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 a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: 21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS

i

A STUDY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENTS

AND THEIR IMPLEMENTATION OF 21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS

by

Crystal Turner

_____________________________________________________________________

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

December 2013

Copyright 2013 Crystal Turner

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS

ii
ACKNOWLEGEMENTS

I remember an anniversary dinner with my husband, Tom, where we were
debating whether or not it was the right time to take on the challenge of a doctoral
program. I had just given birth to Quinn two months before and had my 3 year old son,
Troy to worry about as well. Tom told me emphatically that it was irresponsible of me
not to pursue my doctoral degree and that it would be a huge mistake to let the
opportunity pass. I have been grateful for his persuasiveness ever since as my career has
grown dramatically over the course of this program. Thank you, Tom, for every late
night that I was away at class.
My family, my parents, sister and brother-in-law, have provided support to me
many times and were always willing to come over to help Tom when he needed support
with the kids. My mother, the best teacher I have ever worked with, has shown me the
way to be a successful mom, wife, and educator. She is my true inspiration.
I want to thank my dissertation chairs, Dr. Pedro Garcia and Dr. Rudy Castruita,
who have given me the support and confidence to complete this dissertation. Both
professors have also given me excellent professional advice and I value their input and
support infinitely. I would also like to thank Alison Nordyke, our third committee
member for her intelligence, sense of humor, and most of all, supportive friendship.
I also want to acknowledge my thematic team- George Cheung, Patrick
Gittisriboongal, Suzy Kim, and Sherry Mohazab. We have worked very well together
and made this long process a bit more fun!
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS

iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements ii

List of Tables v

List of Figures vi

Abstract viii

Chapter One: Overview of the Study 1
Introduction 1
Statement of the Problem 4
Purpose of the Study 4
Research Questions 5
Significance of the Study 5
Summary of Methodology 5
Assumptions 6
Limitations 6
Delimitations 7
Definition of Terms 7

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature 10
Introduction 10
Globalization 10
Economic and Business Impact 13
21
st
Century Skills 18
Superintendents as Instructional Leaders 34

Chapter Three: Methodology 40
Introduction 40
Research Design 41
Sample and Population 42
Instrumentation 43
Qualitative Instrumentation 43
Quantitative Instrumentation 44
Instrument Validity 44
Data Collection 44
Qualitative Data Collection 45
Quantitative Data Collection 45
Ethical Considerations 47

Chapter Four: Results 49
Introduction 49
Purpose 50
Response Rate 50
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS

iv
Quantitative Demographic Data 50
Qualitative Demographic Data 52
Research Question One 52
Discussion 53
Research Question Two 53
State and Federal Accountability 54
Community/Businesses 56
Marketplace 57
Politician 58
Discussion 61
Research Question Three 61
School Level Administration 62
Teachers 63
District Level Administration 65
Community 65
Students 66
School Boards 66
Parents 67
Unions 67
Politicians 68
Discussion 68
Research Question Four 69
Discussion 69
Emerging Themes 70

Chapter Five: Conclusions 71
Introduction 71
Statement of the Problem 73
Purpose of the Study 73
Research Questions 73
Methodology 73
Findings 74
Recommendations for Future Study 75
Conclusions 76

References 77

Appendices
Appendix A: Research Question/Instrument Connection 86
Appendix B: Survey Instrument 87
Appendix C: Survey Cover Letter 89
Appendix D: Interview Consent Form 90

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS

v
LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Quantitative Survey: Response Rate

Table 2: Quantitative Survey: Highest Educational Attainment

Table 3: Quantitative Survey: Superintendent

Table 4: Quantitative Survey: Characteristics for Superintendents and Districts

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS

vi
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Quantitative Survey: Factors of Influence

Figure 2: Quantitative Survey: Influential Factors

Figure 3: Quantitative Survey: Stakeholders

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS

vii
Abstract

The number of school districts needing to focus their attention on ensuring that
their students are receiving a 21
st
Century education has grown considerably with the
creation of the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) and the looming
deadline of the 2014-2015 school year when the new assessments will be given. The
assessment dates, along with the global demand for increased rigor and relevance also
calls for a 21
st
Century schooling experience. In order to spearhead large scale reform,
the superintendent of the school district must lead his/her school district to develop,
implement, and sustain the changes made to address the 21
st
Century student.
A mixed methods approach was used to answer four research questions related to
the superintendent’s implementation of 21
st
Century skills. Data was collected through
an online survey with 35 responses with ten qualitative interviews of superintendents to
support the four major findings.
The first finding was that professional development and teacher training is
essential to any district-wide reform. Without the proper training and support for
teachers, it sustainable reform is unlikely. Next, the importance of teacher leadership
shows that superintendents need to work with their principals to build a site-based school
leadership team to effectively create a lasting reform. The third theme is that the
superintendent must identify his/her essential stakeholders such as cabinet members,
board members, community members, and principals in order to create support for the
21
st
Century skills transformation. Finally, the superintendent must hold his/her
stakeholders accountable for the changes requested of them. Without accountability, it is
difficult to sustain the 21
st
Century skills reform.
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 1
CHAPTER ONE
OVERIEW OF THE STUDY
“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 public 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.
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
United States 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
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
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 2
had begun to occur - others were matching and surpassing American educational
experiences.
Almost twenty years later, Gurría, (2010), the Organisation for Economic Co-
operation and development (OECD) Secretary-General, reported 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
them. 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)
cited 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
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 21
st
Century skills assessment based on the new Common Core State
Standards (CCSS) has forced districts to reexamine current practices. School districts are
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 3
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 essential as the students of our educational system are
increasingly competing against students from the 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) explained 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
research and all combine to suggest that changes need to be made within the schooling
system.
Wagner (2010) claimed that when observing classrooms students are not
necessarily receiving a poor education, just that it is the same instruction that was
delivered to students 50 to 100 years ago. While the world around students has changed,
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 4
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 American 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 CCSS, 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 - the 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.
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.

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 5
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
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 ten superintendents to provide in depth responses to the research questions. The
interview protocol is included (Appendix A). Quantitative data was collected in the form
of a survey with 21 questions (Appendix B). The questionnaire was sent to
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 6
superintendents of public school districts in California. The multiple superintendents and
their responses form data triangulation, with a focus on two superintendents plus the
survey responses from superintendents, which is 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
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.

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 7
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 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
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 8
(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
• Program for International Student Assessment-International (PISA):
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 9
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 C’s- Collaboration, Critical Thinking, Creativity, and
Communication: Students need to learn more than the “3 R’s”- Reading,
Writing, and Arithmetic to be successful in the global community. The 4
C’s 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.
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 10
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
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, Arvind, and Tamirisa (2007) described globalization as the
agent that “makes the world a smaller place,” where distance is no longer an obstacle in
obtaining goods, services, and ideas (p. 32).

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 11
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,
“crossnational 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 also recognized that however “globalized” education is, there are many
inequities in terms of quality and access for certain countries, particularly in 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” referred to “bringing nations together”
through international trade, commerce, mobility, and education (Bloom, 2004, p.68).
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 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
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 12
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 believed that California is at an advantage being an immigrant state and
thus globalization should happen faster in this state (1996).
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
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).

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 13
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
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).
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 14
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.
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,
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 15
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
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
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 16
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.
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
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 17
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 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
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 18
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 by the NAIS Commission on Accreditation (2010), 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?” Wagner (2008) defined the seven 21st
Century skills needed to be competitive in this global knowledge economy. These 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
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 19
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?
Access & Analysis. According to Prensky (2001) commentators on education
discussed the new generation of learners that are 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” (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 (2001). 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 (2001)
also asserted that this generation learns differently. They are active, experiential learners,
proficient in multitasking, and dependent on communication technologies for accessing
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 20
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 (2001). Prensky claimed
that most teachers belong to the digital immigrant group. Bennett, Maton, and Kervin
(2008) argued that although there is need for major reform in education, schools have
been subjected to little critical scrutiny, are under-theorized, and lack a sound empirical
basis. Thus, there is an immediate 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.
According to Wagner (2008), with the advent of the 21
st
Century, media and
technology have grown exponentially. Wagner further contended that the ability to
analyze this information and discern what is important and what is not is essential (2008).
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,
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 21
2010). Wagner contended 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
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.
Unfortunately, as students continue through the education system, they become less and
less inquisitive, ask fewer questions and exhibit apathy towards learning (Wagner, 2010).
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
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 22
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.
Problem solving and critical thinking skills. Critical thinking (CT), or “the
ability to engage in purposeful, 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 (2002) claimed 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).
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 23
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
to instructors (e.g. Martin, Craft, & Sheng, 2001; Zohar, Weinberger, & Tamir, 1994;
Zohar & Tamir, 1993; VanTassel-Baska, Zuo, Avery, & Little, 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 (2002) 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
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 24
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
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 (2002). 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. 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
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 25
individuals’ abilities to communicate in person (Wagner, 2010). Wagner’s interview of
more than 800 CEOs indicated that employers 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
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 26
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 (Yilmaz & Orhan, 2010). Cheung and Huang (2005) agreed 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
that allows them to use internet. Another method, Yilnaz and Orhan (2010) contended, is
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 27
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
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
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 28
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.
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
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 29
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
students need to be ready for a career and for college” (p. 1).
Agility & 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. It
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 30
has infiltrated how people are learning, experiencing the world, and interacting with one
another (Wagner, 2008). Wagner identified 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. 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
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 31
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.
Education is no exception (Wagner, 2010). People who work today must be able
to think, be flexible, change, and use a variety of 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
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 32
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 (1999).
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-Leino (2011), 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
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 (2003) revealed teacher interviews that included their views
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 33
on what enterprise and entrepreneurship means. “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 (interview with a primary school teacher).” 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
(2003). 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 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, 2003). 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
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 34
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
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
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 35
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
skills, planning, and evaluations in place to ensure the success of the stated goals. Waters
and Marzano (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
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 36
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 (2005)
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
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,
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 37
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
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
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 38
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
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
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 39
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).

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 40
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
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 competitive global society.
Globalization has contributed to the increased communication regarding student
achievements on an international level. Schools are held accountable for preparing
students to be 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, the 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
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
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 41
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 California Superintendents define 21
st
Century Skills?
2. How do California Superintendents implement 21
st
Century Skills?
3. Who are the key stakeholders needed for Superintendents to implement 21
st

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 21
st
Century teaching and learning reform
that will produce citizens who meet the needs of the global economy.
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, 2009). Creswell further defines the mixed
method approach to be a combination of both qualitative and quantitative (2009). It
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 42
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 (Creswell, 2009).
In this study, 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.
Sample and Population

Purposeful sampling was used to select at least ten superintendents for the
interviews and 112 questionnaires were 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
requirements in the interview portion of the study. The two years of service requirement
is needed to collect answers in the interview that show an implementation over time in
one district, whereas the survey includes any willing superintendent respondents.
Thirty-five superintendents who are identified on the California Department of
Education website with the aforementioned criteria received a letter with a description of
the study with a request for participation and its purpose. Also included in the letter was
an Institutional Review Board (IRB) protocol description regarding the participation of
human subjects. The questionnaire was also included for the superintendents to
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 43
complete. The research is limited to the state of California. 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.
Instrumentation

The instrumentation selected for this study is a mixed method and includes both
interviews of sitting superintendents and questionnaires given to superintendents.
Qualitative
Interviews of superintendents were chosen as a method to collect information
regarding the implementation of 21
st
Century skills in his/her district (Appendix A).
Interviews were also selected because it may be necessary for the principal investigator to
probe for deeper answers to complex questions (Merriam, 2009). Value, opinion, and
knowledge questions were included in the protocol. During the interviews, the
superintendents were 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. Questions regarding how the reform
implementation will be delivered to staff and the monitoring of its success were also
questioned. The protocol was implemented consistently to all interviewees. In addition
to the standard, open-ended questions, follow-up questions were 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.

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 44
Quantitative
Questionnaires were selected for their ability to reach additional participants.
Surveys also allowed the investigator to gather information about how superintendents
described 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 neutral response of “neither agree or disagree” so that the investigator can
determine a definite response (Fink, 2013).
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 manage the amount of
time that each interview would require.
The importance of this study may have implications for other districts as they
implement 21
st
Century skills. These interviews 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, was used when
collecting data. Qualitative data was collected in the form of interviews and quantitative
data was collected using surveys. The researchers received approval from the
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 45
Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the University of Southern California prior to
conducting any interviews or sending out surveys to participating parties. Data that was
collected from this study will be secured and only be used by the approved researchers.
All respondents’ identities will remain confidential throughout the course of this study.
Qualitative Data
A series of interviews with various superintendents was conducted during the
spring and 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).
Researchers interviewed ten California superintendents. All interviews were
audio recorded, transcribed, and coded. All participating superintendents will be given a
chance to receive a copy of the completed dissertation.
Quantitative Data
Quantitative 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 contacted approximately 100 California superintendents to participate in the
survey in the summer of 2013. Participating superintendents had a timeframe of one
month to complete the online survey. The researcher coded all received survey data to
use for the study. All survey data will be confidential and will only be accessible to the
researcher who was 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). Merriam (2009) indicated
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 46
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 followed 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, 2009).
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, 2009). 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 analyzed documents based on the relevant
characteristics of the content. Merriam (2009) indicated that the constant comparative
method compares one segment of data with another to determine similarities and
differences. The constant comparative method was used to analyze data gathered from
documents, observations, and interviews.
Results from the online survey questions provided data for the quantitative
portion of the study. Survey Monkey provided the necessary online security and data
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 47
analysis capability, including the ability to analyze open-ended results and create
comparison reports, use cross-tabulations, and 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.
Also, the responses compared how different groups of respondents answer survey
questions. In analyzing the data in this 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) indicated that the final step of the data analysis involves a period
of intensive analysis with findings that are substantiated, revised, or reconfigured.
Furthermore, Creswell (2009) identified 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
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 48
put into place so that each participants’ anonymity was guaranteed, and any request to
withdraw from the study at any time was honored.
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 49

CHAPTER FOUR

FINDINGS

Introduction

The number of school districts needing to focus their attention on ensuring that
their students are receiving a 21
st
Century education has grown considerably with the
creation of the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) and the looming
deadline of the 2014-2015 school year when the new assessments will be given. The
assessment dates, along with the global demand for increased rigor and relevance also
calls for a 21
st
Century schooling experience. In order to spearhead a large scale reform,
the superintendent of the school district must lead his/her school district to develop,
implement, and sustain the changes made to address the 21
st
Century student.
This chapter presents the findings from the mixed-method study comprised of ten
California superintendents and a quantitative survey completed by 35 superintendents.
These interviews and surveys aligned with the following research questions:
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?
4. What strategies do California superintendents use to evaluate the
effectiveness of the implementation?

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 50
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. Potential evaluations of the 21
st
Century skills
implementation will also be provided in this report.
Response Rate
The selection criteria required that superintendents be located in the state of
California. The survey was sent out to 112 superintendents. Table 1 shows that 35
superintendents elected to respond. This result shows 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 earned a Doctoral Degree, and 2.9% hold another
professional degree, which was unspecified.
Table 2
Quantitative Survey: Highest Educational Attainment

Measure Bachelor’s Master’s Other Professional Doctoral Total
Degree Degree Degree Degree
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 51

Superintendents 0 14 1 20 35
% of Superintendents 0 40 2.9 57.1 100
Kowalski, McCord, Petersen, Young, and Ellerson reported that in their survey
participation of 1,867 superintendents, 45.3% had doctoral degrees (2010). The finding
from this survey showed a doctoral degree rate of 57.1%, a difference of 11.8% above the
national rate.
Table 3 documents the years of experience that superintendents have in their
current district. All 35 respondents answered this question.
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 is relevant as the Common Core State Standards
and the new accountability system, Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC),
will be implemented in the 2014-2015. Superintendents who responded are most likely
working to implement 21st Century skills, which is the basis of the SBAC testing system
(Porter, McMaken, Hwang, & Yang, 2010).
Qualitative interviews were conducted with ten superintendents and the researcher
focused on two superintendent interviews. Each superintendent has been in their current
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 52
school district for more than two years and the detailed demographic information
regarding their district will provide an overview of each superintendent interviewed and
therefore lend context to the responses. Special consideration was given to school
districts that had evidence of 21
st
Century skills currently in their districts. All of the
interviews were conducted in person and were recorded with an audio recording device.
Superintendents were also guaranteed anonymity to allow them to freely respond.
Table 4
Quantitative Survey: Characteristics for Superintendents and Districts
Superintendent Profile District

A Gender: Male Enrollment: 23,093
Education: Doctoral Degree Free and Reduced meals: 39%
Years as superintendent: 6 Minority: 66.1%
Years in current position: 2

B Gender: Female Enrollment: 9,640
Education: Doctoral Degree Free and Reduced meals: 9.8%
Years as superintendent: 2 Minority: 37.9%
Years in current position: 2
Both of the superintendents interviewed had earned doctoral degrees. One of the
superintendents was male and one was female. The superintendents both have two years
of experience in their current districts. Superintendent A has been a superintendent for a
total of 6 years, and Superintendent B is in her first assignment.
Research Question One
How do California superintendents define 21
st
Century skills?
21
st
Century skills as defined by Wagner (2006) described the skills needed for
students to be competitive in the current workforce. This includes the following skills:
critical thinking, collaboration, adaptability, initiative, effective written and oral
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 53
communication, accessing and analyzing information, and curiosity and imagination
(Wagner, 2006).
Superintendent A defined 21
st
Century skills as the “Four C’s”. These four C’s
include critical thinking, collaboration, communication, and creativity. He also added
citizenship to make it the “Five C’s”. He continued that these skills are essential for
students will need to know them in order to apply what they are learning to other real life
situations. The Four C’s are being commonly accepted as pillars of Common Core
implementation and the need for 21
st
Century skills in classrooms (Retrieved from
http://www.p21.org). Superintendent B also cited 21
st
Century skills as collaboration and
critical thinking and included technology as part of her definition. In her words:
I think about it in a philosophical, ethereal way. You think about
Plato, I mean, Socrates on the mountainside and everyone listening
there with the rich dialogue and debate and really not so black-and-
white, cut and dry, more authentic learning.

She indicated in her further conversation that she is looking forward to a less-standards
based approach that consists of only one right or wrong response from students.
Discussion
Both superintendents use many of the characteristics of Wagner’s 21
st
Century
learning definition (2006), with an emphasis on the real world application for student
learning. The “Four C’s” were discussed in both interviews as a critical element of 21
st

Century skills. Instructional technology was also discussed by both superintendents.
This indicates that the superintendents hold a similar definition to each other and
Wagner’s definition (2006).

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 54
Research Question Two
How do California superintendents implement 21
st
Century skills?
Figure 1 showcases the extent to which state and federal accountability, demands
from community or businesses, demands from politicians, or market pressure and
competition influence the implementation of 21st Century skills. Each superintendent
was asked to rank their opinion on a Likert Scale from “strongly disagree” to “strongly
agree.” Fink (2013) said that using a four point Likert Scale provides a forced choice for
survey respondents. This does not allow respondents to choose a neutral response and is
successful when data needs a specific opinion. Thus, the researcher chose a four-point
scale in order to receive strong opinions from the survey respondents.

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 55
Figure 1
Quantitative Survey: Factors of Influence
0 5 10 15 20 25
State/Federal Accountability
Demands from the
Community
Demands from Politicians
Demands from the
Marketplace
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

State and Federal Accountability
The highest responses regarding agreeing with pressure are both influences from
State and Federal accountability and demands from the community or businesses.
Findings indicate that the majority of superintendents feel pressure to implement 21
st

Century skills from all of the areas questioned. 32 out of 35 superintendents agreed or
strongly agreed that State and Federal accountability was a major factor of influence with
an average of 3.34. State testing has become a method of measuring a district’s success
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 56
(Mintrop & Sunderman, 2009). Mintrop and Sunderman (2009) discussed how the K-12
public schooling system is focused on this accountability system. The level of
accountability is not expected to change once SBAC is in place in 2014-2015. As long as
Federal and State accountability systems and sanctions are in place, the testing will
remain important to superintendents.
Demands from Community/Business
Tied with State and Federal accountability, 32 out of 35 superintendents also
indicated that demands from the community and businesses are another source of great
influence towards implementing 21
st
Century skills. Granger et al. spoke to the
importance of the community’s support when implementing new reform (2002). Without
the support of the community, teachers will be less likely to maintain the implementation.
Community and business demands scored an average of 3.23. Part of these demands
from the community include elements of state and federal accountability with the offers
of choice to Title 1 underperforming schools. West and Peterson (2006) described the
pressure on school districts to improve the quality of their schools as to not lose students
to other types of schools that may include charter or private schools. Thus, the
superintendents feel that they are responsible for providing schooling experiences that
rival their competitors.
In addition to school choice challenges, the superintendent must also answer to
his/her parent community. Superintendent A says that he has done many parent
presentations regarding 21
st
Century learning and claims that the parents really do not
understand the gravity yet that students are not being prepared for success in the
workplace. His district has spoken to the Rotary, the City, Chamber of Commerce,
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 57
Lions, Kiwanis, and PTA groups, but that until the students start to learn in a 21
st
Century
environment and share it at home, it will be difficult to show them what 21
st
Century
learning means. In District A, the community recently voted and passed a bond,
specifically to fund technology for students. The district used the importance of 21
st

Century learning as the main impetus for the bond. Superintendent A said, “The world
has changed. We have to teach differently. To teach differently, we need new tools.”
This was the messaging used to successfully pass the technology bond. The bond was
sold as an instructional initiative and as such, technology has to be included in order to
keep the district current in its practices. In school district B, the superintendent discussed
that they have not done enough parent education yet. She places more of a priority at this
time with communicating with her school board.
Demands from Marketplace
Twenty-nine out of 35 superintendents ranked demands from the marketplace as a
factor of influence for implementing 21
st
Century skills. Again, this overlaps with the
responses above regarding the view of the community and their options for school choice.
Superintendent A referenced the California Office to Reform Education (CORE) as
perhaps a method to help schools district manage the tremendous amount of lost Average
Daily Attendance (ADA) to private and charter schools. CORE is a group made up of
large urban school districts that are attempting to earn a three-year waiver from NCLB to
exempt the school districts involved by removing NCLB federal sanctions. In fact, the
waiver was just approved by the Federal government (Fensterwald, 2013). This waiver
will save school districts millions of dollars as they would not have to fund the
Supplemental Educational Services (SES), or the tutoring offered by third party
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 58
companies to struggling students as well as the free bussing from identified Program
Improvement schools (Fensterwald, 2013). Superintendent B stated that they had less
demand from the marketplace in their area because their district’s API was already very
high, with a score over 900. However, she did mention one school in the district that
does not have actual attendance boundaries. This school has grown increasingly more
popular as the API is over 985. The waiting lists for this school are very long and she
believes that the popularity is due to the high test scores.
Both superintendents indicated that they feel the pressure from outside forces to
provide excellent schooling opportunities for their students.
Demands from Politicians
This question received the lowest scores with 22 superintendents responding that
they agreed or strongly agreed that demands from politicians influence 21
st
Century
implementation. With an average of 2.63, superintendents appear to feel less like the
politicians are a source of pressure. Neither of interviewed superintendents claimed that
this was an added pressure. When asked, both said that their school boards are the
politicians that matter to them the most.
Figure 2 asked for superintendents to use the same four-point Likert Scale to
identify the importance of the implementation with reform factors including
globalization, California education, economic and business impact, 21
st
Century skills,
and leadership for reform.

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 59
Figure 2
Quantitative Survey: Influential Factors
0
5
10
15
20
25
Globalization
Focus on California
Economic and Business
21st Century skills
Leadership for Reform
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree

Figure 2 indicates that superintendents believe that all of these factors are very
important, with economic and business impact having the most agree or strongly agree
responses at 35 out of 35 and an average score of 3.66. Globalization was the next
highest average with 3.5. The third highest score was 3.41 for the 21
st
Century skills
framework, fourth highest was leadership for reform at 3.34, and lastly, a focus on
California education had an average score of 3.11.
Once the district makes the decision to begin implementing 21
st
Century skills
fully, the factors in Figure 2 show that the economic and business factors influence the
success of the reform. The push to develop different standards and learning opportunities
for students started with the business community. In one example, The Partnership for
21
st
Century Skills (2006) met with companies such as Microsoft, Apple, Disney, and
other small and large companies who complained that students were not prepared for the
workplace. The term “college and career ready” started to become the moniker for the
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 60
businesses’ need for higher quality students. Out of the fear that jobs are beginning to be
outsourced, a change in education was required. The CCSS, the Four C’s, and other
similar devotions to a 21
st
Century learning model have been encouraged and supported
by the business community.
Globalization, the next more important reform factor and a key to implementation
had an average score of 3.5. Kereluik, Mishra, Fahnoe, and Terry (2013) claimed that
there is a need to reevaluate how students are prepared for college and the workplace.
They challenge schools to create “lifelong learners” who are creative and innovative.
The idea being that this will make public students successful in an increasingly
competitive global workforce.
With a score of 3.41, the 21
st
Century skills framework came in third. This
suggests that the actual framework for what is being taught is slightly less important than
the pressures for change on the superintendent from the business community and the
affects of globalization on the schools.
The fourth highest score of 3.34 described the effect of leadership for reform.
This suggests that without the pressures from above, the leaders may not be as
encouraged to implement the reform.
Finally, with a score of 3.11, the focus on California education is the least likely
to affect the implementation reform. Currently, the federal government’s NCLB levies
the sanctions and the responses suggest that the California focus on education is less
important.

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 61
Discussion
Although both superintendents interviewed claimed to care less about test scores
and more about the types of learning happening in the classrooms, State and Federal
Accountability was a critical reason to consider implementation. With the new State and
Federal SBAC assessments beginning in 2014-2015, superintendents clearly feel the
pressure to implement 21
st
Century skills with fidelity.
Superintendents, both interviewed and surveyed, felt the pressure from the
community to provide a 21
st
Century education. The two interviewed superintendents
spoke repeatedly regarding the importance of producing students who will be able to find
a job after finishing college.
Research Question Three
Who are the key stakeholders needed for superintendents to implement 21
st

Century skills in a California K-12 system?
A superintendent cannot implement a new reform such as 21
st
Century skills
without key stakeholders in place to secure the reform. Surveyed superintendents were
asked to rate the importance of key stakeholders in their organizations and the
interviewed superintendents were asked to name their key stakeholders.
Figure 3 asks for superintendents to respond to the question: How important are
different stakeholders are to the implementation process? Superintendents were asked to
respond on a four-point Likert-type scale where “1” indicates strongly disagree, “2”
indicates disagree, “3” indicates agree, and “4” indicates strongly agree. Interviewed
superintendents were also asked to discuss stakeholders and how they affect
implementation in their districts.
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 62
Figure 3
Quantitative Survey: Stakeholders
0"
5"
10"
15"
20"
25"
30"
35"
Community
Parents
District-level personnel
School-level administrators
Teachers
Students
Politicians
Unions
School Boards
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree

This chart shows that superintendents value the support of their teachers and site
administrators with 35 out of 35 choosing agree or strongly agree. Principals and
teachers are two of the most important stakeholders when attempting to implement a
reform (Leithwood, Steinbach, & Jantzi, 2002). District level administrators and school
boards are the next two highest agree and strongly agree selections. Fullan (2000) stated
that the support of the district office staff and the school board is essential to a successful
reform implementation.
School Level Administration
School level administration tied with teachers on the superintendent survey
regarding their level of influence regarding the implementation of 21
st
Century skills,
both with an average score of 3.86. Fullen (2002) stated that the most important element
of sustaining reform is the principal. Superintendent B agreed with this, and she had high
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 63
compliments for her site leadership claiming that they are the strongest team that she has
ever worked with in her district. She believes that the “fundamental person that alters
teacher behavior is the principal.” Desimone (2002) concurred that the principal needs to
hold teachers accountable for implementation of the reform. Superintendent B continues
that she believes it is her sole job as the superintendent to support her principals as they
have the closest proximity to the teachers and by extension, the students. Marks and
Printy (2003) confirmed that the need for strong leadership from the principal is essential
to the success of the reform, in this case, the implementation of 21
st
Century skills. The
research contributes to the importance of strong site leadership from the principal.
Teachers
The importance of teachers and their efforts towards implementation are obvious.
Teachers and the quality of their instruction is the biggest influence at school with
students (Marzano, 2003). The superintendent survey concurred with this with an
average score of 3.86, tying the average score of the importance of principal leadership.
Repeatedly, the research supports that if teachers improve their teaching strategies, using
research based techniques, students will learn more (Schmoker, 2004; Marzano, 2003).
Superintendent B discussed not only the importance of teachers, but the incredible value
of teacher leadership. She relies on department chairs and grade level leads to take new
information back to their staffs. York-Barr and Duke (2004) discussed that teacher
leadership improves morale on campuses, teacher professionalism, and improves the
quality of instruction. Superintendent B has implemented an in depth training model for
the CCSS, which will be an essential piece of 21
st
Century learning. They have hired
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 64
expert trainers from outside the district to train the lead teachers in the best methods to
implement CCSS.
Superintendent A also expressed the value of teacher leadership and coaches. In
his district, a large bond has passed with the sole purpose of turning classrooms into a
21
st
Century learning environments. Part of the district’s commitment to the bond is the
hiring of digital learning coaches to lead the professional development, help teachers to
implement the technology, and provide peer leadership to teachers. He says that the role
of the coaches is to provide support to the teachers directly in the classroom. Marsh,
McCombs, and Matorell (2010) supported the use of instructional coaches in schools.
They say that coaches support both instruction and data driven decision making to
improve student learning. These same digital coaches will be delivering high quality
professional development for teachers. Muijs and Harris (2003) echoed the idea that one
administrator on a site is not able lead every aspect of a school. The coaches and the idea
of using teacher leadership to build capacity within the staff are essential. Superintendent
B also spoke about the amount of time, three different times during the interview, needed
to implement their 21
st
Century classrooms, which includes the CCSS. He said that
providing enough time for teachers to be trained and develop lessons is a challenge for
his district. Mishra and Koehler (2006) discussed that the lack of teacher training makes
it very difficult for teachers to feel comfortable implementing 21
st
Century skills in their
classrooms. Instructional coaches will provide the necessary professional development
for teachers.

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 65
District Level Administration
The superintendents’ survey produced the third highest score with an average of
3.74 regarding the importance of district level administration. Superintendent A named
the Educational Services at the district office as the most important stakeholders. His
rationale was that Educational Services most directly influences the instructional part of
education. Honig (2006) stated that without the support of the central office, it is difficult
for schools to implement reform. In this case, 21
st
Century skills are the reform that
requires support from the district office. Superintendent B praised her current
Educational Services team, stating that “they are the best that I have ever worked with.”
Waters and Marzano discuss that the central office must support the vision of the
superintendent in order for the common messaging that is essential to implementing
lasting reform (2006).
Community
The average score from superintendents on the survey placed the community with
an average score of 3.34. Superintendent A communicates to his community by speaking
to the Rotary, City Council, Chamber of Commerce, Lions, Kiwanas, and Parent Teacher
Association (PTA). He believes that it is important to use consistent messaging
throughout the implementation of 21
st
Century skills in his district. Firestone said that
the clearer the vision, the more likely the vision will be implemented in schools, and all
stakeholders must be included in the delivering of the vision (2009). Superintendent B
spoke of a few resistors to Common Core implementation and 21
st
Century skills. She
said that she will speak to anyone who wants to talk about why it will improve student
learning. She also said that for the most part, the community is very supportive of 21
st

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 66
Century skills because they want their children to receive the best possible education and
that can be accomplished through technology and a depth of learning.
Students
On the superintendent’s survey, students scored an average of 3.60 level of
importance for implementation of new reforms. Superintendent B said that she
appreciates the new movement to focus on 21
st
Century teaching and learning because a
child’s life and success in school should not be defined by a CST score or an API
number. She continued, saying that she was to provide students with best first
instruction, and if that is done then the students will be successful in school. Breivik
(2005) agreed that students and their learning needs are changing dramatically. She
argues that it is the responsibility of the schools to adjust their teaching practices to better
engage students in their own learning. Superintendent B also claimed that she wants to
prepare students for college and life, not a test. Darling-Hammond (2006) agreed with
this idea of preparing students for life beyond a K-12 education. She claims the only way
to make a shift for students is in the teacher’s training opportunities. Without the proper
preparation, students will not be college and career ready when they exit high school.
Superintendent A did not discuss students and their role in implementation.
School Boards
The average level of importance regarding school boards from the superintendents
surveyed was 3.63. This is the fourth highest average for the question regarding
stakeholders. In order to keep his board informed, Superintendent A holds regular board
workshops. These workshops communicate the current messaging and visioning for the
school district. Petersen and Short (2001) said that the public’s perception of the
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 67
superintendent’s trustworthiness is directly related to how often the school board
approves the proposals. An important item on the agenda over the past year was the
progress on their technology bond. The board needed to be informed about the spending,
implementation, and the community’s position on the bond. Superintendent B spoke
about her board’s interest in being involved intimately with every detail of what is
happening in their school district. She said that when a board member calls, that takes
precedence over everything else. She also claims, “Our board wants extraordinary,
unlimited, for all kids in all things.” Mountford (2004) reported that relationship between
the school board and the superintendent is essential to the success of the school district,
especially in the implementation of reform. The stronger the relationship between the
Board and the superintendent, the more likely that reforms can be implemented
successfully.
Parents
Parents received an average score of 3.66 on the superintendent’s survey
regarding the influence over implementation of 21
st
Century skills. Warren (2005)
discussed the importance of engaging parents in the process of the change. This can
encourage parents to support the reform. Neither interviewed superintendent spoke of
parents during the interview.
Unions
Unions placed eighth in the survey of superintendents with an average importance
score of 2.94. Both superintendent A and superintendent B work with the union in an
interest based bargaining environment. Interest based bargaining is the ability for the two
opposing sides, the district and the union, to work together on agreed upon district wide
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 68
goals and develop working agreements without the oppositional nature of traditional
bargaining (Koppich, 2005). For example, in school district A, most schools exercise the
option within the contract to “bank” minutes during the school day, providing one day
per week for teachers to meet together as a result of students leaving early. This allows
time for teachers to work together (Murphy, 1997). In the 2013-14 school year, school
district A’s contract will read that the schools will have an early dismissal day, unless
otherwise negotiated. This contract language clarifies the expectation that banking
minutes will be the rule, not the exception. Superintendent B said that the interest based
practices work until a school district has to ask its employees for reduced salaries due to
state budget cuts. Fortunately, Superintendent B explained that the financial outlook is
far more positive than it has been in the past five years and she is confident that the
interest based bargaining agreement will continue.
Politicians
Superintendents responded with an average score of 2.63 for the level of influence
that politician have over the implementation process. This was the lowest average score
on the survey. The interviews both with Superintendent A and B did not mention
politicians during their interviews.
Discussion
Teachers, principals, district office staff, and the school board have the most
influence as the key stakeholders in a reform of a 21
st
Century learning process. Both of
the interviewed superintendents spoke often about the need for teacher leadership at the
site level, the critical element of professional development of teachers, and the need for
additional time for teachers to be trained and to plan. Site administrators were discussed
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 69
as a close link to the teachers and thereby the students. Without the support and
accountability of the site administration, reform will be unlikely to occur. The district
office administrators play a critical role in the training and support of the sites. It is their
job to communicate the mission and vision of the superintendent. Communication with
the school board is also essential according to the interviewed superintendents. Both
spend considerable time communicating what is happening in the school district to the
school board. This allows the board to understand the reasons why the reform is
important. Without these key stakeholders working together, it is difficult to implement a
reform such as 21
st
Century skills.
Research Question Four
What strategies do California superintendents use to evaluate the effectiveness of
the implementation?
Superintendent A uses graduation rates, SAT, AP, IB, and the like to assess
student learning. His district has also identified a local university who will partner with
them to assess student learning, particularly in the context of the technology bond. He
also mentioned SBAC. With a timeline of 2014-2015, SBAC will soon have its
assessment in place to test 21
st
Century skills (Tamayo, 2010).
Superintendent B uses the similar schools rankings, which are based on CST to
help her evaluate how her schools are performing compared to other schools that have the
same types of populations in regards to their subgroups (Powers, 2004). Her expectation
for schools is that they all score a ten, which is the highest ranking. If they do not
perform as well, then there are serious conversations that occur.

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 70
Discussion
Both superintendents are using state and national tests to measure student success.
Due to the fact that the new SBAC assessment has only been field tested, it is still unclear
as to what the test will look like for students. The reauthorization of No Child Left
Behind has not been announced at this time either. School districts currently do not know
how the state and federal accountability requirements will work. So while one district is
working with a university partner to start identifying key evaluative measures, the
evaluation component is still undefined in both districts.
Emerging Overall Themes
Four major themes emerged from this research. First, professional development
and teacher training is essential to any district-wide movement. Without the proper
training and support for teachers, it will be difficult to see any lasting reform. Next, the
importance of teacher leadership shows that superintendents need to work with their
principals to build a site-based school leadership team to effectively create a lasting
reform. The third theme is that the superintendent must identify his/her essential
stakeholders such as cabinet members, board members, community members, and
principals in order to create support for the 21
st
Century skills transformation. Finally,
the superintendent must hold his/her stakeholders accountable for the changes requested
of them. Without accountability, it is difficult to sustain their reform of 21
st
Century
skills.

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 71
CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSIONS

Introduction

American public education is under intense pressure from the community,
politicians, and the media to improve the quality of schools. Most parents tend to feel
positively about their own 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.
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 focus of the nation turned to question
public education.
Almost twenty years later, Gurría, (2010), the OECD Secretary-General, reported
that the U.S. still returns only average scores in reading (rank 14 in OECD) and science
(rank 17) but the United States has dropped below the OECD average in mathematics
(rank 25).
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
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 72
PISA (2013), and the encouragement from the business community provided an impetus
to the education community to reconsider their educational practices.
21
st
Century skills are essential as the students of our educational system are
increasingly competing against students from the outside global community for jobs.
Dede (2010) described 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.
Wagner (2010) claimed 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.

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 73
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.
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 21
st

Century skills in a California K-12 system?
4. What strategies do California Superintendents use to evaluate the effectiveness of
the implementation?
Methodology

A mixed-methods design was used to examine the proposed research questions. A case
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 74
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 is 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 data triangulation required for research (Merriam, 2009).
Findings

Research question one asks, How do California superintendents define 21
st

Century skills? Superintendents used the “Four C’s” which includes, critical thinking,
collaboration, creativity, and communication to describe 21
st
Century skills. They also
discussed the value of technology embedded within the curriculum and the importance of
the new Common Core State Standards.
Research question two asks, How do California superintendents implement 21
st

Century skills? Superintendents cited State and Federal accountability as essential to the
implementation of reform. The community and local businesses in the local community
also dictate that the students being produced in their school districts must be prepared
according to current business needs. In addition, teacher leaders are essential to the
implementation process. These site based leaders make it possible for their peers to
implement change. Principals and the quality of their leadership is also a key component
of implementation according to the superintendents interviewed and surveyed.
Research question three asks, Who are the key stakeholders needed for
superintendents to implement 21
st
Century skills in a California K-12 system? Teacher
leaders, principals, district administrators, and school boards are cited as the key
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 75
stakeholders to implement 21
st
Century skills. Teachers are essential to the
implementation of reform as they are with students to make the reform possible.
Principals hold teachers accountable for teacher’s level of implementation. District
administrators provide the training and support necessary for principals to successfully
implement new practices. Without proper professional development and training for
teachers, implementation will not be successful.
Research question four asks, What strategies do California Superintendents use to
evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation? Superintendents are working to partner
with universities to conduct the necessary evaluative pieces. The SBAC test will also
provide summative data, but the test will not be scored until the 2014-2015 school year.
The superintendents interviewed both expressed that this is currently a weakness in their
implementation.
Recommendations for Future Study

In order to gain further clarity on superintendents’ implementation of 21
st
Century
skills, the following suggestions are made for future study:
1. As the evaluation measures for 21
st
Century skills becomes clearer, it will
be important to return to this study to strengthen the evaluation section of
the study.
2. This study focused on California superintendents and the sample can be
increased to include superintendents who are located in other states.
3. An in depth qualitative review of one district’s 21
st
Century skills’
implementation could include the view of key stakeholders and their
specific roles in a strong reform process.
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 76
Conclusion

School districts are under pressure to change their educational systems to a 21
st

Century learning environment. The superintendent must lead the charge for change in
order to prepare students to be college and career ready. As a result, the superintendent
must provide clear direction for the community, staff, and students in order to provide a
21
st
Century learning environment for all students.

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 77
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), pp. 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.

Carnoy, M. & Rhoten, D. (2002). What does globalization mean for educational change?
A comparative approach. Comparative Education Review. 46(1), 1-9.

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.

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 78
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. Naperville, IL: Learning Point
Associates.

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

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

Fensterwald, J. (2013). CORE districts to make final personal pitch for No Child Left
Behind waiver. Edsource. Retrieved from
http://www.edsource.org/today/2013/core-districts-to-make-final-personal-pitch-
for-no-child-left-behind-waiver/36052#.UehIURaijfY

Fensterwald, J (2013). Eight California districts receive historic NCLB waiver. Edsource.
Retrieved from http://www.edsource.org/today/2013/duncan-grants-nclb-waiver-
to-eight-california-districts/36918#.Ug5uZxZpC5c

Fink, A. (2013). How to conduct surveys. (5
th
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Firestone, W. (2009). Accountability nudges districts into changes in culture. Phi Delta
Kappan, 90(9), 670-676.

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 79
Freeman, R. (2007). America works: The exceptional US labor market. Russell Sage
Foundation Publications.

Friedman, T. (2007). The world is flat 3.0: A brief history of the twenty-first century.
Macmillan.

Fullan, M. (1999). Change forces: The sequel. London, GB: Falmer.

Fullan, M. (2000). The return of large-scale reform. Journal of Educational Change, 1(1),
5-27.

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 (2002-216). 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, D.C.: 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.

Granger, C., Morbey, M., Lotherington, H., Owston, R., & Wideman, H. (2002). Factors
contributing to teachers' successful implementation of IT. Journal of Computer
Assisted Learning, 18(4), 480-488.

Greenhill, V. (2010). 21
st
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.
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 80

Honig, M. I. (2006). Street-level bureaucracy revisited: Frontline district central-office
administrators as boundary spanners in education policy implementation.
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 28(4), 357-383.

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.

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 1-
82.

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.

Kereluik, K., Mishra, P., Fahnoe, C., & Terry, L. (2013). What knowledge is of most
worth: Teacher knowledge for 21st century learning. Journal of Digital
Learning in Teacher Education 29(4), 127-140.

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.

Koppich, J. (2005). Addressing teacher quality through induction, professional
compensation, and evaluation: The effects on labor-management relations.
Educational Policy, 19(1), 90-111.

Kowalski, T. (2005). Evolution of the school superintendent as communicator.
Communication Education, 54(2), 101-117.

Kowalski, T., McCord, R., Petersen, G., Young, P., & Ellerson, N. (2010). The
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 81
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.

Leithwood, K., Steinbach, R., & Jantzi, D. (2002). School leadership and teachers’
motivation to implement accountability policies. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 38(1), 94-119.

Levitt, P. (1996). Social remittances: A conceptual tool for understanding migration and
development. New Jersey: Princeton University.

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.

Marks, H., & Printy, S. (2003). Principal leadership and school performance: An
integration of transformational and instructional leadership. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 39(3), 370-397.

Marsh, J., McCombs, J., & Martorell, F. (2010). How instructional coaches
support data-driven decision making policy implementation and effects in Florida
middle schools. Educational Policy, 24(6), 872-907.

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.

Marzano, R. (2003). Curriculum and instruction: Critical and emerging issues for
educational leadership. Best practices, best thinking, and emerging issues in
school leadership, 65-72.

Merriam, S. (2009). Qualitative research design: A guide to design and
implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Mintrop, H., & Sunderman, G. (2009). Predictable failure of federal sanctions-driven
accountability for school improvement—and why we may retain it anyway.
Educational Researcher, 38(5), 353-364.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A
framework for teacher knowledge. The Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-
1054.

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 82
Mountford, M. (2004). Motives and power of school board members: Implications for
school board-superintendent relationships. Educational Administration Quarterly,
40(5), 704-741.

Muijs, D., & Harris, A. (2003). Teacher leadership-improvement through
empowerment? An overview of the literature. Educational Management
Administration & Leadership, 31(4), 437-448.

Murphy, C. (1997). Finding time for faculties to study together. Journal of Staff
Development, 18, 29-44.

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, DC: Partnership for 21st Century Skills.

Partnership for 21
st
Century Skills. (2011). 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.
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 83

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.

Petersen, G., & Short, P. (2001). The school board president’s perception of the district
superintendent: Applying the lenses of social influence and social style.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 37(4), 533-570.

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.

Powers, J. (2004). High-stakes accountability and equity: using evidence from
California’s Public Schools Accountability Act to address the issues in Williams
v. State of California. American Educational Research Journal, 41(4), 763-795.

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

Schmoker, M. (2004). Tipping point: From feckless reform to substantive instructional
improvement. Phi Delta Kappan, 85(6), 424-432.

Seikkula-Leino, J. (2011). The implementation of entrepreneurship education through
curriculum reform in Finnish comprehensive schools. Journal of Curriculum Studies,
43(1), 69-85.

Sergiovanni, T. J. (1998). Leadership as pedagogy, capital development and school
effectiveness. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 1(1), 37-46.
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 84
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.

Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium. (2012). Retrieved from
www.smarterbalanced.org

Tamayo, Jr., J. (2010). Assessment 2.0:“Next-generation” comprehensive assessment
systems. An analysis of proposals by the partnership for the assessment of
readiness for college and careers and smarter balanced assessment consortium:
Aspen Institute.

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.

Warren, M. (2005). Communities and schools: A new view of urban education reform.
Harvard Educational Review, 75(2), 133-173.

Waters, J. & Marzano, R. (2006). School district leadership that works: The effect
of superintendent leadership on student achievement. Retrieved from
http://www.McRel.org
Webb, N., & Farivar, S. (1994). Promoting helping behavior in cooperative small groups
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 85
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. (1994). Learning from Strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview
studies. New York, NY: The Free Press.

West, M., & Peterson, P. (2006). The efficacy of choice threats within school
accountability systems: Results from legislatively induced experiments. The
Economic Journal, 116(510), C46-C62.

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.

York-Barr, J., & Duke, K. (2004). What do we know about teacher leadership? Findings
from two decades of scholarship. Review of educational research, 74(3), 255-316.

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.

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 86
APPENDIX A

RESEARCH QUESTION/INSTRUMENT CONNECTION

Table 1: 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?

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 87
APPENDIX B

SURVEY INSTRUMENT

Table 2: 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
f. Students 1 2 3 4
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 88
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

21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 89
APPENDIX C

INTERVIEW COVER LETTER/EMAIL
DATE
Dear SUPERINTENDENT’S NAME,
My name is YOUR NAME, 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,
Crystal Turner, USC doctoral candidate
Cmturner14@att.net
949-291-4314
21
ST
CENTURY SKILLS 90
APPENDIX D

CONSENT FORM
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education

3470 Trousdale Parkway Los Angeles, CA 90089
CONSENT
TO
AUDIO
RECORDED
INTERVIEW
TITLE OF THE STUDY
A
STUDY
OF
CALIFORNIA
PUBLIC
SCHOOL
DISTRICT
SUPERINTENDENTS
AND

THEIR
IMPLEMENTATION OF 21st CENTURY SKILLS
Crystal Turner
Cmturner14@att.net

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

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The number of school districts needing to focus their attention on ensuring that their students are receiving a 21st Century education has grown considerably with the creation of the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) and the looming deadline of the 2014-2015 school year when the new assessments will be given. The assessment dates, along with the global demand for increased rigor and relevance also calls for a 21st Century schooling experience. In order to spearhead large scale reform, the superintendent of the school district must lead his/her school district to develop, implement, and sustain the changes made to address the 21st Century student. ❧ A mixed methods approach was used to answer four research questions related to the superintendent’s implementation of 21st Century skills. Data was collected through an online survey with 35 responses with ten qualitative interviews of superintendents to support the four major findings. ❧ The first finding was that professional development and teacher training is essential to any district-wide reform. Without the proper training and support for teachers, it sustainable reform is unlikely. Next, the importance of teacher leadership shows that superintendents need to work with their principals to build a site-based school leadership team to effectively create a lasting reform. The third theme is that the superintendent must identify his/her essential stakeholders such as cabinet members, board members, community members, and principals in order to create support for the 21st Century skills transformation. Finally, the superintendent must hold his/her stakeholders accountable for the changes requested of them. Without accountability, it is difficult to sustain the 21st Century skills reform.

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

What strategies do urban superintendents utilize to address global challenges in the implementation of 21st century skills

PDF

The process secondary administrators use to implement twenty‐first century learning skills in secondary schools

PDF

The development of 21st century skills among incarcerated youth: a needs assessment of teachers

PDF

The role of district leadership and the implementation of 21st century skills through professional development

PDF

21st century superintendents: the dynamics related to the decision-making process for the selection of high school principals

PDF

21st century skills as equity pedagogy to teach academic content standards: a socioeconomically diverse district's implementation

PDF

Impact of leadership on professional development programs on districts' and schools' implementation of 21st century skills

PDF

Getting to the Core: an examination into the resources, strategies and skills superintendents employed as they implemented the Common Core state standards and the politics in play

PDF

Common Core implementation: decisions made by Southern California superintendents of unified school districts

PDF

Evaluating the implementation of 21st century skills and learning

PDF

The influence of leadership on the development of 21st century skills throughout Irish schools

PDF

A case study of 21st century skills programs and practices

PDF

Instructional leadership: the practices employed by elementary school principals to lead the Common Core State Standards and 21st century learning skills

PDF

Preparing students for the future - 21st century skills

PDF

The role of the school district toward preparing students for the 21st century

Asset Metadata

Creator Turner, Crystal (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

Publication Date 11/20/2013

Defense Date 09/17/2013

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

Tag 21st century skills,common core,OAI-PMH Harvest,superintendents,Technology

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 cmturner14@att.net

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-349005

Unique identifier UC11296567

Identifier etd-TurnerCrys-2169.pdf (filename),usctheses-c3-349005 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-TurnerCrys-2169.pdf

Dmrecord 349005

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Turner, Crystal

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