent A confirmed this sentiment by stating, “And when they
[the board] interact with parents or community members it is important for them to
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
64
be able to advocate for the importance of the Common Core and why this is good
for a district, why this good for our kids, how this is enables us to keep our upward
trajectory as far as student achievement.” She further informed of “educating”
parents as a way to reach out to them as well as “pushing out” the message to the
community, appearing regularly in the Rotary Club, and using the media as ways to
“keeping the community really informed”. Superintendent B also confirmed using
the media and reported writing in the local paper regularly. He further reported
using the district’s website as a means to inform stakeholders. His regular campus
visits are communication opportunities with principals and teachers.
Superintendent A spoke of regular reports to the board:
As a part of our regular routine we give the board progress reports for updates at the
board meeting so that once a quarter we summarize our progress to date that we've
done and talk about what our next steps are.
Superintendent A also stressed the importance of the district office in the
role to lead and support through communication:
We need to lead and support. The upside of being small is that we meet once a
week with our management team and our discussions are often about teaching and
learning and so we can focus time and talk about the Common Core and plan as a
group. We can adapt more easily, we can shift gears more easily, we can figure out
"Oh this isn't working so well," we can regroup, we can figure out what resources
we need, what training we need, so that I think is our role - to lead and to guide but
to also make sure that the group is working together as we move forward in a united
way on this.
Discussion
How superintendents define 21
st
Century skills as well as the board acting as
a catalyst in the definition of these skills together with the role of leadership in the
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
65
implementation of the 21
st
Century skills stood out as major themes both in the
quantitative surveys as well as in the qualitative interviews of superintendents.
Superintendents generally supported most of the survey items as important, but
qualitative interviews provided clarity about the mechanisms superintendents used
for the implementation of 21
st
Century learning – mainly training and
communication methods. In reality, Superintendent B informs and models how he
expects the curriculum to be accessed for all stakeholders – through writing and
communicating, “I write in the paper regularly. In fact, if you look in the paper out
there, it came out today, it's a full page article by me of the year we just finished
and the first thing is about 21st Century skills and writing.”
Responses to Research Question Three
The third research question that guided this study was: Who are the key
stakeholders needed for Superintendents to implement 21st Century skills in a California
K-12 system?
According to Waters and Marzano (2006), the district office is responsible for
ensuring that goals are formed through collaboration with significant stakeholders. Sims
(2002) further asserts that this effort will support the success and longevity of
organizational change because stakeholders will have had the responsibility of carrying
out the reform and are thus partners in the change process. This shared ownership of the
plan creates the accountability for outcomes that cannot be mandated. Superintendents
are concerned with success in reform because they are held accountable for student
achievement. Superintendent B made known that he is evaluated by the board, “And the
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
66
board actually evaluates me partially on how well we're implementing those Four Cs in
the district.”
Involving the Top Five Stakeholders in Meaningful Ways
Table 6 depicts superintendent responses to the survey question: To what extent
do you agree that the following stakeholders are important to the implementation
process? Superintendents were asked to indicate their level of agreement using a Likert-
type scale with choices anywhere from strongly disagree to strongly agree.
Table 6
Superintendent Rating of Stakeholder Importance to 21
st
Century Skill Implementation
Strongly Disagree Agree Strongly Rating Rating
Disagree Agree Average Count
Stakeholder
Community 0.0% 2.7% (1) 62.2% (23) 35.1 (23) 3.32 37
Parents 0.0% 0.0 % 37.8% (14) 62.2 (23) 3.62 37
District Level 0.0% 0.0% 27% (10) 73% (27) 3.73 37
Personnel
School-level 0.0% 0.0% 16.2% (6) 83.8% (31) 3.84 37
Administrators
Teachers 0.0% 0.0% 13.5% (5) 86.5% (32) 3.86 37
Students 0.0% 0.0% 40.5% (15) 59.5% (22) 3.59 37
Politicians 0.0% 29.7% (11) 48.5% (18) 13.5% (5) 2.68 37
Unions 5.4% (2) 24.3% (9) 37.8% (14) 32.4% (12) 2.97 37
School Boards 0.0% 0.0% 37.8% (14) 82.2% (23) 3.52 37
The response range for all categories within this item was from the highest and
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
67
thus most important stakeholder, teachers (86.5%), to the least important stakeholder,
politicians (13.5%).
Teachers.
Both superintendents interviewed as well as the ones surveyed overwhelmingly
supported involving teachers in the implementation of 21
st
Century skills. Teachers
received the highest rating in this question. Superintendents interviewed spoke of talented
and professional teachers, who are often leaders, helping the implementation process.
“Our teachers are really professional and very talented - almost exclusively - so they have
been very cooperative and collaborative,” stated Superintendent A. This superintendent
referred to teachers in the district as being on the front line and was resolute in stating,
“They’re probably the most important players. What happens, happens in the classroom -
it either happens or it doesn't happen.” Superintendent B substantiated Superintendent
A’s thoughts and claimed:
We have great teachers. Teachers have just jumped on it and they've put all this giving.
One of my first grade teachers said to me, "I used to think I did a great job teaching
writing and now I realize I was only reaching 2/3 of the kids. Now I have reached every
single kid." That's what I love.
Both superintendents interviewed spoke strongly on involving teachers in
implementing the 21
st
Century skills. District B has a teacher on special assignment for
21st Century teaching and learning and another teacher on special assignment for writing
and literacy. Likewise, Superintendent A was eager to share, “Now we are going to bring
in a teacher, full-time, a release teacher to be a coach and go out and lead discussions and
work with PLCs at each of the school sites.”
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
68
School-based administrators.
School-level administrators ranked the second highest response from
superintendents surveyed (Table 6). Superintendent A stated:
Principals are connected to the district office and they need district support which means
we can't just say go off and do that and we're going to hold you accountable. We have to
provide them with the support, the training, the time for reflection, and revisiting things.
Superintendent B referred to administrators as “Change engineers,” and Superintendent A
stressed the importance of administrators saying, “Ultimately teachers are the most
important piece, second is the principal, third the district office.” Thus, the district must
employ administrators who have the capacity to be innovative instructional leaders who
can move their organizations forward while following the district’s vision and mission.
Since student achievement reforms actually happen at school sites, it is imperative that
principals believe in their own ability to drive innovative change. A failure to have the
right administrators would be a missed opportunity in the change process.
District-level personnel.
District-level personnel ranked third highest in the superintendent survey (Table
6) in stakeholder importance for implementation of 21
st
Century skills. Superintendent B
referred to his cabinet and district staff stating, “They're doing an amazing job.” Both
superintendents contended how reliant they are on their district staff in executing the
district’s vision. District B has two teachers on special assignment (TOSAs) working in
the district office while District A is currently looking to bring some TOSAs into the
district office. Both superintendents spoke of their staff with high regard and reiterated
how talented they were.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
69
School boards.
Of the superintendents surveyed (Table 6), 62.2% strongly agreed that school
boards were instrumental in the implementation of 21
st
Century skills. Schools boards
ranked fourth in the surveys. Similarly, one of the themes that emerged from the
interviews was the importance of the School board – also ranking fourth in importance.
Superintendents reported that school boards must play a critical role because they need to
support them as they embark on change efforts that challenge the current constructs
within their organization. Superintendent B exemplified this belief by describing the role
of the board as a critical and important partner who is highly engaged and knowledgeable
to be able to effectively support the plan as it develops. Superintendent B explained his
close working relationship with the board, “The board and I are very together. In my
three years here we have had one non 5-0 vote.” He further stated, “The board actually
evaluates me partially on how well we're implementing the 21
st
Century skills in the
district,” and further reported that the board goals included the Four Cs (creativity,
communication, collaboration, and critical thinking). Superintendent A also reported
close ties to the board and revealed the role the board has in ensuring an effective
implementation:
As a part of our regular routine we give the board progress reports for updates at the
board meeting so that once a quarter we summarize our progress to date that we've done
and talk about what our next steps are and one of our strategic goals is implementing the
Common Core ensuring that teachers have training materials, etc. and to be able to do
that effectively.
Superintendent A described the board as:
We have a really good school board - that has been really, really helpful. They are not
caught up in, you know, in some school districts school boards are very political in the
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
70
true sense of the word. Part of some politics are ideological politics. Our board is very
cohesive as far as wanting to support the district's goal then really focuses on the goal and
doesn't get pulled off and side tracked. They are willing to devote the funding that is
necessary. They respect teachers and classified staff. They have been there for a big
chunk of years so we've been be able to build a plan and execute the plan - a multiyear
plan - and not just try to do a one-all thing because those are not effective in the long
term.
It seems that school boards are holding superintendents accountable for their work
and their results and this in itself gives importance to their role as a major stakeholder in
districts. Through the interviews it also became evident that the boards were very
accessible mainly because both districts are small districts. Both superintendents
described their board as very smart, knowledgeable, and cooperative while generous in
funding.
Parents and the community.
Table 6 depicts that 62.2% of superintendents surveyed highly agreed on the
importance of parents in the implementation process. Furthermore, 62.2% of these
superintendents also agreed that the community played a very important role in the
process. Superintendents B confirmed the importance in the interview, “In District B
parents are very major stakeholders. They’re very enthusiastic about what we're trying to
do. I work very closely with our PTA leadership. I work very closely with our
fundraising organization which are parent based as well. The PTA has been instrumental
in providing funds for technology, for example.” Both Superintendent A and B further
reported that parental buy-in is very high. Superintendent B described the district as,
“People move here and sacrifice to move here. They go from a big house somewhere else
to a smaller house here to be in the school district,” and Superintendent A described the
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
71
district as:
All the homes are expensive in this district and there are some families that are extremely
wealthy and have mansions and the great thing is that families have opportunities to go to
private schools but they come to the public school because it's very high achieving and
also we attend to the whole child and they invest their time and energy and money in the
local school district.
Both superintendents reported strong ties to the community and felt the main
support from the community comes through funding:
We have a Boys' and Girls' Club in town and we are very close partners with them and
they serve mostly but not all low SES kids and most of them are English Language
Learners and they are just a wonderful organization they provide such good learning
environments and extensions of learning for the kids and the families feel very welcome
and the community is very supportive of the Boys' and Girls' Club. Yeah. So we kind of
have some of that liberal binge to where it's very much about social justice and making
sure that opportunities are available. (Superintendent A, interview, June 14, 2013).
Superintendent A also reported a partnership with the Mission Hospital for those
students interested in pursuing a career in the medical field and Superintendent B
reported the collaboration with the district high school and the Disney Concert Hall,
where the school orchestra had performed recently.
Trust is the value that parents and the community use to show their support. Both
superintendents revealed that this trust is based on the results the community sees and
they are thus responsive. Superintendent A stated, “As long as we keep them (the
community) apprised, as long as we educate them, they're good and because they're by
and large very well educated it's not difficult to educate them - it's not difficult to reach
out to them.” This superintendent keeps her ties to the community strong by being a
member of the Rotary Club, which she visits weekly to update the community about what
the district is doing. “It’s a way of putting the message out and making sure the
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
72
community feels good about what we’re doing,” says this superintendent. Additionally,
the five media outlets in town are used by this superintendent to push out media.
Superintendent B also reported that he regularly releases articles in the local paper and
his latest article included 21
st
Century skills as the highlight.
Discussion.
Superintendents surveyed and interviewed confirmed the importance of various
stakeholders in the 21
st
Century skill implementation process. They identified the most
important stakeholders as being teachers, school-level administrators, district-level
personnel, the board, parents, and the community because they bring forth the experience
and expertise needed to drive the plan. Other groups were important as well but mostly
served as supporters in the process.
Responses to Research Question Four
The fourth research question that guided this study was: What strategies do
California Superintendents use to evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation?
Continuously evaluating any reform plan will contribute to the success of
the plan. Evaluation will bring to light necessary adjustments that must be made to
enhance practice (Chrispeels et al., 2008). Too often reforms are abandoned and not
given a chance. To avoid such abandonment a dynamic work environment must be
present in which all stakeholders are expected to adapt to changing needs. This
commitment gives the organization the strength to endure challenges and
demonstrate resiliency.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
73
Both Childress et al. (2006) and Togneri and Anderson (2003) contended
that successful districts use student achievement data to evaluate student
achievement reform. And as Superintendent A reminded us – it is college and
career readiness we are looking for, “There are various measures or strategies we
are using where you can ensure that students are college and career ready.”
Monitor Reporting and Formal Assessment
Reviewing goals and monitoring progress documented through evidence is
essential for sustaining support from the school board, the district, and from the
superintendent. Superintendent A never forgot to reiterate the importance of
communication to the school board, “And again, we need to report to the school
board.”
Superintendent A reported on ways she evaluates the implementation of 21
st
Century skills. “As a part of our regular routine we give the board progress reports
for updates at the board meeting so that once a quarter we summarize our progress
to date and talk about our next steps.” She goes on to report that she herself meets
with her management team once a week and they talk about the Common Core and
they plan as a group. The cabinet’s role is not only to lead and guide but also to
make sure the group is working together as they move forward in a united way.”
Superintendent B reported being evaluated by the board based on the 21
st
Century
skills (the Four Cs), “The board actually evaluates me partially on how well we're
implementing those in the district.”
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
74
Superintendent B employs an innovative method to monitor 21
st
Century
learning:
The main thing we've done for 2 years now with the technology that we've done and
we have, we've built survey data on how we are doing and we didn't ask questions
about test scores, we didn't do any of that. All the questions are built around
collaboration, creativity, coordination, and cooperation (the Four Cs). That's the
main piece of data that we have. We don't think we can measure this with our CST
scores.
Superintendent A’s tells us about how her principals report progress:
About once a quarter - they do a written summary of here are the goals, like here's
what we accomplished so far, second column - now it's second quarter - here's what
we've accomplished, so basically they're tracking throughout the year what they've
done so far.
Furthermore,” she stated, “We still have the CSTs, we just went through and
administered those. Those are a measure - I'm not sure they are a valid measure for
the Common Core but they are a way for us to measure our academic achievement.
We have invested a lot of time and energy in training teachers on Cognitively
Guided Instruction or we have the Response to Intervention (RTI) program for all
levels K-12 and those have been really effective in helping close learning gaps for
specific students.”
Members of the community must be informed of the progress as well. The
media, availability of board reports, and communication by principals provide the
tangible evidence that community members and parents can understand.
Informal Evaluation and Formative Assessment
Apart from all formal evaluation mechanisms Superintendent A revealed
previously, she described the most primary tool to evaluate a program, “When you're
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
75
teaching a classroom you are observing students and how they interact and you're doing
formative assessments.” “The way progress is measured in implementation is qualitative
and a bit quantitative because you can count a little and you can measure it through the
PLCs - they have an agenda and they need to produce something with an artifact or some
written summary of what their discussion was. So that's one way to measure the
implementation.” Another way that Superintendent A revealed they measure was the
number of trainings teachers go to and participate. The quality of discussions and staff
meetings:
When a principal and other administrators are talking with their staff, how familiar, how
conversational are they with the whole Common Core? The same with their local PTAs,
the conversations they have to have and the quality of the dialogue that emerges from
these conversations is extremely important.
Superintendent B uses frequent campus visits to check on progress:
A lot of it is just anecdotal. We are looking at the writing. We use that as a barometer.
The lava is me. I try to visit the campuses. I try to visit and have scheduled visits on each
campus at least once a month and many unscheduled visits. And so does my admin team
here. And talking to the principals too is another measure for me.
Discussion
Evaluating and sustaining reform aimed at increasing student achievement and
producing citizens who are college and subsequently career ready to enter the workforce
is a continuous process and one which is of great concern to superintendents.
Superintendents must be able to control progress and push all stakeholders out of their
comfort zones to ensure that the response to continuous change is encouraged at all levels
and is a hallmark of excellence. Superintendents are on a quest to achieve this by
continuous formal and informal assessment and reporting. The strategies discussed
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
76
establish how superintendents view the different levels of their organization as
contributors to the 21
st
Century implementation process.
Emerging Themes
Superintendents interviewed and surveyed cited a wide variety of strategies they
had employed in the implementation of 21
st
Century learning. Five themes emerged from
the review of the triangulated data for the four research questions.
The first four themes that emerged came out of the first two research
questions that guided this study: How do CA Superintendents define 21st Century
Skills and how do CA Superintendents implement 21st Century Skills?
A Clear and Simple Definition of 21
st
Century Skills with the Board as a
Catalyst
In order for all stakeholders to understand and be comfortable with a big
reform movement such as moving from the state standards to the federal Common
Core standards and moving towards a set of new skills required from students, the
definition must be simple and clear. Stakeholders must easily be able to recite what
is required of them while the board must fully support the direction.
The Role of Writing and Technology in 21
st
Century Learning
Grooming students who are college and later career ready in the 21
st
Century requires them to be creative, collaborative, critical thinkers, and good
communicators. These four skills constitute the four main skills, the core, although
the list of 21
st
Century skills is longer, according to Wagner (2008). The Common
Core standards presently only cover language arts and mathematics while the others
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
77
are being developed. Writing across the curriculum is used to learn and use 21
st
Century skills. A student, who can write well, is analyzing, synthesizing,
communicating and doing much more.
Communication to Increase Buy-in
Throughout the interviews the superintendents disclosed reporting
mechanisms they were using in their districts. Communication methods are used to
advocate for, report, evaluate, and persuade stakeholders in the 21
st
Century
implementation process. The communication methods were meetings, reports, data
analysis reports, the media, visitation to community events and visits to schools,
conversations with the various stakeholders, as well as the internet and websites.
The Role of Professional Learning Communities and Professional
Development
Superintendents named teachers as the most important stakeholders and
further asserted that teachers must be invested in learning, knowledgeable, skilled,
and they need the training and the resources to engage students in 21
st
Century
learning while needing to be persuaded of the reform. High expectations for student
achievement, preparing students who are college and career ready who can
collaborate, communicate, be creative, and think critically is a part of the vision and
mission of both districts interviewed. To ensure students are ready for careers by
the time they graduate from college, teachers in particular must be trained on the
what and the how of the reform. Staff development, meaningful Professional
Development (PD), working in Professional Learning Communities (PLCs),
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
78
teachers on assignment, coaching, modeling, advocating for all student groups, and
not relying on the mostly outdated textbooks were strategies superintendents used to
keep their teachers up to date.
The next theme that emerged came out of the third research question that guided
this study: Who are the key stakeholders needed for Superintendents to implement 21st
Century skills in a California K-12 system?
Involving the Top Five Stakeholders in Meaningful Ways
Teachers, school-level administrators, district-level personnel, school boards, and
the community (including parents) were named as the top five stakeholders as they bring
their professional expertise and the necessary support to implementing the 21
st
Century
skills effectively.
The next theme that emerged came out of the fourth research question that guided
this study: What strategies do California Superintendents use to evaluate the
effectiveness of the implementation?
Evaluation Strategies in Sustaining the Change Process
Superintendents used monitoring reports, formal assessment, and formative
assessment as well as informal, anecdotal data to evaluate and sustain the employment of
21
st
Century skills.
Chapter Five follows with a summary of the research study including conclusions
and implications.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
79
Chapter Five
Conclusions
Introduction
While there have been many studies on 21
st
Century education—its necessity to
compete in the global economy, building up critical thinking skills, sparking curiosity,
and encouraging innovation—little is known about the characteristics and strategies of
superintendents who implement 21
st
Century skills in their respective school districts.
The following study will examine several California superintendents’ implementation of
21
st
Century skills in the K-12 public school system.
This chapter provides a summary of the study followed by findings related to the
four research questions. In closing, limitations not previously discussed, implications, and
recommendations for future study will be detailed.
The purpose of this study is to examine California superintendents’
implementation of 21
st
Century skills in the K-12 public school system. The findings
from the research will provide superintendents and other district leaders with the
direction and the intellectual resources to plan their own implementation of 21
st
Century
skills as defined by Wagner (2008).
The following research questions guided the study:
1. How do CA superintendents define 21st Century skills?
2. How do CA Superintendents implement 21st Century Skills?
3. Who are the key stakeholders needed for Superintendents to implement 21st Century
skills in a California K-12 system?
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
80
4. What strategies do California Superintendents use to evaluate the effectiveness of the
implementation?
Summary of Findings
Research question one asks, How do CA superintendents define 21st Century
skills? A two-sided salient theme that came through in both the interviews and the
surveys was the importance of a 21
st
Century skills’ framework as well as the
significance of the school board to this framework. Interviews provided clarity and detail
to both the framework and its relevance to the school board. Interviews revealed that for
an entire district to embrace and remember a new direction, the direction must be easy to
remember and very clear. Both districts disclosed that stakeholders in their districts could
name the elements of 21
st
Century learning as the Four Cs (communication,
collaboration, critical thinking, and creativity). They both agreed that there were other
skills such as entrepreneurship as a part of this skill set yet they both made it very clear
that to sustain change they needed to assure that all stakeholders, including students,
could name the fundamentals of their vision and mission. In both interviews the board
played an important role in advocating for the vision and mission to stakeholders and in
holding the superintendents accountable for the implementation of these skills.
Research question two asks, How do CA Superintendents implement 21st
Century Skills? Survey responses indicated that globalization was considered the
most important factor influencing the implementation of 21
st
Century learning.
Superintendent responses collected through interviews shed more light on what
strategies these specific superintendents are using to address globalization. Findings
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
81
were placed into three broader categories of strategies: the role of writing and
technology in 21
st
Century learning, communication to increase buy-in, and the role
of Professional Learning Communities and professional development.
Both superintendents named writing as the method to access the curriculum and
the 21
st
Century skills; both superintendents pointed out that the Common Core standards
only included language arts and mathematics and that writing would provide the skill set
necessary to demonstrate college and career readiness. They asserted that through writing
students can collaborate, analyze, critically think, communicate, and be creative. They
were both insistent that technology was solely a tool that could be used to complement
learning on the path to becoming global citizens.
Furthermore, both superintendents revealed the importance of communication in
advocating for the new 21
st
Century direction. The school boards are informed and
continually updated, students can recite what is expected of them, teachers are being
trained and coached. The Superintendent, the school boards, and the principals provide
the necessary communication to the community and parents. The media is used to push
out information.
Finally, both superintendents stressed the importance of professional development
(PDs) and the time teachers take in the Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) to
work on the implementation of 21
st
Century learning in their schools and classrooms. The
both contended that giving teachers time for learning was of the essence and that the PDs
offered needed to be appropriate and relevant.
Research question three asks, Who are the key stakeholders needed for
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
82
Superintendents to implement 21st Century skills in a California K-12 system? The
superintendents surveyed and interviewed identified the following stakeholders in order
of importance: teachers, school-level administrators, district-level personnel, school
boards, and parents and the community. Both superintendents interviewed contended that
teachers were the most important stakeholder but that the reform would not be possible
without the leadership on the school and district level and definitely not without the
support from their boards. Parents and the community were seen as important fund givers
and were both important in providing opportunities for students while also instrumental
in advocating for the reform.
Research question four asks, What strategies do California Superintendents
use to evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation? Superintendents
interviewed supported the use of monitor reporting and formal assessment, informal
and formative assessment to evaluate the progress and to sustain the move to 21
st
Century learning.
Both superintendents disclosed regular reporting to the board and likewise
receiving reports from principals. In a similar fashion, teachers have regular
discussions in their PLCs. California Standardized Tests (CST) still serve as formal
assessment measures yet one of the superintendents reported having created an in-
house survey measuring 21
st
Century skills without mentioning the skills. Both
superintendents reported consistently taking turns with their administration team to
regularly visit campuses to assess progress informally and anecdotally.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
83
Limitations
One major limitation in this study is the number of superintendents interviewed
and surveyed. Although the two superintendents interviewed provided insight into the
strategies that their high performing districts employed, it is not substantial enough to
warrant change reform in many districts. Furthermore, only 37 of the 100 surveys
emailed were returned. A larger return would have provided a much better insight into
the districts.
A second limitation is the sole view the superintendent presents. There is a need
to interview and survey other stakeholders to get a better picture of the change reform
and to create higher validity for the data collected.
Implications for Practice
The findings in this study contribute to the body of scholarly literature by
identifying the strategies superintendents have taken to implement the 21
st
Century
learning needed to transform students into global and competitive citizens. The insights
and findings will be helpful to current and aspiring superintendents as they embark in the
journey of implementing the new direction the Common Core standards is leading the
nation.
Leadership models might not be easy to duplicate yet this study suggests that
superintendents use many of the same strategies in the rollout of 21
st
Century learning. A
compilation of common strategies can provide the necessary guidance for superintendent
training academies as they deliberate how to train their staff and meet the demands of
internal and external sources.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
84
Finally, the findings can be used by schools districts to increase awareness and
also for evaluation purposes. School boards can use strategies from the study to create
their own criteria for superintendent evaluation. Superintendents can use the strategies to
create direction for school-site administration and personnel to drive and later evaluate
their rollout of the learning that has taken place. This type of implementation is research-
based and lends more validity to the process.
Recommendations for Future Research
In pursuit of greater clarity about the actions of superintendents responding to
demands for the implementation of 21
st
Century skills, the researcher recommends that
the following be considered for future study:
1. It is imperative to revisit the districts interviewed once the Common Core
based Smarter Balanced annual assessments have been implemented in their full capacity
to see what further changes need to be made due to the assessment results. At the same
time, it would be worthwhile to examine to what extent the reform to 21
st
Century has
been sustained.
2. This study looked mainly at the Common Core standards and the Smarter
Balanced testing. There is a need to do a comparative study of results from the Smarter
Balanced assessment as compared to the PISA tests run every four years by the OECD.
District strategies should be compared to strategies participating OECD countries engage
in. to find a set of best strategies.
3. Students are the end result of the new reform to 21
st
Century learning. There is
a need for a study or studies based only on students and student data and their knowledge
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
85
and interests to determine what strategies set forth by leadership worked and which were
not effective. Concurrently, it is important to find out exactly where the gaps in student
learning might be in order to be able to inform leadership what changes they should
make.
4. Finally, there is a need to do the exact same research in other districts and
other states to validate data and to find a variety of strategies that can be presented as a
toolbox to districts looking for change efforts that are in progress and show promise.
Conclusion
Schools and districts are under extraordinary pressure to fulfill the promise to
educate all students as they face demands for change in school districts. Superintendent
leadership is vital in this process and they must proactively take charge of current
practices and direction to drive change. Ultimately, the superintendent’s leadership sets
the tone for change in his or her district.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
86
References
American Management Association. (2010). Critical skills survey. Retrieved from
http://www.amanet.org/news/AMA-2010-critcal-skills-survey.aspx
Bell, S. (2010). Project-based learning for the 21
st
century: Skills for the future. The
Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 83(2), 39-
43.
Bennett, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical
review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology. 39(5). 775-
786.
Black, S. & L. M. Lynch (2004), What’s driving the new economy? The benefits of
workplace innovation. The Economic Journal, 114(493), F97-F116.
Bloom, D. (2004). Globalization and education: An economic perspective. In M. Suarez-
Orozco (Ed.), Globalization: Culture and Education in the New Millennium.
Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Breivik, P. S. (2005). 21st century learning and information literacy. Change: The
Magazine of Higher Learning, 37(2), 21-27.
Boaler, J. (1999). Mathematics for the moment or the millennium? Education Week.
17(29). 30–34.
Bottery, M. (2006). Education and globalization: Redefining the role of the educational
professional, Educational Review, 58(1), 95-113.
Chan, C. (2001). Peer collaboration and discourse patterns in learning from incompatible
information. Instructional Science, 29, 443–479.
Childress, S., Elmore, R., & Grossman, A. (2006). How to manage urban school districts.
Harvard Business Review, November 2006, 55-68.
Coe, D., Arvind, S., & Tamirisa, N. (2007). The missions globalization puzzle: Evidence
of the declining importance of distance. IMF Staff Papers. 54, 34-58.
Creswell, J. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Datnow, A. (2000). Power and the politics in the adoption of school reform models.
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22(4), 357-374.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
87
Dede, C. (2010). Comparing frameworks for 21
st
century skills. Retrieved from
http://www.watertown.k12.ma.us
Dede, C., Korte, S., Nelson, R., Valdez, G., & Ward, D (2005). Transforming learning
for the 21
st
century: An economic imperative. Learning Point Associates,
Naperville, IL.
Duncan, A. (2009). Education Secretary Duncan Highlights Budget Proposals to Increase
College Access and Affordability. Retrieved from
http://www2.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2009
/02/02262009.html
Childress, S., Elmore, R., & Grossman, A. (2006). How to manage urban school districts.
Harvard Business Review, November 2006, 55-68.
Chrispeels, J., Burke, P., Johnson, P., & Daly, A. (2008). Aligning mental modes of
district and school leadership teams for reform coherence. Education and Urban
Society, 40(6), 730-750.
Commission of the European Communities. (2006). Implementing the community Lisbon
programme: Fostering entrepreneurial mindsets through education and learning,
communication from the commission to the council, the european parliament, the
european economic and social committee and the committee of the regions.
Retrieved from http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/com/2006/com2006_0033en01.pdf
Earle, R. (2002). The integration of instructional technology: Promises and challenges.
ET Magazine, 42(1). Retrieved from http://bookstoread.com/e/et
Edsource. (2006). Similar students, different results: Why do some schools do better?
Elmore, R. (1999). Leadership of large-scale improvement in American education.
Cambridge, MA: Graduate School of Education, Harvard University.
Ely, D. (1990a). Conditions that facilitate the implementation of educational technology
innovations. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 23(2), 298-305.
European Commission. (2004). Final report of the expert group. Retrieved from
http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/entrepreneurship/support_measures/training_
education/doc/entrepreneurship_education_final_en.pdf
Fink, A. (2013). How to conduct surveys. (5
th
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Freeman, R. (2007). America works: The exceptional US labor market. Russell Sage
Foundation Publications.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
88
Friedman, T. (2007). The world is flat 3.0: A brief history of the twenty-first century.
Picador.
Fullan, M. (1999). Change forces: The sequel. London, GB: Falmer.
Fullan, M. (2002). The change. Educational leadership, 59(8), 16-20.
Fullan, M. (2003). Leadership and sustainability. Center for Development & Learning,
8(2), 1-12.
Fullan, M. (2005). The Roots of Educational Change (pp. 202-216). A. Lieberman (Ed.).
Netherlands: Springer.
Gardner, D. (1983). A nation at risk. The imperative for educational reform. An open
paper to the American people. A report to the nation and secretary of education.
Washington, DC: Superintendent of Documents - Government Printing Office.
Geier, R., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R., Krajcik, J., Soloway, E., & Clay-Chambers, J.
(2008). Standardized test outcomes for students engaged in inquiry-based
curricula in the context of urban reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching
45(8). 922–939.
Greenhill, V. (2010). 21st Century Knowledge and Skills in Educator Preparation.
Washington, DC: Partnership for 21st Century Skills.
Grogran, M. & Andrews, R. (2002). Defining preparation and professional development
for the future. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38(2), 233-256.
Guillén, M. (2001). The limits of convergence: Globalization and organizational change
in Argentina, South Korea, and Spain. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Gultekin, M. (2005). The effect of project based learning on learning outcomes in the 5th
grade social studies course in primary education. Educational Sciences: Theory
and Practice. 5(2). 548–56.
Haas, P. & Keeley, S. (1998). Coping with faculty resistance to teaching critical thinking.
College Teaching. 46(2). 63-67.
Howe, N. & Strauss, W. (2000). Millennials rising: The next great generation. New York,
NY: Vintage.
Hoyle, J. (1989). Preparing the 21
st
century superintendent. Phi Delta Kappa
International, 70(5), 376-379.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
89
Jarboe, S. (1996). Procedures for enhancing group decision making: Communication and
group decision making. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Jerald, C. (2009). Defining a 21
st
century education. The Center for Public Education.
Johnson, S. (1996). Leading to change: The challenge of the new superintendency. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kafai, Y. (2002). Elementary students’ perceptions of social networks: Development,
experience, and equity in collaborative software design activities. Boulder, CO:
LEA.
Kirschner, P., Sweller, J. & Clark, R. (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. 75-
86.
Knight, G., & Bohlmeyer, E. (1990). Cooperative learning and achievement: Methods
for assessing causal mechanisms. New York, NY: Praeger.
Koc, E. & Koncz, A. (2009). Job Outlook 2010. Bethlehem, PA: National Association of
Colleges and Employers.
Kowalski, T. (2005). Evolution of the school superintendent as communicator.
Communication Education, 54(2), 101-117.
Kowalski, T. J., McCord, R. S., Petersen, G. J., Young, P., & Ellerson, N. M. (2010). The
american school superintendent: 2010 decennial study. Lanham, MD: The
American Association of School Administrators.
Leffler, E. & Svedberg, G. (2003) Enterprise in swedish rural schools: Capacity building
through learning networks. Queensland Journal of Educational Research. 19(2),
83-99.
Levitt, P. (1996). Social remittances: A conceptual tool for understanding migration and
development.
Lundström, H. (2005). Entreprenörskapets rötter. Lund, SE: Studentlitteratur.
Macdonald, D. (2003). Curriculum change and the post-modern world: Is the school
curriculum-reform movement an anachronism? Journal of Curriculum Studies,
35(2), 139-149.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
90
Martin, D., Craft, A., & Sheng, Z. (2001). The impact of cognitive strategy instruction on
deaf learners: An international comparative study. American Annals of the Deaf.
146(4). 366-378.
Merriam, S. (2009). Qualitative research design: A guide to design and
implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
National Center on Education, & the Economy (US). New Commission on the Skills of
the American Workforce. (2007). Tough choices or tough times: the report of the
New Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce. Jossey-Bass.
OECD (2013). The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Retrieved
from http://www.oecd.org/about
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2006). A state leader’s action guide to 21st century
skills: A new vision for education. Washington, DC: Partnership for 21st Century
Skills.
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2007). Beyond the three r’s: Voter attitudes toward
21st century skills. Washington, DC: Partnership for 21st Century Skills.
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2008). Maximizing the impact: The pivotal role of
technology in a 21st century education system. Washington, DC: Partnership for
21st Century Skills.
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2009). Framework for 21st century learning.
Washington D.C., D.C.: Partnership for 21st Century Skills.
P21 (2011). Partnership for 21
st
Century Skills. Retrieved from http://www.p21.org
Pascarella, E. & Teranzini, P. (1991). How college affects students. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3
rd
ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Petersen, G. (1999). Demonstrated actions of instructional leaders: An examination of
five california superintendents. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 7(18),
Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu
Petersen, G. (2002). Singing the same tune: Principals’ and school board members’
perceptions of the superintendent’s role as instructional leader. Journal of
Educational Administration, 6(3), 243-264.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
91
Petersen, G., Sayre, C., & Kelly, V. (2007). What teachers think: An
investigation of teachers’ perceptions regarding the superintendent’s influence on
instruction and learning. Forum, 2, 1-29.
Pink, D. (2005). A whole new mind: Moving from the information age to the conceptual
age. New York, NY: Penguin Group.
PISA (2013). Programme for International Student Assessment. Retrieved from
http://www.oecd.org/edu/school/programmeforinternationalstudentassessmentpisa
Prensky, M., (2001). Digital Natives, digital immigrants part 1, On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6.
Porter, A., McMaken, J., Hwang, J., & Yang, R. (2011). Common core standards the new
US intended curriculum. Educational Researcher, 40(3), 103-116.
Roschelle, J., & Teasley, S. (1995). The construction of shared knowledge in
collaborative problem solving. Heidelberg, DE: Springer-Verlag.
Rotherham, A. & Willingham, D. (2009). 21
st
century: The challenges ahead.
Educational Leadership, 67(1), 16-21.
Rotherham, A., & Willingham, D. (2010). 21
st
century skills: Not new, but a
worthy challenge. American Educator, 17.
Salpeter, J. (2008). 21st century skills: Will our students be prepared? Retrieved from
http://www.techlearning.com/article/13832
Seikkula-Leino, J. (2007). Curriculum and the implementation of entrepreneurship
education. Helsinki, FI: Yliopistopaino.
Sergiovanni, T. J. (1998). Leadership as pedagogy, capital development and school
effectiveness. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 1(1), 37-46.
Shuldman, M. (2004). Superintendent conceptions of institutional conditions that impact
teacher technology integration. Journal of Research on Technology in Education,
36(4), 319-343.
Silva, E. (2008). Measuring skills for the 21
st
century. Education Sector Reports, 11.
Sims, R. (2002). Employee involvement is still the key to successfully managing change:
Changing the way we manage change. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.
Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium. (2012). Retrieved from
http://www.smarterbalanced.org
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
92
Toffler, A. (2006). The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read
and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn.
Togneri, W., & Anderson, S. (2003). Beyond islands of excellence: What districts can do
to improve instruction and achievement in all schools. Washington, DC: Learning
First Alliance.
Torlakson, T. (2013, January 9). Official proposes state burst bubble on multiple choice.
The Associated Press. p. 1.
Tsui, L. (1999). Courses and instruction affecting critical thinking. Research in Higher
Education, 40(2). 185-200.
Tsui, L. (2002). Fostering critical thinking through effective pedagogy: Evidence from
four institutional case studies. The Journal of Higher Education, 73(6). 740-763.
United States Department of Education. (2001). No Child Left Behind Act Overview
Executive Summary. Retrieved from
http://ed.gov/nclb/overview/intro/execsumm.html
VanTassel-Baska, J., Zuo, L., Avery, L., & Little, C. (2002). A curriculum study of
gifted-student learning in the language arts. Gifted Child Quarterly. 46(1). 30-44.
Wagner, T. (2008). The global achievement gap: Why our kids don't have the skills they
need for college, careers, and citizenship-and what we can do about it. New
York, NY: Basic Books.
Wagner, T. (2010). The global achievement gap: Why even our best schools don’t teach
the new survival skills our children need- and what we can do about it. New
York, NY: Basic Books.
Waters, J. & Marzano, R. (2006). School district leadership that works: The effect
of superintendent leadership on student achievement. McRel, 1-125. Retrieved
from http://www.McRel.org
Webb, N., & Farivar, S. (1994). Promoting helping behavior in cooperative small groups
in middle school mathematics. American Educational Research Journal, 31(2),
369–395.
Webb, N., & Mastergeorge, A. (2003). Promoting effective helping behavior in peer
directed groups, International Journal of Educational Research. 39. 73–97.
Weiss, R. S. (1994). Learning from Strangers: The art and method of qualitative
interview studies. New York, NY: The Free Press.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
93
Witt, (2010). Making his case for schools of the future. Retrieved from
http://www.nais.org
Yan, T. & Yun, C. (2007). Social interaction and adolescent’s learning in enterprise
education. Education and Training. 49(8/9). 620-633.
Yilmaz, M., & Orhan, F. (2010). High school students educational usage of internet and
their learning approaches. World Journal on Educational Technology, 2(2), 100-112.
Zoghi, C., Mohr, R., & Meyer, P. (2010). Workplace organization and innovation.
Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, 43(2), 622-639.
Zohar, A., Weinberger, Y., & Tamir, P. (1994). The effect of the biology critical thinking
project on the development of critical thinking. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching. 31(2). 183-196.
Zohar, A., & Tamir, P. (1993). Incorporating critical thinking into a regular high school
biology curriculum. School Science and Mathematics. 93(3). 136-140.
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
94
Appendix A
Interview Protocol
Research Question 1: How do CA superintendents define 21st Century Skills?
• How do CA superintendents define 21st Century Skills?
• What are the goals of 21st Century skills for your district?
• What challenges do you face in trying to implement 21st Century learning in your
school? How have you met these challenges?
Research Question 2: How do CA superintendents define and implement 21st Century
Skills?
• How do CA superintendents define and implement 21st Century Skills?
• What are your thoughts about 21st Century learning and how does it affect your school
district?
• Tell me what steps have been taken to implement 21st Century learning in your district?
Research Question 3: Who are the key stakeholders needed for superintendents to
implement 21st century skills in a California K-12 system?
• Who are the key stakeholders needed for superintendents to implement 21st Century
skills in a California K-12 system?
• What role does the district office have in implementing 21st Century skills?
• What role does the board have in implementing 21st Century skills?
• What role do principals have in implementing 21st Century skills?
• What role do your teachers and unions have in implementing 21st Century skills?
• What role does your community have in implementing 21st Century skills?
• What challenges do you face in involving all stakeholders in the implementation of the
21st Century skills?
Research Question 4: What strategies do California superintendents use to evaluate the
effectiveness of the implementation?
• What strategies do superintendents use to evaluate the effectiveness of the
implementation?
• How do you evaluate the effectiveness of implementing 21st Century skills?
• What indicators or measures do you use?
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
95
Appendix B
Survey Instrument
Questionnaire
1. Highest educational attainment?
Bachelors Degree
Masters Degree
Other Professional Degree
Doctoral Degree
2. Years of experience as the superintendent in your current school district:
__________
3. Years of experience as a school superintendent: ______
4. To what extent do you agree that the following factors influence reform for 21
st
Century skills? (Please rank in order from most important (rank 1) to least
important (rank 4))
a. State and federal accountability _________
b. Demands from the community/businesses _________
c. Demands from politicians _________
d. Market pressure and competition, including competition from charter schools,
private schools, and declining enrollment _________
5. To what extent do you agree that the following stakeholders are important to the
implementation process? (1=Strongly disagree; 2=Disagree; 3=Agree,
4=Strongly agree)
a. Community 1 2 3 4
b. Parents 1 2 3 4
c. District-level personnel 1 2 3 4
d. School-level administrators 1 2 3 4
e. Teachers 1 2 3 4
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
96
f. Students 1 2 3 4
g. Politicians 1 2 3 4
h. Unions 1 2 3 4
i. School boards 1 2 3 4
6. To what extent do you agree that the following factors influence implementation
of reform with a focus on 21
st
Century skills?
a. Globalization 1 2 3 4
b. Focus on California education 1 2 3 4
c. Economic and business impact 1 2 3 4
d. 21
st
century skills frameworks 1 2 3 4
e. Leadership for reform 1 2 3 4
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
97
Appendix C
Interview Cover Letter
INTERVIEW COVER LETTER/EMAIL
DATE
Dear SUPERINTENDENT’S NAME,
My name is Sherry Mohazab, a doctoral student in the Rossier School of Education at
USC. I am conducting a research study as part of my dissertation process under the
direction of Dr. Garcia and Dr. Castruita.
Our research focuses on a Study of California Public School District Superintendents and
their Implementation of 21
st
Century Skills. Thank you for your willingness to participate
in a 30-minute interview.
Participation in this study is entirely voluntary. This research study has been reviewed
and approved by the University of Southern California Institutional Review Board for
Human Subjects Research. The IRB believes that the research procedures safeguard your
privacy, welfare, civil liberties, anonymity, and rights. Please be assured that your
participation and answers will be kept confidential and anonymous. In no way will any
data be presented in any manner where any individual can be identified. If you have any
questions, please feel free to contact me at the information listed below.
Our interview has been scheduled to take place at your office on:
Date Time
Attached please find a list of topics and questions we may cover during this interview.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Thank you for your
participation.
Sincerely,
Sherry Mohazab, USC doctoral candidate
mohazab@usc.edu
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
98
Appendix D
Audio Recording Consent Form
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
3470 Trousdale Parkway Los Angeles, CA 9008
CONSENT
TO
AUDIO
RECORDED
INTERVIEW
TITLE OF THE STUDY
A
STUDY
OF
CALIFORNIA
PUBLIC
SCHOOL
DISTRICT
SUPERINTENDENTS
AND
THEIR
IMPLEMENTATION OF 21st CENTURY SKILLS
Sherry Mohazab
mohazab@usc.edu
CONSENT
I,
___________________________________________,
hereby
consent
to
the
audio
recording
of
the
interview
taken
by
the
researcher
for
the
purposes
of
collecting
data
for
the
above
study.
I
have
been
advised
that
all
data
collected
shall
be
confidential
and
used
solely
for
the
purposes
of
this
study.
I
authorize
the
transcription
of
this
interview
from
the
audio
recording
for
use
by
the
researcher
for
preparation
of
the
study.
Any
quotes
and
or
description
of
answers
will
be
anonymous.
Signature Date
A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL
99
Appendix E
Survey Cover Letter
Dear Superintendent:
I am currently a doctoral student working on my dissertation. I am pursuing an Ed.D.
degree in the K-12 leadership at the University of Southern California, chaired by Dr.
Pedro Garcia and Dr. Rudy Castruita.
The purpose of my research is a “Study of California Public School District
Superintendents and their Implementation of 21
st
Century Skills.” Dr. Garcia and Dr.
Castruita have identified you as a successful leader in your district and stated your input
would be invaluable. Gathering data from superintendents like yourself who have
demonstrated highly effective leadership skills will be an essential part in the success of
my research.
I am very aware of your time constraints so I composed a short survey that I hope you
would be able to complete. The survey will take approximately 15 minutes to complete.
This research study has been reviewed and approved by the University of Southern
California Institutional Review Board for Human Subjects Research. The IRB believes
that the research procedures safeguard your privacy, welfare, civil liberties, anonymity,
and rights. Please be assured that your participation and answers will be kept confidential
and anonymous. In no way will any data be presented in any manner where any
individual can be identified. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
Please click the following link to take the survey at your earliest convenience. Thank you
very much for your time and kind assistance.
SURVEY MONKEY LINK inserted here
Sincerely,
Sherry Mohazab, USC doctoral candidate
mohazab@usc.edu
Abstract (if available)
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
A study of California public school district superintendents and their implementation of 21st century skills
PDF
A study of California public school district superintendents and their implementation of 21st-century skills
PDF
A study of California public school district superintendents and their implementation of 21st -century skills
PDF
Strategies California superintendents use to implement 21st century skills programs
PDF
A study of California public school district superintendents and their implementation of 21st century skills
PDF
The process secondary administrators use to implement twenty‐first century learning skills in secondary schools
PDF
What strategies do urban superintendents utilize to address global challenges in the implementation of 21st century skills
PDF
21st century superintendents: the dynamics related to the decision-making process for the selection of high school principals
PDF
Evidence-based school counseling: challenges encountered by public high school counselors in implementing 21st century counseling skills
PDF
21st century skills as equity pedagogy to teach academic content standards: a socioeconomically diverse district's implementation
PDF
The role of district leadership and the implementation of 21st century skills through professional development
PDF
Preparing students for the future - 21st century skills
PDF
The development of 21st century skills among incarcerated youth: a needs assessment of teachers
PDF
21st century superintendents: the dynamics related to the decision-making process for the selection of high school principals
PDF
Embracing globalization and 21st century skills in a dual language immersion school
PDF
The influence of leadership on the development of 21st century skills throughout Irish schools
PDF
The role of the school district toward preparing students for the 21st century
PDF
Latinas in the superintendency: the challenges experienced before and after obtaining the superintendency and strategies used for success
PDF
Model leadership: discovering successful principals' skills, strategies and approaches for student success
PDF
Leadership strategies employed by K-12 urban superintendents to improve the academic achievement of English language learners
Asset Metadata
Creator
Mohazab, Scheherazade
(author)
Core Title
A study of California public school district superintendents and their implementation of 21st century skills
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
03/11/2014
Defense Date
09/17/2013
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
21st century skills,leadership assessment methods,leadership skills,leadership strategies,OAI-PMH Harvest,superintendents,Wagner
Format
application/pdf
(imt)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
García, Pedro Enrique (
committee chair
), Castruita, Rudy Max (
committee member
), Nordyke, Alison (
committee member
)
Creator Email
mohazab@usc.edu,sherry.mohazab@gmail.com
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-368930
Unique identifier
UC11295439
Identifier
etd-MohazabSch-2291.pdf (filename),usctheses-c3-368930 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-MohazabSch-2291.pdf
Dmrecord
368930
Document Type
Dissertation
Format
application/pdf (imt)
Rights
Mohazab, Scheherazade
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
21st century skills
leadership assessment methods
leadership skills
leadership strategies
superintendents