University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Providing parents the necessary resources to comprehend the common core state standards: a guide for schools

(USC Thesis Other)

Providing parents the necessary resources to comprehend the common core state standards: a guide for schools

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Providing Parents the Necessary Resources to Comprehend
the Common Core State Standards: A Guide for Schools

Carlos F. Perez

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
MAY 2015

ii
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to examine the resources currently provided by schools to help
parents understand the Common Core State Standards. The rationale of this study was to examine
whether the resources currently provided by schools and districts are helping parents to
understand the CCSS. Parental involvement is examined in this study and is used as the basis for
increasing student achievement through parents’ understanding of the CCSS. As schools make the
shift from the 1997 Standards to the CCSS, parents must play a vital role in providing the support
needed to further their child’s academic achievement. This transition is made more difficult when
districts do not provide these resources to parents. A survey was conducted at three different
demographic high schools in the same school district. The survey instrument used was a Likert
scale survey which asked parents what resources they needed and whether schools were providing
them. Helping parents understand how to better assist their children in achieving their academic
goals will play a key role in their future success. This study was solution based and aimed at
producing results as well as an action plan for helping parents to comprehend and support their
children with the CCSS. This study offers advice for parents and educators based on evidence.
The results indicated that parents find learning walks to be the most interesting resource a school
can provide to learn about the CCSS. Learning walks was also found to create a desire in parents
to learn more about the CCSS. Parent conferences with the teacher or principal were found to be
the most informative method for parents to receive information about the CCSS. Finally, the
study shows that parents find conferences with teachers or principals as the best use of their time
to receive information about the CCSS.

iii
Acknowledgements
I can honestly say that this accomplishment could never have been done without the love
and support of my family and friends. To my mother and father, thank you for always believing
in me and supporting me. This journey began back in September 1979 when my mother took me
by the hand to my first day of kindergarten. Mom, thank you for always being there as I
progressed throughout my education. Dad, you have always been my pillar of strength. You
always showed me that through hard work, I can achieve anything I want to, and I thank you for
that. You have been my role models, showing me that through self-sacrifice, hard work, and
discipline I can achieve any goal I set for myself.
To my sister Marcy and brother Prudencio (A.K.A. Guly), thank you for all your positive
words and thoughts, especially these past three years. It means the world to me to hear you tell
your children: “Look at your Tio Carlos. He’s getting his doctorate. You can do what ever you
want.” I love you both. To my fellow colleagues, thank you for your faith and support as I went
through this program. Special thanks to Stacie Muir and Kortney Tambara for reading and
editing my papers. I appreciate your words of advice and your mastery of the English language.
To my fellow classmates, thank you for the support and knowledge you shared with me
these past three years. Roxane and Allyson, if it wasn’t for you, I am not sure I would have made
it. You are my dear friends and know that I am always here for you. I would also like to thank
my good friends Rafael and Shawn. Even though the both of you made it difficult for me to leave
on Friday nights and attend class, your constant encouragement to reach my goal was all that I
needed. To Jamie, thank you for believing in me and helping me prepare for my defense. You
provided me the calm I needed before going in the storms I perceived.

iv
Finally, thank you to my dissertation chairs, Dr. Kaplan, Dr. Gallagher, and Dr. Roach. I
am grateful for your wisdom, guidance, and insight into the Common Core State Standards and
our educational system. You have been my beacons guiding me to the very end.

v
Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1
Background of the Problem ........................................................................................................ 1
Parental Involvement .................................................................................................................. 6
Statement of the Problem ............................................................................................................ 9
Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................................. 10
Research Questions ................................................................................................................... 10
Importance of the Problem........................................................................................................ 10
Limitations and Delimitations ................................................................................................... 11
Definition of Terms................................................................................................................... 14
Organization of the Study ......................................................................................................... 15
Chapter 2: Literature Review ........................................................................................................ 17
Epstein’s Six Types of Parental Involvement ........................................................................... 17
Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) and
Parental Involvement ................................................................................................................ 31
Classroom Visits/Learning Walks ............................................................................................ 32
The Importance of Parental Involvement ................................................................................. 34
Summary ................................................................................................................................... 39
Chapter 3: Methodology ............................................................................................................... 42
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 42
Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................................. 43
Research Questions ................................................................................................................... 43
Method of Study ....................................................................................................................... 44
Research Methodology ............................................................................................................. 51

vi
Sample Population .................................................................................................................... 51
Instrumentation ......................................................................................................................... 52
Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 53
Chapter 4: Results ......................................................................................................................... 54
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 54
Statement of the Problem .......................................................................................................... 54
Research Questions ................................................................................................................... 56
Methodology ............................................................................................................................. 57
Results ....................................................................................................................................... 57
Summary ................................................................................................................................... 85
Chapter 5: Discussion ................................................................................................................... 87
Background Information ........................................................................................................... 87
Methodology ............................................................................................................................. 88
Key Findings ............................................................................................................................. 89
Limitations ................................................................................................................................ 92
Implications............................................................................................................................... 94
Recommendations ..................................................................................................................... 95
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 96
References ..................................................................................................................................... 98
Appendix A: Letter (English) ..................................................................................................... 107
Appendix B: Survey (English) .................................................................................................... 109
Appendix C: Letter (Spanish) ..................................................................................................... 114
Appendix D: Survey (Spanish) ................................................................................................... 116

vii
List of Tables
Table 1. Demographics of Participants ......................................................................................... 58
Table 2. School Participants ......................................................................................................... 58
Table 3. Gender Frequency ........................................................................................................... 59
Table 4. Age of Participants.......................................................................................................... 59
Table 5. Ethnicity Frequency of Participants ................................................................................ 60
Table 6. Level of Education of Participants .................................................................................. 60
Table 7. Participants Relationship to the Child ............................................................................ 61
Table 8. Parents Initial Level of Understanding
of the CCSS................................................................................................................................... 61

Table 9. Newspapers Play a Role in Your
Understanding of the CCSS .......................................................................................................... 62

Table 10. Videos Play a Role in Your Understanding
of the CCSS................................................................................................................................... 63

Table 11. Group Meetings Play a Role in Your
Understanding of the CCSS .......................................................................................................... 63

Table 12. Talking to Other Parents Plays a Role
in Your Understanding of the CCSS ............................................................................................. 65

Table 13. Talking to Teachers Plays a Role in
Your Understanding of the CCSS ................................................................................................. 65

Table 14. Talking to Your Child Plays a Role
in Your Understanding of the CCSS ............................................................................................. 66

Table 15. Parents Find it Interesting to Read About the CCSS .................................................... 67

Table 16. Parents Find it Informative to Read About the CCSS .................................................. 67

Table 17. Parents Find it Worthwhile to Read About the CCSS .................................................. 68

Table 18. Parents Have a Desire to Learn More from
Reading About the CCSS ............................................................................................................. 68

viii
Table 19. Parents Find it Interesting to Attend
Meetings About the CCSS ............................................................................................................ 69

Table 20. Parents Find it Informative to Attend
Meetings About the CCSS ............................................................................................................ 69

Table 21. Parents Find it Worthwhile to Attend
Meetings About the CCSS ............................................................................................................ 70

Table 22. Parents Have a Desire to Learn More
About the CCSS by Attending Meetings ...................................................................................... 70

Table 23. Parents Find it Interesting to Watch
Videos About the CCSS................................................................................................................ 71

Table 24. Parents Find it Informative to Watch
Videos About the CCSS................................................................................................................ 72

Table 25. Parents Find it Worthwhile to Watch
Videos About the CCSS................................................................................................................ 72

Table 26. Parents Have a Desire to Learn More
About the CCSS by Watching Videos .......................................................................................... 73

Table 27. Parents Find it Interesting to Engage
in Dialogue with Other Parents About the CCSS ......................................................................... 73

Table 28. Parents Find it Informative to Engage
in Dialogue with Other Parents About the CCSS ......................................................................... 74

Table 29. Parents Find it Worthwhile to Engage
in Dialogue with Other Parents About the CCSS ......................................................................... 74

Table 30. Engaging in Dialogue with Other Parents
About the CCSS Creates a Desire to Learn More......................................................................... 75

Table 31. Parents Find it Interesting to Learn
About the CCSS by Visiting Classrooms ..................................................................................... 76

Table 32. Parents Find it Informative to Learn
About the CCSS by Visiting Classrooms ..................................................................................... 76

Table 33. Parents Find it Worthwhile to Learn
About the CCSS by Visiting Classrooms ..................................................................................... 77

ix
Table 34. Parents Have a Desire to Learn More
About the CCSS by Visiting Classrooms ..................................................................................... 77

Table 35. Parents Find it Interesting to Learn About
the CCSS through Conferences with the Principal or Teacher ..................................................... 78

Table 36. Parents Find it Informative to Learn About
the CCSS through Conferences with the Principal or Teacher ..................................................... 79

Table 37. Parents Find it Worthwhile to Learn About
the CCSS through Conferences with the Principal or Teacher ..................................................... 79

Table 38. Parents Have a Desire to Learn More About
the CCSS through Conferences with the Principal or Teacher ..................................................... 80

Table 39. Parents Find it Interesting to Attend an
LCAP meeting to Learn About the CCSS .................................................................................... 81

Table 40. Parents Find it Informative to Attend an
LCAP Meeting to Learn About the CCSS .................................................................................... 81

Table 41. Parents Find it Worthwhile to Attend an
LCAP Meeting to Learn About the CCSS .................................................................................... 82

Table 42. Parents Have a Desire to Learn About
the CCSS by Attending an LCAP Meeting................................................................................... 82

Table 43. Amount of Education Parents Perceive
They Have Received from the School .......................................................................................... 83

Table 44. Overall Summary .......................................................................................................... 84

Table 45. Strongly Agreed or Agreed Percentages of Resources ................................................. 84

Table 46. Strongly Agreed or Agreed Percentages of Resources ................................................. 95

x
List of Figures
Figure 1. Common Core State Standards: Mathematics. .............................................................. 29
Figure 2. Individual reading standards with grade-to-grade development specifications. ........... 30

1
Chapter 1: Introduction
Forty-five states have adopted the newly formed Common Core State Standards (CCSS)
that establish a single set of clear educational standards for kindergarten through 12
th
grade in
English language arts, mathematics, and social studies. The standards are designed to ensure that
students graduating from high school are prepared to enter credit-bearing courses in two or four
year college programs or to enter the workforce (CCSS, 2012). The standards are clear and
concise to ensure that parents, teachers, and students have a well-defined understanding of the
expectations in reading, writing, speaking and listening, language, and mathematics in school
(CCSS, 2012).
The purpose of this study is to determine whether schools are prepared in providing
parents of high school students the necessary resources to comprehend the CCSS. The following
sections present the history of reforms and initiatives that have changed educational policies in
the United States and the history of the challenges and benefits of parental involvement in
education. The literature will provide a background leading to the construction of the most recent
initiative of the Common Core State Standards (National Governors Association Center for Best
Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers, 2010), which is the central focus of the
current study. Chapter 1 concludes with the research questions and an overview of the remaining
chapters.
Background of the Problem
In 1983, the National Commission on Excellence in Education reported that American
schools were failing. The report led to local, state, and federal reform efforts (NCEE, 1983)
which continue today with the newly adopted CCSS. In order to understand the current

2
educational reform efforts, it is necessary to also understand the past efforts and how they have
influenced education.
In 1981, Dr. Terrel Howard Bell, Secretary of Education in the Cabinet of President
Ronald Reagan, requested that Reagan appoint a commission to study excellence in education.
The 1983 report entitled A Nation at Risk initiated the drive for educational reform, which
included a claim that the nation was threatened by a rising tide of mediocrity (NCEE, 1983). As
implied by the title of the report, the commission’s charter responded to Bell’s observation that
the U.S. educational system was failing to meet the national need for a competitive workforce
(NCEE, 1983). The charter required the commission to assess the quality of teaching and
learning at the primary, secondary, and postsecondary levels in both the public and private
sectors. It also required the commission to compare American schools and colleges with those of
other advanced nations (NCEE, 1983). The opening statement of the report sets the overall tone:
“Our Nation is at risk. Our once unchallenged preeminence in commerce, industry, science and
technological innovation is being overtaken by competitors throughout the world…the
educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity
that threatens our very future as a Nation and a people” (NCEE, 1983, p. 3).
The commission also studied the relationship between college admission requirements
and student achievement in high schools. It assessed the degree to which major social and
educational changes in the last quarter century have affected student achievement and defined
certain problems to be overcome if the nation was to successfully pursue a course of excellence
in education (NCEE, 1983).
The report recognized that the declines in educational performance were in large part the
result of disturbing inadequacies in the way the educational process itself was generally

3
conducted (NCEE, 1983). Recognizing that the education system represented a patchwork of
expectations for students, proponents of the standards movement pushed for more coherent
policies (TESOL, 2013). This was the first time the federal government lent its support to
standards-based reform in education. By establishing standards in the core curricular areas,
schools were being held accountable to meet the educational needs of students. Many proponents
for standards-based reform recognized that the playing field was not equal for all students, and as
a result the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was reauthorized in 1994.
Originally passed in 1965, the ESEA addressed concerns with poverty and emphasized
equal access to education which established high standards and accountability (ESEA, 1965).
The act also offered equitable educational opportunities to the nation’s disadvantaged, providing
financial resources to schools to enhance the learning experiences of underprivileged children
(ESEA, 1965). The ESEA has consistently remained the single largest fiscal source of federal
support for educationally vulnerable students (Thomas & Brady, 2005). Although the mission of
this legislation has remained the same, it has evolved over time to include the needs of more
specialized at-risk groups, including English language learners (the Bilingual Act; Title VII),
female students (the Women’s Educational Equity Act; Title IX), and Native American students
(the Improvement of Educational Opportunities for Indian Students Act; Title X) (Thomas &
Brady, 2005).
Provisions have also been added to ensure that all schools provide supplemental
academic services and that children show academic improvement through reaching appropriate
grade-level proficiencies. In order to hold all schools accountable for meeting the needs of
students, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 was passed under the Presidency of
George W. Bush. Prior to the NCLB Act being authorized, the Organization for Economic Co-

4
operation and Development (OECD) created and administered international tests allowing
countries to compare the performance of their students against an international benchmark
(TESOL, 2013).
The data from these tests demonstrated that the best students in the U.S. consistently
scored among the highest performing international students. However, those students
experiencing difficulty in school and living in poverty scored consistently lower than their
international peers. When all students are compared, the overall performance of those from the
U.S. is at or below average among countries participating in international assessments (TESOL,
2013). This persistent achievement gap within U.S. schools motivates groups that support reform
and proponents of standards-based education.
Many argue that for the U.S. to be competitive in today’s global economy, students must
lead in educational performance (Stromquist & Monkman, 2000; Brown & Lauder, 1996).
Advocates of the CCSS describe how the guidelines were developed based on international
learning outcomes from the highest performing countries (CCSS, 2012). These advocates argued
that the CCSS will raise the bar for U.S. graduates, making them competitive not only in the
domestic workforce, but also on an international level as well (TESOL, 2013).
In this book The World is Flat, Friedman (2005) identified a number of trends
dominating the range of careers available to students. These trends that manifest themselves are
irreversible and predict a different American job-scape than seen by employees and employers
today. “The world is flat” is a metaphor that describes the world as a level playing field where
commerce, technology, and information are easily accessible compared to the world prior to the
fall of the Berlin Wall and the advent of the internet.

5
Friedman (2005) stated that much of what is learned today in school will be soon
outdated, and therefore the most successful people in the ‘flat world’ will be those who can adapt
and learn quickly. The greater the curiosity and passion for learning, the greater chances
individuals will have for success later in life. There is also a belief that there is a decline in
America’s world economic leadership that has led many to place the blame for that decline on
the educational system. This has resulted in increased demands to meet the educational needs of
the future and greater accountability (Popham, 2003).
The primary purpose of the NCLB act was to ensure that students in every public school
achieve important learning goals based on a common set of standards while being educated in
safe classrooms by well-prepared teachers (NCLB, 2001). To increase student achievement, the
law required that school districts assume responsibility for all students meeting defined
proficiency levels across important academic content. Furthermore, NCLB requires schools to
close the achievement gaps that exist among students from various backgrounds, including those
who are economically disadvantaged and/or come from different racial and ethnic backgrounds,
as well as students diagnosed with disabilities (NCLB, 2001).
To measure student educational progress, NCLB required that states administer tests to
all public school students. The states set proficiency standards known as adequate yearly
progress (AYP), which progressively increased the percentage of students in a district that had
met the proficiency standard. If a school district did not meet the required proficiency levels, the
law mandated that corrective actions be applied (NCLB, 2001). This law represented a major
change in federal efforts to support elementary and secondary education in the U.S.
Since the implementation of NCLB, the federal government has taken a more visible and
prominent role in classrooms across the country than ever before (NCLB, 2001). Cochran-Smith

6
and Lytle (2006) stated that NCLB has often been regarded as an unprecedented entry by the
federal government into affairs of public education that were once left to states and local school
districts.
The NCLB Act was based on four basic principles: “…stronger accountability for results,
increased flexibility and local control, expanded options for parents, and an emphasis on
teaching methods that have been proven to work” (NCLB, 2001, 3). This federal act resulted in
an increased emphasis on high-stakes performance assessments that measured whether schools
were making adequate yearly progress, and mandated consequences for schools that were not.
Parental Involvement
The African proverb “it takes a village to raise a child” means that the work of raising a
child cannot be done alone, but rather by an entire community. Historically, a student’s
education has always been viewed by parents, and perhaps by society as a whole, as the purview
of the child’s parents (Hiatt, 1992). In Gronlnick and Solwiaczek’s (1994) framework, parental
involvement is defined as the resources parents dedicate to their child’s education. Parental
involvement encompasses parents’ interactions with schools and their children to promote
academic success. This interaction was also important as the thirteen colonies became a nation.
Colonies were granted local control of education during the pre-colonial era in America
(Pulliam, 1987). Religious leaders created the first schools which were later placed under the
governance of townships. Under townships, boards were comprised of lay citizens who were
parents in the community and had control over what was taught in schools (Hiatt, 1992).
As many immigrants left Europe in order to openly practice their religious beliefs,
schools began to represent the religious beliefs of the community (Hiatt, 1992). Religion,
reading, and writing comprised the curriculum for the schools. Since a different religious sect

7
founded each colony, colonial America was dotted with many small schools representing the
religious view of the parental lay board (Hiatt, 1992). Social class largely drove the organization
of these schools. The upper class and a growing middle class created schools which catered to
the social demands of these parents and were supported by fees paid by the parents. For the
lower class of parents and students, a basic education was created to support those children
whose parents could not afford the fees. The citizens of the township paid the fees and the basic
curriculum taught included reading, writing, and arithmetic. Elementary education at this time
was locally controlled and governed by parents. As such, parents supported curriculum, chose
teachers, and supported religious education in the school (Hiatt, 1992).
In 1642, the colony of Massachusetts passed a law which required all parents to provide
their children with education in reading, religion, and a trade. When local leaders realized that
some parents were not teaching their children to read, they passed a law which mandated that all
towns of 50 inhabitants or more hire a teacher who could be paid out of local funds (Hiatt, 1992).
However, it was not until the Revolutionary War era that the sustained support for tax supported
universal education was reported (Pulliam, 1987). When the Colonies became a nation, many of
the first American leaders such as Benjamin Rush and George Washington advocated for
national elementary education supported by federal or state taxes (Hiatt, 1992).
Thomas Jefferson (1779) was an advocate for public education for all children in the
Commonwealth of Virginia. He argued that America’s citizens required certain basic skills in
order to function in a democratic society, including reading, writing, and rhetoric. With many of
America’s European immigrants not possessing the skills required to teach their children,
Jefferson stated that Virginia would provide public schooling for every child (Hiatt, 1992). This
was the beginning of the Jeffersonian model of education.

8
As immigrants entered the U.S. and many of them unable to speak, read, or write in
English, the federal and state government took the responsibility of educating the nation’s youth.
The influx of immigrants and their inability to understand the English language can be attributed
to the decline of parental involvement in the educational system. By the turn of the 20
th
century,
the increasing separation between parent control and parental involvement in the educational
system led to the formation of the National Congress of Mothers (NCM) in 1897 (Hiatt, 1992).
This group was comprised of middle and upper class mothers that met with teachers on
Saturdays to express their concerns through petitions. These mothers studied school curricula,
became informed about child growth and development, and encouraged other parents to be active
in the school. They were active in securing public school kindergarten and health programs. The
influence of this group spread rapidly and formed the basis of the Parent/Teacher Association
(PTA) which continues to be active in U.S. schools today (Hiatt, 1992).
Parental involvement has long been associated with a range of enhanced outcomes for
elementary, middle, and high school students, including varied indicators of achievement and the
development of student attributes that support achievement. These attributes include self-efficacy
for learning, perceptions of personal control over outcomes, and self-regulatory skills and
knowledge (Bandura, Barbaranelli, Caprara, & Pastorelli, 1996). By the 1960s, educational
researchers pointed to the positive influences of parental involvement on student achievement in
schools (Hiatt, 1992). For example, the first federally funded legislation to support the early
education of children from poverty and a cornerstone of President Lyndon Johnson’s War on
Poverty, Project Head Start in 1964 and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965,
required that parents serve on school advisory boards and participate in classroom activities.

9
The importance of parental involvement in education continues today. Under California’s
new Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), there are base, supplemental, and concentration
grants in place of most previously existing K–12 funding streams, including revenue limits and
most state categorical programs. For county offices of education (COEs), the LCFF creates
separate funding streams for oversight activities and instructional programs, and requires all
school districts to have a Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP). The LCAP requires parent
involvement and participation. Like the organization of the earliest schools, today’s governance
structure ensures that the local community is engaged in the decision-making process and the
educational programs of students. This requires that parents continue to be involved in the
decision-making process of their children’s education.
Statement of the Problem
Because of the problems and issues associated with NCLB, under the presidency of
Barrack H. Obama the federal government introduced an initiative sponsored by the National
Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) that
established consistent education standards across the states. The standards ensured that students
graduating from high school were prepared to enter two or four year college programs and/or the
workforce (CCSS, 2012). The standards are clear and concise in order to ensure that parents,
teachers, and students have a clear understanding of the expectations in reading, writing,
speaking and listening, language, and mathematics in school (CCSS, 2012). As important as the
CCSS are and continue to be in the lives of students and their families, essential questions arise
that merit further investigation. For example, are the CCSS clear and concise enough that parents
understand them? How will parents be supported in comprehending the CCSS? How will
districts and schools ensure that parents are involved their children’s education? Will parents be

10
provided the necessary guidance and support to help their children comprehend the Common
Core?
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to examine the resources schools are currently providing
parents to understand the Common Core State Standards. It also examined and addressed the
knowledge and motivational gaps that parents have in understanding the CCSS, as well as those
faced by schools in providing the necessary information and resources required by parents to
understand the CCSS. Finally, this study includes a guide for schools and parents that provides
the requisite information to comprehend the CCSS.
Research Questions
RQ1. What resources do parents of high school students perceive as necessary to
comprehend the shift from the 1997 standards to the CCSS?
RQ2. What current resources and practices have schools implemented to educate parents
to comprehend the CCSS?
RQ3. How are school districts being held accountable to meet parents’ needs to
comprehend the CCSS?
Importance of the Problem
The CCSS were developed based on the idea that students were not prepared for college
at the end of their secondary education, as well as the fact the U.S. was falling behind other
countries in preparing students to enter the advanced technological fields that now exist in the
workforce (Markell & Perdue, 2014). The importance of developing methods for implementing
CCSS will lead to the eventual ability of the workforce in the U.S. to compete with other
countries.

11
The purpose of developing the CCSS was to make the U.S. more competitive in the
global marketplace. It is also important to show that parental involvement in comprehending the
CCSS is vital in helping children to be successful in the global market. The purpose of the CCSS
is to prepare the students for what they will face as they transition from K-12 into higher
education or roles in the job market.
This study focused on providing parents the necessary resources to comprehend the
CCSS. Helping parents understand how to better assist their children in achieving their academic
goals plays a key role in the future success of students. This solution based study was aimed at
producing results as well as an action plan for helping parents to comprehend and support their
children with the CCSS. It offers practical advice for parents and educators based on evidence.
Limitations and Delimitations
This study has several limitations. For example, because it is based on a self-report
survey, there are certain inherent limitations within the methodology. Culture plays a role in the
interpretation of parental involvement and support. However, despite increasing recognition that
parental involvement in education is a multidimensional construct, measures of parental
involvement have remained static (Garcia Coll et al., 2002). Past researchers have recognized that
parental involvement increases student academic performance (Cheung, 2009; Bower & Griggin,
2011; Ceballo, Maurizi, Suarez, & Aretakis, 2014). Parental involvement is multidimensional in
that what works for one particular ethnicity in attracting them to become involved in their child’s
education might not have the same affect on a parent of a different background. Additionally,
there is no precise and consistent operational definition of “parental involvement” in research
(Ceballo et al., 2014). For example, Epstein places parental involvement on a spectrum of six
levels. In level one, parents provide the home conditions that support children as students at each

12
age and grade level, while level six involves a coordination of resources and services for families,
students, and the school with businesses, agencies, and other groups. However, some researchers
believe that Epstein’s level one parental involvement is not parental involvement at all.
The predominant population that was studied in this research was Latino Asian and
Caucasian individuals. The Latino population in the U.S. is disproportionately young and poor,
making the group susceptible to many adverse effects of economic hardship (Eamon, 2005). They
tend to be unsupportive of the system rather than the children (De Gaetano, 2007). On a particular
level, a number of barriers prevent poor Latino parents from engaging in parent-teacher
conferences, attending school events, and volunteering in schools. These barriers can be attributed
to demanding job schedules, inaccessible transportation, a lack of English language fluency, and
unfamiliarity with the American educational system (Ceballo et al., 2014). These limitations had
an impact on the current study.
Variations among potential participants exist in income and other demographics. These
differences within the participating groups can lead to a potential sample bias, particularly if one
group is overly represented in the research study. The results of the study could influence and
reflect the views of one particular group instead of the population as a whole. The influence of
one particular group can limit the applicability of the study’s conclusions to the general
population.
The study was conducted using a self-reporting survey. This research technique has
several inherent problems, the first of which is that parents may not be willing to be honest about
their opinions about the school and how it operates. Parents may fear that their honesty could
affect the educational outcomes of their children. Parents may not want to take a survey for fear

13
that the school could retaliate against their children. The researcher used a survey method that did
not involve personally identifying information and helped to improve the level of honesty.
Three schools were chosen for participation this study. All three schools are multi-ethnic
with a mixture of English and Spanish speaking students and parents. The survey was conducted
in both English and Spanish. The literature review found that the cultural mix of the school helps
determine the effectiveness of measures to improve parental involvement. It is also noted that the
student population in all three schools selected includes an overabundance of one particular
culture. This limits the results of the study to the views of a single cultural group. A key factor
that affects such studies is the willingness of participants to provide honest answers. The ability to
generalize the results of the study to the larger population is another key factor affecting this
study.
One of the main difficulties of the study was reaching potential participants with low
participation in the school system. As a result, the researcher opted to send surveys home with
students; however, many parents who do not participate in school also do not take surveys. The
purpose of this study was to reach those who chose not to participate to determine the reasons for
their lack of participation. Unfortunately, the very nature of the population limits the ability of the
study to eliminate bias. It was expected that the final study would be heavily weighted to the high
participation population of parents because they already participate in the school with their
children and were more likely to fill out the survey than those who do not.
The purpose of this study was to provide parents the necessary resources to comprehend
the CCSS. The study was limited to three high schools and intended to provide a framework that
could be utilized in any school around the country. If a sample bias was found within the study,
the researcher determined whether it played a significant enough role in limiting the application of

14
the study to a certain cultural context. If bias is found in a study, the results are applicable to the
school setting with the most similar demographic composition.
Definition of Terms
In the conduct of academic research it is important to understand key terms and how they
relate to the study. Operational definitions are different than many other types because they
specifically define the term within the parameters of the study. The following terms were used in
this research study.
Common Core State Standards (CCSS). The CCSS refers to the latest academic
standards in reading and math as part of the nationalized curriculum with an emphasis on math
and reading skills.
Economically advantaged students. Economically advantaged students are from
families whose annual income exceeds $85,000. Their income level is above the poverty line and
parents are able to provide food, shelter, and basic needs.
Economically disadvantaged students. An economically disadvantaged student is a one
whose parents make at or below the Federal income poverty level. It can also include students
who live in a neighborhood with a low socio-economic status. This is included in the definition
because of the cultural attitudes that are prevalent within these communities.
Epstein’s model. Epstein’s model refers to parental involvement that includes all six
types listed within the actual model. When used in this research study, the term refers to all six
elements of the model, rather than any one particular component or group of components unless
otherwise specified.
Latino. A person of Latin American origin or descent. In this research, this population is
the predominant group that will be studied.

15
Parent. In today’s society, the definition of parent must be extended beyond the
traditional model that involves a mother, father, and their children. A parent can be any
individual who takes on the parental role and responsibilities of a child. In cases of divorce, it
will mean the single parent who has full custody of the child. In some cases, children will live
with their grandparents, and in this study they will be considered the parents. The definition of a
parents is any individual who cares for the basic needs of the child and supports them in their
school endeavors.
Parental involvement. Although the literature review found that certain studies use their
own definition of parental involvement, this study uses the model that was developed by Epstein
which includes the aforementioned six definitions. Epstein’s framework provides consistency
throughout this study. It is also in alignment with the key models chosen by schools in the
development of their parental involvement programs (Epstein, Coates, Salinas, Sanders, &
Simon, 1997).
Standardized testing. Standardized testing refers to the completion of statewide testing
to make certain that students are performing at their current grade level. States that have adopted
the Common Core curriculum evaluate each grade level according to the tests, rather than
academic advancement to the next grade level.
Organization of the Study
The first chapter outlines the reasoning behind the conduct of the study. It explores the
significance of the study, the importance of the study, background information, and the reasoning
behind the study’s purpose. It sets forth the hypotheses and research questions and provides the
rationalization for the conduct of the study.

16
The second portion of the research study is the literature review. The literature review
uses current journal articles and other sources from credible research organizations. It also
includes literature from governmental agencies and authoritative resources on the topic. Only in
one instance does it utilize a mass media source, as in this case the source provides a reference
on the given subject.
Chapter two focuses on building a basic understanding of the CCSS, Epstein’s model,
and how these concepts relate to the LCAP. The chapter explores the research to-date on the
importance of parental involvement and some factors that have been found to affect parents’
willingness to participate in schooling. The literature review explores factors such as culture,
income, lack of English language fluency, and others that have an effect on the ability to increase
or discourage parental involvement. Understanding this concept will help in the design of
effective measures to increase parental involvement in the school district.
The third chapter of the research study consists of the research methodology. This section
of the study outlines the manner in which the research was conducted. It defines the sample
population and its characteristics that make it suitable for answering the research questions. It
explains how the research methodology relates to the study’s hypothesis and provides data to
answer the research questions.
A sample of the survey questions is provided in Chapter three, along with an explanation
of how they relate to the research questions and hypothesis. The appendix includes a cover letter
that accompanied the survey providing the participants with the necessary information to assure
that their confidentiality would be protected. It serves as an informed consent for the study.

17
Chapter 2: Literature Review
The purpose of this research study was to examine the factors involved in the ability of a
school to increase parental involvement in supporting the Common Core State Standards
(CCSS). The study represents an area that has received little academic attention until now. This
lack of attention is largely due to the newness of the CCSS. This literature review focuses on the
topic of parental involvement and how it can increased. It examines existing research on the
CCSS themselves. Finally, it also examines the ways that schools can meet the needs of parents
to get them involved in helping to support their students with the CCSS.
This literature review will use Epstein’s six types of parental involvement as a framework
on which to form the theoretical basis of the research study. It examines the existing literature
about the topics supporting this study, including resources from government agencies and
recognized educational authorities. The purpose of this literature review is to gain a full
understanding of Epstein’s six types of parental involvement and the general efficacy of parental
involvement in a child’s education.
Epstein’s Six Types of Parental Involvement
The purpose of Epstein’s six types of parental involvement is to help schools develop
meaningful partnerships among three critical educational stakeholders: parents, schools, and
communities. Epstein’s model explores different practices of partnership. Each of these different
practices faces challenges. These different types of involvement lead to different outcomes for
students (Epstein, Coates, Salinas, Sanders, & Simon, 1997). Epstein’s six types of parental
involvement are parenting, communicating, volunteering, learning at home, decision making,
and collaborating with the community. Each of these types of involvement is fully explored in
the following section.

18
Type 1: Parenting. The first form of involvement is parenting. This involves helping
parents to understand child and adolescent development. It also involves helping them
understand what creates the optimal home environment to support children in their learning
endeavors, and helping schools to understand families and how they function. Aspects of
parenting include housing, health, nutrition, clothing, and safety. Parenting includes maintaining
the home in a manner that supports learning, which requires developing appropriate parenting
skills for children of all ages.
Epstein (1997) suggested that schools use parenting education such as workshops, video
tapes, and computer phone messages on various parenting topics. The researcher also suggested
family support programs to help with the necessary resources such as health, nutrition, clothing,
and support from other parents. Epstein advocated for home visiting programs and meetings to
help the schools better understand the families in their communities. This type of parental
involvement also includes surveys for parents to serve as a forum for sharing information about
their child such as their goals, strengths, weaknesses, and any special talents or interests that they
may have.
Epstein pointed to the effectiveness of education such as GED, literacy, and advanced
college or training programs for parents. These programs are part of the parenting model because
the educational level of the parents has an impact on the learning environment and support for
the child. One of the key challenges to this type of parental involvement is that only a select few
attend workshops or meetings. There are many reasons for low attendance, such as
transportation, obligations to other small children, job responsibilities, and financial difficulties.
The parents that attend the workshop require less help through other services. The challenge is

19
providing information and services to parents that do not typically attend special parenting
events (National Network of Partnership Schools, 2006).
Parental involvement results in students who are better able to balance time spent on
chores, studies, and other activities (Epstein et al., 1997). This results in regular attendance and a
sense of awareness that school is an important aspect of a student’s life. Parents gain confidence
in their ability to support the child through school and in their knowledge of adolescent
development. Schools and teachers benefit by understanding family goals as well as the
challenges that their students face.
Type 2: Communication. Epstein’s type 2 parental involvement focuses on
communication which can take many forms, such as teacher meetings, memos, report cards,
calendars, computer access to grades, and updates from the school. Communication also involves
providing parents with information on their child’s test scores. Communication between the
school and parent is typically weighted toward those communications initiated by the institution.
Parents communicate by interacting through questions about their child’s progress. They also
communicate by attending teacher conferences and having a dialogue with teachers (National
Network of Partnership Schools, 2006).
One of the challenges that schools face in communicating with parents is language and/or
cultural barriers. Parents may or may not be able to read and comprehend school
communications. Students benefit from these communications through the ability to monitor
their own progress and deficiencies (National Network of Partnership Schools, 2006). They
receive information that is useful in maintaining grades. The student often conveys messages
from the school. Parents that participate and communicate with school personnel tend to feel that
the school is more efficient than others (Epstein, 1997). When the child falls behind and requires

20
additional support, communication is essential, as it allows teachers to network with families
(National Network of Partnership Schools, 2006).
Type 3: Volunteering. Volunteering as parent helpers is another form of parental
involvement in Epstein’s model. There are many opportunities for parents to volunteer. For
example, they can volunteer in the classroom as aids, tutors, or chaperones, and can assist in
many other school programs. Parents can also volunteer by attending school activities such as
assemblies, performances, sports, and other events. There are other ways that parents can
volunteer, however, such as helping with phone trees and serving as patrolmen to increase school
safety.
One of the key challenges is the ability to recruit a wide variety of parents, and to create
flexible schedules so that they can attend the different meetings and school events. The National
Network of Partnership Schools (2006) redefined volunteering to include not just parents who
come to school during the day as volunteers, but also any parent who supports the children’s
learning in any way at any time.
Volunteering has many benefits for students. For example, they gain skills in
communicating with adults and gain skills by interacting with a variety of different people.
Through interaction, parents are able to better understand the role of a teacher which in turn
increases their confidence that the instructor is doing his or her job properly. By enrolling in
programs, parents able to learn useful skills themselves (National Network of Partnership
Schools, 2006). Schools benefit by being able to spend more one-on-one time with children
because of the extra help.
Type 4: Learning at home. Type 4 parental involvement is learning at home, which
Epstein (1997) describes as involving the following: helping with homework, ensuring the child

21
has the required skills, making decisions related to the child’s curriculum, and encouraging other
possible talents the child may have. The school can support learning at home by providing
information for families about what the child needs as well as identifying areas of potential
improvement. Schools can provide reporting packets and activities to help keep the child’s skills
up-to-date. They can also participate by helping students with academic goals and making future
plans for later in life.
One of the key challenges is the ability to design and implement homework strategies in a
way that promotes interaction between the student and his or her family members (National
Network of Partnership Schools, 2006). The National Network of Partnership Schools (2006) has
redefined homework to include not just work that the student takes home, but also work that the
student discusses with their families. Learning at home does not necessarily mean teaching
school subjects outside of the classroom, but rather supporting and encouraging students after
school.
Parents helping students at home increases the chances of completing homework and
improving test scores. The student develops a sense of consistency between the attitude of both
parents and teachers which helps them develop a positive attitude toward school. When parents
help students at home, it encourages the child to stay abreast of what is happening in the
classroom. Schools also benefit from greater satisfaction and support among families. The school
faces special challenges in supporting families that may be single-parent, dual-income, or low
income (National Network of Partnership Schools, 2006).
Type 5: Decision making. Type 5 parental involvement is participation in decision
making. Parents can take part in making decisions on a school wide basis by participating in
Parent Teacher Student Association (PTSA)/Parent Teacher Organization (PTO) groups and by

22
attending board meetings. They can also participate in individual school advisory groups.
Epstein’s focus was on parental participation at the school-wide level. One of the key challenges
that schools face is integrating parents from different racial, cultural, and socioeconomic groups
(National Network of Partnership Schools, 2006).
Decision-making involves a partnership in the ability to share views and take action on
shared goals. Students benefit by knowing that their families represent their views when schools
make decisions. Students also directly benefit from the policies that are the result of parent
advocacy. Decision-making should be partnership rather than a power struggle. The school
benefits by understanding parents’ wishes and opinions about school policies and decisions.
Over time, schools learn to accept the opinions of family representatives as valid (National
Network of Partnership Schools, 2006).
Type 6: Collaboration with the community. Epstein’s sixth type of parental
involvement is collaborating with the community. Partners can be businesses, agencies, health
services, recreation, and other groups and programs that can collaborate with schools to enhance
the educational experience of students. Committee partnering can help resolve problems such as
boundaries, responsibilities, funding, and meeting community goals (National Network of
Partnership Schools, 2006). Schools can participate by informing families about community
resources and opportunities that are available.
All individuals interested in the quality of education can participate in a partnership with
the schools. Parents benefit by learning about the different programs and resources available
within their communities, and also benefit from interactions with other families and service
providers. Students benefit from different curricular and extra-curricular activities that can help
them in their exploration of future career plans. Schools benefit from the use of community

23
resources to improve the curriculum. These programs can help students learn to be better
participants in their schools and communities.
Epstein’s model has been used as a framework to improve areas of parental involvement
in various schools (Smith et al., 2011). It has also served as a framework for conducting research
studies to evaluate the level of parental involvement in schools (Wright, 2009) and is a model for
developing a plan to increase parental involvement. Schools develop programs in the six basic
areas of parental involvement in an attempt to improve educational quality.
Bower and Griffin (2011) explored the efficacy of Epstein’s model to increase and
evaluate parental involvement. The study involved using the model at schools with low parental
involvement. The school in question had a significant population of minority students in a low-
income district. For the purposes of this study, the researchers chose to use the word "parents" to
mean not only biological parents, but also grandparents, uncles/aunts, guardians, and any other
mentors or community members who serve in the parental role for students. The results of the
study indicated that the school continued to struggle with parental involvement even after the
application of various elements of the Epstein model. Cultural differences within the school were
found to play a significant role in the effectiveness of encouraging parental involvement. The
researchers also found that the Epstein model was not a clear indicator of how much the parents
actually wanted to participate. Simply applying Epstein’s model did not ensure the involvement
of parents from different populations. Bower and Griffin’s (2011) study suggested that different
methods should be developed that are more culturally responsive in schools with high student
populations. The researchers noted that the results of their study could not be generalized to other
schools that did not have similar student populations.

24
Regardless of past study results, Epstein’s model has become a standard for increasing
parental involvement in schools. An adapted version of Epstein’s survey for comparing the
perceptions of parents regarding student involvement and the perceptions of the school’s ability
to provide parents with the necessary resources to understand the CCSS was used in this study.
The adoption of CCSS requires higher levels of parental involvement to achieve success.
Epstein’s model addresses how to improve parental involvement in all areas of the school.
However, Bower and Griffin’s (2011) study focused on how parents could help by becoming
more involved in reading and mathematics activities required by CCSS.
The purpose of this study was not to determine how to improve parental involvement
overall, but rather how to extend parental involvement in understanding the CCSS and the role of
parents in increasing the effectiveness of the CCSS. Volunteering, decision-making, and
community involvement have an indirect effect on achievement in CCSS. The factors of
parenting, communicating, and learning at home are more directly related to state achievement in
the CCSS.
This research concentrated on those factors that are directly related to achieving the goals
of the CCSS, and will treat factors that are indirectly related as secondary. Epstein’s model is
typically not applied in such a specific manner, as will be done in this proposed study. A gap in
the research exists regarding the use of Epstein’s model to specifically improve parental
involvement in certain subjects. The problem faced by schools is that they not only need to
increase overall parental involvement, but they must also find a method for communicating with
parents that can help students achieve higher scores on tests and provide parents with an overall
understanding of the CCSS. Understanding the CCSS helps to connect the principle of Epstein’s
model of parental involvement to overall student achievement.

25
Common Core State Standards
The Common Core State Standards differ from the 1997 curriculum in that they are more
focused on English and math skills. The CCSS were developed as a result of colleges and
secondary schools complaining that students graduating from high school were not prepared with
the basic skills that they needed to succeed (TESOL, 2013). Students would often have to take
remedial courses in college to learn what they were supposed to have mastered by the time they
graduated from high school (Kirst, 2013). Furthermore, for students who did not move on to
higher education or technical schools, this gap in knowledge left them unprepared to enter the
workforce directly after high school.
The adoption and implementation of the CCSS has been proven to be a challenge. One of
the key advantages of the CCSS is that when students move from one school to another, they are
being taught using the same content standards and often the same curricular materials, which
provides stronger continuity in the learning process. The 1997 standards were the first to
integrate the school system so that there was consistency in what the children were learning
(Kirst, 2013). Although the 1997 standards represented an improvement over the prior
frameworks utilized by educators, the CCSS were able to address the specific knowledge that
students needed to succeed.
One example of how the CCSS changed from the 1997 standards is that fourth grade
math now focuses primarily on fractions. Students must understand fractions before moving on
to algebra, probability, and statistics (Kirst, 2013). If students do not have the basic knowledge
of fractions, they cannot advance to the higher mathematics classes. The reading standards take a
similar approach of building on what has been learned before. The text complexity at which
students can read becomes gradually more challenging as they progress. The CCSS focus on

26
analytical techniques and what they can prove, which makes students better prepared for the type
of writing they will do in college and in the workplace (Kirst, 2013) through critical thinking.
Teaching methods have also changed since 1997 in that older teaching approaches
focused on the memorization of material. New methods include the ability to analyze, evaluate,
and model concepts (Kirst, 2013). Teachers must now develop new instructional materials and
utilize methods that use evidence-based approaches for learning models. School districts have
the ability to determine their individual needs and to adapt the materials as they see fit.
Testing procedures have also changed under the new CCSS. Multiple choice tests were
not designed to measure a deeper understanding of concepts. The CCSS stress the adoption of
new testing methods. Computer adaptive tests have been developed that require longer responses
from students. Students will have to learn to take tests differently because they are being
assessed based on these new skills (Kirst, 2013).
The CCSS involve a change in accountability as well. Schools were traditionally
following a system that was based only on test scores, and many teachers felt they were only
teaching to the test. The CCSS include different measures that can be used to determine district
success. These measures include graduation rates, absences, and readiness for college and the
workforce. The adoption of CCSS means significant changes in every aspect of the school
system.
California’s CCSS for math are outlined in a book published by the California
Department of Education (2010). This publication specifically outlines the information that the
student is expected to have mastered by the end of each grade level. The student begins by
learning how to make sense of problems in order to solve them. Students begin describing the
world around them through math and then later begin to reason abstractly and quantitatively. In

27
the next phase, students learn to construct arguments and critique the reasoning of others
(California Department of Education (2010).
The CCSS require students to learn and model the application of math skills to solve
problems that they will encounter in their daily lives. The next phase of the standards is learning
to use mathematic tools strategically. Students learn to choose the appropriate tools and apply
them to their everyday lives. Students next learn to make use of structure and to determine
patterns; they learn to look for shortcuts for doing calculations that they must do repeatedly. This
laddered approach focuses more on the application of mathematical concepts rather than on
simply learning how to solve problems (California Department of Education, 2010).
The CCSS for language arts, history, science, social studies, and technical subjects focus
on the same set of goals. The curriculum is designed to help students learn to focus on the results
rather than the process for getting there by integrating research and media skills into the
curriculum (California Department of Education, 2010). Teachers of different disciplines must
play a role in the development of language arts. The language arts teacher plays a vital role, but
these other subjects also require students to be able to read and understand material. This new
approach takes a more integrated approach toward how students learn language. The CCSS in
these areas are a continuation of the development of analytical skills learned through math
(California Department of Education, 2010).
The 1997 standards focused on the student’s ability to comprehend what they were
reading, while the new CCSS assume that students will comprehend the material while asking
them to learn from their learning and to demonstrate their understanding of their reading by
critiquing it. Students learn to evaluate evidence and to use digital media strategically, skills that

28
are applicable across subject domains, while also examining other perspectives of situations and
cultures (California Department of Education, 2010).
The CCSS in language arts, history, social studies, and science grow in complexity using
a laddered approach. The standards teach students to prewrite, draft, revise and edit, rewrite, and
publish different types of writing. They must also be able to identify different types of writing
such as argumentative, explanatory, and narrative. They learn to work in teams and use flexible
communication in collaboration with others (California Department of Education, 2010).
The CCSS not only require that the students learn the material, but they must also be able
to comprehend and understand the material in a deeper way. It is not enough to simply know the
standards, and the students must be able to integrate the concepts into different settings and
subject domains in order to solve various problems. The CCSS give students an introduction to
the type of thinking that they will be doing in secondary education and in the high technology
world that they will enter after high school. The 1997 standards expected students to memorize
and recite information (Brown, 2004), which did not prepare them for the analytical world they
would enter.
The needs of employers have steadily changed over time. Another contributing factor to
the status has been advancements in technology. Schools need to find ways to provide students
with what they need to meet the challenges that define present-date society. Teaching students to
analyze different opinions and exposing them to different cultures prepares them for the global
world of business. The CCSS have changed the way students learn as well as the ways that
teachers run their classrooms. Success in mastering the CCSS depends largely on parental
involvement, and this gap is the focus of the current study. Schools must regularly change to
meet the needs of society. Parents grew up in a world that differed from that of their children.

29
Parents were taught using an older educational system that likely came before the introduction of
standardized tests in 1997. For example, they likely learned multiplication through the use of
memorizing a table.
Figure 1 summarizes the differences between the old math standards in California and the
new CCSS.

Figure 1. Common Core State Standards: Mathematics.
Source: Wurman, Z., & Wilson, S. (2012). The Common Core Math Standards. Education Next,
3(12). Retrieved from http://educationnext.org/the-common-core-math-standards/

This chart summarizes the laddered approach to mathematics learning skills. The same laddered
concept is applied to all other subjects.

30
Figure 2 summarizes Common Core standards for Language Arts.

Standard 1
Grades K-10
Read closely to
determine what
the text says
explicitly and
to make logical
inferences from
it; cite specific
textual
evidence when
writing or
speaking to
support
conclusions
drawn from the
text.
Grades 6-12
Standard 2
Grades K-10
Determine
central ideas or
themes of a text
and analyze their
development;
summarize the
key supporting
details and ideas.
Grades 6-12
Standard 3
Grades K-10
Analyze how and
why individuals,
events, and ideas
develop and
interact over the
course of a text.
Grades 6-12
Standard 4
Grades K-10
Interpret words
and phrases as
they are used in
a text, including
determining
technical,
connotative,
and figurative
meanings, and
analyze how
specific word
choices shape
meaning or
tone.
Grades 6-12
Standard 5
Grades K-10
Analyze the
structure of texts,
including how
specific sentences,
paragraphs, and
larger portions of
the text (e.g., a
section, chapter,
scene, or stanza)
relate to each
other and the
whole.
Grades 6-12
Standard 6
Grades K-10
Assess how
point of view
or purpose
shapes the
content and
style of a text.
Grades 6-12

Standard 7
Grades K-10
Integrate and
evaluate content
presented in
diverse media
and formats,
including
visually and
quantitatively, as
well as in words.
Grades 6-12
Standard 8
Grades K-10
Delineate and
evaluate the
argument and
specific claims in
a text, including
the validity of the
reasoning as well
as the relevance
and sufficiency of
the evidence.
Grades 6-12
Standard 9
Grades K-10
Analyze how
two or more
texts address
similar themes
or topics in
order to build
knowledge or to
compare the
approaches the
authors take.
Grades 6-12
Standard 10
Grades K-10
Read and
comprehend
complex literary
and informational
texts
independently and
proficiently.
Grades 6-12

Figure 2. Individual reading standards with grade-to-grade development specifications.
Source: "Charts Formatted to Clarify the Common Core Literacy Standards?" (2014). Retrieved
from http://teacher.depaul.edu/CommonCoreReading-Grade-to-Grade.htm

31
The CCSS teach students to analyze and define a problem rather than learning the answer
by rote memorization. A new method of learning can sometimes lead parents to feel
disconnected from their child’s learning environment. In order to be successful, schools must
find a way to bridge this gap and promote parent participation in the learning process. Schools
not only need to provide their teachers and students with the tools necessary to succeed, but they
also need to provide information and resources to parents as well.
Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) and Parental Involvement
Rethinking the curriculum and the way it is being taught to students means changing the
way schools think about parental involvement. Research on new paradigms in parental
involvement indicates that several key factors have changed, and that these factors represent
indicators of how well schools have responded to the need to integrate parents into the programs
(Families in Schools, 2013). Studies on how schools have attempted to increase parental
involvement indicate that schools are playing an active role in promoting the participation
(Families in Schools, 2013). These initiatives and changes create a more welcoming environment
for parents. For some schools, this involves the development of parent centers staffed by a family
involvement coordinator. Schools are training staff on how to interact and engage parents more
effectively (Families in Schools, 2013).
One indicator of improved parental involvement is a 50% increase in the response rate on
parent surveys. Schools that conducted frequent parental surveys were found to have higher
levels of involvement (Families in Schools, 2013). There is evidence that schools have
implemented Epstein’s principles into their programs. Evidence of this can be noted in the
introduction of home visitation programs and an increase in the average number of home visits
conducted within the school system. Schools are reporting that they have increased the number

32
of educational programs and resources for at risk students because of these visits (Families in
Schools, 2013).
Some schools hold training sessions for parents in order to teach them how to fulfill their
role in helping students succeed. A higher number of parents are participating on school advisory
councils and at board meetings than before. Research indicates that parents are using the
complaint process more frequently and that complaints are being resolved in a timely manner
(Families in Schools, 2013). Schools are placing a higher priority on shared responsibility and
are using Epstein’s principles to help achieve their goals.
California’s Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) and the Local Control
Accountability Plan (LCAP) represent changes in the way schools are funded and the way they
must account for the funds that they receive. These new accountability standards allow schools
to more easily understand their strengths and weaknesses. Engaging parents is one of the
priorities required in the new funding system. The LCAP understands the importance of parental
participation and requires districts to detail goals and actions that they intend to take to increase
their partnerships between parents and schools.
One of the actions includes the development of partnership academies that focus on
students at risk of dropping out. It also includes the provision for job internships and the
introduction of home visits for children that have high absentee rates (Fensterwald, 2014). These
initiatives are taken directly out of Epstein’s model. The LCAP requires school districts to
increase the initiatives of parental involvement.
Classroom Visits/Learning Walks
A Learning Walk is a brief classroom visit utilizing a researched-based tool that provides
principals, teachers, and parents opportunities to reflect on what students are learning, strategies,

33
student interaction with the content, and student engagement (Albemarle County Public Schools,
2013). Visiting classrooms has traditionally been a practice conducted by administrators to
evaluate a teacher’s performance or observe how instruction, classroom student behavior, facility
standards, and student academic progression are taking place. The role of visiting classrooms has
changed recently, and teachers as well as parents are now being invited to visit classrooms and
observe both teachers and students.
Fisher and Frey (2014) stated that learning walks have been transformative in schools and
districts, especially in moving from professional development to professional practice. This
notion of professional practice allows teachers an opportunity to grow in their teaching capacity
by observing and discussing with their fellow colleagues the best instructional strategies being
utilized. Parents also benefit by visiting classrooms because they are able understand the learning
taking place and explore other topics revolving around education at the school.
Parent classroom visits also create an opportunity to build, improve, and strengthen
home-school relations, creating true partners in education and another step in removing the wall
that often exists between home and school. However, learning walks differ from instructional
rounds (City, Elmore, Fiarman, & Teitel, 2009) in their scope and formality. Unlike instructional
rounds which use protocols for establishing long-term networks, defining problems of practice,
and formally analyzing patterns, learning walks are more loosely structured (Fisher & Frey,
2014).
Learning walks focus on certain instructional principles to improve teaching, such as
questioning strategies, classroom management, differentiated instruction, cooperative learning,
wait time, and classroom ecology (McCune, 2013). When parents are given opportunities to
participate in learning walks, they are able to observe the workings of a classroom. The

34
dynamics of the classroom can be discussed with the help of trained teachers who can direct the
conversation of instructional strategies being used in the classroom. This practice can facilitate
an easy transition for parents to learn about the Common Core State Standards and see how they
are being utilized in the classroom.
The Importance of Parental Involvement
Epstein’s model has been adopted by many school districts as the key to improving
parental involvement. Studies have focused on the gap in the perceptions of parents and schools
as to how well they keeping parents engaged in the school system. The switch to the CCSS is an
adjustment for both students and teachers. Parents that grew up in the old school system may
find it difficult to understand how they can help their child perform better in school using the
new CCSS. The LCAP requires schools to take the initiative to help improve parental
involvement using the theories presented in Epstein’s model. Understanding parental
involvement is the key to improving academic outcomes, regardless of the curriculum being
used.
The CCSS are more challenging than the 1997 standards curriculum because they require
students to utilize higher level thinking skills and apply them in their everyday lives. Many
parents who did not have this type of schooling or training may find it difficult to understand
how they can help their child in their academic studies. The new CCSS make many parents feel
lost. Getting parents involved in the school system and providing them with the tools they need
to understand the CCSS will help them to better support their children, thereby increasing the
academic success of the school district as a whole.
Since the introduction of Epstein’s model and changes in the school curriculum, it has
been assumed that parental involvement plays a significant role in student success. This

35
connection between parental involvement and student success has been largely unquestioned.
The next step is to examine empirical evidence that supports this connection. In a study that
focused on parental engagement with children outside of the typical school day, the researchers
found that there was a correlation between improved test scores among students whose parents
were involved in interventions (Nye, Turner, & Schwartz, 2006). These interventions included
playing games, reading together, and additional training in other learning activities in subjects
such as math and science. The research provided parents with a training program to help them
learn how to provide the interventions necessary for their children. The empirical study
demonstrated that programs to increase parental involvement with children at home have an
impact on improved overall academic achievement (Nye et al., 2006).
Considerable academic research has been conducted to determine the best methods for
improving educational outcomes. Nye et al. (2006) concluded that parental involvement
improved academic performance, but not all researchers have come to the same conclusion.
Fishel and Ramirez (2005) obtained inconclusive results in a meta-analysis examining records
from 1980 to 2002. The parental involvement component of the research included parents
helping children learn at home. The study was inconclusive on the ability of parents to help
children to improve educational outcomes due to weaknesses in the methodological approach.
To provide better insight into parental involvement, a study was conducted in the
Netherlands that mirrors those conducted in the U.S. regarding parent and teacher perceptions of
parental involvement. Other studies have also confirmed that parental involvement helps to
improve grades, even in students from other countries (Bakker, Denessen, & Brus-Laeven, 2007;
Jeynes, 2007). The study, which took place in a Finnish school system, produced the same

36
results as the national study. Parental involvement improved grades and lowered the dropout rate
(Barnard, 2004).
Another study exploring the impact of parental involvement specifically focused on
economically-advantaged students and their parental involvement compared to economically
disadvantaged students and their parental involvement and academic success determined that
increased involvement led to a dramatic increase in academic achievement among the
disadvantaged students (Cooper & Crosnoe, 2007). Parental involvement was found to be similar
among these two groups, but only the economically disadvantaged students demonstrated drastic
increases in academic achievement with increased parental involvement (Cooper & Crosnoe,
2007).
Dee, Wei, and Jacob (2006) studied the effects of school size on parental involvement.
The study found that smaller schools in rural areas tended to have greater parental involvement
than those in large urban areas. However, these factors may be due to cultural differences
between rural and urban schools. A study of Latino children and parents found that this culture
has a generally low level of parental involvement (De Gaetano, 2007). Through a series of
workshops, parents were found to become more trusting and supportive of teachers and staff
once they were provided with these new supports (De Gaetano, 2007). Ippolito and Schechter
(2008) studied an English Second Language (ESL) program and the impact parental involvement
has on its success. The results indicated that the ESL program effectively increased parental
involvement, but the researchers provided no way to compare what would have happened
without the ESL program.
These studies indicate that culture plays a role in parental involvement. Three factors
were found to predict parental involvement: the parent’s motivational beliefs, being invited to

37
become involved at the school, and parenting skills and knowledge of how to become more
involved (Green & Walker, 2007). A school liaison program funded by the Indianapolis Public
School System found that an invitation to participate and the parents’ perceived life context
played a significant role in increased parental involvement (Howland et al., 2006).
Houtenville and Conway (2008) defined parental involvement as the frequency with
which parents discuss school events, student class work and the schools course offerings, as well
as how often they volunteer or attend meetings. The researchers found that the level of school
resources affects parental effort and, although the effect is theoretically ambiguous, it appears to
be negative. Ingram, Wolfe, and Lieberman (2007) defined parental involvement as providing
the tools necessary for school achievement, including limiting TV time, recognizing
achievements, and dropping off and picking up the student from school. The phrase also included
building social skills for the child and taking them to activities such as visiting museums, zoos,
and libraries. All of these studies indicate that parental involvement can be defined in many
different ways.
Seitsinger, Felner, and Brand (2008) found that parental involvement was directly related
to the teacher’s level of effort. The researchers also found that the amount of parental
involvement tends to decrease during middle and high school. Small schools or learning
communities that connect business partners and help in the amount of school and home
connections resulted in improved attendance and higher math and reading scores (Sheldon,
2007).
Culture was found to be one of the key barriers to parental involvement in the school
system. Individuals of different cultures have varying attitudes on the importance of education
and support from parents (LaRocque, Kiemann, & Darling, 2011). A study that utilized data

38
from the National Household Education Surveys Program in 2007 found that Pacific Islander
mothers were the most likely to help their children with homework. Also, African-Americans
were found to have high levels of parental involvement with their children’s schools (Hartlep &
Ellis, 2010).
Parental involvement tends to be low when children are in the welfare system (Kemp,
Marcenko, Hoagwood, & Vesneski, 2009). Children and parents involved in the system are often
separated, leaving little opportunity for parent and child interactions. However, these same
children have increased parental involvement by their foster parents and benefit academically
(Kemp et al., 2009). Findings of another study suggested that parental involvement results in
fewer behavioral issues and higher scores on standardized tests (Nermeen, Nokali, & Bachman,
2011). Studies have also shown that poor academic achievement and behavior was associated
with students whose parents provided little to no parental involvement (Pianta, Belsky, Houts, &
Morrison, 2007).
The focus of this research has been to explore the ways one can increase parental
involvement and the impact it can have on parents understanding the CCSS curriculum and
providing support for their children. However, there are significant problems with the CCSS
which cause frustration in both teachers and parents alike (Nochin, 2014). One of these issues is
that there are no lessons or materials being developed for instruction. Teachers must create their
own materials to support the new curriculum, and many of them spend their own money to
develop lesson plans (Nochin, 2014).
This lack of insight led to the CCSS getting off to a poor start. Teachers were not certain
that the materials they were developing were consistent or in compliance with the new format.
This represented a lack of planning on the part of policymakers. If teachers were frustrated

39
because they had no support for the new curriculum, this would trickle down to parents who saw
the lack of organization and lesson plans to support their children. This problem is slowly being
resolved, but the impressions of the CCSS was less than stellar because of this error in the
implementation plan.
This poor start has led to dissension among teachers and parents as they continue to
struggle to make sense of this new piece of legislature that was supposed to be an improvement
in education. Teachers had no choice but to make due the best that they could. It is likely that
many parents have given up in these early stages and have backed off from participation as they
see their teachers not being able to answer many questions regarding the CCSS. Had the roll out
been more organized and structured, parents may have been better able to cope with these new
changes in their children’s education. The problem that many schools face is that parents are
frustrated with this new process. Because of this, it may be difficult to get them to come back to
a position of support. This is just one of the challenges associated with the CCSS.
Summary
Numerous researchers have highlighted the importance of parental involvement in a
number of different settings and cultures. Researchers understand that there are many types of
parental involvement. Epstein’s six-factor model is only one way to define parental involvement.
Several other methods for defining parental involvement have been used by other studies.
However, Epstein’s model provides the most widely accepted definition of parental involvement.
The six-factor approach makes it easy to clarify the different types of parental involvement that
exist. Epstein bridged the gap in defining what parental involvement is according to the model.
This literature review indicated that the importance of parental involvement in improved
academic outcome should not be underestimated. The CCSS depend on the input of parents to

40
support classroom studies. The CCSS are more challenging than the old 1997 academic
standards. The CCSS use a logical, systematic approach of building on math and reading skills.
Parents play an important role in helping students to achieve success using this academic model.
The CCSS were designed to meet the needs of secondary schools and future employers. The
highly technical world that has developed over the past two decades has led to an increased need
for knowledge and technical skills. When students had secondary training using the old school
model, they were not prepared for the future, particularly with math and reading. The CCSS are
designed to eliminate the need for college students to repeat remedial courses.
The LCAP can use Epstein’s model as a guideline for funding programs, as it prioritizes
parent involvement and ways to support it. However, research has shown that funding is not the
greatest barrier to parental involvement. Culture and communication were found to be significant
factors in parental involvement. This leads the researcher to believe that focusing on
communication is the key to resolving parental involvement issues involving support for the
CCSS. Programs that concentrate on eliminating barriers, especially for low income families of
minority decent, play the biggest role in increasing parental involvement and improving
academic scores.
The purpose of this study involves increasing parental involvement and participation in
support of the CCSS. The study examines methods that can be used to support the CCSS. One of
the studies found that parents must be invited and feel welcomed if they are to participate in the
implementation of the CCSS, meaning that schools must initiate the first contact with parents
about supporting the CCSS at home.
Schools also need to use surveys to determine the existing knowledge gaps of parents.
Schools should hold workshops to help fill these gaps for parents that will experience difficulty

41
in understanding the curriculum and the homework that their children will bring home. Parental
involvement in their child’s education is crucial to the academic success of their students.
Parents need to understand the importance of helping their children with homework while also
demonstrating that they are involved with the school in other ways.
This literature review connected parental involvement to improved scores in the CCSS.
This research study solidifies this connection and results in the development of aids to improve
parental involvement, help parents understand the CCSS, and promote the successful
implementation of the CCSS. This research looks at specific actions schools could take to
improve parental involvement and understanding of the CCSS curriculum and what can be done
to help. The study results in actionable steps that can be taken to develop a better understanding
of what parents can do to help their child succeed with the CCSS.
This study is action oriented and will fill the knowledge gap between what parents need
to know to help their children succeed. The focus is not parental involvement in general, as this
has already been addressed sufficiently in the existing literature, but rather on improving parental
involvement in the CCSS. This adds a new dimension to the existing literature, and one that is
relevant to contemporary educational issues.

42
Chapter 3: Methodology
Introduction
To understand how the state of California is disseminating and holding Local Education
Agencies (LEA’s) accountable for the implementation of the Common Core State Standards
(CCSS), it is important to first understand the new Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) as
well as the Local Control Accountability Plans (LCAP) that each LEA must implement. For the
purpose of this section, the researcher focuses on the LCAP. As aforementioned, the LCAP is an
important component of the LCFF. Under the LCFF, all LEAs are required to prepare an LCAP
which describes how they intend to meet the annual goals for all pupils, with specific activities to
address state and local priorities identified pursuant to EC Section 52060(d) (California
Department of Education, 2014).
Each LEA must set annual goals in eight state priority areas: 1) Basic necessities:
qualified and properly assigned teachers, sufficient instructional materials, and facilities in good
repair; 2) Implementation of CCSS; 3) Parental involvement; 4) Student achievement: statewide
assessments, Annual Performance Index (API), English Learners (EL) reclassification rate, and
college preparedness; 5) Student engagement: attendance rates, dropout rates, and graduation
rates; 6) School climate: suspension and expulsion rates; 7) Access to courses; and 8) Other
student outcomes in subject areas (California Department of Education, 2014). For the purpose
of this research, the focus was on priorities number two and three: implementation of the CCSS
and parental involvement.
The implementation of the CCSS is one component required for all LEA’s to secure
funding from the state government. Under priority number three, LEA’s must establish Parent
Advisory Committees to advise school boards and superintendents on LCFF implementation.

43
These committees must include parents and guardians of students that are eligible for free or
reduced-price meals, English learners, or foster youth (California Department of Education,
2014). Furthermore, if English learners comprise at least 15% of a district’s enrollment and the
LEA enrolls at least 50 English learners, it must establish a District English Learner Advisory
Committee (DELAC) which includes parents/guardians. LEAs must present their LCAPs to
these advisory committees for review (California Department of Education, 2014).
Purpose of the Study
The goal of this study was to improve student outcomes with the CCSS. In doing so, the
study fulfills the needs of the community and country by providing them with future employees
that are qualified and capable of performing the tasks that they need to be competitive in the
global marketplace. The goal of the CCSS is to improve the economic position of the U.S.
through providing an education that is aligned with current global needs.
This study focused on providing parents with the necessary resources to comprehend the
CCSS. Helping parents understand how to better assist their children achieving their academic
goals plays a key role in their success in the future. The study was solution based and aimed at
producing results and an action plan for helping parents comprehend and support their children
with the CCSS. It offers practical advice for parents and educators based on evidence.
Research Questions
The research objective is to answer the following questions:
RQ1. What resources do parents of high school students perceive they need to
comprehend the shift from the 1997 standards to the CCSS?
RQ2. What current resources and practices have schools implemented to educate parents
to comprehend the CCSS?

44
RQ3. How are school districts being held accountable to meet parents’ needs to
comprehend the CCSS?
Method of Study
The theoretical framework for this research study is based on Epstein’s Model of parental
involvement. This model has been used to develop a number of surveys that explore the topic of
parental involvement (Izzo, Weissberg, Kasprow, & Fendrich, 1999; Kessler-Sklar & Baker,
2000; Fantuzzo, Tighe, & Childs, 2000; Gunnarsdottir, Sigurdardottir, Njardvik, Olafsdottir, &
Bjarnason, 2011; Abel, 2012). This study utilized a variety of demographic groups consisting of
varying socio-economic levels and ethnicities (i.e. Latino, Asian, and Caucasian) and parent
education levels. A survey was developed by the researcher to compare three high schools
located in the same district and the different types of strategies/resources they are currently
providing to parents to understand and educate them regarding the CCSS. The survey provided
data regarding parent knowledge levels concerning the CCSS, as well as the different strategies
schools are providing to parents that contribute to an increase in parental involvement at their
school sites.
For the purpose of this study, the following high schools were chosen for participation:
Oxford Academy, Cypress High School, and Katella High School. These three schools are in the
Anaheim Union High School District and vary demographically.
Oxford Academy. Oxford Academy is a college preparatory, seventh through twelfth
grade public school established in September 1998. The mission of Oxford Academy is to
prepare students to be academically and ethically focused for entrance into college or university
(OA: SARC, 2014).

45
Oxford Academy is a school of choice limited to students from the diverse attendance
area of the Anaheim Union High School District (AUHSD) which serves over 33,000 students.
Oxford receives students from 71 elementary schools representing five districts within their
geographical region. Oxford’s current enrollment is 1,151 students. The ethnic breakdown of the
student body is as follows: 61% Asian, 16% Hispanic or Latino, 10% white, 10%
Filipino/Pacific Islander, and 2% black students. Seventy-two percent (72%) of Oxford Academy
students come from homes where English is not the primary language spoken, with 28 different
home languages represented. Thirty percent (30%) of students participate in the Free and
Reduced Lunch program (OA: SARC, 2014).
Oxford receives approximately 1,000 applications from perspective students each year.
New student enrollment is limited to seventh, eighth, and ninth graders. Approximately 200 new
students enter seventh grade each year. Additional new students are enrolled in eighth grade and
ninth grade as needed to maintain enrollment at 200 students. To give a balanced representation
from across the district, twenty-five students from each of the eight AUHSD junior high school
attendance areas who scored the highest on the admissions test were accepted to be part of each
new class of seventh graders (OA: SARC, 2014).
All Oxford Academy students participate in a comprehensive honors curriculum and are
required to enroll in a minimum of four of the school’s seventeen Advanced Placement courses
in order to graduate. Ninety-nine to one hundred percent (99-100%) of students meet A-G
University of California admissions requirements, a percentage which is the highest among
public schools in the state. To support students in achieving the high expectations of Oxford
Academy, all seventh, eighth, and ninth grade students take part in a Learning Skills class that

46
meets three days a week to offer academic assistance, homework support, and encouragement of
student collaboration (OA: SARC, 2014).
Additionally, all Advanced Placement teachers have at least one conference period
available at the end of the day in order to meet with upper class students in need of additional
support or individual tutorials. All Oxford students are required to maintain a minimum grade
point average in order to remain at the school, ranging from 2.5 to 3.0.
In addition to Oxford’s rigorous college preparatory program, all students participate in
one of two career pathways: Advanced Sciences or Business. The business pathway capstone
class is a course called Virtual Enterprise. Students create a virtual business from the ground up
and engage in commerce with other participating schools locally, nationally, and internationally
through online sales trade shows and in-house events (OA: SARC, 2014).
Oxford’s seventh through twelfth grade structure allows for a successful vertically
aligned instructional program that has strengthened teaching and learning practices and has
provided students with meaningful learning experiences throughout the content areas.
Departments have enhanced instructional strategies across grade levels, allowing for a learning
continuum from grades seven through twelve. Collaboration among teachers facilitates the
development and delivery of more challenging learning experiences (OA: SARC, 2014).
Parental involvement. There are a number of ways Oxford Academy promotes a family-
friendly environment. PTSA, OA Foundation, School Site Council, and booster groups for sports
and music are active organizations on the campus. PTSA provides parent volunteers for school
functions, weekly office assistants, and field trips. The OA Foundation’s mission is to provide
financial resources and assistance to promote the educational advancement and success of the

47
students. Financial support is generated through the Direct Investment Drive and by partnering
with various groups in the community (OA: SARC, 2014).
School Site Council (SSC) membership is comprised of elected parents, students, and
school staff. The SSC oversees and monitors the spending of categorical funds which are
intended to enhance academic achievement outcomes. The counseling staff conducts parent
workshops and facilitates family conferences throughout the school year. Timely information is
disseminated to parents through Naviance, the school website, and the TeleParent phone system
(OA: SARC, 2014).
Cypress High School. Cypress High school serves students in grades 9-12 and offers a
secondary educational program that focuses on a rigorous academic course of study to prepare
students for post-secondary education, as well as providing students with a rich array of career-
planning opportunities. The mission of Cypress High School is to foster a safe, positive learning
environment that enables students to achieve their potential in an atmosphere that promotes
responsible citizenship and an appreciation of individual differences (CHS: SARC, 2014).
The climate of the Cypress High School community is founded upon academic
excellence and high expectations. Upon graduation, Cypress High School students are expected
to demonstrate the following outcomes:
1. That as part of the partnership for the 21st Century, students are college and career
ready, and knowledgeable in technology, career pathways, and the "Essential Skills"
needed for the preparation for the work place.
2. Experiences in “career-planning.”

48
3. Students must model the ability to use “critical thinking skills” through collaboration,
creativity, project-based learning, analyzing written and verbal communication, and
synthesizing ideas in oral and written form.
4. Participate in experiences that facilitate an interest in “life-long learning” and
“leadership opportunities.”
Cypress High School is a comprehensive campus for grades 9-12 with a current
enrollment of approximately 2,670 students. Cypress High School is committed to preparing all
students for college and career readiness as part of the Partnership for the 21st Century, utilizing
collaboration, verbal and written communication, creativity, and application of learning or
project-based assessments as part of the academic experience. The school maintains a rigorous
academic focus with a CCSS curriculum, emphasizing preparing students for the college arena.
Cypress High is among the top performing schools academically in the state. Academic
achievement is ranked in the top percentile for schools statewide and in 100 similar schools
(CHS: SARC, 2014).
Cypress High offers a wide variety of career-technical electives that support the Career
Pathways Program, visual and performing arts programs, athletic programs, and advanced
placement and honors-level courses to enhance students’ preparation for college entrance.
Cypress High School maintains high expectations for student behavior and academic progress
(CHS: SARC, 2014).
Parental involvement. Parents are actively involved in the school through the Parent
Teacher Student Association (PTSA), booster clubs for athletics and performing arts, the School
Site Council (SSC), and special committees such as the English Learner Advisory Committee
(ELAC). Parents are invited to attend a variety of informational events throughout the year to

49
learn about topics such as freshman orientation, scholarships, college financial aid, and parenting
strategies. Parents have the opportunity to communicate with teachers on a daily basis through
the use of academic planners which are required for all students (CHS: SARC, 2014).
Parents may access their students’ academic, attendance, and behavioral information
using the Aeries student database parent-portal. Information regarding school activities, events,
and counseling services is posted on the school website. Parents are encouraged and expected to
be part of their child’s education, and are welcome to meet with staff members to improve their
learning experiences (CHS: SARC, 2014).
Katella High School. Katella High School’s mission is to create an environment in
which students develop the desire to learn and subsequently become life-long learners. Student
learning generates the skills necessary to function competently with personal, academic, and
social success in an increasingly complex global society (KHS: SARC, 2014). The school
developed the following ESLRs to fulfill the mission statement:
1. Graduates will be Productive Global Citizens who develop cultural awareness and
tolerance for diversity, practice fairness, promote mutual respect, and take personal
responsibility for their decisions and actions.
2. Graduates will be Critical Thinkers who demonstrate proficiency in logical reasoning,
creative problem solving, and inquiry skills; evaluate sources of information for
credibility; access, create, apply, and present information via technology.
3. Graduates will be Academic Achievers who reach academic proficiency in all content
areas with an emphasis on math, reading, and writing; and strive for career and
college-readiness.

50
In addition to this mission statement and the aforementioned ESLRs, the school has
adopted a mission to become a reflective learning community as part of a plan to improve
student learning and success. The staff members create pacing guides and common assessments
that are used to continually improve student achievement through the reflective process. Katella
is committed to improving instructional strategies using research-based approaches and data-
driven decision-making, and implementing a shared decision-making process for all programs
and strategic planning (KHS: SARC, 2014).
Parental involvement. Katella High School strives to move parent participation from
awareness to active involvement in the decision-making process. Parents are encouraged to
actively participate in both on- and off-campus activities for students. The Committee for Parent
Involvement plans and coordinates all parent involvement opportunities to ensure that they
support the vision, mission, and goals of the school (KHS: SARC, 2014).
Parents are actively involved in the school through the Parent Teacher Student
Association (PTSA), booster clubs for athletics and performing arts, and the School Site Council.
Parents are encouraged to be part of their child’s education and are welcome to meet with staff
members to improve their learning experiences. In addition to these more traditional activities,
the school provides unique services through the on-site Family Center. The Center’s bilingual
staff member’s help parents understand the academic procedures and services of the school,
while also providing a cultural support system for parents and students alike (KHS: SARC,
2014).
Katella High School partners with GEAR UP to offer parents opportunities to learn how
to support their students' academic achievement. The addition of the TeleParent system makes it
possible for teachers, administrators, and staff to more frequently and completely communicate

51
with parents regarding their child's progress in school, school events, meetings, and opportunities
to become involved with the school through membership in PTA, ELAC, School Site Council,
booster clubs, and other activities. The school publishes and communicates all school
information to the community in both English and in Spanish to ensure maximum distribution
and comprehension (KHS: SARC, 2014).
Research Methodology
This study is quantitative in nature. According to Creswell (2009), quantitative research
is a means for testing objective theories by examining the relationships among variables. These
variables can be measured with instruments so that the numbered data can be analyzed using
statistical procedures. The researcher used a survey to assess the perceptions of parents regarding
the resources they need to comprehend the CCSS and to improve parental participation in the
school setting. The researcher also utilized a survey instrument to explore parental perspectives
on how well the school is providing parents with what they need to comprehend the CCSS and to
increase parental involvement.
This research focused on both of these trends and thus gained a detailed perspective on
the data. This research method addresses all three research objectives. The researcher used an
inductive process to arrive at the final conclusions and recommendations.
Sample Population
Based on the survey instrument, the respondents were identified using convenience
sampling. Convenience sampling is a non-probability sampling technique where subjects are
selected because of their convenient accessibility and proximity to the researcher (Zelinski,
Burnight, & Lane, 2001). For this study, the sample participants for the survey consisted of
parents in three local high schools in the same school district. The sampling was conducted by

52
dropping off the questionnaires with the principal and asking parents at different parent meetings
to complete them. Parents were able to complete the surveys and returned them when finished.
The drawback of this sampling technique is that it is more likely to utilize parents that are
more involved in the school than those who are less involved. Because uninvolved parents are
not likely to be at the selected meetings, a sample bias might create data that could adversely
affect the results. The sample population for this study consisted of 100 parents.
Instrumentation
The first step in conducting this study involved obtaining permission from the
superintendent of the school district to administer the parent surveys at the three high schools.
After obtaining permission from the superintendent, a letter was mailed to all three principals of
the schools detailing the study and asking for their permission to conduct the survey at the
selected sites.
The participants were informed regarding the nature of the study, the intended use of the
results, and the researcher’s university affiliation. The participants will be notified in writing of
the voluntary nature of the study, the anticipated time requirements, and the potential benefits to
the participants. A letter detailing parents’ agreement to participate was on the cover of the
survey itself, representing informed consent from the participants. The survey was administered
to the participants in either English or Spanish. The participants were able to choose the language
they felt most comfortable with. The survey was developed in English and then translated into
Spanish using a certified translator.
To ensure the validity of the survey, the researcher asked another certified translator to
translate the Spanish survey back into English. The results of this translation from English to
Spanish then back to English demonstrated a 98% accuracy rate of what the researcher had

53
developed. Once all of the surveys had been administered, the school secretary collected and
placed them in an envelope to be stored in a secure place. The researcher picked them up at a
designated time and completed the data analysis.
Data Analysis
The survey instrument used in this study is a Likert scale type survey. The various
responses were analyzed for frequency distribution by response categories. The quantitative
portion of the survey was presented graphically in the final study. Those who answered in
English were compared to those who answered in Spanish to determine whether the cultural
differences found during the literature review were present in this sample population. Other
demographic patterns were also explored, and these patterns were directly related to the research
questions. The survey gathered demographic data and used ANOVA to test for differences based
on age, education level, gender, and race. A Cronbach’s alpha was used to test for internal
validity of the survey instrument. Internal consistency describes the extent to which all of the
items in a test measure the same concept or construct, and therefore it is connected to the inter-
relatedness of the items within the test (Tavakol & Dennick, 2011).

54
Chapter 4: Results
Introduction
This study examined the resources schools are currently providing to parents in order to
understand the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and sought to address the knowledge gaps
that parents demonstrate with the CCSS. This study also examined the organizational gaps
schools demonstrate when providing information and resources that parents require to fully
comprehend the CCSS. The study led to the development of a guide for schools and parents that
provides the requisite information to comprehend the CCSS.
Presented in this chapter are the findings of a Likert scale survey administered to three
high schools in the Anaheim Union High School District: Katella High School, Cypress High
School, and Oxford Academy. These three schools are demographically distinct from one another.
The survey asked parents what resources they felt were necessary to be provided by the schools to
help them comprehend the CCSS. Helping parents understand how to better assist their children
in achieving their academic goals is crucial to student success. This study was solution based and
aimed at producing results and an action plan for helping parents to comprehend and support their
children with the CCSS. The study offers advice for parents and educators based on evidence.
Statement of the Problem
The CCSS stipulate that parents, teachers, and students should have a clear understanding
of expectations in reading, writing, speaking and listening, language and mathematics in school
(CCSS, 2012). However, the question still remains: Are the CCSS clear and concise enough that
parents will understand them? How will parents be supported in comprehending the CCSS and
how will districts and schools ensure that parents are staying involved with their children’s

55
education? Will parents be provided the necessary guidance and support to help their children
comprehend the Common Core?
Pulliam (1987) stated that during the pre-colonial era in America, the colonies were
granted local control of education. Hiatt (1994) stated that under townships, boards were
comprised of lay citizens who were parents in the community and had control over what was
taught in the schools. Religion, reading, and writing comprised the majority of curriculum for
these schools. Hiatt (1994) also stated that parents largely controlled elementary education at this
time through parental support of the curriculum, parental choice of teachers, and parental support
of religious teachings at the school. Thomas Jefferson (1779) argued for public education for all
children in the Commonwealth of Virginia. He argued that America’s citizens required certain
basic skills in order to function in a democratic society, such as reading, writing, and rhetoric. As
immigrants entered the U.S., many of them unable to speak, read, or write in English, the federal
and state governments took on the responsibility of educating the nation’s youth.
The influx of immigrants and their inability to understand the English language can be
greatly attributed to the decline of parent involvement in the educational system. Hiatt (1987)
stated that in 1897 the National Congress of Mothers (NCM) was formed to address the
increasing separation between parent control and parental involvement in the educational system.
This group was comprised of middle and upper class mothers that would meet with teachers on
weekends to express their concerns to the school principal through petitions. These mothers
studied school curricula, became informed about child growth and development, and encouraged
other parents to be active in the school. This group later became the Parent Teachers Association
(PTA). Parental involvement has long been believed to be associated with a range of enhanced
outcomes for all students, such as an increase in self-efficacy for learning, their perceptions of

56
personal control over their own outcomes, and self-regulatory skills and knowledge (Bandura et
al., 1996).
By the 1960s, educational research studies highlighted the positive influences of parental
involvement on student achievement (Hiatt, 1987). Project Head Start, the first federally funded
legislation, was passed for disadvantaged children in inner cities. Legislators also passed the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, which required parents serve on school
advisory boards and participate in classroom activities regularly.
Under California’s new Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), there are base,
supplemental, and concentration grants in place of previously existing K–12 funding streams,
including revenue limits and most state categorical programs. The LCFF also requires school
districts to have a Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) that mandates parent involvement
and participation so that the local community is engaged in the decision-making process and
educational programs of students. This requires parents to become involved in the decision-
making process of their children’s education, closely resembling the spirit of parental
involvement of the late 1700s.
Research Questions
The following research questions guided the data analysis of this study:
RQ1. What resources do parents of high school students perceive they need to
comprehend the shift from the 1997 standards to the CCSS?
RQ2. What current resources and practices have schools implemented to educate parents
to comprehend the CCSS?
RQ3. How are school districts being held accountable to meet parents’ needs to
comprehend the CCSS?

57
Methodology
This quantitative study was conducted with the use of Qualtrics, a data collection system
from the University of Southern California. A survey consisting of sixteen questions was given
to parents of high school students at the three schools. The survey instrument was a Likert scale
type survey. The various responses were analyzed for frequency distribution by response
categories. The quantitative portion of the survey is presented graphically in the chapter. Those
who answered in English were compared to those who answered in Spanish to determine
whether there were cultural differences as suggested in the literature review. Other demographic
patterns were also explored.
The analyses were run across each and all of the dependent variables (DVs) and were
used to create an overall scale variable which became the primary DV. The data was also ran
across a Cronbach’s alpha test of scale reliability for each DV to create an alpha value of .94,
validating the use of the overall scale. After concluding that the scale was usable, the data was
run across non-parametric tests of the DVs on each of the independent variables (IVs) (e.g.
gender, ethnicity, age). The analysis showed that none of the groups of participants differed on
the overall scale.
Results
The total population of this study was 84 (N = 84). Some participants did not respond to
various questions on the survey. Table 1 depicts the number of non-responses to those questions.
The participant may have rushed through the survey, not understood certain questions, or simply
declined to answer the question.

58
Table 1
Demographics of Participants
Participants Gender
Male
Female
Ages
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
Other
Ethnicity
Caucasian/White
Hispanic
Afr./American
Asian
Other
Level of Education
Some High School
HS Grad
Some College
Bach. Degree
Master’s Degree
Other
Relation
Mother
Father
Step-Mom
Step-Dad
Grandparent
Other
N 84 82 83 82 81 83

Table 2
School Participants
n Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Cypress HS 16 19.0 19.0 19.0
Katella HS 31 36.9 36.9 56.0
Oxford Academy 37 44.0 44.0 100.0
Total 84 100.0 100.0

A total of 84 participants completed the survey (N=84). Cypress High School had the
lowest number of participants with 16 (19% of the total population), Katella High School had 31
(36.9% of the total population), and Oxford Academy had a total of 37 (44% of the total
population). The home school of the researcher was Katella High School. The principals of the
other two schools agreed to participate in the study and allowed the survey to be administered to
parents at various meetings such as Coffee with the Principal, Parent Teacher Student
Association (PTSA) meetings, and School Site Council (SSC) meetings.

59
Table 3
Gender Frequency
Frequency Percent Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Male 24 28.6 29.3 29.3
Female 58 69.0 70.7 100.0
Total 82 97.6 100.0
Missing 2 2 2.4
Total 84 100.0

There were 24 males (28.6%) and 58 females (69%) who took the survey. Two (2.4%)
participants did not specify a gender.
Table 4
Age of Participants
Frequency Percent Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
20-29 2 2.4 2.4 2.4
30-39 14 16.7 16.9 19.3
40-49 43 51.2 51.8 71.1
50-59 23 27.4 27.7 98.8
60 or Older 1 1.2 1.2 100.0
Total 83 98.8 100.0
Missing 1 1.2
Total 84 100.0

Forty-three (51.8%) of those surveyed were between the ages of 40 and 49, while 23
individuals (27.7%) were between 50 and 59. One (1.2%) participant declined to answer this
question.

60
Table 5
Ethnicity Frequency of Participants
Frequency Percent Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Caucasian/White 17 20.2 20.7 20.7
Hispanic 39 46.4 47.6 68.3
African
American
2 2.4 2.4 70.7
Asian 23 27.4 28.0 98.8
Other 1 1.2 1.2 100.0
Total 82 97.6 100.0
Missing 2 2.4
Total 84 100.0

Thirty-nine (47.6%) of the participants were Hispanic, twenty-three (28%) were Asian,
and seventeen (20.7%) of the participants were Caucasian/White. These three ethnicities were
the predominant races found in the survey. Katella is predominately Hispanic, Cypress is
predominately Caucasian/White, and Oxford is predominately Asian. Two participants failed to
answer this question.
Table 6
Level of Education of Participants
Frequency Percent Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Some HS 7 8.3 8.6 8.6
HS Grad 11 13.1 13.6 22.2
Some College 20 23.8 24.7 46.9
Bachelor’s
Degree
21 25 25.9 72.8
Masters 19 22.6 23.5 96.3
Other 3 3.6 3.7 100.0
Total 81 96.4 100.0
Missing 3 3.6
Total 84 100.0

Twenty-one (25.9%) of the parents surveyed had a bachelor’s degree, while 20 (24.7%)
had some college experience but no degree. Nineteen (23.5%) participants had master’s degrees

61
and 11 (13.6%) had only high school diplomas. Three participants did not respond to answer this
statement.
Table 7
Participants Relationship to the Child
Frequency Percent Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Mother 57 67.9 68.7 68.7
Father 21 25.0 25.3 94.0
Grandparent 2 2.4 2.4 96.4
Other 3 3.6 3.6 100.0
Total 83 98.8 100.0
Missing 1 1.2
Total 84 100.0

Fifty-seven (67.9%) of the participants surveyed were mothers, 21 (25.3%) were fathers,
2 (2.4%) were grandparents, and 3 (3.6%) responded that they were related to the child in some
other manner. One participant declined to respond to this statement.
Table 8 illustrates the statistical data received from the following question: What level of
understanding do you perceive you have regarding current educational ideas?
Table 8
Parents Initial Level of Understanding of the CCSS
Frequency Percent Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
I have no idea 1 1.2 1.4 1.4
I know a little 34 40.5 47.2 48.6
I know enough 35 41.7 48.6 97.2
I know all there
is to know
2 2.4 2.8 100.0
Total 72 85.7 100.0
Missing 12 14.3
Total 84 100.0

Table 8 illustrates that 34 (47.2%) of the parents surveyed knew very little about the
CCSS, while 35 (48.6%) had a basic understanding. Only 1 (1.4%) participant was not familiar

62
with the CCSS, while 2 (2.8%) stated that they were extremely knowledgeable about them.
Twelve (14.3%) participants did not respond to this question.
The first question asked: What factors in the community influence your understanding of
the CCSS? Parents were given the following choices: newspapers, videos, group meetings,
talking to other parents, and talking to the students. Parents were then asked to rank these choices
from: 1 = Strongly Disagree to 5 = Strongly Agree. The following tables illustrate the results for
each variable listed above.
Table 9
Newspapers Play a Role in Your Understanding of the CCSS
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
13 15.5 16.9 16.9
Disagree 11 13.1 14.3 31.2
Neutral 22 26.2 28.6 59.7
Agree 25 29.8 32.5 92.2
Strongly Agree 6 7.1 7.8 100.0
Total 77 91.7 100.0
Missing 7 8.3
Total 84 100.0

The results indicated that 25 (32.5%) of the respondents agreed that newspapers were a
factor for understanding the CCSS. Twenty-two (28.6%) of the participants felt neutral about the
impact of newspapers on their understanding of CCSS. Thirteen (16.9%) participants strongly
disagreed that newspapers did not play a role in their understanding of the CCSS. Seven (8.3%)
participants did not respond to this statement.

63
Table 10
Videos Play a Role in Your Understanding of the CCSS

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
13 15.5 17.6 17.6
Disagree 14 16.7 18.9 36.5
Neutral 20 23.8 27.0 63.5
Agree 19 22.6 25.7 89.2
Strongly Agree 8 9.5 10.8 100.0
Total 74 88.1 100.0
Missing 10 10 11.9
Total 84 100.0

Twenty (27%) participants provided a neutral response for videos having no role in their
understanding of the CCSS. Nineteen (25.7%) participants responded that they agreed that
videos played a role in their understanding of the CCSS. Fourteen (18.9%) participants disagreed
that videos played a role in their understanding of the CCSS, while 10 (11.9%) participants did
not respond to the statement.
Table 11
Group Meetings Play a Role in Your Understanding of the CCSS

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
9 10.7 12.0 12.0
Disagree 4 4.8 5.3 17.3
Neutral 9 10.7 12.0 29.3
Agree 34 40.5 45.3 74.7
Strongly Agree 19 22.6 25.3 100.0
Total 75 89.3 100.0
Missing 9 10.7
Total 84 100.0

Thirty-four (45.3%) participants agreed that group meetings were a factor in their
understanding of the CCSS. Nineteen (25.3%) participants strongly agreed, while 13 (17.3%)

64
strongly disagreed. About 70.6% of the respondents felt that group meetings played a role in
their understanding of the CCSS. Nine (10.7%) participants did not answer this statement.

65
Table 12
Talking to Other Parents Plays a Role in Your Understanding of the CCSS

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
8 9.5 10.3 10.3
Disagree 6 7.1 7.7 17.9
Neutral 20 23.8 25.6 43.6
Agree 31 36.9 39.7 83.3
Strongly Agree 13 15.5 16.7 100.0
Total 78 92.9 100.0
Missing 6 7.1
Total 84 100.0

Thirty-one (39.7%) participants agreed that talking to other parents was a factor in their
understanding of the CCSS. Twenty (25.6%) participants felt neutral, while 13 (16.7%) strongly
agreed that talking to parents was a factor in their understanding of the CCSS. Overall, 56.4% of
the respondents agreed or strongly agreed that talking to other parents was a factor in their
understanding of the CCSS. Six (7.1%) of the respondents did not answer this statement.
Table 13
Talking to Teachers Plays a Role in Your Understanding of the CCSS

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
3 3.6 3.8 3.8
Disagree 4 4.8 5.1 9.0
Neutral 8 9.5 10.3 19.2
Agree 21 25.0 26.9 46.2
Strongly Agree 42 50.0 53.8 100.0
Total 78 92.9 100.0
Missing 6 7.1
Total 84 100.0

Forty-two (53.8%) participants strongly agreed that talking to teachers was a factor in
understanding the CCSS, while 21 (26.9%) participants agreed. Therefore, 63 (80.7%) of the

66
parents strongly agreed or agreed that talking to teachers played a role in their understanding of
the CCSS. Seven (8.9%) of the respondents strongly disagreed or disagreed that talking to
teachers did not have a role in their understanding of the CCSS, while six (7.1%) participants did
not respond to the statement.
Table 14
Talking to Your Child Plays a Role in Your Understanding of the CCSS

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
6 7.1 7.4 7.4
Disagree 9 10.7 11.1 18.5
Neutral 16 19.0 19.8 38.3
Agree 24 28.6 29.6 67.9
Strongly Agree 26 31.0 32.1 100.0
Total 81 96.4 100.0
Missing 3 3.6
Total 84 100.0

Twenty-six (32.1%) participants strongly agreed that talking to their child was a factor in
their understanding of the CCSS, while 24 (29.6%) participants agreed. Overall, 50 (61.7%)
participants strongly agreed or agreed that talking to their child was a factor in their
understanding of the CCSS. Sixteen (19.8%) participants were neutral, while 15 (18.5%)
strongly disagreed or disagreed that talking to their child played a role in their understanding of
the CCSS.
The researcher posed the following seven statements to determine whether parents found
those activities interesting, informative, worth their time, and if they created a desire to learn
more. The first statement said: I could become more knowledgeable about the Common Core
State Standards by reading different materials.

67
Table 15
Parents Find it Interesting to Read About the CCSS

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
2 2.4 2.5 2.5
Disagree 9 10.7 11.1 13.6
Neutral 15 17.9 18.5 32.1
Agree 31 36.9 38.3 70.4
Strongly Agree 24 28.6 29.6 100.0
Total 81 96.4 100.0
Missing 3 3.6
Total 84 100.0

Thirty-one (38.3%) of the respondents agreed that reading different materials about the
CCSS would interest them, and another 24 (29.6%) strongly agreed. Fifteen (18.5%) participants
neither agreed nor disagreed with the statement. Eleven (13.6%) participants strongly disagreed
or disagreed that reading different materials would be interesting. Overall, 55 (67.9%) of the
respondents agreed or strongly agreed that reading different materials about the CCSS would
interest them. Three (3.6%) participants did not respond to this statement.
Table 16
Parents Find it Informative to Read About the CCSS

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Disagree 3 3.6 3.6 3.6
Neutral 10 11.9 12.0 15.7
Agree 37 44.0 44.6 60.2
Strongly Agree 33 39.3 39.8 100.0
Total 83 98.8 100.0
Missing 1 1.2
Total 84 100.0

Overall, 70 (84.4%) of the respondents agreed or strongly agreed that reading different
materials about the CCSS would be informative. None of the participants strongly disagreed.

68
Only 3 (3.6%) of them disagreed, while another 10 (12%) were neutral. Only 1 (1.2%)
participant did not respond to this statement.
Table 17
Parents Find it Worthwhile to Read About the CCSS

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
1 1.2 1.3 1.3
Disagree 5 6.0 6.4 7.7
Neutral 18 21.4 23.1 30.8
Agree 26 31.0 33.3 64.1
Strongly Agree 28 33.3 35.9 100.0
Total 78 92.9 100.0
Missing 6 7.1
Total 84 100.0

Overall, 54 (69.2%) participants agreed or strongly agreed that reading different materials
about the CCSS was worth their time. Eighteen (23.1%) of them were neutral, and another six
(7.7%) strongly disagreed or disagreed with the statement. Six (7.1%) participants did not
respond to this statement.
Table 18
Parents Have a Desire to Learn More from Reading About the CCSS

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Disagree 8 9.5 10.0 10.0
Neutral 17 20.2 21.3 31.3
Agree 23 27.4 28.7 60.0
Strongly Agree 32 38.1 40.0 100.0
Total 80 95.2 100.0
Missing 4 4.8
Total 84 100.0

Fifty-five (68.7%) participants felt that reading different materials would create a desire
to learn more about the CCSS, while 23 (28.7%) respondents were neutral. Eight (10%) of the

69
respondents disagreed, and no participants responded that they strongly disagreed. Only 4 (4.8%)
participants did not respond to the statement.
The following tables depict the results for the second statement: I could become more
knowledgeable about the Common Core State Standards by attending meetings.
Table 19
Parents Find it Interesting to Attend Meetings About the CCSS

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
1 1.2 1.2 1.2
Disagree 6 7.1 7.3 8.5
Neutral 10 11.9 12.2 20.7
Agree 38 45.2 46.3 67.1
Strongly Agree 27 32.1 32.9 100.0
Total 82 97.6 100.0
Missing 2 2.4
Total 84 100.0

Overall, 65 (79.2%) participants agreed or strongly agreed that attending meetings about
the CCSS would be interesting to them. Ten (12.2%) participants rated this task as neutral,
seven (8.5%) strongly disagreed or disagreed that getting information in this manner would
interest them, and two (2.4%) did not respond to this statement.
Table 20
Parents Find it Informative to Attend Meetings About the CCSS

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Neutral 12 14.3 14.6 14.6
Agree 39 46.4 47.6 62.2
Strongly Agree 31 36.9 37.8 100.0
Total 82 97.6 100.0
Missing 2 2.4
Total 84 100.0

70
Seventy (85.4%) participants agreed or strongly agreed that attending meetings about the
CCSS would be informative while 12 (14.6%) participants were neutral. No participants strongly
disagreed or disagreed with this statement. Only 2 (2.4%) participants did not respond to this
statement.
Table 21
Parents Find it Worthwhile to Attend Meetings About the CCSS

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
2 2.4 2.5 2.5
Disagree 2 2.4 2.5 4.9
Neutral 17 20.2 21.0 25.9
Agree 36 42.9 44.4 70.4
Strongly Agree 24 28.6 29.6 100.0
Total 81 96.4 100.0
Missing 3 3.6
Total 84 100.0

Overall, 60 (70%) participants agreed or strongly agreed that attending meeting about the
CCSS would be worthwhile. Seventeen (21%) participants were neutral, while another 4 (5%)
strongly disagreed or disagreed with the statement. Three (3.6%) participants did not respond to
the statement.
Table 22
Parents Have a Desire to Learn More About the CCSS by Attending Meetings
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Strongly
Disagree
2 2.4 2.5 2.5
Disagree 3 3.6 3.8 6.3
Neutral 19 22.6 23.8 30.0
Agree 32 38.1 40.0 70.0
Strongly Agree 24 28.6 30.0 100.0
Total 80 95.2 100.0
Missing 4 4.8
Total 84 100.0

71
Fifty-six (70%) of the respondents agreed or strongly agreed that attending meetings
would create a desire to learn more about the CCSS. Nineteen (23.8%) participants were neutral,
while another 5 (6.3%) strongly disagreed or disagreed with this statement. Four (4.8%)
participants did not respond to the statement.
The following tables depict the results for the third statement: I could become more
knowledgeable about the Common Core State Standards by watching videos.
Table 23
Parents Find it Interesting to Watch Videos About the CCSS

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
1 1.2 1.2 1.2
Disagree 11 13.1 13.6 14.8
Neutral 18 21.4 22.2 37.0
Agree 30 35.7 37.0 74.1
Strongly Agree 21 25.0 25.9 100.0
Missing 81 96.4 100.0
Total 84 100.0

Fifty-one (62.9%) participants strongly agreed or agreed that watching videos about the
CCSS would be interesting to them. Eighteen (22.2%) were neutral and 12 (14.8%) strongly
disagreed or disagreed that watching videos would be interesting to them. Three (3.6%) did not
respond to this statement.

72
Table 24
Parents Find it Informative to Watch Videos About the CCSS

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
1 1.2 1.2 1.2
Disagree 6 7.1 7.3 8.5
Neutral 22 26.2 26.8 35.4
Agree 31 36.9 37.8 73.2
Strongly Agree 22 26.2 26.8 100.0
Total 82 97.6 100.0
Missing 2 2.4
Total 84 100.0

Overall, 53 (64.6%) participants strongly agreed or agreed that watching videos about the
CCSS would be informative. Twenty (26.8%) participants were neutral, and 7 (8.5%) strongly
disagreed or disagreed. Two (2.4%) participants did not respond to this statement.
Table 25
Parents Find it Worthwhile to Watch Videos About the CCSS

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
2 2.4 2.5 2.5
Disagree 6 7.1 7.5 10.0
Neutral 25 29.8 31.3 41.3
Agree 25 29.8 31.3 72.5
Strongly Agree 22 26.2 27.5 100.0
Total 80 95.2 100.0
Missing 4 4.8
Total 84 100.0

Forty-seven (58.8%) participants agreed or strongly agreed that watching videos about
the CCSS would be worth their time. Twenty-five (31.3%) participants were neutral, while eight
(9%) strongly disagreed or disagreed. Four (4.8%) participants did not respond to this statement.

73
Table 26
Parents Have a Desire to Learn More About the CCSS by Watching Videos

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
3 3.6 3.7 3.7
Disagree 4 4.8 4.9 8.6
Neutral 29 34.5 35.8 44.4
Agree 23 27.4 28.4 72.8
Strongly Agree 22 26.2 27.2 100.0
Total 81 96.4 100.0
Missing 3 3.6
Total 84 100.0

Forty-five (55.6%) participants agreed or strongly agreed that watching videos would
create a desire to learn more about the CCSS. Twenty-nine (35.8%) participants were neutral,
while seven (8.6%) strongly disagreed or disagreed. Three (3.6%) participants did not respond to
this statement.
The following tables depict the results for the fourth statement: I could become more
knowledgeable about the Common Core State Standards by having a dialogue with other parents.
Table 27
Parents Find it Interesting to Engage in Dialogue with Other Parents About the CCSS

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Disagree 10 11.9 12.3 12.3
Neutral 20 23.8 24.7 37.0
Agree 37 44.0 45.7 82.7
Strongly Agree 14 16.7 17.3 100.0
Total 81 96.4 100.0
Missing 3 3.6
Total 84 100.0

Fifty-one (63%) participants strongly agreed or agreed that engaging in dialogue with
other parents about the CCSS would be interesting. Twenty (24.7%) participants were neutral,

74
while 10 (12.3%) disagreed. No one strongly disagreed with this question. Three (3.6%)
participants did not respond to this statement.
Table 28
Parents Find it Informative to Engage in Dialogue with Other Parents About the CCSS

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
1 1.2 1.2 1.2
Disagree 11 13.1 13.6 14.8
Neutral 23 27.4 28.4 43.2
Agree 35 41.7 43.2 86.4
Strongly Agree 11 13.1 13.6 100.0
Total 81 96.4 100.0
Missing 3 3.6
Total 84 100.0

Overall, 46 (56.8%) participants strongly agreed or agreed that engaging in dialogue with
other parents about the CCSS would be informative. Twenty-three (28.4%) participants were
neutral, while 12 (14.8%) strongly disagreed or disagreed. Three (3.6%) participants did not
respond to this statement.
Table 29
Parents Find it Worthwhile to Engage in Dialogue with Other Parents About the CCSS

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
3 3.6 3.8 3.8
Disagree 6 7.1 7.5 11.3
Neutral 28 33.3 35.0 46.3
Agree 34 40.5 42.5 88.8
Strongly Agree 9 10.7 11.3 100.0
Total 80 95.2 100.0
Missing 4 4.8
Total 84 100.0

75
Forty-three (53.8%) participants strongly agreed or agreed that engaging in dialogue with
other parents about the CCSS would be worth their time. Twenty-eight participants were neutral,
while nine (11.3%) strongly disagreed or disagreed. Four (4.8%) participants did not respond to
this statement.
Table 30
Engaging in Dialogue with Other Parents About the CCSS Creates a Desire to Learn More

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
1 1.2 1.3 1.3
Disagree 13 15.5 16.3 17.5
Neutral 22 26.2 27.5 45.0
Agree 32 38.1 40.0 85.0
Strongly Agree 12 14.3 15.0 100.0
Total 80 95.2 100.0
Missing 4 4.8
Total 84 100.0

Overall, 44 (55%) of the participants strongly agreed or agreed that engaging in dialogue
with other parents about the CCSS would create a desire to learn more. Twenty-two (27.5%)
participants were neutral, while 14 (17.6%) strongly disagreed or disagreed. Four (4.8%)
participants did not respond to this statement.
The following tables depict the results for the fifth statement: I could become more
knowledgeable about the Common Core State Standards by visiting classrooms.

76
Table 31
Parents Find it Interesting to Learn About the CCSS by Visiting Classrooms

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Disagree 4 4.8 4.9 4.9
Neutral 9 10.7 11.0 15.9
Agree 24 28.6 29.3 45.1
Strongly Agree 45 53.6 54.9 100.0
Total 82 97.6 100.0
Missing 2 2.4
Total 84 100.0

Sixty-nine (84.2%) participants strongly agreed or agreed that visiting classrooms to learn
about the CCSS would be interesting. Nine (11%) participants were neutral, while four (4.9%)
disagreed. No participants responded with strongly disagree, and two (2.4%) participants did not
respond to this statement.
Table 32
Parents Find it Informative to Learn About the CCSS by Visiting Classrooms

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Disagree 1 1.2 1.2 1.2
Neutral 10 11.9 12.3 13.6
Agree 25 29.8 30.9 44.4
Strongly Agree 45 53.6 55.6 100.0
Total 81 96.4 100.0
Missing 3 3.6
Total 84 100.0

Seventy (86.5%) participants strongly agreed or agreed that visiting classrooms to learn
about the CCSS would be informative. Ten (12.3%) participants were neutral, while one (1.2%)
participant disagreed. No participants responded with strongly disagree, and three (3.6%) did not
respond to the statement.

77
Table 33
Parents Find it Worthwhile to Learn About the CCSS by Visiting Classrooms

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
1 1.2 1.2 1.2
Disagree 5 6.0 6.2 7.4
Neutral 11 13.1 13.6 21.0
Agree 29 34.5 35.8 56.8
Strongly Agree 35 41.7 43.2 100.0
Total 81 96.4 100.0
Missing 3 3.6
Total 84 100.0

Sixty-four (79%) participants strongly agreed or agreed that visiting classrooms to learn
about the CCSS would be worth their time. Eleven (13.6%) participants were neutral, while six
(7.4%) strongly disagreed or disagreed. Three (3.6%) participants did not respond to this
statement.
Table 34
Parents Have a Desire to Learn More About the CCSS by Visiting Classrooms

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
1 1.2 1.2 1.2
Disagree 4 4.8 4.9 6.2
Neutral 13 15.5 16.0 22.2
Agree 24 28.6 29.6 51.9
Strongly Agree 39 46.4 48.1 100.0
Total 81 96.4 100.0
Missing 3 3.6
Total 84 100.0

Overall, 63 (77.7%) participants strongly agreed or agreed that visiting classroom to learn
about the CCSS would create a desire to learn more. Thirteen (16%) participants were neutral,

78
while five (6.1%) strongly disagreed or disagreed. Three (3.6%) participants did not respond to
the statement.
The following tables depict the results for the sixth statement: I could become more
knowledgeable about the Common Core State Standards by having a conference with the
principal or teacher.
Table 35
Parents Find it Interesting to Learn About the CCSS through Conferences with the Principal or
Teacher

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
2 2.4 2.5 2.5
Neutral 14 16.7 17.3 19.8
Agree 27 32.1 33.3 53.1
Strongly Agree 38 45.2 46.9 100.0
Total 81 96.4 100.0
Missing 3 3.6
Total 84 100.0

Sixty-five (80.2%) participants strongly agreed or agreed that having a conference with
the principal or teacher to learn about the CCSS would be interesting. Fourteen (17.3%)
participants were neutral, while two (2.5%) strongly disagreed. No participants disagreed with
this statement, while three (3.6%) did not respond to it.

79
Table 36
Parents Find it Informative to Learn About the CCSS through Conferences with the Principal or
Teacher

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
1 1.2 1.2 1.2
Disagree 2 2.4 2.4 3.7
Neutral 8 9.5 9.8 13.4
Agree 31 36.9 37.8 51.2
Strongly Agree 40 47.6 48.8 100.0
Total 82 97.6 100.0
Missing 2 2.4
Total 84 100.0

Seventy-one (86.6%) participants strongly agreed or agreed that having a conference with
the principal or teacher to learn about the CCSS would be informative. Eight (9.8%) participants
were neutral, while three (3.6%) strongly disagreed or disagreed. Two (2.4%) participants did
not respond to this statement.
Table 37
Parents Find it Worthwhile to Learn About the CCSS through Conferences with the Principal or
Teacher

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
1 1.2 1.3 1.3
Disagree 3 3.6 3.8 5.0
Neutral 9 10.7 11.3 16.3
Agree 32 38.1 40.0 56.3
Strongly Agree 35 41.7 43.8 100.0
Total 80 95.2 100.0
Missing 4 4.8
Total 84 100.0

80
Sixty-seven (83.8%) participants strongly agreed or agreed that having a conference with
the principal or teacher to learn about the CCSS would be worth their time. Nine (11.3%)
participants were neutral, while four (5.1%) strongly disagreed or disagreed. Four (4.8%)
participants did not respond to this statement.

Table 38
Parents Have a Desire to Learn More About the CCSS through Conferences with the Principal
or Teacher

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
1 1.2 1.3 1.3
Disagree 2 2.4 2.5 3.8
Neutral 19 22.6 23.8 27.5
Agree 24 28.6 30.0 57.5
Strongly Agree 34 40.5 42.5 100.0
Total 80 95.2 100.0
Missing 4 4.8
Total 84 100.0

Fifty-eight (72.5%) participants strongly agreed or agreed that having a conference with
the principal or teacher to learn about the CCSS would create a desire to learn more. Nineteen
(23.8%) participants were neutral, while three (3.8%) strongly disagreed or disagreed. Four
(4.8%) participants did not respond to this question.
The following tables depict the results for the seventh statement: I could become more
knowledgeable about the Common Core State Standards by attending a Local Control
Accountability Plan (LCAP) meeting.

81
Table 39
Parents Find it Interesting to Attend an LCAP meeting to Learn About the CCSS

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
5 6.0 6.2 6.2
Disagree 10 11.9 12.3 18.5
Neutral 26 31.0 32.1 50.6
Agree 27 32.1 33.3 84.0
Strongly Agree 13 15.5 16.0 100.0
Total 81 96.4 100.0
Missing 3 3.6
Total 84 100.0

Forty (49.3%) participants strongly agreed or agreed that attending an LCAP meeting to
learn about the CCSS would be interesting. Twenty-six (32.1%) participants were neutral, while
15 (18.5%) strongly disagreed or disagreed. Three (3.6%) participants did not respond to this
statement.
Table 40
Parents Find it Informative to Attend an LCAP Meeting to Learn About the CCSS

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
6 7.1 7.3 7.3
Disagree 6 7.1 7.3 14.6
Neutral 22 26.2 26.8 41.5
Agree 31 36.9 37.8 79.3
Strongly Agree 17 20.2 20.7 100.0
Total 82 97.6 100.0
Missing 2 2.4
Total 84 100.0

Forty-eight (58.5%) participants strongly agreed or agreed that attending an LCAP
meeting to learn about the CCSS would be informative. Twenty-two (26.8%) participants were

82
neutral, while 12 (14.6%) strongly disagreed or disagreed. Two (2.4%) particiapnts did not
respond to this statement.
Table 41
Parents Find it Worthwhile to Attend an LCAP Meeting to Learn About the CCSS

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
6 7.1 7.5 7.5
Disagree 9 10.7 11.3 18.8
Neutral 27 32.1 33.8 52.5
Agree 25 29.8 31.3 83.8
Strongly Agree 13 15.5 16.3 100.0
Total 80 95.2 100.0
Missing 4 4.8
Total 84 100.0

Thirty-eight (47.6%) participants strongly agreed or agreed that attending an LCAP
meeting to learn about the CCSS would be worth their time. Twenty-seven (33.8%) participants
were neutral, while 15 (18.8%) strongly disagreed or disagreed. Four (4.8%) participants did not
respond to the statement.
Table 42
Parents Have a Desire to Learn About the CCSS by Attending an LCAP Meeting

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Strongly
Disagree
8 9.5 10.0 10.0
Disagree 7 8.3 8.8 18.8
Neutral 26 31.0 32.5 51.2
Agree 24 28.6 30.0 81.3
Strongly Agree 15 17.9 18.8 100.0
Total 80 95.2 100.0
Missing 4 4.8
Total 84 100.0

83
Thirty-nine (38.8%) participants strongly agreed or agreed that attending an LCAP
meeting to learn about the CCSS would create a desire to learn more. Twenty-six (32.5%)
participants were neutral, while 15 (18.8%) strongly disagreed or disagreed. Four (4.8%)
participants did not respond to this statement.
The final question asked: To what degree do you feel that your school has been
accountable in educating you regarding the Common Core State Standards?
Table 43
Amount of Education Parents Perceive They Have Received from the School

Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Not at All 5 6.0 8.6 8.6
Very Little 33 39.3 56.9 65.5
Enough 17 20.2 29.3 94.8
More Than
Enough
3 3.6 5.2 100.0
Total 58 69.0 100.0
Missing 26 31.0
Total 84 100.0

Thirty-three (56.9%) participants felt that the school had done very little to educate them
about the CCSS, while five (8.6%) participants felt that the school had done nothing at all.
Seventeen (29.3%) said that the school educated them enough to understand the CCSS, and three
(5.2%) felt that the school had done more than enough to educate them about the CCSS. Twenty-
six (31%) participants did not respond to this question.
The table below is an overall summary of the highest percentages (Agree or Strongly
Agreed) that participants found as the most useful resources schools can provide parents to
educate them about the CCSS.

84
Table 44
Overall Summary
Resource Percent Agreed or Strongly
Agreed
Valid Percent of Agreed or
Strongly Agreed
Talking to Teachers 75.0 80.7
Group Meetings 63.1 70.6
Talking to Children 59.6 61.7
Talking to other Parents 52.4 56.4
Newspapers 36.9 40.3
Videos 32.1 36.5

Overall, participants agreed or strongly agreed that talking to teachers (80.7 valid) was
the number one resource that schools could provide to parents to help them understand the
CCSS. Table 45 is an overall summary of the highest percentages (Agree or Strongly Agreed)
that participants found as the most useful resources schools could provide parents to educate
them about the CCSS.
Table 45
Strongly Agreed or Agreed Percentages of Resources
Resources Interesting Informative
Worth My
Time
Desire to Learn
More
Visiting Classrooms 69 (84.2%) 70 (86.5%) 64 (79.0%) 63 (77.7%)
Parent Conferences
w/Teacher or
Principal
65 (80.2%) 71 (86.6%) 67 (83.8%) 68 (72.5%)
Attending Meetings 65 (79.2%) 70 (85.4%) 60 (74.0%) 56 (70.0%)
Reading Different
Materials
55 (67.9%) 70 (84.4%) 54 (69.2%) 55 (68.7%)
Dialoging w/Other
Parents
51 (63.0%) 46 (56.8%) 43 (53.8%) 44 (55.0%)
Watching Videos 51 (62.9%) 53 (64.6%) 47 (58.8%) 45 (55.6%)
Attending an LCAP
Mtg.
40 (49.3%) 48 (58.5%) 48 (47.6%) 39 (48.8%)

Table 45 represents the overall data collected of participants who, using a Likert Scale,
rated possible parental resources on CCSS as Interesting, Informative, Worth My Time, and

85
created a Desire to Learn More. For example, when participants responded to the statement:,
“Visiting classrooms to learn about the CCSS would be interesting to me,” 69 (84.2%) of them
agreed or strongly agreed. The data represents an overall number of participants who agreed or
strongly agreed that the three schools surveyed should provide these resources to parents. Any of
these resources provided to parents individually or in combination would help parents to better
comprehend the CCSS.
Summary
The data collected in this survey represents the perceptions of parents about the resources
they need to comprehend the CCSS and to improve parental participation in the school setting.
The survey instrument utilized and explored parental perspectives on how well the school was
providing parents with the resources they needed to help them comprehend the CCSS and to
increase involvement.
This research focused on the various resources that schools currently do and do not use to
gain a detailed perspective of the data. This research method addressed all three research
objectives. Based on the survey instrument, the respondents were identified using a convenience
sampling approach. Convenience sampling is a non-probability technique where subjects are
selected because of their convenient accessibility and proximity to the researcher (Zelinski et al.,
2001). For this survey, the sample participants consisted of parents in three local high schools in
the same school district. The sampling was conducted by dropping off the questionnaires with
the principal and asking parents at different parent meetings (i.e. Coffee with the Principal,
School Site Council, English Language Advisory Council, and Parent Teacher Student
Association) to complete them during their meeting time.

86
The drawback of this sampling technique was that it was more likely to utilize parents
already involved in the school than those who are less involved. Because uninvolved parents are
not likely to be at the selected meetings, a sample bias was created and the data adversely
affected the results. The issue with devising sampling for this study is that the researcher sought
to determine why parents were not highly involved with the school and what they needed
comprehend the CCSS. At present, there are no simple solutions to this problem.
Sixty-nine (84.2%) participants strongly agreed or agreed that visiting classrooms was the
most interesting resource a school could provide to help parents better comprehend the CCSS.
Also, 70 (86.6%) of the participants strongly agreed or agreed that parent conferences with the
teacher or principal was the most informative resource schools could provide to educate parents
about the CCSS. The data show that participants find conferences with the teacher or principal as
being the best use of their time. Sixty-seven (83.8%) participants strongly agreed or agreed that
these meeting were worth their time. Finally, the data show that 63 (77.7%) of participants
strongly agreed or agreed that being provided an opportunity to visit classrooms would create a
desire to learn more about the CCSS.

87
Chapter 5: Discussion
Background Information
This study examined the resources schools are currently providing to parents to help them
understand the transition to the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). The study also addressed
the knowledge gaps that parents demonstrate regarding their understanding of the CCSS, as well
as the organizational gaps schools demonstrate when providing information and resources that
parents require to comprehend the CCSS.
In 1983, the National Commission on Excellence in Education reported the ever-growing
assertion that American schools were failing, causing local, state, and federal reform efforts
(NCEE, 1983). This assertion that schools were failing led to the implementation of the CCSS
and emphasis on the importance of parental involvement.
Parental involvement is associated with a range of enhanced outcomes for elementary,
middle, and high school students, including varied indicators of achievement and the
development of student attributes that support achievement. These indicators include self-
efficacy for learning, perceptions of personal control over outcomes, and self-regulatory skills
and knowledge (Bandura, Barbaranelli, Caprara, & Pastorelli, 1996). Epstein’s six types of
parental involvement were used as the basis for this study to help schools develop meaningful
partnerships among three critical educational stakeholders: parents, schools, and communities.
Epstein’s model explores the different practices of partnership between parents and schools.
California’s Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) and the Local Control
Accountability Plan (LCAP) represent changes in the way schools are funded and the way they
must account for the funds they receive. These new accountability standards allow schools to
more easily understand their strengths and weaknesses in supporting the implementation of new

88
and existing programs. Engaging parents is one of the priorities required in the new funding
system. The LCAP recognizes the importance of parental participation and requires districts to
detail the goals and actions that they intend to take to increase partnerships between parents and
schools.
The study focused on providing parents with the necessary resources to comprehend the
CCSS. Helping parents to understand how to better assist their children in achieving their
academic goals plays a key role in the student’s future success. This study was solution based
and was aimed at producing data as well as an action plan for helping parents to comprehend and
support their children with the CCSS. It offers practical advice for parents and educators based
on evidence derived from the study.
Methodology
The survey instrument explored parental perspectives on how well the school was
providing parents with the resources they needed to help them comprehend the CCSS and to
increase parental involvement.
This research focused on the various resources schools do and do not use for parental
involvement. This research method addressed all three research questions. Based on the survey
instrument, the respondents were identified using convenience sampling. Convenience sampling
is a non-probability technique where subjects are selected because of their convenient
accessibility and proximity to the researcher (Zelinski et al., 2001). For this survey, the sample
participants consisted of parents in three local high schools in the same school district. The
sampling was conducted by providing the questionnaires to the principal and asking parents at
different parent meetings (i.e. Coffee with the Principal, School Site Council, English Language

89
Advisory Council, and Parent Teacher Student Association) to complete them during their
meetings.
The instrument used was a Likert type scale survey. The various responses were analyzed
for frequency distribution by response categories. The survey gathered demographic data and
used an ANOVA to test for differences based on age, education level, gender, and race. A
Cronbach’s alpha was also utilized to test for internal validity of the survey instrument.
Key Findings
Research question 1. What resources do parents of high school students perceive they
need to comprehend the shift from the 1997 standards to the CCSS? To answer this question, the
survey asked each parent what level of understanding they had regarding current educational
ideas. The results showed that 34 (47.2%) of the parents surveyed knew little of the CCSS, while
35 (48.6%) knew enough about them. Only one (1.4%) participant was not familiar with the
CCSS, while two (2.8%) answered that they were extensively familiar. Twelve (14.3%)
participants did not respond to the question. Forty-eight percent of the parents surveyed stated
that they were familiar with the CCSS, and another 47.2% stated that they knew very little about
them. Before schools can provide parents with the resources needed to comprehend the CCSS,
they must first determine whether parents know what the CCSS are. Almost 50% of the
participants surveyed knew what the CCSS were, while another 50% did not. Therefore, schools
must do a better job of educating parents about the CCSS (O’Brien, 2014). This is the
fundamental question that schools must ask before they can provide the necessary resources to
parents for comprehending the CCSS.
Another question asked in the survey that answers the first research question is: What
factors in the community influenced parents’ understanding of the CCSS? The survey asked

90
parents if the following resources helped them to comprehend the shift from the 1997 standards
to the CCSS: newspapers, videos, group meetings, talking to other parents, talking to teachers,
and/or talking to their children. The results indicated that the resource that had the most impact
on their understanding of the CCSS was talking to teachers or parent-teacher meetings. Sixty-
three respondents (80.7%) agreed or strongly agreed with this statement. The resource that
parents felt had the least impact on their understanding of the CCSS was watching videos.
Twenty-seven (36.5%) participants disagreed or strongly disagreed with the concept of videos as
an essential resource.
The results show that schools should provide opportunities for parents to meet with
teachers and have discussions about the CCSS. Such meetings will have a greater impact on their
understanding of CCSS and the implications. Under Epstein’s Six Types of Parent Involvement,
teacher meetings fall under the category of type two: Communication (Epstein et al., 1997).
Communication with parents can take many forms, such as teacher meetings, memos, report
cards, calendars, grades, and phone calls from the school. It also includes providing information
on tests regarding the child’s progress (Epstein et al., 1997). Communication between the school
and parent is typically weighted toward those communications initiated by the school. Parents
communicate by interacting with questions about their child’s progress (Epstein et al., 1997) and
by attending teacher conferences and having a dialogue with the student’s teacher (National
Network of Partnership Schools, 2006).
Communication about the CCSS was essential between the teacher and the parent. It
allowed parents an opportunity to communicate what they did and did not know about the CCSS,
thereby giving teachers a basic understanding of the parent’s knowledge. Just as teachers assess
their students to understand levels of proficiency, they must also do the same with parents.

91
Parent classroom visits. The data indicated that parents find visiting classrooms as the
most interesting thing a school can provide to help them comprehend the shift from the 1997
standards to the CCSS. Sixty-nine (84.2%) of the parents strongly agreed or agreed with this
concept. Visiting classrooms also created the highest desire to learn more about the CCSS. The
data indicated that schools should give parents opportunities to visit classrooms to help them
understand the instructional strategies used to teach students. This allows parents an opportunity
to interact and collaborate with teachers and other parents. Parent classroom visits create
opportunities to build, improve, and strengthen home-school relations, and also create true
partnerships in education. This step helps to further eliminate the barriers between home and
school (Fisher & Frey, 2014).
Parent conferences with teachers and principals. The survey data showed that parents
find having parent-teacher or parent-principal conferences to be the most informative manner of
gaining information about the CCSS. Eighty-six percent of parents strongly agreed or agreed
with this statement. The data showed that parents find conferences with teachers or principals as
worthwhile (Davis, 2000). Parent conferences can occur during a time that best suits the parent,
and the parents are given an opportunity to question teachers or principals about the CCSS and
how they relate to their child’s education.
Research question 2. What current resources and practices have schools implemented to
educate parents to comprehend the CCSS? The data showed that 33 (56.9%) of the respondents
felt that their school had done little to educate them about the CCSS. Five (8.6%) participants felt
that their school had done nothing at all. Thirty-eight (65.5%) of the parents felt their schools had
done little to nothing at all in helping them to understand the CCSS. Only 20 (34.5%) of the
parents felt that their schools had done enough or more than enough to educate them about the

92
CCSS. Schools need to be aware of the data and do a better job of educating parents about the
CCSS. By providing parents with opportunities such as learning walks/classroom visits and more
parent teacher or principal conferences, they may feel that schools are doing a better job of
educating them about the CCSS (O’Brien, 2014).
Research question 3. How are school districts being held accountable for meeting parent
needs to comprehend the CCSS? California’s Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) and the
Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) represent changes in the way schools are funded and
the way they must account for the funds they receive. These new accountability standards allow
schools to more easily assess their strengths and weaknesses in helping parents. Engaging
parents is one of the priorities required in the new funding system. The LCAP addresses the
importance of parental participation and requires districts to detail the goals and actions that they
intend to enact to increase the partnerships between parents and schools.
Fifty-one percent of the parents felt that attending an LCAP meeting was informative.
They indicated that such meetings would be worthwhile and would create a desire to learn more
about the CCSS. School districts should inform or educate parents about the LCAP meetings so
they can participate in the process. School districts must do a better job of educating parents
about the importance of LCAP meetings and how they relate to the funding of the school district
(LCFF, 2014). As the state of California continues to fund schools in this manner and holds
districts accountable for having parent participation on district committees, parents will place
more value on their roles.
Limitations
There were a number of limitations to this research study. For example, only 82
participants took the survey (n = 82), which is considered a low amount. Additionally, the

93
participants were parents who were already involved with the school, and therefore the sample
was heavily biased. To capture better data, a larger sample of parents must be considered,
including those who are not already involved with the school.
Another limitation to this research was that CCSS implementation is still fairly new.
Many teachers were struggling to change their instructional strategies to accommodate for the
CCSS and had been reluctant to make this shift. Many school districts were transitioning from
the 1997 State Standards to the CCSS. Also, there was little test data to show that the new CCSS
was helping to prepare students for the realities of 21
st
century work environments.
School districts also needed to educate and inform parents about their roles in the Local
Control Funding Formula (LCFF) and the Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP). To
increase parental involvement as suggested in this study, schools must do a better job of inviting
parents to the campus, making them feel welcomed, and involving them in the school. As long as
parents feel that they cannot communicate with schools and are not welcomed, their motivation
to join learning walks/classroom visits will be low. Additionally, if parents do not feel
welcomed, the accessibility to attend parent conferences will also be low.
Providing parents with the necessary resources to comprehend the CCSS is not a difficult
task. This research provides evidence detailing what parents want and need to become LCAP
participants. The limitation that needs to be addressed regarding parent learning walks/classroom
visits is providing parents with different times to attend these events. Due to parent work
schedules, it is often difficult for parents to attend learning walks/classroom visits. Schools will
need to accommodate parents by providing different times for parents to participate.
The data collected in this survey also has another limitation. The sampling of parents
used in this survey are individuals who are already involved with the schools. Because

94
uninvolved parents are not likely to be at the selected meetings, a sample bias was created and
the data adversely affected the results. The issue with devising sampling for this research is that
the study sought to determine the reasons why parents are not highly involved with schools and
what they need to comprehend the CCSS. At present, there are no simple solutions to this
problem.
Implications
This study presented findings on the resources schools should provide to parents to help
them comprehend the CCSS. Future research should continue to explore additional resources that
schools can provide to parents in order to help them better understand the CCSS and their
implications on student learning. As schools continue to make the shift to the CCSS, parents
must be provided with resources that will address their needs. Parents who understand the CCSS
are better equipped to provide their children with support on their homework and other classwork
outside of school. Although this study did not explore the correlation between parents who
understood the CCSS and their child’s academic achievement, future research can address this
concept.
Getting non-involved parents to participate in a survey would provide future researchers
with data on the reasons that they are not involved. Because the participants surveyed in this
research were already involved with the schools, the data was biased and did not give a true
representation of what resources parents need to understand the CCSS. Future research should
continue to explore how to increase parental involvement in schools, specifically focusing on
non-involved parents. Parental involvement has long been associated with a range of enhanced
outcomes such as student academic achievement, self-efficacy for learning, perceptions of
personal control over outcomes, and self-regulatory skills and knowledge (Bandura et al., 1996).

95
Finally, future research can survey schools that utilized the guide in the following
recommendations section and compare them to schools that did not. The data gathered in this
study showed that all of the resources in the survey would have a positive impact on how well
parents understand the CCSS. Therefore, future research may show a distinction between schools
who used the resources as outlined in this study compared to schools that did not use the guide.
Recommendations
This research study is meant to provide schools with a guide on the resources they can
provide parents to educate them on the CCSS. The data indicated that the resources used in the
survey can benefit schools in helping parents to better understand the CCSS. Using Table 47 as a
reference, schools have a number of options to help parents understand the standards.
Table 46
Strongly Agreed or Agreed Percentages of Resources
Resources Interesting Informative
Worth My
Time
Desire to Learn
More
Visiting Classrooms 69 (84.2%) 70 (86.5%) 64 (79.0%) 63 (77.7%)
Parent Conf.
w/Teacher or
Principal
65 (80.2%) 71 (86.6%) 67 (83.8%) 68 (72.5%)
Attending Meetings 65 (79.2%) 70 (85.4%) 60 (74.0%) 56 (70.0%)
Reading Different
Materials
55 (67.9%) 70 (84.4%) 54 (69.2%) 55 (68.7%)
Dialoging w/Other
Parents
51 (63.0%) 46 (56.8%) 43 (53.8%) 44 (55.0%)
Watching Videos 51 (62.9%) 53 (64.6%) 47 (58.8%) 45 (55.6%)
Attending an LCAP
Mtg.
40 (49.3%) 48 (58.5%) 48 (47.6%) 39 (48.8%)

Schools can begin by providing parents with multiple opportunities to meet with
principals and teachers to discuss the CCSS. At these meetings, parents can be provided with
handouts about the standards or about the protocols of Learning Walks/Classroom Visits. The
school can begin the meeting by showing an educational video about the CCSS or Parent

96
Learning Walks/Classroom Visits. The principals or teachers can have a discussion with parents
on the importance of understanding the CCSS and how it relates to the academic achievement of
their children. Parents can also engage in dialogue with other parents regarding the importance of
understanding the CCSS. The principals or teachers can then discuss the protocols of Learning
Walks/Classroom Visits and how parents would be able to see the CCSS in action. Finally,
schools can provide parents with information about the Local Control Accountability Plan
(LCAP). Again, parents would be provided an opportunity to discuss this important meeting and
how it relates to the funding of programs at their child’s school.
By providing parents with a detailed guide of these activities and allowing them different
times to attend the meetings, there is a higher probability that those who are not involved in their
children’s education would be willing to participate in the future. Also, it is important to note
that providing a school culture that welcomes parents and provides this information in their
native language would increase the number of non-involved parents at the school site.
Conclusion
As schools transition to the new CCSS, they must provide parents with the necessary
resources to comprehend them. One of those resources is to increase parental involvement at the
school. Increased parental involvement results in students that are better able to balance time
spent on chores, studies, and other activities (Epstein et al., 1997). This results in regular
attendance and awareness that school is an important part of life. Parents gain confidence in their
ability to support their children through school and in their knowledge of child and adolescent
development. Schools and teachers benefit by understanding family goals as well as the
challenges that their students face.

97
Schools that provide parents with opportunities to visit classrooms through the use of
learning walks will increase parent comprehension of the CCSS. Learning walks have been
transformative in schools and districts, particularly in moving from professional development to
professional practice (Fisher & Frey, 2014). This notion of professional practice allows teachers
an opportunity to grow in their instructional capacity by observing and discussing with their
fellow colleagues the best instructional strategies being utilized. It also allows parents an
opportunity to understand those best instructional practices and how they relate to the CCSS.
Schools that provide parents with a variety of opportunities to meet and confer with
teachers and school administrators will have a greater impact on parents understanding the
CCSS. This shift is necessary, and this research study provided data that shows what parents
want and need. It provides schools with data that show how parents feel about not receiving the
necessary information to comprehend the CCSS. As schools and districts continue to make this
transition, they need to survey parents to determine the level of understanding they have of the
CCSS. Learning walks and parent conferences with teachers or principals are two resources that
schools can implement to increase parent understanding as this transition occurs.

98
References
Abel, Y. (2012). African American fathers’ involvement in their children’s school-based
lives. The Journal of Negro Education, 81(2), 162-172. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/1034740095?accountid=14749
Albemarle County Public Schools. (2013). Learning walks overview learning walks: A reflective
practice model that guides classroom visits. Retrieved from
http://www2.k12albemarle.org/acps/staff/TPA/Documents/Learning_Walks_Overview.pdf
Bakker, J., Denessen, E., & Brus-Laeven, M. (2007). Socio-economic background, parental
involvement and teacher perceptions of these in relation to pupil achievement.
Educational Studies, 33(2), 177-192. doi:10.1080/03055690601068345
Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (1996). Multifaceted impact of
self-efficacy beliefs on academic functioning. Child Development, 67(3), 1206-1222.
doi:10.2307/1131888
Barnard, W. M. (2004). Parent involvement in elementary school and educational attainment.
Children and Youth Services Review, 26(1), 39-62. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2003.11.002
Bower, H., & Griggin, D. (2011). Can the Epstein model of parental involvement work in a
high-minority, high-poverty elementary school? A Case Study. Professional School Counseling,
15(2), 77-87. doi:10.5330/psc.n.2011-15.77
Brown, S. (2004). Assessment for learning. Retrieved from
http://www.qub.ac.uk/directorates/AcademicStudentAffairs/CentreforEducationalDevelo
pment/FilestoreDONOTDELETE/Filetoupload,120807,en.pdf

99
California Department of Education. (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics for
California public schools kindergarten through grade twelve. Retrieved from
http://www.msjc.edu/cte/Documents/EEA/MathCommonCoreStandards.pdf
California Department of Education. (2013). Common Core State Standards for English
language arts & literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects.
Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/st/ss/documents/finalelaccssstandards.pdf
Ceballo, R., Maurizi, L. K., Suarez, G. A., & Aretakis, M. T. (2014). Gift and sacrifice: Parental
involvement in Latino adolescents’ education. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority
Psychology, 20(1), 116-127. doi:10.1037/a0033472
“Charts Formatted to Clarify Common Core Literacy Standards.” (2014). Retrieved from
http://teacher.depaul.edu/CommonCoreReading-Grade-to-Grade.htm
Cheung, C. (2009). Evaluating the benefit from the help of the parent-teacher association to child
performance. Eval Program Plan, 32(3), 247-56. doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2008.12.004
City, E. A., Elmore, R. F., Fiarman, S. E., & Teitel, L. (2009). Instructional rounds in education.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Cooper, C. E., & Crosnoe, R. (2007). The engagement in schooling of economically
disadvantaged parents and children. Youth & Society, 38(3), 372-391.
doi:10.1177/0044118x06289999
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
Cypress High School. (2014). School accountability report card. Retrieved from
http://new.auhsd.us/district/media/files/2013_School_Accountability_Report_Card_9-
12_Cypress_High_School_20140128.pdf

100
Davis, D. (2000). Supporting parent, family, and community involvement in your school.
Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.
Dee, T. S., Wei H., & Jacob, B. A. (2006). The effects of school size on parental involvement
and social capital: Evidence from the ELS. Brookings Papers on Education Policy,
2006(1), 77-97. doi:10.1353/pep.2007.0002
De Gaetano, Y. (2007). The role of culture in engaging Latino parents’ involvement in school.
Urban Education, 42(2), 145-162. doi:10.1177/0042085906296536
Eamon, M. K. (2005). Social-demographic, school, neighborhood, and parenting influences on
the academic achievement of Latino young adolescents. Journal of Youth and
Adolescences, 34(2), 163-174. doi:10.1007/s10964-005-3214-x
Epstein, J. L., Coates, L., Salinas, K. C., Sanders, M. G., & Simon, B. S. (1997). School, family,
and community partnerships: Your handbook for action. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin
Press.
Families in Schools. (2013). Reimagining parent involvement in California: Moving from 1.0 to
2.0. Retrieved from
http://parentsmatternow.org/wpcontent/uploads/2013/11/FIS_ReimaginedSummaryRpt_1
01413_WithCover.pdf
Fantuzzo, J., Tighe, E., & Childs, S. (2000). Family involvement questionnaire: A multivariate
assessment of family participation in early childhood education. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 92(2), 367-376. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.92.2.367
Fensterwald, J. (2014). State board poised to elevate parents' role in setting district priorities.
EdSource. Retrieved from http://edsource.org/2014/state-board-poised-to- elevate-
parents-role-in-setting-district-priorities/56361#.UzUwHPldXdc

101
Fishel, M., & Ramirez, L. (2005). Evidence-based parent involvement interventions with school-
aged children. School Psychology Quarterly, 20(4), 371-402.
doi:10.1521/scpq.2005.20.4.371
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2014). Using teacher learning walks to improve instruction. Principal
Leadership: Instructional Leader. Retrieved
from http://www.nassp.org/Content/158/pl_jan14_instructldr.pdf
Fletcher, J. C. (1995). It takes a village. New York, NY: Scholastic.
Friedman, T. (2011). How about better parents. New York Times. Retrieved from
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/20/opinion/sunday/friedman-how-about-better-
parents.html?_r=0
Garcia Coll, C., Akiba, D., Palacios, N., Bailey, B., Silver, R., … & Chin, C. (2002). Parental
involvement in children’s education: Lessons from three immigrant groups. Parenting:
Science and Practice, 2(3), 303-324. doi:10.1207/S15327922PAR0203_05
Green, C. L., & Walker, J. M. T. (2007). Parents’ motivations for involvement in children’s
education: An empirical test of a theoretical model of parental involvement. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 99(3), 532-544. Retrieved from
http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/edu/index.aspx
Gronlnick, W. S., & Slowiaczek, M. L. (1994). Parents’ involvement in children’s schooling: A
multidimensional conceptualization and motivational model. Child Development, 65(1),
237-252. doi:10.2307/1131378
Gunnarsdottir, T., Sigurdardottir, Z. G., Njardvik, U., Olafsdottir, A. S., & Bjarnason, R. (2011).
A randomized-controlled pilot study of Epstein’s family-based behavioral treatment for

102
childhood obesity in a clinical setting in Iceland. Nordic Psychology, 63(1), 6-19.
doi:10.1027/1901-2276/a000024
Hartlep, N., & Ellis, A. (2010). Are household income, gender, and race important in shaping
parental involvement in children’s education? Retrieved from
http://www.academia.edu/1418931/Are_Household_Income_Gender_And_Race_Importa
nt_In_Shaping_Parental_Involvement_In_Childrens_Education
Hiatt, D. B. (1994). Parent involvement in American public schools: An historical perspective
1642-1994. The School Community Journal, 4(2), 27-38. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/621706245?accountid=14749
Houtenville, A., & Smith Conway, K. (2008). Parental effort, school resources, and student
achievement. The Journal of Human Resources, 43(2), 437-453.
doi:10.1353/jhr.2008.0027
Howland, A., Anderson, J. A., Smiley, A. D., & Abbot, D. J. (2006). School liaisons: Bridging
the gap between home and school. The School Community Journal, 16(2), 47-68.
doi:10.4135/9781446213780.n5
Ingram, M., Wolfe, R., & Lieberman, J. (2007). The role of parents in high-achieving schools
serving low-income, at-risk populations. Education and Urban Society, 39(4), 479-497.
doi:10.1177/0013124507302120
Ippolito, J., & Schecter, S. (2008). Parent involvement as education: A case study. Education
Canada, 48(2), 55-58. Retrieved from http://www.cea-ace.ca/sites/default/files/EdCan-
2008-v48-n2-Ippolito.pdf
Izzo, C. V., Weissberg, R. P., Kasprow, W. J., & Fendrich, M. (1999). A longitudinal assessment
of teacher perceptions of parent involvement in children's education and school

103
performance. American Journal of Community Psychology, 27(6), 817-39. Retrieved
from http://search.proquest.com/docview/205349740?accountid=14749
Jefferson, T. (1961). Crusade against ignorance: Thomas Jefferson on education. New York,
NY: Teachers College Press.
Jeynes, W. H. (2007). The relationship between parental involvement and urban secondary
school student academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Urban Education, 42(1), 82-110.
doi:10.1177/0042085906293818
Katella High School. (2013). School accountability report card. Retrieved from
http://new.auhsd.us/district/media/files/2013_School_Accountability_Report_Card_9-
12_Katella_High_School_20140128.pdf
Kemp, S. P., Marcenko, M. O., Hoagwood, K., & Vesneski, W. (2009). Engaging parents in
child welfare services: Bridging family needs and child welfare mandates. Child Welfare,
88(1), 101-126. Retrieved from http://www.cwla.org/child-welfare-journal/
Kessler-Sklar, S., & Baker, A. J. L. (2000). School district parent involvement policies and
programs. The Elementary School Journal, 101(1), 101-118. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/224519268?accountid=14749
Kirst, M. (2013). New common core standards are right for California. Retrieved from
http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/article/New-Common-Core-standards-are-right-for-
California-4739733.php
LaRocque, M., Kleimann I., & Darling, S. (2011). Parental involvement: The missing link in
school achievement. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and
Youth, 55(3), 115-122. doi:10.1080/10459880903472876

104
Local Control Funding Formula [LCFF]. (2014). Making a plan to develop the LCAP. Retrieved
from http://lcff.wested.org/making-a-plan-to-develop-the-lcap/
Merriam, S. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
National Network of Partnership Schools. (2006). Six types of involvement: Keys to successful
partnerships. Retrieved from
http://www.csos.jhu.edu/p2000/nnps_model/school/sixtypes.htm
Nermeen E., Nokali, E. L., & Bachman, H. (2011). Parent involvement and children's academic
and social development in elementary school. Child Development, 81(3), 988–1005.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01447.x
Nochin, E. (2014). Teacher: Common Core frustration of curriculum support. Retrieved from
http://www.katu.com/news/local/Oregon-teacher-about-Common-Core--
252827781.htmlNye, C., Turner, H., & Schwartz, J. (2006). Approaches to parental
involvement for improving the academic performance of elementary school age children.
UCF Center for Autism & Related Disabilities. Retrieved from
http://www.sfi.dk/graphics/Campbell/reviews/parental_involvement_review.pdf
O’Brien, A. (2014). What do parents need to know about the common core? Edutopia. Retrieved
from http://www.edutopia.org/blog/what-parents-need-to-know-common-core-anne-
obrien
Oxford Academy. (2014). School accountability report card. Retrieved from
http://new.auhsd.us/district/media/files/2013_School_Accountability_Report_Card_7-
12_Oxford_Academy_20140128.pdf

105
Pianta, R., Belsky, J., Houts, R., & Morrison, F. (2007). Opportunities to learn in America’s
elementary classrooms. Science, 315(5822), 1795-1796. doi:10.1126/science.1139719
Pulliam, J. D. (1987). History of education in America (4
th
ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill
Publishing Company.
Salinas, K. C., Epstein, J. L., Sanders, M. G., Davis, D., & Alderhaes, I. (2009). Measure of
school, family, and community partnerships. Retrieved from
http://www.state.nj.us/education/title1/tech/module4/measurepartner.pdf
Seitsinger, A. M., & Felner, S. (2008). A large-scale examination of the nature and efficacy of
teachers’ practices to engage parents: Assessment, parental contact, and student-level
impact. Journal of School Psychology, 46(4), 477-505. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2007.11.001
Sheldon, S. B. (2007). Improving student attendance with school, family, and community
partnerships. Journal of Educational Research, 100(5), 267-275.
doi:10.3200/joer.100.5.267-275
Smith, J., Wohlstetter, P., & Kuzin, A. (2011). Parent involvement in urban charter schools: New
strategies for increasing participation. The School Community Journal, 21(1), 71-94.
Retrieved from https://www.usc.edu/dept/education/cegov/focus/charter-
schools/publications/journals/PW_JS_School_Community.pdf
Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of
Medical Education, 2, 53-55. Retrieved from http://www.ijme.net/archive/2/cronbachs-
alpha.pdf
Thomas, J. Y., & Brady, K. P. (2005). The elementary and secondary education act at 40: Equity,
accountability, and the evolving federal role in public education. Review of Research in
Education, 29, 51. Retrieved from http://rre.sagepub.com/

106
Wright, T. (2009). Parent and teacher perceptions of effective parental involvement. Retrieved
from
http://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1217&context=doctoral
Wurman, Z., & Wilson, S. (2012). The common core math standards. Education Next, 12(3).
Retrieved from http://educationnext.org/the-common-core-math-standards/
Zelinski, E. M., Burnight, K. P., & Lane, C. J. (2001). The relationship between subjective and
objective memory in the oldest old: Comparisons of findings from a representative and a
convenience sample. Journal of Aging and Health, 13(2), 248-66. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/215851406?accountid=14749

107
Appendix A: Letter (English)
Date:
Dear Parent,
I am a doctoral student attending the University of Southern California. My program of
study is K-12 Urban Education in the Rossier School of Education. I would like to ask you to
participate in a survey designed to help improve parent involvement in the school and your
understanding of the new educational standards that guide your son/daughter’s education. These
new standards are known as the California Common Core State Standards. It will help to
determine which activities will be best suited to increase parental involvement. Parental
Involvement in the school system is an essential component of student academic achievement.
The purpose of this research will be to develop programs to enhance parental involvement in the
school system.
Your participation in the survey is entirely voluntary. You may decline participation. By
signing below and completing the survey, you are giving your consent to participate in the study.
Your privacy will be maintained at all times. No identifying information will be asked of you.
The secretary of the school will keep the surveys secure until picked up by the researcher. All
surveys will be destroyed upon final completion and acceptance of the project. Only the
researcher will have access to the survey records.
Enclosed in the envelope you will find the Parent Involvement Survey. The survey is a
series of Likert type questions that ask you to answer questions on a 5-point scale from (1)
Strongly Disagree to (5) Strongly Agree and six demographic questions. Please circle the number
by the question that represents your response most closely. Finally, complete the demographic
portion of the survey. Once the survey is complete the researcher asks that you place the survey

108
in the envelope and return it to the secretary. You do not have to put your name on the envelope.
Please seal your envelope before returning it to the secretary.
Your assistance with this study is greatly appreciated. Together we can work to improve
academics at the school, one piece at a time.
Sincerely,

Carlos F. Perez
Doctoral Candidate
University of Southern California

109
Appendix B: Survey (English)
Instructions: Please respond to each of the following statements by indicating how much
knowledge you would gain in comprehending the Common Core State Standards as it relates to
these activities.

1. What level of understanding do you perceive you have regarding current educational ideas?

1=I have no idea 2=I know a little
3=I know enough 4=I know all there is to know
For questions 2 - 9, please use the following scale:

2. What factors in the community influence your understanding of the Common Core State
Standards:

Newspapers 1 2 3 4 5
Videos 1 2 3 4 5
Group Meetings 1 2 3 4 5
Talking to other parents 1 2 3 4 5
Talking to teachers 1 2 3 4 5
Talking to your children 1 2 3 4 5

3. I could become more knowledgeable about the Common Core State Standards by reading
different materials. Examples:

Reading different materials about the CCSS would be interesting to me:
1 2 3 4 5
Reading different materials about the CCSS would be informative to me:
1 2 3 4 5
Reading different materials about the CCSS would be worth my time:
1 2 3 4 5
Reading different materials about the CCSS would create a desire to learn more:
1 2 3 4 5

1=Strongly Disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neutral 4=Agree 5=Strongly Agree

110
Instructions: Please respond to each of the following statements by indicating how much
knowledge you would gain in comprehending the Common Core State Standards as it relates to
these activities.

4. I could become more knowledgeable about the Common Core State Standards by attending
meetings. Examples:

Attending meetings about the CCSS would be interesting to me:
1 2 3 4 5
Attending meetings about the CCSS would be informative to me:
1 2 3 4 5
Attending meetings about the CCSS would be worth my time:
1 2 3 4 5
Attending meetings about the CCSS would create a desire to learn more:
1 2 3 4 5

5. I could become more knowledgeable about the Common Core State Standards by watching
videos.
Examples:

Watching videos about the CCSS would be interesting to me:
1 2 3 4 5
Watching videos about the CCSS would be informative to me:
1 2 3 4 5
Watching videos about the CCSS this be worth my time:
1 2 3 4 5
Watching videos about the CCSS would create a desire to learn more:
1 2 3 4 5

1=Strongly Disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neutral 4=Agree 5=Strongly Agree

111
Instructions: Please respond to each of the following statements by indicating how much
knowledge you would gain in comprehending the Common Core State Standards as it relates to
these activities.

6. I could become more knowledgeable about the Common Core State Standards by dialoguing
with other parents. Examples:

Dialoguing with other parents about the CCSS would be interesting to me:
1 2 3 4 5
Dialoguing with other parents about the CCSS would be informative to me:
1 2 3 4 5
Dialoguing with other parents about the CCSS would be worth my time:
1 2 3 4 5
Dialoguing with other parents about the CCSS would create a desire to learn more:
1 2 3 4 5

7. I could become more knowledgeable about the Common Core State Standards by visiting
classrooms.
Examples:

Visiting classrooms to learn about the CCSS would be interesting to me:
1 2 3 4 5
Visiting classrooms to learn about the CCSS would be informative to me:
1 2 3 4 5
Visiting classrooms to learn about the CCSS would be worth my time:
1 2 3 4 5
Visiting classrooms to learn about the CCSS would create a desire to learn more:
1 2 3 4 5

1=Strongly Disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neutral 4=Agree 5=Strongly Agree

112
Instructions: Please respond to each of the following statements by indicating how much
knowledge you would gain in comprehending the Common Core State Standards as it relates to
these activities.

8. I could become more knowledgeable about the Common Core State Standards by having a
conference with the principal or a teacher.
Examples:

Having a conference with the principal or a teacher to learn about the CCSS would be interesting
to me: 1 2 3 4 5
Having a conference with the principal or a teacher to learn about the CCSS would be
informative to me: 1 2 3 4 5
Having a conference with the principal or a teacher to learn about the CCSS would be worth my
time: 1 2 3 4 5
Having a conference with the principal or a teacher to learn about the CCSS would create a
desire to learn more: 1 2 3 4 5

9. I could become more knowledgeable about the Common Core State Standards by attending a
Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) meeting.
Examples:

Attending a LCAP meeting to learn about the CCSS would be interesting to me:
1 2 3 4 5
Attending a LCAP meeting to learn about the CCSS would be informative to me:
1 2 3 4 5
Attending a LCAP meeting to learn about the CCSS would be worth my time:
1 2 3 4 5
Attending a LCAP meeting to learn about the CCSS would create a desire to learn more:
1 2 3 4 5

1=Strongly Disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neutral 4=Agree 5=Strongly Agree

113
10. To what degree do you feel that your school has been accountable in educating you regarding
the Common Core State Standards:

1=Not at all 2=Very little 3=Enough 4=More than enough

11. What is your gender? _____ Female
_____ Male

12. What is your age? _____ 20 - 29
_____ 30 - 39
_____ 40 - 49
_____ 50 - 59
_____ Other (please list): _____

13. What is your race/ethnicity? _____ Caucasian/White
_____ Hispanic
_____ African-American
_____ Asian
_____ Other (please list): _____________________

14. What is your highest level of education? _____ Some high school
_____ High school graduate
_____ Some college
_____ Bachelor’s degree
_____ Master’s degree
_____ Other (please list): _____________________

15. What is your relationship to the child? _____ Mother
_____ Step-Mother
_____ Father
_____ Step-Father
_____ Grandparent
_____ Other (please list): _____________________

16. How many children do you have in school? _____ 1
_____ 2
_____ 3
_____ 4
_____ 5 or more_______

114
Appendix C: Letter (Spanish)
Encuesta para Padres

Fecha: 23 de octubre 2014
Estimados padres de familia,
Soy un estudiante que está asistiendo a la Universidad del Sur de California para obtener
el doctorado. Mi programa de estudio está basado en la Educación Urbana en la Escuela de
Educación Rossier K-12. Quisiera pedirles que participen en una encuesta diseñada para ayudar
a mejorar la participación de los padres en la escuela y la comprensión de los nuevos estándares
educativos que rigen la educación de sus hijos. Estas nuevas normas se conocen como los
Estándares Estatales Comunes de California. Esto ayudará a determinar las actividades más
adecuadas para que aumente la participación de los padres. La participación de los padres en el
sistema educativo es un componente esencial en el logro académico del estudiante. El propósito
de esta investigación es desarrollar programas para mejorar la participación de los padres en el
sistema educativo.
Su participación en la encuesta es totalmente voluntaria. Usted puede declinar su
participación. Al firmar y completar la encuesta, usted está dando su consentimiento para
participar en este estudio. En todo momento respetaremos su privacidad. En ningún momento
se solicitará su identificación. La secretaria de la escuela mantendrá las encuestas en un lugar
seguro hasta que el investigador lo solicite. Una vez que el proyecto haya sido aceptado y se dé
por finalizado, procederemos a destruir todas las encuestas. Sólo el investigador tendrá acceso a
la información de las encuestas.
La encuesta es una serie de preguntas en las que les piden que respondan sobre una escala
de 5 puntos en las que el (1) indica estar completamente en desacuerdo y el (5) indica estar

115
completamente de acuerdo; además deben responder a seis preguntas demográficas. Favor de
marcar con un círculo el número que mejor represente su respuesta a cada una de las preguntas.
Por último, completen la parte demográfica de la encuesta. Una vez que la encuesta se ha
completado el investigador les pide que regresen la encuesta en y lo devuelvan a la secretaria.
Apreciamos mucho su participación en este estudio. Juntos podemos trabajar para
mejorar, paso a paso, el aspecto académico en la escuela.

Atentamente,

Carlos F. Perez
Candidato a Doctor
Universidad del Sur de California

Al firmar abajo , estoy de acuerdo en participar en esta encuesta .

______________________________________________
Firma Fecha

116
Appendix D: Survey (Spanish)
Instrucciones: Por favor responda a cada una de los siguientes puntos indicando la cantidad de
conocimiento que obtendría en la comprensión de los Estándares Estatales Comunes
relacionadas a estas actividades.
1. ¿Qué nivel de entendimiento percibe que usted tiene con respecto a las ideas actuales de la
educación?
1=No tengo ni idea 2=Sé muy poquito
3=Sé lo suficiente 4=Sé todo lo que debo saber
2. ¿Qué factores de la comunidad influyen en su comprensión de los Estándares Estatales
Comunes:
Periódicos 1 2 3 4 5
Videos 1 2 3 4 5
Reuniones de grupos 1 2 3 4 5
Conversación con otros padres 1 2 3 4 5
Conversación con los maestros 1 2 3 4 5
Conversación con sus hijos 1 2 3 4 5

3. Yo podría estar más informado acerca de las Estándares Estatales Comunes mediante la
lectura de diferentes materiales. Ejemplos:

La lectura de diferentes materiales de CCSS sería interesante para mí:
1 2 3 4 5
La lectura de diferentes materiales de CCSS me tendría informado:
1 2 3 4 5
La lectura de diferentes materiales de CCSS representaría tiempo de beneficio para mí:
1 2 3 4 5
La lectura de diferentes materiales de CCSS crearía en mí el deseo de aprender más:
1 2 3 4 5

1=Muy en desacuerdo 2=En desacuerdo 3=Neutral 4=De acuerdo 5=Muy de acuerdo

117
Instrucciones: Por favor responda a cada una de los siguientes puntos indicando la cantidad de
conocimiento que obtendría en la comprensión de los Estándares Estatales Comunes
relacionadas a estas actividades.

4. Yo podría estar más informado acerca de los Estándares Estatales Comunes asistiendo a las
reuniones. Ejemplos:

Asistir a las reuniones de CCSS sería interesante para mí:
1 2 3 4 5
Asistir a las reuniones de CCSS me tendría informado:
1 2 3 4 5
Asistir a las reuniones de CCSS sería tiempo de beneficio para mí:
1 2 3 4 5
Asistir a las reuniones de CCSS crearía en mí el deseo de aprender más:
1 2 3 4 5

5. Podría estar más informado acerca de los Estándares Estatales Comunes mirando videos.
Ejemplo:

Mirar los videos relacionados a CCSS sería interesante para mí:
1 2 3 4 5
Mirar los videos relacionados a CCSS me tendría informado:
1 2 3 4 5
Mirar los videos relacionados a CCSS sería tiempo de beneficio para mí:
1 2 3 4 5
Mirar los videos relacionados a CCSS crearía en mí el deseo de aprender más:
1 2 3 4 5

1=Muy en desacuerdo 2=En desacuerdo 3=Neutral 4=De acuerdo 5=Muy de acuerdo

118
Instrucciones: Por favor responda a cada una de los siguientes puntos indicando la cantidad de
conocimiento que obtendría en la comprensión de los Estándares Estatales Comunes
relacionadas a estas actividades.

6. Yo podría estar más informado acerca de las Estándares Estatales Comunes mediante el
dialogo con otros padres de familia. Ejemplos:

Dialogar con otros padres de familia acerca de CCSS sería interesante para mí:
1 2 3 4 5
Dialogar con otros padres de familia acerca de CCSS me tendría informado:
1 2 3 4 5
Dialogar con otros padres de familia acerca de CCSS sería tiempo de beneficio para mí:
1 2 3 4 5
Dialogar con otros padres de familia acerca de CCSS crearía en mí el deseo de aprender más:
1 2 3 4 5

7. Yo podría estar más informado acerca de las Estándares Estatales Comunes mediante la
visita a los salones de clases. Ejemplos:

Visitar los salones de clases para aprender acerca de CCSS sería interesante para mí:
1 2 3 4 5
Visitar los salones de clases para aprender acerca de CCSS me tendría informado:
1 2 3 4 5
Visitar los salones de clases para aprender acerca de CCSS sería tiempo de beneficio para mí:
1 2 3 4 5
Visitar los salones de clases para aprender acerca de CCSS crearía en mí el deseo de aprender
más: 1 2 3 4 5

1=Muy en desacuerdo 2=En desacuerdo 3=Neutral 4=De acuerdo 5=Muy de acuerdo

119
Instrucciones: Por favor responda a cada una de los siguientes puntos indicando la cantidad de
conocimiento que obtendría en la comprensión de los Estándares Estatales Comunes
relacionadas a estas actividades.

8. Yo podría estar más informado acerca de las Estándares Estatales Comunes mediante
conferencias con el director o un maestro. Ejemplos:

Tener una conferencia con el director o un maestro para aprender acerca de la CCSS sería
interesante para mí: 1 2 3 4 5
Tener una conferencia con el director o un maestro para aprender acerca de la CCSS me tendría
informado: 1 2 3 4 5
Tener una conferencia con el director o un maestro para aprender acerca de la CCSS sería tiempo
de beneficio para mí: 1 2 3 4 5
Tener una conferencia con el director o un maestro para aprender acerca de la CCSS crearía en
mí el deseo de aprender más: 1 2 3 4 5

9. Yo podría estar más informado acerca de las Estándares Estatales Comunes mediante la
asistencia a las reuniones del Plan de Rendición de Cuentas y Control Local (LCAP por sus
siglas en inglés).
Ejemplos:

Asistir a las reuniones de LCAP para aprender acerca de CCSS sería interesante para mí:
1 2 3 4 5
Asistir a las reuniones de LCAP para aprender acerca de CCSS me tendría informado:
1 2 3 4 5
Asistir a las reuniones de LCAP para aprender acerca de CCSS sería tiempo de beneficio para
mí: 1 2 3 4 5
Asistir a las reuniones de LCAP para aprender acerca de CCSS crearía en mí el deseo de
aprender más: 1 2 3 4 5

1=Muy en desacuerdo 2=En desacuerdo 3=Neutral 4=De acuerdo 5=Muy de acuerdo

120
10. ¿Hasta qué punto considera que su escuela ha tomado la responsabilidad en educarle a usted
con respecto a los Estándares Estatales Comunes:

1=En absoluto 2=Muy poco 3=Lo suficiente 4=Más que suficiente

11. ¿Cuál es su sexo? _____ Femenino
_____ Masculino

12. ¿Cuál es su edad? _____ 20 - 29
_____ 30 – 39
_____ 40 - 49
_____ 50 - 59
_____ 60+
_____ Otro (por favor indíquelo): _____________

13. ¿Cuál es su raza u origen étnico? _____ Caucásico / Blanco
_____ Hispano
_____ Afro Americano
_____ Asiático
_____ Otro (por favor indíquelo)_________

14. ¿Cuál es su nivel de educación? _____ Algunos años en high school
_____ Graduado de high school
_____ Algunos años en un colegio comunitario
_____ Licenciatura (Bachelor’s degree)
_____ Maestría Master’s degree
_____ Otro (por favor indíquelo)_______________

15. ¿Qué relación tiene con el estudiante? _____ Madre
_____ Madrastra
_____ Padre
_____ Padrastro
_____ Abuelo o abuela
_____ Otro (por favor indíquelo)_________

16. ¿Cuántos hijos tiene en la escuela? _____ 1
_____ 2
_____ 3
_____ 4
_____ 5 o más _______

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The purpose of this study is to examine the resources currently provided by schools to help parents understand the Common Core State Standards. The rationale of this study was to examine whether the resources currently provided by schools and districts are helping parents to understand the CCSS. Parental involvement is examined in this study and is used as the basis for increasing student achievement through parents’ understanding of the CCSS. As schools make the shift from the 1997 Standards to the CCSS, parents must play a vital role in providing the support needed to further their child’s academic achievement. This transition is made more difficult when districts do not provide these resources to parents. A survey was conducted at three different demographic high schools in the same school district. The survey instrument used was a Likert scale survey which asked parents what resources they needed and whether schools were providing them. Helping parents understand how to better assist their children in achieving their academic goals will play a key role in their future success. This study was solution based and aimed at producing results as well as an action plan for helping parents to comprehend and support their children with the CCSS. This study offers advice for parents and educators based on evidence. The results indicated that parents find learning walks to be the most interesting resource a school can provide to learn about the CCSS. Learning walks was also found to create a desire in parents to learn more about the CCSS. Parent conferences with the teacher or principal were found to be the most informative method for parents to receive information about the CCSS. Finally, the study shows that parents find conferences with teachers or principals as the best use of their time to receive information about the CCSS.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

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

PDF

Shifting educator’s paradigm from the practice of implementing standards based learning and assessments to project based learning and assessments for the Common Core State Standards

PDF

Multi-site case studies on the collaboration of career technical education teachers and core teachers

PDF

A case study of the instructional leader's role in leading change: preparing for the implementation of Common Core State Standards in elementary schools

PDF

Effective leadership practices used by middle school principals in the implementation of instructional change

PDF

Meaningful access to the Common Core for high school students with significant cognitive disabilities

PDF

Multi-site case studies on the collaboration of career technical education teachers and core teachers

PDF

A Catholic school dilemma: Adopt Common Core State Standards?

PDF

Impact of inquiry‐based learning professional development on implementation of Common Core State Standards

PDF

Common Core State Standards: implementation decisions made by middle school English language arts teachers

PDF

English language learners meeting the Common Core: do principals make a difference?

PDF

An examination of Oregon’s implementation of literacy and common core state standards: preparing students to be college and career ready

PDF

Examining the relationship between knowledge, perception and principal leadership for standard English learners (SELs): a case study

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

Educational resource allocation at the middle school level: a case study of six middle schools in one California district

PDF

Teacher perceptions of English learners and the instructional strategies they choose to support academic achievement

PDF

An examination of teacher-centered Explicit Direct Instruction and student-centered Cognitively Guided Instruction in the context of Common Core State Standards Mathematics…

PDF

Educational resource allocation at the high school level: a case study of high schools in one California district

PDF

Educational resource allocation at the elementary level: a case study of one elementary school district in California

PDF

The degree to which the use of sheltered instructional strategies in classrooms impact student access to common core content as a consequence of professional development

Asset Metadata

Creator Perez, Carlos F. (author)

Core Title Providing parents the necessary resources to comprehend the common core state standards: a guide for schools

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 04/14/2015

Defense Date 02/23/2015

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

Tag Common Core State Standards,OAI-PMH Harvest,Parents,resources

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Kaplan, Sandra (committee chair), Gallagher, Raymond John (committee member), Roach, John A. (committee member)

Creator Email carlosfp@usc.edu,perez_ca@auhsd.us

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-547126

Unique identifier UC11298736

Identifier etd-PerezCarlo-3287.pdf (filename),usctheses-c3-547126 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-PerezCarlo-3287.pdf

Dmrecord 547126

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Perez, Carlos F.

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