University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Teachers helping students: a sociocultural perspective

(USC Thesis Other)

Teachers helping students: a sociocultural perspective

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content i
TEACHERS HELPING STUDENTS: A SOCIOCULTURAL PERSPECTIVE
by

Heather Robertson
______________________________________________________________
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2007
Copyright 2007 Heather Robertson
ii
Table of Contents
Abstract ...........................................................................................................iv
Chapter 1: Introduction ....................................................................................1
The Problem.............................................................................................2
Purpose Statement....................................................................................3
Research Questions ..................................................................................4
Themes of the Study.................................................................................5
Sociocultural Aspects of Teacher-Student Interaction.............................5
Importance of the Study...........................................................................8
Outline of the Dissertation .......................................................................9
Chapter 2: Literature Review.........................................................................10
Theoretical Framework ..........................................................................12
Sociocultural Theory and the ZPD in Practice.......................................30
Weaknesses in the Literature .................................................................33
Summary ................................................................................................35
Chapter 3: Research Design...........................................................................37
Site Selection..........................................................................................38
Participant Selection...............................................................................43
Data Collection.......................................................................................46
Data Analysis .........................................................................................59
Summary ................................................................................................62
Chapter 4: Data ..............................................................................................63
NAI History............................................................................................63
NAI School Culture ...............................................................................74
NAI Partnerships....................................................................................92
Summary ..............................................................................................105
Chapter 5: Analysis of the Data ...................................................................107
Theoretical Foundation ........................................................................109
Review of Methodology.......................................................................113
Data Analysis .......................................................................................117
Implications for Policy.........................................................................129
Recommendations for Future Research ...............................................134
Conclusion ...........................................................................................137
References....................................................................................................139
iii
Appendix A: USC Neighborhood Academic Initiative Organizational
Chart.............................................................................................................146
Appendix B: Research Protocols ................................................................147
Appendix C: School Staffing Profiles.........................................................153
Appendix D : Model of College Preparation Program Effectiveness.........155
Appendix E: NAI Graduate Survey 1997-2004...........................................156
iv
Abstract
This study examined how the teachers of the University of Southern
California Neighborhood Academic Initiative respond to students. The research
focused on how organizational, social, and cultural factors drive student-teacher
interaction within a pre-college program for low SES minority students. The study
identifies and describes organizational, social, and cultural factors as they emerge in
teacher interaction with students. The research questions are: 1) How does a
teacher’s social and cultural background appear in his or her responses to students?
2) How does school organizational culture appear in teacher responses to students?
3) What other factors affect a teacher’s responses?
Data collection included document analysis; observation of NAI teachers’
classes at NAI and local high schools; observations of faculty meetings and parent
leadership board meetings; individual interviews of NAI teachers, students,
administrators, staff, school principals, and parent board members; videotaping of
each NAI teacher conducting one class (7 videotaped sessions) used in a second
interview with each teacher to elicit teacher thought processes during the lesson
(“stimulated recall”); and focus groups of NAI teachers, students, and parents. The
study's key finding is that organizational culture is the strongest driver of teacher-
student interaction and is instrumental in the success of the students.
1
Chapter 1: Introduction
If Johnny cannot read, Robin cannot write, and Jane cannot calculate, what is
a teacher to do? Too many students are below grade level in reading, writing, or
arithmetic. At 17, an age when students should be ready for college work, few
students are adequately prepared. The latest National Assessment of Educational
Progress (NAEP 2005) data show that nationally, only 38% of 17-year-olds can read
at a level where they can understand, summarize, and explain relatively complicated
information, and only 6% of students read at the highest level tested. In math, only
7% of 17-year-olds can solve problems at the algebra level. Facing these dismal
statistics, high school teachers have the task of helping students get ready for
college-level English and math classes.
Although discussion about the problems of American schools is almost
constant, the focus is often on resources, curriculum, school organization, teacher
education, or educational policy. What happens in the fundamental interaction
between teacher and student--the teachable moment, the point at which learning
actually takes place? In the social-constructivist perspective, meaning is generated
through social interaction. Learning takes place not so much because of the
curriculum or the class materials, but primarily because a teacher interacts with a
student. The sociocultural theorist, Vygotsky (1978), characterizes this distinction as
the difference between an object, in this case the curriculum or materials, and a
process, in this case human interaction. A more contemporary sociocultural theorist,
Rogoff (1990), terms the learning interaction between teacher and student an
2
apprenticeship in thinking. She explains that learning takes place when student and
teacher solve problems together. What happens when a teacher enters into dialog
with an individual student? I focused on interaction between teacher and student.
The Problem
Teaching is often framed within the context of educational problems. There
are many challenges that face schools. Some of the problems discussed in the media
include lack of parental involvement, children lacking sufficient language skills,
inadequate teacher training and unqualified teachers, low standards, inadequate
textbooks an other materials, deteriorating school facilities, and lack of funding,
along with a litany of other problems.
A variety of reforms and initiatives aim to remedy educational problems. For
example, one of the biggest recent reforms is the No Child Left Behind Act of 2002.
The key goals of this Act are holding schools accountable for results and
encouraging better teaching methodology (U.S. Department of Education 2005).
The positive effects of this law are that first, schools can no longer hide the poor
performance of subgroups of students, forcing them to give more resources to
underperforming groups. Second, NCLB focuses attention on performance standards
and pushes states to produce cohesive systems of standards and assessments.
Finally, it forces schools to address the achievement gap (Fusarelli, 2004). Better
teaching methodology may help to make these changes, so research into
methodology is important, but the fundamental social nature of the interaction
between teacher and student seems to be lost in the rhetoric of reform.
3
Methodology is often treated like technology, with principles and steps and
methods presented for teachers to follow (Bartolome, 1994). However, the
application of methodology depends heavily on the individual teacher. Although
prospective teachers study the technology of methodology, in practice it is affected
by sociocultural factors such as school culture and the teacher’s unique outlook
based on culture, experience, social class, gender, ideology, and possibly other
factors. The organizational culture of the school can affect classroom behavior as
well. Organizational culture includes school leadership, policies, mission, and
organizational responses to influences from the neighborhood as well as district,
state, and federal influences. Sociocultural factors have a historical basis, so history
is another a factor to take into account. Bartolome argues that teacher-student
interaction is the key aspect of education, regardless of method, and that
sociocultural background must be taken into account within this interaction. I
conducted a descriptive ethnographic case study to examine sociocultural factors that
affect teacher behavior. The approach can best be characterized as cultural and
cognitive anthropology (Creswell 1998). The next section will further focus the
study on one aspect of teacher behavior: helping students struggling with course
material.
Purpose Statement
The purpose of this ethnographic case study is to use the lens of sociocultural
theory to describe and analyze how the eight teachers in
the Neighborhood Academic Initiative respond to individual students when they
4
need help. A tentative definition at this time for “respond” is the way teachers
identify a student to talk to individually, analyze a student’s needs, choose an
instructional strategy, deliver instruction, and evaluate instructional success. The
intent of the study is descriptive: to identify sociocultural factors that affect teacher
interaction with individual students.
Research Questions
NCLB holds schools and teachers accountable for student achievement,
regardless of the hurdles they may face. Teachers are required to soldier on,
teaching in the face of many difficulties and obstacles. In decades of reforms, and
advances in computers and other educational technology, one thing that has
remained constant is that a teacher must instruct students in a classroom. Because
students in a class do not all have the same level of skill or speed of learning,
inevitably, a student will have difficulty with course work. There is a strong impetus
generated by NCLB to bring up the level of subgroups of students who are lagging.
How does a teacher respond to a student who is struggling with course work? In this
study, I seek an answer to this question.
The questions guiding my research into teacher responses to struggling
students include the following:
How does a teacher’s social and cultural background affect his or her
responses to students in need?
o What are the effects of a teacher’s social and cultural experiences in
teacher training and in childhood schooling?
5
o How does a teacher’s social class (family status, parents’ status, or
grandparents’ status) or gender affect his or her responses to students
in need?
How does school organizational culture affect teacher responses to students in
need?
What other factors affect a teacher’s responses?
Themes of the Study
This study specifically addresses one-to-one interactions between teacher and
student. Within these interactions, I examine the following through the lens of
sociocultural theory.
Rapport with student
Assessment of student level
Analysis of student needs
Choice of instructional strategy
Delivery of instruction
Evaluation of instructional success
Sociocultural Aspects of Teacher-Student Interaction
A variety of studies examine the influence of sociocultural factors on teacher-
student interaction. The first two studies focus on mathematics and literacy. Povey
(2002) studied mathematics teachers and how their beliefs and educational
background affected their teaching. One aspect Povey studied was teacher
attribution of student failure to learn math. Teachers had two divergent perspectives
6
about the causes of student failure. One set of teachers attributed student failure to
learn to structural problems in the school, such as how students are placed into
classes. The other set of teachers attributed student failure to learn to students’ own
lack of ability or motivation. The first group believed that mathematics and
knowledge in general is culturally and historically situated, not absolute. The second
set of teachers differed in their ideas about the nature of mathematics and knowledge
in general. They felt mathematics represented absolute truth, and took a more
authoritarian attitude. These differing ideas produced different teaching attitudes and
behaviors.
In the area of literacy, McCarthey (1997) focused on how students from
diverse backgrounds develop literacy. In her case study of five students from
different cultures, she found that the cultural background or home culture of the
student affects achievement. If a student’s home culture is similar to the culture of
the school, achievement is higher than if the student comes from a home culture
different from the school. The author recommends that teachers learn about their
students’ cultures and backgrounds in order to help them learn.
Focusing on at-risk students, Hones (2002) studied bilingual students using a
narrative, dialogic research process. These students tend to be academically at risk,
and Hones looked for a way to help them through dialog. His case study of three
bilingual students from different language backgrounds highlighted how schools can
use students’ cultural backgrounds as a foundation for academic and social
development.
7
A different perspective comes from Hebert and Reis (1999), who studied
high achieving students from diverse cultural backgrounds in a large urban high
school in the Northeast. They found that specific factors enabled these students to
succeed in the face of obstacles, including “belief in self, supportive adults,
interaction with a network of high-achieving peers, extracurricular activities,
challenging classes such as honors classes, personal characteristics such as
motivation and resilience, and family support (428).” Among these factors, the
support of teachers is most relevant to my project. Teacher support consisted of
going beyond the class curriculum to help students get organized and to encourage
them both to persevere in spite of setbacks and to take on academic challenges.
Students reported that supportive teachers, coaches, and counselors listened to them
and tried to understand their problems.
In the same vein, Howard (2001) conducted a case study of four high-
achieving urban elementary school teachers who taught predominantly African-
American students. These students as a group tend to underachieve. For his sample,
the author selected teachers whom school administrators, peers, and community
members considered to be effective at teaching African-American students. The
study examined the four teachers’ culturally relevant teaching practices. The results
showed that these teachers not only made sure that students developed academic
skills, but they took an interest in their holistic development, including social,
emotional, and moral aspects as well. The teachers also were very familiar with
African-American verbal style, and were competent communicators in that style.
8
The study highlights the importance of culturally relevant pedagogy for student
success.
These studies highlight key aspects of teacher-student interaction with respect
to mathematics, literacy, at-risk students, high-achieving students, and effective
teachers. They all point to the importance of sociocultural factors in education.
Although the studies point to the importance of sociocultural factors and
interaction in student achievement, they do not examine the exact sociocultural
mechanisms driving teacher-student interaction. This is particularly true in the case
of teachers helping students who are struggling with course material.
Importance of the Study
Since currently there is wide concern about the number of students who are
not achieving up to grade-level standards, information about how teachers respond to
these students can be valuable for educators and policy-makers. This can be
particularly useful for pre-college programs similar to NAI. This study highlights
how teachers approach the problem of students who do not understand course
material, and examines the sociocultural aspects of teachers’ thinking process when
they help struggling students. This information can be used for training teachers,
both new and experienced. For the participants in the study, I hope the research gave
them insight into their teaching practices and responses to students. For the program
under study, the University of Southern California Neighborhood Academic
Initiative, the results of the study can affect professional development programs for
NAI teachers.
9
Outline of the Dissertation
In chapter two, I will review the literature on sociocultural theory as it relates
to teacher-student interaction. Chapter three will present the methodology for this
study, along with examples of other studies which have used similar methods. In
chapter four, I will present the data gathered from field study and key themes.
Finally, chapter five will show the data analysis and the results of the study.
10
Chapter 2: Literature Review
Joey is falling behind in class. His teacher has talked to him several times
about improving his attendance and homework completion, and each time, he
promises to try harder. However, with the next assignment, his problems are still the
same. His reading and writing skills are showing very little improvement. He is a
friendly and agreeable person, but he seems frustrated when he works in class and he
hands in incomplete writing assignments. The teacher is wondering what to do to
help him.
The teacher needs to consider the student’s sociocultural environment. For
instance, Joey’s father recently went to prison and his mother works. He has to care
for his three younger siblings while trying to do his homework at the same time. He
is often tardy because he has to take them to school in the morning. These
circumstances are impacting his classroom performance.
As presented in chapter one, a key moment when teaching and learning
should take place is when a student, like Joey, is struggling with course material.
Bennett (1986) points out the importance of dealing “at a profound level with the
‘knots’ that complicate children’s understanding” (p. 50). Teacher responses in this
situation need to be examined. This descriptive case study analyzed teacher
responses through the lens of sociocultural theory.
In this section, I review the literature on sociocultural theory as it pertains to
teacher responses to students having difficulty in class. First, I examine the relative
importance of teachers compared to other sociocultural factors influencing student
11
performance such as SES and culture. Second, I examine the theoretical framework
of sociocultural theory, beginning with the widest lens, social constructivism. Then I
focus on Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory and how it has evolved, including common
units of analysis. I discuss a key element of the theory, the Zone of Proximal
Development, in detail, because it is particularly pertinent to the current research
study. Finally, I explore two aspects of how sociocultural theory explains what
happens in the classroom: how the theory can be used to explain student failure and
how it can be used in practice to encourage student success.
Teachers Make a Difference
With numerous studies showing the strong effect of student background, such
as culture and SES, on learning (Bourdieu, 1973, Brooks-Gunn & Duncan, 1997,
DiMaggio 1982, Lareau 1987), some may argue that teachers can do little to help
students achieve. However, teachers do have an effect on learning, although the size
of the effect is in dispute (Resnick, 2004). Rowan, Correnti, and Miller (2002)
analyzed 1991-1994 data from a large government survey study using a variety of
statistical methods to determine the relative effects of schools, classrooms, and
student demographic factors. They found that the classroom effect size depended on
the statistical method used and whether researchers measured cumulative student
achievement vs. student gains during one year of schooling. For cumulative student
achievement, using variance decomposition models, they found the effect of
individual classroom teachers on student test scores ranges between four to 18
percent. When they measured annual gain with the same method, the effect of the
12
classroom teacher was between three and thirteen percent. Although these effects
may seem small, Correnti and Miller point out that they add up if students have more
effective or less effective teachers several years in a row. The evidence shows that
what a teacher does in the classroom has an impact on what children learn. This
project’s research into how teachers respond to students who are having difficulties
may shed light on the mechanisms that make a teacher more or less effective.
Theoretical Framework
To establish the theoretical framework for the study, I first introduce the
underpinnings of sociocultural theory, specifically the epistemology of
constructivism. Second, I review some of the seminal works of sociocultural theory,
particularly as developed by the Russian psychologist Vygotsky, after which I
examine later theoretical developments. I give particular attention to the units of
analysis used by researchers in sociocultural theory, as this may indicate exactly
what to attend to in the current study of teacher responses to students having
difficulties. Third, I discuss Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) in
detail, because in sociocultural theory, it is a key to teacher-student interaction and
learning. In the study of how teachers respond to students, the ZPD is a critical
concept because it specifies the point at which learning can take place. Fourth, while
sociocultural theory is usually used to describe student learning, some research has
used it to analyze student failure to learn, and I review this literature because it may
shed light on additional aspects of the student-teacher learning transaction.
13
Social Constructivism
Sociocultural theory is a type of constructivism. Abdal-Haqq (1998)
summarizes constructivism as an epistemological explanation of how people learn
and make sense of the world. Constructivism posits that people construct knowledge
by interacting with the world and integrating new experiences with previously
learned concepts. He contrasts this with previous theories of knowledge such as
behaviorism, which emphasized stimulus and response, leading to repetition,
imitation, and memorization. Leont'ev (1981) explains that construction of
knowledge takes place through internalization: “The process of internalization is not
the transferal of an external activity to a preexisting, internal ‘plane of
consciousness’: it is the process in which this plane is formed” (p.57). This implies
that the entire internal world of consciousness is a product of the external context, in
other words, it is constructed out of social activity. Since everyone grows up in a
different environment, people have different internal planes of consciousness. Guba
and Lincoln (1994) characterize constructivism as relativistic and based on multiple
knowledges of groups and individuals. They contrast constructivism with the
positivist idea that there is an objective reality or truth that can be discovered. This
is a crucial point in education because it means that each student lives in a different
reality. When a teacher responds to a student who is having trouble learning in class,
because the mental landscape of the teacher and that of the student may be quite
different, there may be a barrier to communication and learning.
14
There are at least two types of constructivism. Abdal-Haqq contrasts social
constructivism (sociocultural theory) with psychological constructivism, as espoused
by Piaget. Psychological constructivism is also termed cognitive constructivism by
Rueda and Dembo (1995). Psychological constructivism focuses on the learning of
the individual, in contrast to social constructivism which focuses on learning in a
social context, including interaction with the environment, other people, and history.
Vygotsky (1978) points out that the historical conditions in which children develop
are constantly changing, so that the development of one child is not necessarily
similar to another. Unlike Piaget, he suggests there may be no universal
developmental stages that can be associated with particular ages.
Further elaboration of these multiple aspects of sociocultural context is
presented by Au (1998), who includes “historical, political, and cultural
trends…face-to-face interactions, group processes both explicit and implicit with
intended and unintended consequences” in her description of context (p. 299). In
sum, social constructivism states that people have different ways of knowing
depending on their backgrounds, and this can be extended to mean that what teachers
believe they are teaching is not necessarily what students are actually learning. In
addition, the classroom is not immune to political and historical forces that may
affect student learning for better or worse. As a result, a teacher’s response to
student problems is impacted by more factors than just pedagogy.
In addition to the ramifications of sociocultural context with respect to the
classroom, there are some further implications for educational research. Cole
15
(2001), in his analysis of a series of sociocultural research articles, points out some
key cultural and historical aspects for researchers to consider. First, it is a mistake to
generalize findings to other cultures and other times. Research is tied to a cultural
and historical context. Moreover, educational research is dependent upon the choice
of language and tools used. In addition, Cole says methods of inquiry and concepts
taught within the curriculum are historically based, even in scientific subjects, and
are not universal. Culture and history affect perception and what people observe;
they also affect planning and problem-solving strategies. For this reason,
educational researchers need to consider wider social and historical factors. This is
what sociocultural theory strives to do.
Sociocultural Theory
Sociocultural theory, which is based on social constructivism, is one of the
newer threads in psychology. Rueda and Dembo (1995) point out that sociocultural
theory was a way to combine psychology with the social and cultural contexts of
real-life situations in order to explain everyday behavior. This is in contrast to the
laboratory setting in which psychological research had often been conducted
previously. Rueda and Dembo also contrast sociocultural theory with cognitive
theory, a useful distinction for the current study. Cognitive theory also provides
many useful tools with which to analyze how teachers respond to struggling
students; however, sociocultural theory, not cognitive theory, is the focus of this
research.
16
The basis of sociocultural theory is the work of Vygotsky. His theory,
originally labeled cultural-historical theory, was later termed sociocultural theory
(Wertsch, 1991). Vygotsky (1978) presented learning as the interaction between a
more capable person and one who is still developing capability in a task. Vygotsky
focused mainly on learning as represented by or evidenced by problem-solving.
Through the process of problem-solving tasks, human interaction drives the
construction of concepts within the learner. Vygotsky stressed that processes of
cognitive development can only take place through interaction with the environment
and with people. This interaction is mediated or helped by tools specific to a culture.
These tools he called mediational means. Mediational means include language,
writing systems, mathematical systems, as well as any other symbols or physical
items. To elaborate, from his qualitative observations, Vygotsky concluded that
language is a tool for accomplishing goals just as a stick or a chair is a tool. For
instance, planning, which is a language task, is essential to achieve a goal. In
addition to spoken language, Vygotsky (1978) included other cultural tools such as
all manner of symbols and symbol systems, including mathematics and writing.
These he considered the basis of learning in the sense that social interaction between
people, mediated by cultural tools, forms the foundation for the development of
thinking in a child.
Tharp and Gallimore (1988) elaborated on the social character of learning.
They illustrate how a goal can be reached with the cooperation of an adult and child,
where neither one individually would have been able to accomplish it. Learning and
17
problem-solving or goal-reaching appear to be characterized as the same by the
authors. The authors therefore define learning in terms of collaborative activity that
is oriented toward solving problems to reach a goal. An important aspect of this
collaboration is the situation. In this context, Rueda and Dembo (1995) point out
that there are three key aspects of what they call the activity setting: 1) “objective
features of the setting and environment,” 2) “objective features of the motoric and
verbal actions of the participants,” and 3) “subjective features of the participants’
experience, intention, and meaning” (p. 268). The activity setting is one type of unit
of analysis, which is the specific item that a research study examines.
Unit of Analysis
Particular units of analysis appear in the sociocultural literature and are
typical or representative of this theory. In this section, I first consider the
requirements of a sociocultural unit of analysis. Then, I examine the various units of
analysis that have been used in sociocultural theory. Finally, I focus on one unit of
analysis for the current research study.
Based on his study of Vygotsky’s writings, Zinchenko (1985) outlines seven
requirements of any sociocultural unit of analysis. I illustrate each of Zinchenko’s
requirements by using examples of Vygotsky’s (1986) unit word meaning, very
simplified for illustrative purposes to just word. First, a unit of analysis must be “an
integrated psychological structure” (97), not a combination of unrelated items. A
word is a combination of sounds (or letters in the written word) which has an
integrated relationship that carries psychological meaning. Second, a unit should
18
“maintain the characteristics of the unified whole” (97), in other words be a
simplified representation that could develop into the whole. For instance, a word
represents and can develop into a language. Third, the units must be capable of
development, of being changed by activity. Word meanings change based on the
social context. Fourth, it should be a living part of the whole system and it should
not be possible to break it into smaller units without destroying its structure. A word
is a living part of a language, and breaking a word into individual letters or sounds
destroys its meaning. Fifth, the unit should enable the study of its structure,
development, and function and should fit into a taxonomy. Word structure (spelling,
phonology), development (etymology), and function can fit into language taxonomy,
along with syntax and other language elements. Sixth, the units should be
combinable into a new synthesis. Words can be combined into sentences or
thoughts, sentences can be combined into narratives. Seventh, the unit of analysis
must allow the study of the relationship between a psychological function and
consciousness. To continue the example, words represent thoughts.
Based on these requirements put forth in his theoretical writings, Zinchenko
(1985) discussed three units of analysis: living movement, liberated action, and tool-
mediated action. Living movement is the external movement, as for example a
movement observed in a subject in a psychology laboratory, as well as the mental
representations that go along with that movement. Liberated action is the kind of
action that occurs when a person acts without thinking in moments of high stress,
such as in an emergency, war, or a competition. Zinchenko’s unit that is most
19
pertinent to the current study is tool-mediated action. Wertsch (1991) reiterated this
unit of analysis. Tool mediated action is based on Vygotsky’s (1978) concept of
mediational means discussed earlier. As Vygotsky postulated, the mediational tools
in tool-mediated action are elements such as language and other symbols. What
Zinchenko and Wertsch did was combine the action and the tool used into one unit of
analysis. According to Wertsch, the action and the mediational tool should not be
studied in isolation because this would leave out the social context, and social
context is essential to understanding human behavior. In keeping with the
requirements for a unit of analysis, tool-mediated action is a microcosm of
sociocultural behavior.
Some other units of analysis have appeared in theoretical papers. In his
theoretical analysis, Habermas (1984) categorized various types of action that
contrast with the tool-mediated action of Zinchenko and Wertsch. First, he described
teleological action as the type of action that is planned and oriented toward decision-
making and goal achievement. The tool-mediated action described previously could
be categorized as a subset of teleological action. Another type of action is
presentation of self, which is action for presenting an image to the social world. The
third type of action is complying with a norm, or actions that comply with group
rules and expectations. Combining elements of all three types of action is
communicative action. According to Habermas, communicative action involves at
least two people in a relationship who define the situation and plan actions together.
The key elements of communicative action are understanding and agreement. In
20
their discussion of sociocultural issues, Rueda and Dembo (1995) state that the
activity setting, or the context in which learning takes place, is a suitable unit of
analysis for sociocultural theory. This unit is notable in that it is external to the
individual, while the other units are based on individual actions.
I next present how units of analysis appear in the research. As illustrated in
the discussion above about requirements of a unit of analysis, Vygotsky (1986) chose
word meaning as his unit of analysis. He studied over three hundred people, from
children through adults. His key finding was that word meaning is a part of concept
formation. This formation process begins with young children, but does not fully
develop until puberty. Vygotsky’s (1986) comment captures the sociocultural
essence of his study:
Unlike the development of instincts, thinking and behavior of adolescents are
prompted not from within but from without, by the social milieu. The tasks
with which society confronts an adolescent as he enters the cultural,
professional, and civic world of adults undoubtedly become an important
factor in the emergence of conceptual thinking. If the milieu presents no such
tasks to the adolescent, makes no new demands on him, and does not stimulate
his intellect by providing a sequence of new goals, his thinking fails to reach
the highest stages, or reaches them with great delay (108).
In this passage, Vygotsky highlights the critical nature of the relationship between an
adolescent’s social surroundings and cognitive development. This is the foundation
of the current study, because since adolescents spend a great part of their day in the
21
classroom, what happens in the classroom is, based on Vygotsky’s findings using
word meaning as a unit of analysis, essential to their mental development and
learning. Other researchers in the sociocultural tradition have used different units of
analysis.
The unit of analysis I use is mentioned by Wertsch (1991). It is the “dyad”
(p. 27) or a pair of participants who think and remember together. Education is often
conceptualized as a teacher teaching a class as a group, but the individual
relationship of each student to the teacher is an important aspect of the learning
process. Stough and Palmer (2003) highlight this dyadic quality of teaching in their
qualitative study of expert special education teachers. The central phenomenon
revealed by the research was teacher concern for each individual student’s
performance rather than concern about the class performance as a whole. Teachers
individualized their instruction by monitoring student behavior. They responded to
students as individuals, walking over to a student and providing guidance when they
recognized it was needed. This study highlights how these 19 effective special
education teachers responded to students who were having difficulties, showing that
individually tailored one-on-one interactions were an essential part of effective
instruction.
The current study proposes the teacher-student dyad as the unit of analysis of
classroom interaction between teacher and student. Regardless of the unit of analysis
chosen, the key area where the unit comes into play is the zone of proximal
development.
22
The Zone of Proximal Development
Vygotsky uses the construct of the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) to
explain how learning takes place in a social context. He defines ZPD as the
“difference between the child’s actual level of development and the level of
performance that he achieves in collaboration with the adult” (Vygotsky, 1987, p.
209). He further explains that in the child, cognitive skills appear first with the help
of an adult or other more skilled individual before they appear independently in the
child. This idea has been termed the general genetic law of cultural development
(Wertsch, 1985). Vygotsky says a skill appears “in two planes. First it appears on
the social plane, and then on the psychological plane. First it appears between
people as an interpsychological category, and then within the child as an
intrapsychological category” (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 163). By interpsychological,
Vygotsky means thinking that takes place between people, in a sense outside the
individual. As examples, group brainstorming and focus groups illustrate how this
kind of thinking can take place. By intrapsychological, he is referring to thinking
that occurs independently of others, inside the individual. This is the commonly
conceived idea of thinking as a solitary activity one does inside one’s head. In sum,
the difference in performance between problem-solving a child can do with capable
assistance and alone constitutes the ZPD.
Tharp and Gallimore (1988) point out that Vygotsky did not analyze in depth
exactly what the mechanisms are that assist learning in the ZPD. They studied these
processes of assisted learning. Before starting with school learning, they first looked
23
at child learning at home. The home environment proved very effective at imparting
all kinds of knowledge to children, without the participants even being aware that
teaching and learning were taking place. They define teaching as “assisting
performance through the ZPD. Teaching can be said to occur when assistance is
offered at points in the ZPD at which performance requires assistance” (p. 31). They
then attack the issue of teaching in school, and of training teachers. They extend
Vygotsky’s theory to adults, positing that adults also learn in the same manner,
through the ZPD. Next, I focus on Tharp and Gallimore’s four stages of the ZPD.
Because first stage is the one my research focuses on, I give more emphasis to the
literature about this stage.
In Tharp and Gallimore’s (1988) outline of the four stages in the ZPD, the
first stage is when adults help children. Depending on the level of the child, the
methods of assistance can vary, as can the child’s understanding of the task. For
instance, adults could direct attention, give encouragement, or provide key
information. In addition, the adult can structure the situation by choosing
appropriate materials and tasks for the child (Rogoff, 1986). In this stage, the child
begins by needing a great deal of assistance, and progressively becomes more
independent in task performance. Tharp and Gallimore see the assisted learning
process as task-specific, so a new task will begin at a different point in the ZPD. As
the child progresses, the adult needs to adjust goals and sub-goals in the activity. As
a result, the authors stress that it is important for the teacher to have a deep
24
knowledge of the subject matter to move easily through the set of sub-goals and
goals.
Bruner (1985) elaborates on the first stage of the ZPD. He introduces the
term scaffolding to describe the assistance provided by another. This scaffolding he
describes as “a vicarious form of consciousness” (p. 24) that supports the learner
until the time the student internalizes the knowledge. Bruner also points out that in
the learning transaction, there are props, processes, and procedures, corresponding to
educational curriculum, learning, and teaching. He postulates an acquisition process
in the learner aided by an external support system. The characteristics of this
external support system include a person modeling the task, encouraging the student
to attempt the task by reducing the chance of error, and then scaffolding. In the
scaffolding process, the adult reduces the number of possible actions a student can
take, increasing the chances for success. In addition, when the student has trouble,
the adult provides whatever assistance is needed. In this way, the task is
accomplished with no apparent errors. After the child has accomplished the task,
there is dialog about what was done.
Taylor, King, Pinsent-Johnson, and Lothian (2003) studied the scaffolding
and the ZPD in adults taking literacy classes. Their qualitative case study examined
four adult literacy classrooms in one program in Ontario, Canada. Nine students in
levels one and two as well as four teachers were interviewed. In addition there were
observations, a focus group, and document analysis. Several themes emerged from
the research. Most pertinent to the current study is the classroom environment, the
25
leadership role of the teacher, and peer collaboration. The teachers set up the
classroom environment to facilitate learning by arranging the seating and allowing
students to choose classmates to sit next to and work with. The instructors took a
facilitative and enabling role in leading the class, which produced a student-centered
learning environment. In addition, the teachers structured activities and tasks with
the aim of minimizing the chance of student errors. Once the teacher set up the
environment and tasks, students could then collaborate with peers and use the teacher
as a resource when they had difficulties. This classroom arrangement moves away
from the role of teacher as lecturer and holder of knowledge toward a classroom
where students have a greater role in their learning. They work with each other,
independently, and with the teacher as their needs change based on the learning task.
The class becomes a social network or community of learners in which students learn
collaboratively. Some of the student behaviors observed in the study were inviting,
assisting, directing, tutoring, and modeling. Students also used negotiation to build
consensus and compromise. In addition there was feedback in the form of self-
correction, correction from others, and seeking information. The authors described
directionality patterns, or who assists whom. Students were observed to be very
aware of which students were most capable at a certain task, and they would ask the
more capable peers for assistance. This study shows how the instructor can scaffold
or structure the learning situation so that adult learners can collaborate and teach
each other. In the research study, elements of Tharp’s (1993) seven methods of
26
assisting performance are evident: modeling, providing feedback, contingency
management, instructing, questioning, cognitive structuring, and task structuring.
In the second stage of the ZPD, the child can do an activity unassisted, but
uses language to mediate the process. In a sense, the child takes on the role of the
adult, giving spoken directions to herself. In this way, the child uses language as a
tool to mediate action (Tharp & Gallimore, 1988). Vygotsky goes so far as to say
that if a child is not allowed to verbalize instructions to herself at this stage, she may
not be able to complete the task. In addition, the more difficult the task is for the
child, the more the child verbalizes (Vygotsky, 1978). Use of this self-instruction is
evidence of the second stage, and at times even adults use this method of assisting
themselves (Tharp & Gallimore, 1988).
The third stage is when performance becomes automatic. Tharp and
Gallimore (1988) call this the developmental stage, which corresponds to the stage of
knowledge most commonly tested in schools. The fourth stage is de-automatization
and recursion, when automated knowledge is lost or forgotten due to a variety of
factors and needs to be relearned. In such a situation, the individual reverts to a
previous stage in the ZPD, generally stage two. Thus a reversion to speaking aloud
to solve a problem can appear. Other methods of regaining a skill include reviewing
what a teacher said or asking for help, steps farther back in the stages of the ZPD.
To summarize, the Zone of Proximal Development as introduced by
Vygotsky is the social space in which learning takes place. Learning is socially
constructed with the presence of others or another person, and is not an individual
27
but a cooperative or joint activity. Learning takes place through assisted
performance based on the learner’s level, and tools and symbols mediate the
interaction necessary for the learning process. Scaffolding, or structuring the
learning environment in the first stage of the ZPD, may be essential to student
learning. If something goes awry at this stage, learning may not occur. The next
section examines studies showing why there might be a failure to learn.
Failure as a socially defined construct
Although teachers may have the best intentions for all their students to learn
and succeed in the classroom, there are social and cultural factors within the
educational system that may inhibit student learning. When I study how teachers
respond to students, especially those who might be having difficulty in class, I need
to consider these inhibiting factors in context. In this section, I examine a variety of
explanations of student failure as they relate to sociocultural theory.
If, according to sociocultural theory, learning is socially constructed by
participants in activity settings, then a failure to learn may also be socially
constructed (Au, 1998). Au proposes a diverse constructivist framework to account
for student underperformance in schools in the area of literacy. She uses this term to
distinguish it from social constructivist orientations that tend to focus on similarities
among participants. She emphasizes the differences between individuals’
background knowledge. Her framework focuses on diversity in seven areas of the
educational context: the goal of instruction, the role of the home language,
instructional materials, classroom management, interaction with students,
28
relationship to the community, instructional methods, and assessment. When
diversity exists, standard methods of instruction, which tend to assume homogeneity
on the part of learners, are ineffective because they do not address differences in
social class, language, and ethnicity. The identity of the teacher with respect to that
of the students is also important. Diverse populations bring diverse ways of knowing
and performing. Students from these populations may under perform in a classroom
with a mainstream social context, because a teacher who is not aware of his or her
own cultural biases may use practices that disempower students. Student failure is
socially constructed through the characteristics of the activity setting which prevent
students from learning. The implication is that even a teacher with the best
intentions of helping a struggling student may not be effective because of cultural
differences. These differences may be between the student and the teacher,
methodology or curriculum.
A case study of one student can illustrate Au’s (1998) point. In a study of
cultural differences in literacy, Gallas and Smagorinsky (2002) present the case of
one minority boy whose ideas about literacy did not match those of the school. This
resulted in learning problems. The boy’s concept of reading was that reading is to
learn words. He thought adults read so that they do not forget words. He could
decode text and read aloud, but the idea that reading can communicate entertaining
stories and important information was foreign to him. He demonstrated his ability to
invent entertaining stories of his own, and his verbal skills were very good, but he
was inattentive when the teacher read aloud to the class. He did not have the same
29
concept of literacy as that of the teacher; therefore, he could not see the usefulness of
a teacher reading to students. The study demonstrates how every student comes to
class with a culturally-determined script of what learning should be. If the script
does not match the class flow, confusion, inattention, and alienation can result. This
student’s ideas about literacy were a product of the representations of reading that he
had been exposed to in the media, in previous schooling, and at home. The
mismatch between the student’s and teacher’s concepts of literacy was a barrier to
learning.
Another reason that more learning does not take place in schools is a lack of
assisted performance (Tharp and Gallimore 1988). Although assisted performance is
common in homes, it is almost absent in schools, according to the authors. This is a
product of how the schools are organized and run. Unlike the special education
teachers in the study by Stough and Palmer (2003), who taught each student as an
individual, most teachers do not have the opportunity to get to know each student’s
particular point in the ZPD. They do not have the time for the individual attention
necessary for assisted performance, in part because of large class size. In essence,
the authors say that the school sociocultural context is not conducive to learning.
Even if the schools were reorganized, teachers do not have the training to assist
performance. Tharp and Gallimore argue that simply knowing how to raise one’s
own children does not translate into effective classroom teaching; teachers need
specialized training in assisted performance.
30
The problem is that society conceptualizes the primary educational
relationship as teacher to class. According to sociocultural theory, the learning
relationship is teacher to individual student. John-Steiner and Souberman (1978)
point out that if a teacher simply stands in front of the class and lectures, the social
interaction necessary for learning in the ZPD is missing. They also point out that
students who are behind in their learning are often tracked into special education
classes that may have less interaction and more “programmed” and “mechanized
instruction” (p. 131). Such practices may serve to exacerbate student learning
deficits instead of reducing them.
In sum, the social context of the school constructs student failure because it
withholds the appropriate assistance and social interaction that students need in order
to learn, by not providing appropriately trained teachers and a learning environment
conducive to learning. The diversity in educational context described by Au (1998),
lack of assisted performance (Tharp & Gallimore, 1988), and lack of social
interaction with the teacher (John-Steiner & Souberman, 1978) are several factors to
observe when studying how teachers respond to students. Moving from these
theoretical points, next I examine recent empirical studies and the application of
sociocultural theory and the ZPD in the classroom.
Sociocultural Theory and the ZPD in Practice
A study about cooperative learning and the ZPD was conducted in the
Netherlands by Veenman, Denessen, van den Akker, and van der Rijt (2005). They
examined the effect of teacher training on student cooperative learning skills. Their
31
mixed-methods nonequivalent pretest-posttest control group design included 15
sixth-grade teachers and 24 dyads of sixth-grade students. Notable in the research
design is the dyad as a unit of analysis. The treatment group consisted of teachers
who had participated in a two-year cooperative learning training program with
supplemental training, and their student dyads. There were two control groups of
teachers and students, one with one year of training and one group with no
cooperative learning training. The student dyads consisted of pairs in which one
student was more advanced than the other. The goal was for students to help each
other to solve a set of 15 mathematics problems. Students were video and audio-
taped as they worked on the problems, then transcripts were made and coded. The
researchers focused on student interactions related to help seeking, help giving,
constructive activities, procedural and affective statements, as well as non-content
statements. Student dyad performance on the pre- and post- math tasks was also
assessed to see if the groups using more cooperative interactions achieved better
results. The treatment group showed greater use of cooperative skills such as
elaboration and explanation, and greater performance gains in the post-test than the
control group. The results can be interpreted to show that cooperative learning,
which by definition should be within the ZPD, can improve student performance.
The key elements of the study are that teachers were trained in cooperative learning
methods, and that student dyads with the trained teachers performed better than
dyads having teachers with less or no training. Therefore, in the classroom, it is
32
possible that cooperative learning within the ZPD requires special training of the
teacher.
Another study investigated how students learn the meaning of mathematical
words through the ZPD. Steele (1999) focused her study on Vygotsky’s unit of
analysis, word meaning. She points out that one reason that children have difficulty
in mathematics is that mathematical words have special and precise meanings. If
students do not already know the concepts represented by the words used in class,
they have difficulty learning. In many cases, mathematical words represent concepts
that can only be understood by actively manipulating items in the environment. (A
simple example is that it is difficult to learn the meaning of numbers without actually
counting physical items.) Steele observed a fourth-grade mathematics teacher
conducting an interactive lesson about circles. Key word meanings students learned
included diameter, center, and radius. The method of instruction used the ZPD in the
following way. Instead of simply writing the words on the board and defining them,
the teacher asked students to use a variety of tools (paper, ruler, pencil, journal for
notes) to find the center of the circle. After a period when students worked
individually and with each other to solve this problem, the teacher asked students to
come up to the board and demonstrate their solutions. In fact, the demonstrations
were not completely accurate, but accuracy was not the objective of the board work.
The goal was to provide assistance to students’ performance, a keystone of the ZPD.
Consequently, as each student worked out the problem on the board, the teacher gave
advice about what to do. With this assistance, and after several students came to the
33
board to try to find the center of the circle, students were able to perform the task on
their own. Students learned the target meanings because the teacher stated the words
diameter, radius, and center whenever students spontaneously used these methods to
solve the problem. In the process of students working out the problem, the teacher
pointed out key aspects of the concepts, for instance that a diameter has to cross the
widest part of a circle, and that the center can be found by drawing two diameters
that cross each other. This one lesson provides a clear case of how the ZPD can be
used, even when class size may not be optimal. Although the teacher may not have
interacted individually with every student, having the students come up to the board
and using dialog to help them provided interaction that students could learn from.
Weaknesses in the Literature
Some researchers apply the ZPD too narrowly or misapply it in classroom
research. One example is a study by Kozulin and Garb (2002), who developed an
assessment instrument to measure student’s ZPD in English as a foreign language
reading comprehension. Their qualitative study involved 23 students aged 20-23 in
Israel, who were academically at-risk because they had failed their high school
English exam. The assessment process included a pre-test; two mediated learning
sessions (instruction) designed to develop students’ cognitive strategies in reading
comprehension; and a re-test. The pre-test was designed as much as possible to test
reading strategies, rather than prior knowledge. The first 50-minute instructional
session focused on grammar, vocabulary, and basic English language conventions.
The second 50-minute session focused on reading comprehension strategies such as
34
recognizing text structure, transitions, and using background knowledge. After the
two sessions, students took a re-test designed to test the same skills as the pre-test.
Test results showed that some students made greater gains from the first to the
second test than others. The authors conclude that these gain differences indicate
each student’s learning potential. Although the students received instruction
between the two tests, it appears that the second test was administered in the same
way as the first, in other words without any help from a teacher. As a result,
although the authors’ assessment may show how much each student gained from the
intervening instruction, the instrument does not really measure a student’s ZPD. To
do that, the pre-test tasks must take place in cooperation with a teacher who is giving
instructions and help as the student works. This would show students assisted
performance level. Another key item that is missing is the manner of instruction in
the two 50-minute lessons. The students who made more progress may have
received more individual help from the teacher than others.
The literature has pointed to several areas needing further research.
Huberman (1996) highlights the contributions that practicing teachers can make to
research. This is pertinent to my study because I am a practicing teacher. Huberman
discusses various streams in teacher research, pointing out the value of studies by
participants and observers grounded in specific educational contexts. Although these
studies can not be generalized, the documentation of particular cases and practices
still adds to the knowledge base of the teaching profession. The current study is just
such a situated study.
35
The one-on-one relationship of teacher to individual student is one facet of
the classroom that has not been studied as much as others. According to Vygotsky’s
ZPD, this relationship is important to learning because teacher-student interaction is
the arena where learning takes place. How does a teacher assess what a student’s
needs are at a given moment for a given task? How does the teacher respond based
on this assessment? Is the response effective in helping a student progress?
Summary
The literature on sociocultural theory begins with constructivism, the idea
that meaning, and by extension knowledge, is a social phenomenon, developed
within a cultural group. In modern society, a large part of the responsibility for
transmitting this knowledge lies with educational institutions and teachers. Although
many sociocultural factors influence student learning, such as family background and
SES, this study focuses on the role of teachers in transmitting knowledge. The
theoretical framework of sociocultural theory proposes an explanation for how this
knowledge is transmitted. Sociocultural theory has evolved as various researchers
added their own elaborations. Within sociocultural theory, I have examined one
important mechanism for transmitting meaning and knowledge, the ZPD. Finally,
although the theory can explain student learning, it can also explain why students fail
to learn.
Sociocultural theory can be a tool to explore teacher responses to students,
especially those who are struggling with course material. The culture of the teacher,
student, and school, as well as other sociocultural factors such as social class and
36
gender may affect how teachers respond to individual students in a classroom. I
studied how these sociocultural factors affect teacher rapport with a student, the
assessment of a student’s level and needs, and the choice, delivery, and evaluation of
instructional strategies.
In the next chapter, I introduce the methodology of the study, including an
examination of how these methods have been used in other studies. In chapter four, I
present the data, and in chapter five I analyze the data and present my findings.
37
Chapter 3: Research Design
As mentioned in chapter one, the purpose of this qualitative case study of the
Neighborhood Academic Initiative (NAI) was to examine how teachers responded to
students who were having difficulty with course concepts. I focused on teacher-
student dyads and how teachers interacted to help students. The study could be
significant within the NAI as an aid to designing teacher training and professional
development, and ultimately could be valuable as an addition to the research on
pedagogy.
The conceptual framework for the study was sociocultural theory, as
discussed in chapter two. This framework explains how culture and the social
context play a vital function in learning. In this study, I examined the teacher-
student relationship through the lens of sociocultural theory. As discussed earlier,
Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) is the zone where learning takes
place as a more skilled adult or peer helps a student. I analyzed the process of
teacher helping student with respect to the teacher’s cultural background and
socialization into the teaching role in the NAI (the culture of the NAI program), as
well as the interaction of teacher’s culture and student’s culture. Considering the
ZPD, I analyzed teachers’ approaches to assessing a student’s skills and to
monitoring the level of assistance the teacher offers to the student.
In this chapter, I first introduce the site, followed by a description of the
participants. The school and program site names are authentic because I released
this study to NAI; however, I disguised the names of teachers, students, and
38
administrators for confidentiality. After the description of site and participants, the
third section covers the sampling procedures, the fourth, data collection, the fifth
data analysis, and the sixth section describes how I ensured validity and reliability.
Site Selection
The site for the research project was the University of Southern California’s
Neighborhood Academic Initiative (NAI). Located in Los Angeles, the NAI was
part of a set of USC programs that reach out to the local community. The umbrella
organization for all these programs was the USC Community Education Academy,
whose mission was “To provide the needed support to USC education outreach
programs in order to strengthen the services provided, eliminate barriers and
encourage collaboration among programs” (Office of External Relations, 2004). Its
outreach programs strove to involve students from pre-school to university level in
educational enrichment. The NAI was part of this Academy, along with five other
programs: Mathematics Engineering Science Achievement, McNair Scholars,
Medical Counseling, Organization & Recruitment, and the Office of civic &
Community Relations/USC Family of Schools, which encompassed the Educational
Opportunity Programs Center, Multimedia University Academy, and the School of
Early Childhood Education. The goal of all these programs was to attract students to
USC, help them prepare for college, and keep them in school.
The NAI was established in 1989 to help and encourage students at local
schools to go on to study at USC. Its mission is “to increase the enrollment and
graduation rate of low socioeconomic, neighborhood, under-represented students to
39
the University of Southern California, by serving as a model for a 6-year pre-college
enrichment program” ( Neighborhood Academic Initiative, 2005 par. 13). After
successfully completing six years of preparation at the NAI, students with qualifying
GPA and SAT scores receive a four-and-a-half-year full tuition scholarship to USC.
The program operates on public and corporate funding as well as private donations.
For the past four years, all of the NAI seniors have graduated and gone on to college.
I selected the NAI as the site for the study because its purpose is to prepare
average students from urban schools for entrance to USC. These students are from
the neighborhood schools near USC, and are mostly low-income, at-risk and
minority. In such a situation, it is highly likely that some students will have
difficulty with course content, since these students are only average achievers at their
schools, yet the NAI challenges them with college preparatory work. This allows
opportunities to observe how teachers respond to students who have difficulty with
course content. The rationale for the site choice is that there may be more teacher-
student interactions of the type that is the object of the study. Specifically, there may
be more incidents of teachers responding to students in difficulty. In the next
section, I examine the neighborhood schools in more detail.
Demographics
Broadly speaking, the neighborhoods around USC are mainly minority and
low-income. Three local schools from the Los Angeles Unified School District work
in partnership with the NAI: 1) Foshay Learning Center, an inner-city school for
high-achieving K-12 grade students, 2) Manual Arts High School, a large inner-city
40
school grades 9-12, and 3) John Muir Middle School, an urban middle school grades
6-8. Because Foshay Learning Center includes both the junior high and high school
levels, the feeder schools for NAI consist of two junior high schools (Foshay and
Muir) and two high schools (Foshay and Manual Arts). Since NAI students come
exclusively from these schools, this section outlines key demographic statistics for
each school. I focus on the high schools because my study does not include the
junior high school students.
The first school, Foshay Learning Center, has grades K-12 and an enrollment
of 3503 students. The school is located several blocks west of USC. It is currently
on a three-track schedule. Founded in 1924, the school’s mission is to encourage
students to go on to college and successfully graduate. Hispanic students comprise
the majority of the enrollment, at 76%, while 23% are African American.
Approximately one-third of the students are English Learners. The poverty level is
high, with 95% of students qualifying for free or reduced-price lunch. Thirty-five
percent of parents did not complete high school. To give a further idea of the social
atmosphere of the school, there were 734 suspensions during the 2003-04 school
year, and the transiency rate was 15%.
The school has 146 certificated teachers. The department with the largest
number of teachers is mathematics, with 21 teachers. Next are special education, 18
teachers, and English, 17 teachers. The large number of special education teachers is
notable. Social science has 14 teachers and science eight, with bilingual-ESL at six.
Other departments have fewer than six teachers each. Of the teachers, 92 are
41
continuing, meaning that they are full-time and permanent (Los Angeles Unified
School District, 2003). A detailed breakdown of teacher data can be found in
appendix C.
The second school, Manual Arts High School, has a long history, having been
established in 1910 (Los Angeles Unified School District 2003). It has undergone
many changes, and in its present form comprises a grades 9-12 year-round school
with three tracks and eight academies, each specializing in a particular subject. Data
for 2004-05 show 3802 students enrolled, comprised of 20% African-American and
79% Hispanic students. Thirty-eight percent of students are English learners. For
the 2003-04 school year, the transiency rate was high, at 56%, while attendance was
only 85%. In that year, there were 1140 suspensions, for a suspension rate of 29%.
In contrast, the suspension rate for LAUSD is 11% (Los Angeles Unified School
District, 2005). Eighty-one percent of students participated in the free or reduced
price lunch program. Forty-five percent of parents did not complete high school, and
39% of students are English learners (Los Angeles Unified School District, 2003).
The school has 160 certificated teachers of which 116 are continuing. Many
of the teachers have been at the school for several years; 22 teachers have taught at
Manual Arts for more than 11 years, and another 26 have taught there for six years or
more. This means almost a third of the teaching staff has been at the school six years
or more. Compared to Foshay, Manual Arts has a larger teaching staff. The biggest
department is English, with 28 teachers, next biggest is mathematics, with 18
teachers. Other large departments are social science, 15, and science and special
42
education, which both have 14 teachers. The foreign language department has ten
teachers, but all other departments have less than six teachers each (Los Angeles
Unified School District 2005). A detailed faculty breakdown can be found in
appendix C.
Finally, Muir Middle School is for students grades 6-8, and has a four-track
school calendar. The population of 1687 students is 26% African-American and
73% Hispanic. Over 69% of the students are English learners. The transiency rate is
over 43%, with 500 student suspensions in the 2003-04 school year. There are 99
certificated teachers of which 58 are continuing. Thirty-two teachers have
probationary status. Over half of the teachers have been at the school for five years
or less (Los Angeles Unified School District, 2005).
The NAI recruits 9
th
to 12
th
grade students from Foshay and Manual Arts.
Approximately half of the grade 9-12 students come from Foshay and half from
Manual Arts. Within the NAI, the weekday student population consists of 9-12
th
grade students with a C+ grade average. These students are from Foshay and
Manual arts and were identified by their high school teachers as having potential.
They must have at least a C+ in Algebra 1 to qualify for the NAI. The program does
not recruit advanced placement or honors students. Middle school students from
Muir and Foshay attend a Saturday academy, but do not take regular weekday
classes in the NAI. The next section describes the participants of the study.
43
Participant Selection
The NAI staff and administration consists of an executive director, assistant
director, administrative coordinator, a middle school liaison, eight teachers, and
various temporary employees, student workers, and volunteers (see Appendix A for
an organization chart). There is also a ten-person parent leadership board.
Interacting with the NAI are the school principals of Foshay and Manual Arts as well
as senior administration in the USC Community Education Academy. There are 219
9
th
-12
th
grade students in the program in fall 2005, plus another 221 7
th
-8
th
grade
students who attend on Saturdays. In all, the entire population of people affiliated
with the NAI is approximately 470, not including parents and families.
From this wide group, I have based the participant selection on my interest in
teacher education. I was particularly interested in teachers for two reasons. First, as
a teacher educator, I want to know what factors affect the way teachers perceive,
analyze, and respond to student problems. Second, I could use my 25 years of
teaching experience to inform my observations of teacher-student interactions in the
classroom. As a result, the focus participants in this project are the NAI teachers.
The program has eight instructors: four instructors from Foshay learning center and
four from Manual Arts High School. The teachers are five males and three females.
Each teacher teaches one grade level and one subject, either Math or English. The
research study included all eight teachers in focus groups and observations. One
teacher declined to participate in the videotaping or interview due to being
overcommitted. A list of teachers and their assignments follows:
44
9
th
grade geometry Mr. Manning, Manual Arts
9
th
grade English Mrs. Middleton, Foshay
10
th
grade algebra 2 Mr. North, Foshay
10
th
grade English Mr. Penn, Manual Arts
11
th
grade math analysis Mr. Brenner, Manual Arts
11
th
grade English Mr. Castle, Manual Arts
12
th
grade calculus Ms. Medina, Foshay
12
th
grade English Ms. Roan, Foshay
I obtained participant demographics as well as teacher background and
experience through interviews. Four NAI teachers taught at Foshay, and four taught
at Manual Arts. Of the eight teachers who participated, there were five males and
three females. Six classified themselves as white and culturally American. One
teacher classified herself as of central American/Mexican descent, and one teacher
classified himself as American of East Indian descent. For social class, although
teaching is considered a middle class occupation, I explored class background in
more depth by asking about parent’s occupations. Five out of seven teachers
interviewed had parents with middle-class occupations, while the two had parents
with working class occupations, based on Wright (2000). The length of time
working at NAI ranged from new, meaning this was the first year teaching there, to
eleven years at NAI. Three teachers completed credential programs at CSU
campuses and two received credentials through the Los Angeles Unified School
District intern program. Two teachers’ training is unknown.
45
In addition to the teachers, I also interviewed administrators. These included
the executive director, assistant director, administrative coordinator and middle
school liaison at NAI, a previous NAI administrator, the principal of Manual Arts,
and a CEA administrator. Interviewing these people was important because
administrators set the requirements for hiring and provide training and curriculum
which affect the teachers’ classroom behavior. In addition, the administrators
influence school culture, which is important to consider when using sociocultural
theory.
In order to round out the dyad unit of analysis, I intended to interview
students I observed interacting with the teachers. In practice, it was difficult to get
student participation, and I eventually interviewed student volunteers regardless of
whether I had observed them interacting with a teacher. Since the students talked
about their interactions with teachers, I could still obtain useful data. I interviewed a
total of 15 students, consisting of six ninth grade students, three tenth grade students,
four eleventh grade students, and two twelfth grade students. (The seniors were the
most difficult to recruit because they were very busy.) The student group included
11 females and four males. They were evenly divided between Hispanic and
African-American ethnicities.
Because the parent leadership board also influenced NAI, I interviewed
board members. I interviewed six parents on the parent leadership board, including
the board president, secretary, ombudsman, and general members. In all, I
interviewed 35 people.
46
Data Collection
The NAI program runs in two sessions, from July 1 to October 23 and
January 3 to April 23. I conducted the research during both sessions. I started the
data gathering process in October and continued through graduation in May. I also
observed the orientation for the incoming ninth grade students for the following year.
In this study, I employed qualitative methods of data collection, primarily
ethnography and secondarily case study. An ethnographic case study method can
answer the central questions of this research project, as specified in chapter one:
How does a teacher’s culture affect his or her responses to students? How does
school organizational culture affect teacher responses? Ethnography can provide the
kind of data suitable to answer these questions using the framework of sociocultural
theory. According to Creswell (1998), in ethnography, the researcher studies the
“meanings of behavior, language, and interactions of a culture-sharing group (58).”
In this case, the culture-sharing group is the NAI teachers.
Along with ethnography, I used case study in the sense that I was only
observing the NAI, and not other programs. My study was “bounded by time and
place” (Creswell, 1998): The NAI location and the 2005-2006 school year.
Although the NAI is unique and another researcher might do an intrinsic case study
because if it’s uniqueness, according to Creswell’s definitions, this case study is
instrumental because I focused on an issue, teacher-student interaction, in order to
illustrate how this interaction is influenced by culture. The case study is within-site
as opposed to multi-sited because I only studied the NAI site.
47
An example of an ethnographic case study as a type of educational research is
a landmark educational study by Willis (1977). He conducted a comparative
ethnographic case study of how British working class boys get working class jobs as
a result of their culture. Willis studied 12 working-class boys in a place he called
Hammertown, located in central England. The boys had a culture of opposition and
resistance to school. In order to study this culture, his data collection methods were
observation and participant observation in class, around school, and during leisure
time, recorded group discussions, informal interviews, and diaries. These methods
are hallmarks of ethnography. Ethnographic methods allowed Willis to get the
information necessary to study working class culture. His findings show that
working-class high school boys form informal social groups and a culture of
resistance to school. The result is they do not get a good education and therefore
take working class jobs, in this way reproducing the class structure. Ethnographic
methods were an essential means for Willis to gather the data he needed to reach his
conclusions, shedding new light on the role of culture in reproducing social class.
Willis’ study opened the field of education to ethnographic research because the
insights he gained were very different from results of more conventional research.
Ethnography can pose a new type of question, the question of how culture influences
education. My study examined the influence of culture on education.
Like Willis, my data collection procedures included observation and
interviewing. In addition I included document analysis and videotaping. These
encompass the four forms of data discussed by Creswell (1998): observations,
48
interviews, documents, and audiovisual materials. First, I will discuss the researcher
as research instrument, and then I will present my data collection procedures.
Research instrument. In qualitative research, the researcher is the instrument
(Lincoln and Guba 1985, Patton 2002). Creswell (1998) states it is important that
the researcher disclose his or her “biases, values, and context” (172). Nonetheless,
Patton (2002) emphasizes the importance of keeping “empathetic neutrality” (50), in
other words it is important not to enter a study with a preset agenda to prove a
particular point. (This is quite different from quantitative inquiry, where the
researcher sets out to prove a hypothesis.) With these points in mind, I would like to
disclose my personal background.
Having taught students from other countries for my entire career, I have a
special interest in cultural issues affecting teacher-student interaction. I have been
teaching college-level English as a second language since 1979, and am familiar with
methods of teaching language learners. My experience is solely with teaching
adults, but in this study I observed high school teaching, so student age is different.
The students in the study were fluent English speakers, although there were some
ESL students. In spite of these considerations, my long experience was an asset in
observing teachers and identifying their problem-solving strategies. My
unfamiliarity with the students and grade levels in the study allowed me to look at
classroom interactions with a fresh view.
Since culture is a focus of this study, next I will disclose my cultural
background because it may affect my observations. All my grandparents were
49
immigrants and came of age in other countries: Turkey, Belgium, England, and
Canada. My mother was born in the USA, but entered school without knowing any
English. French was her first language, Spanish her second, and English her third
language. Her family valued multilingualism, and I share that value. Hispanic
culture had a strong influence on my childhood. My mother’s family is Sephardic,
and her uncle ran a school in Mexico. When I was a child my household was
bilingual English-(Mexican) Spanish, not only because of family, but also because
we had a series of live-in housekeepers who spoke only Spanish. As a result, I saw
firsthand some of the problems Spanish-speaking children face in school. Since
many of the students in this study are Hispanic, this cultural issue may be a source of
bias, but it may also be a source of insight.
Next I will discuss my background from a social standpoint. Both my
parents suffered from poverty and discrimination when they were children, in part
because of my mother’s Hispanic Jewish ancestry and my father’s Scottish ancestry.
My father was a Canadian citizen, but he spent much of his childhood traveling up
and down the West Coast as his father moved from job to job, mostly working on
farms. Even though my parents went to college and were middle-class professionals,
their childhood backgrounds influenced the cultural milieu of my family. Within
Lareau’s (2003) categorization of the characteristics of working class and middle
class childhoods, my childhood was like the working class. I grew up in urban Los
Angeles, a few miles north of the location of this study; as a result, I encountered
gangs, drugs, violence, teenage pregnancy, and many other urban problems.
50
Knowing firsthand what an urban childhood entails can help me understand NAI
students, because they come from similar neighborhoods. In sum, my background
can be an asset in allowing me greater insight into the social class and cultural
dynamics of student-teacher interactions.
Document analysis. Document analysis was one of the first steps in my
research. As Patton (2002) points out, documents are “material culture” and an
important source of data for ethnographic research. They can provide historical
background as well as the program goals and mission. Documents can give context
for observations. I began the study by analyzing public NAI program documents,
particularly those pertaining to program mission, curriculum, pedagogy, and teacher
training, in order to get the official version of the program as well as its formal
structure.
Observations. Observations were the second step in the research process
because they were a good way to get a holistic picture of the NAI program. An
example of observation in educational research is Bettie (2003). She conducted her
ethnographic study over nine months in a high school in California’s Central Valley
with the purpose of portraying how race, gender, sexuality, and class interact in the
experiences of white and Mexican-American senior high school girls from the
working class. Bettie’s methods included participant observation of six cliques at the
school and interviews of individual students. She pointed out that the participant
observation and interview methods became blended as girls had long conversations
with her as she was observing. She conducted the observations and interviews on the
51
high school campus for varying amounts of time. She recorded and transcribed her
interviews. Bettie personally did all the research and developed trusting
relationships with her participants.
In my case, I observed one NAI class session and one home school class
session for each teacher and took observation notes. In addition, I observed five
teacher meetings and three teacher retreat days and took field notes. I observed two
parent leadership board meetings and one administrative staff meeting, taking
observation notes each time. During the classroom observations, I simply sat in the
back of the room and did not participate, but during the meetings, I did participate by
asking and answering questions. As Creswell (1998) points out, participant
observation can cause participant perception of the researcher to change from
outsider to insider. This kind of participation might have made the participants more
comfortable with my presence.
An example of a study employing participant observation is Lareau’s (2003)
study of how family life reflects class and racial differences. The study’s most
important element was naturalistic participant observations of families at their homes
and at other activities such as parties and doctor visits. During these observations,
the researchers participated with children in games, meals, and other child-centered
activities. There were also classroom observations. Sometimes the observer
participated in classroom activities, while other times not. Lareau also conducted
interviews with parents, teachers, school personnel, and adults who interacted with
children during organized activities outside of school. Lareau’s key findings were
52
that both poor and working-class families differ from middle class families in their
child-rearing practices. Poor and working-class families allow their children to grow
up naturally, without much adult supervision or organized activities, while middle-
class families enroll their children in multiple organized activities. Participant
observation, particularly participating with children, allowed researchers to become
involved in everyday family life Creswell (1998) in order to obtain data about family
activities and child-rearing practices.
Interviews. Using a semi-structured interview format, I individually
interviewed seven of the eight teachers. The eighth teacher was too busy to schedule
interviews. I intended to interview all the teachers two times. I interviewed five
teachers twice and two teachers once, also because of their schedules. I interviewed
the NAI executive director, the assistant director, the administrative coordinator, the
middle school liaison, and a former NAI director one time each, using a semi-
structured interview format. All the above interviews were audiotaped and
transcribed. I also interviewed a total of fifteen students. For these interviews, I
took notes instead of using audiotape in order to make the students feel more
comfortable. I interviewed six parents, taking notes to record the data. I interviewed
the principal of Manual Arts, taking notes to record his responses. I conducted a
telephone interview with the vice-president of external relations at USC, who
oversees NAI along with other programs.
I met with most participants individually or in focus groups on the NAI
school site, which is the University of Southern California campus, at a time
53
convenient to each participant. I conducted some interviews at the home schools, in
coffee shops, in private homes, or by telephone for the convenience of the
participants.
In the literature, an example of interview research methods is in Stanton-
Salazar’s (2001) work. Stanton-Salazar used interviews extensively in his research.
He presents ethnographic and statistical data to describe how the social networks of
Latino youth tend to prevent their social mobility. Here I will only describe the
interview aspect of the research. In the Bay Area, 205 Latino sophomore, junior, and
senior high school students participated in semistructured interviews about social and
informational support. In San Diego, Stanton-Salazar interviewed fifty-one
sophomores and juniors at Auxilio High School. Students participated in intensive
semistructured interviews conducted by four interviewers in school, at homes, and at
neighborhood locations. Another set of interviews asked parents, particularly
mothers, about their views of obstacles to student success. A final set of interviews
asked institutional agents whom students had identified as supportive about social
conditions that allowed them to be supportive. Through the interviews, Stanton-
Salazar showed how the social networks of the Latino students helped or hindered
them in succeeding in school and by extension, society. This example study
illustrates the use of interviews to conduct ethnographic research.
Videotaping. I videotaped one 60-minute session of each teacher’s class (7
videotaped sessions) during the spring semester. The purpose of the videotaping was
to capture teacher-student interactions to extract cases of the teacher responding to
54
students having difficulty with coursework. I used the videotapes for stimulated
recall as described below.
Stimulated recall. After each videotaped class session (7 recall sessions), I
replayed the videotape to the teacher and asked the teacher to recall his or her
thoughts and actions captured in the video with respect to responses to students. I
audiotaped and transcribed these teacher responses.
A study using this research method can illustrate how stimulated recall
works. My study replicated the stimulated recall procedures used by Stough and
Palmer (2003). They used grounded theory methods to study how expert special
education teachers teach. This study is particularly important because my study
mirrored its procedures in many respects. Stough and Palmer found that expert
teachers think of students as individuals and respond to them individually, as
compared to responding to the class as a whole. Strategies teachers used with
individual students included instructional strategies, class management, and
behavioral strategies. The research highlighted the dynamic, complex, interactive
nature of teacher decision-making when it came to assisting individual learners.
Stough and Palmer selected 19 teachers from five school districts, including urban,
mid-size, and rural settings. They chose these teachers because of their expertise as
determined by their years of teaching, certification, recognition for superior teaching,
and the progress of their students. Methods of gathering data included interviews of
the teachers, videotaping of teachers teaching their own classes, observations,
stimulated recall, and field notes. Interviews lasted 45 minutes and were audiotaped
55
and transcribed. Each teacher was videotaped six times for 30 minutes to one hour
during a two-month period. During each videotaping session, an observer took notes
to, among other things, map out the classroom, student seating, and to note amount
of time the teacher spent with individual students. On the same day as the
videotaping session, the teacher participated in a stimulated recall session. This
involved the teacher watching the video and stopping it to explain his or her thoughts
or feelings at various points during the lesson. According to Stough and Palmer’s
very detailed description, if the teacher did not stop the video and comment on it
after two minutes, the researcher would stop the video and ask “open-ended
questions such as ‘What were you trying to accomplish here?’ or ‘What were your
thoughts or feelings at this point?’” (p. 5). The content of field notes included
researcher comments about data collection, ideas, reminders for the next meeting
with the teacher, and observations about the mood of the session.
Stimulated recall is based on work by Ericsson and Simon (1993). They
outlined how to use verbal reports as data, a process called protocol analysis.
Protocol analysis means analyzing the transcripts of people thinking aloud or
recalling their thoughts in a given situation. In anthropology and ethnography,
researchers have always relied on verbal reports to do research. In educational
psychology (Ericsson and Simon’s field) however, it is only recently that verbal
reporting has been considered a valid source of data. Educational researchers usually
would observe behavior and use various sorts of tests to study learning, instead of
just asking people what they were thinking. Ericsson and Simon present a
56
comprehensive guide for using verbal reports as data in educational psychology. The
value of this method is that it allows the researcher to observe and record thinking
processes. For that reason, I transplanted this educational psychology research tool
into my ethnographic study. It allowed me to observe what teachers are thinking as
they interact with students in class.
One key use for protocol analysis is to show how subjects selectively identify
relevant information. Ericsson and Simon (1993) define two types of verbal reports:
concurrent verbalization, which consists of thinking aloud as one is doing something,
and retrospective verbalization, which consists of recalling the thinking process after
the action is completed. I was particularly interested in the second type, because
after a lesson, a teacher can explain his or her thinking process as the lesson was
going on, discussing the thinking behind any changes or adjustments made in
response to student performance. I attempted to discern what teachers identify as the
relevant information in student behavior that cues them to adjust their teaching
methods. This can be particularly important in determining how teachers identify
and assess students who are having problems with course material. Combining this
with ethnographic data, I analyzed how culture influences teacher responses to
students.
There are, however, some issues that a researcher has to be aware of: with
retrospective verbalization the subject will not remember every thought, and the
subject may remember inaccurately (Ericsson & Simon, 1993). Researchers have to
analyze data from verbal reports carefully for these reasons, and the authors spend a
57
great deal of their book discussing various pitfalls and how to adjust for them. They
say interviews with the subjects to find out their knowledge base can be helpful in
reducing errors in the data. In my study, in addition to interviews, I used video as an
aid to teacher recall of their thought process during their lessons. Although Ericsson
and Simon do not specifically mention video, Stough and Palmer (2003) used video
to reduce problems of incomplete or inaccurate recall, thus their term stimulated
recall.
Focus groups. According to Creswell (1998), focus groups can elicit
information that may not surface in private interviews, and they are useful when the
group members are similar and cooperative with each other. My research included a
total of six focus groups.
I conducted two focus groups with the teachers, which I audiotaped and
transcribed. The first, in the fall semester, was to discuss how they perceived and
responded to student problems. The second was at the teacher retreat in May, after
the observations, videotaping, interviews, and stimulated recall. During the second
focus group, I presented the results to the teachers and administrators for their
comments and responses. The goals of the second focus group were validation of
my findings and group identification of best practices. In addition, another
researcher conducted a focus group session during a teacher retreat I observed in
December. I obtained permission to transcribe the audiotape and included it in my
data.
58
I also organized some of the students into focus groups by grade level. We
met at the NAI office during after-school tutoring time. The focus group format put
students at ease and they were more talkative. Unfortunately, because they were
more excitable in this format, they often talked over each other, making it difficult to
take notes about who said what. Further, I used the focus group format for parents at
the NAI office because it was convenient for them to participate in this way when
they convened for a parent leadership board meeting.
Field notes. In addition to notes taken during observations and interviews,
after each contact with a teacher or administrator, I recorded comments and
reflections as well as any problems that came up or concerns about the data.
Creswell (1998) describes this type of reflective note taking as field notes. Field
notes also included my perceptions about the mood and tone of each session.
Getting participant buy-in. As Patton (2002) points out, a field study begins
with negotiation with gatekeepers. From the NAI administrator’s point of view, this
research study provided ideas for program enhancement as well as material for
teacher training and for improving instruction. To encourage teachers to participate,
I provided as much information about the project as possible, so that their curiosity
became a motivating factor. The possibility of getting insights into their teaching
methods by watching videotapes of themselves and discussing their thinking process
was intrinsically motivating to the teachers. According to Ericsson and Simon
(1993), a side effect of retrospective verbalization is that it sometimes improves
subsequent performance on the task, which can be an added benefit to teachers who
59
participated. After analyzing most of the data, I presented the results to the NAI
faculty and staff, along with a written draft report. A monograph summarizing the
study is the final product to be submitted to NAI. This deliverable can be valuable to
NAI as well.
Data Analysis
I analyzed the data based on the qualitative methodology of the ethnographic
case study. The case under study is NAI. I did a thematic analysis of the data from
all sources, including documents, interviews, videotaping/stimulated recall and
observations. This is in keeping with Creswell’s (1998) description of case study
analysis.
As I completed each step in the data gathering process, I analyzed the data, so
that the research proceeded in an iterative process. Lincoln and Guba (1985)
describe this process as the flow of naturalistic inquiry. It moves from collecting or
sampling the data to analysis to theory to adjustments in the sampling process and
back to sampling. As I analyzed each document, observation, or interview, I
adjusted future data collection procedures by focusing my attention on what
appeared to be the most salient characteristics for the study.
I analyzed the teacher interview transcripts to identify themes. Preliminary
themes presented in chapter 1 included:
Rapport with student
Assessment of student level
Analysis of student needs
60
Choice of instructional strategy
Delivery of instruction
Evaluation of instructional success
During the iterative data analysis process, some of these changed. I found that the
above themes were dependent on broader issues of program history, culture, and
relationships to other institutions. The revised list of themes and sub-themes is as
follows:
Program history and mission
Program culture
o Student culture
o Faculty culture
o Administrative culture
NAI partnerships
o Partnership with families
o Partnerships with home schools
o Partnership with USC
I looked for “key phrases, terms, and practices that are special to the people
in the setting” (Patton 2002) as a way to clarify themes. I endeavored to see the NAI
through the eyes of the teachers, administrators, and students, to see how they
perceived the program. After reviewing data from an interview, I fitted it into other
data to describe, analyze, and interpret (Creswell, 1998) the helping behavior of NAI
61
teachers. I produced a holistic picture of the NAI, both from the view of the
participants and from the viewpoint of sociocultural theory.
Methods to Ensure Trustworthiness
Scientific studies need to address issues of reliability and validity. In
ethnographic research, perhaps a more appropriate term is trustworthiness (Lincoln
and Guba 1985). In constructivism and sociocultural theory, since knowledge is
constructed, it is not so easy to discern what the “truth” is. Different people have
different ideas; knowledge is relative. For this study, truth is defined by the people
in the case under study, along with the researcher, as well as other uninvolved
observers. If these three groups can agree about the data, analysis, and results, the
study will be trustworthy.
I began checking the trustworthiness of my study early, by first checking the
interview transcripts with the interviewees shortly after each interview to ensure
accuracy. Second, when my analysis and results were largely completed, I presented
them to the NAI teachers and administrators in a focus group format for their
comments. These methods to ensure trustworthiness are termed member checking by
Lincoln and Guba (1985). In the final step, I shared the data and analysis with other
doctoral students in my dissertation group. These three steps can enhance the
trustworthiness of the study.
Another method to improve trustworthiness is triangulation. Triangulation
means using multiple data sources, methods, researchers, and theories (Lincoln &
Guba, 1985). In this study, I was the only researcher and I only used sociocultural
62
theory; in addition, my methods were only qualitative. However, I used multiple
data sources. Data sources included document analysis, observations, interviews,
videotapes, and stimulated recall. This variety gave many views of the same
phenomenon, namely the influence of culture on teacher-student interaction. Having
multiple ways to analyze the same target can reduce errors common in a particular
method (Patton, 2002). Cross-checking information obtained from interviews,
observations, stimulated recall, and document analysis reduced the chance for error.
Summary
In this study I used ethnographic case study methods to study teacher-student
interaction at the NAI, an urban program to prepare average but promising inner-city
students for college work. Using the lens of sociocultural theory, I analyzed how
sociocultural factors affected teachers helping students. To gather data, I used the
methods of document analysis, observations, interviews, videotaping, and stimulated
recall. The primary participants of the study were teachers, but I also interviewed
students, administrators, staff, and parents.
The next chapter presents the data on teacher-student interaction as well as
cultural factors evident at NAI. Chapter 5 analyzes the relationship between
sociocultural factors and teacher thought and behavior when interacting with
students. Sociocultural theory is the tool of this analysis. I also present policy
recommendations for best practices, as well as recommendations for future research.
63
Chapter 4: Data
The problem this research investigates is, given that low SES inner-city
minority students are underrepresented in colleges, how can schools effectively
prepare students in this population for college? The purpose of the study is to
examine the case of the NAI, a pre-college program for the population under
discussion. The NAI may serve as a model for other programs.
How does NAI produce college-ready students? Specifically, what is it about
student-teacher interaction that helps students learn the necessary skills to go to
college? The intent of my study is to focus on how teachers help students who are
having trouble with coursework.
I examine student-teacher interaction in the classroom through the lens of
sociocultural theory. Since this theory predicts that historical, cultural and social
factors influence the teaching-learning interaction, my data are organized into these
three broad themes. In light of these themes, I will next present data about program
history, NAI culture, and social influences, specifically partnerships, at NAI. I look
at how student-teacher interaction and learning may be affected by these factors.
The names of study participants are pseudonyms to protect privacy. A further
discussion of the data and theory will be presented in Chapter 5.
NAI History
Events in NAI’s past have left a clear mark on the present situation at NAI,
for better or for worse. This history affects the current program mission, the overall
64
program functioning, and the students. There are two ways that program history
affects student-teacher interaction. First, the original program purpose and mission
still drives interactions. Second, previous administrative problems have changed the
program and have especially affected the 12
th
grade students who lived through
them. In this section on history, I present data about mission and previous
administrators to provide the foundation for the following sections on culture and
partnerships.
A brief timeline of the program history can serve as an introduction to this
section. I consulted news articles of the day to find data about program history.
According to Tucker (1991), in 1985, the USC Dean of Graduate Studies and USC
Executive vice Provost met to discuss ways to increase the number of minority
students applying to graduate studies at USC. After analyzing the problem, they
determined that in order to be qualified for graduate studies, minority students would
need to start preparing for college in the 7
th
grade. This was the origination of the
idea that developed into NAI. According to Hill (1995) in 1989, USC hired an
administrator to develop the NAI program and serve as its first director, and he spent
the first year planning the program, getting funding, and getting support from USC
faculty and local school principals. Lubman (1994) says the first 59 students from
Foshay and Adams Junior High schools started the program as 7
th
graders in the
1991-92 school year. Sullivan (1997) documents that when this group of students
graduated in 1997, 17 of them were accepted to USC on full scholarships.
65
I interviewed Dr. Fitch, a previous interim administrator, and filled in the
history after 1997. NAI had a successful first decade under the leadership of its first
director, Dr. Heath, who, according to Dr. Fitch, “…was an extraordinarily
charismatic man, powerful speaker, and brought with him a sense of urgency about
something being done about these youngsters being excluded from the university
opportunity.” The director was a charismatic and powerful leader. Lubman (1994)
questioned whether the program could continue in the same form if he left. That
question was tested when the Dr. Heath left the program in 1999, and six months
later a new director, Dr. March, came on board. According to Dr. Fitch, after Dr.
Heath’s departure, the NAI started to falter. This point is corroborated by the
teachers and present administrators. The program’s social worker was eliminated
and it seemed that the original vision might be lost. Dr. Fitch took over the
directorship in January 2002 on an interim basis for six months. She says her goal
was to reestablish the purpose and vision of the NAI. After six months, Ms. Watson
was hired as director in July, 2002. As Ms. Watson said, “When I just came in, we
had a slippery slope of leadership.” There were two unstable years after Dr. Heath’s
departure, but with intervention and new administration, the program got back on
track. Ms Watson was director at the time of this study.
The original configuration of the program was similar to today. Here I will
outline that configuration, and point out any differences that exist now. Smith (1993)
describes the NAI’s five components. First, the Pre-College enrichment Academy
66
includes early morning math and English classes on the USC campus for students
from local schools. The five-day-a-week classes were originally two hours long, but
now are only one and a half hours long. The second component was a crisis
intervention program headed by an NAI staff member with training in social work
and manned by interns from USC’s School of Social work. This component is not
currently in operation. The third component is the Family Development Institute,
where parents take Saturday classes on a variety of topics designed to improve their
parenting skills and ability to help their children in school. Fourth, once students
graduate and enter USC, there is a Retention Program to ensure their college success.
The final component is research and development. During the course of my project,
I mainly observed the Pre-College Enrichment Academy, including its adjuncts,
which are after-school tutoring and Saturday Academy classes.
Program Mission
In a well-run organization, the program mission is evident in every
interaction (Bennis & Goldsmith, 1997). In my observations, I found this to be a
characteristic at NAI. First I will present data about the NAI mission from program
documents. Then I will present data from observations that relates to the mission.
I consulted program documents and other published materials to identify the
program mission. The program vision is stated somewhat differently in different
documents. For instance, “the Neighborhood Academic Initiative (NAI) provides
multiple educational opportunities for Scholars and their parents to gain an
67
understanding of self, and obtain limitless capacity for skills enabling them to
assume a measure of control over the direction and quality of life” (USC Community
Education Academy Strategic Plan 2004-2005). On the NAI website, the vision is
stated as, “to increase the enrollment and graduation rate of low socioeconomic,
neighborhood, underrepresented students to the University of Southern California, by
serving as a model for a 6-year pre-college enrichment program” (Neighborhood
Academic Initiative (n.d.).
To clarify the mission further, it would have been ideal to interview the
founder, Dr. Heath. Since I was unable to do that, I found articles that quoted Dr.
Heath talking about the program. His passion for the program mission is evident in
his comments: “Our focus is on the average student because our premise is we can
take an average student, and in six years render that student a scholar” (Jones, 1992).
In another article, Heath stated, “My fundamental goal is to prove that all students
can be learners…We consider the student as a complex, whole human being: mind,
body, spirit…Push them and never give up on them” (Fleming, 1993). Heath
mentioned another aspect that might be included in the program mission, “This is an
educational model that could and should be duplicated by any college or university
located in an urban setting” (Smith, 1993). Dr. Heath’s comments reveal a program
mission founded on the ideas that average students can be taught to excel, educators
should not give up on students, and all aspects of students’ lives need to be
considered when teaching them. In addition, Dr. Heath proposes that NAI can serve
68
as a model for other schools. Next, I present data on administrators, faculty, and
students to show how I observed the NAI mission to be expressed in program
interactions.
I found that administrators often made comments that showed adherence to
the mission. In an interview, Ms. Watson, the program director, talked about staying
with the program vision and mission. “I think [my role is] not only to further the
goals of the mission of our program, but also to maintain affinity to the model, the
NAI model, [to] take a look at where we need assistance with implementing the
model.” In my very first meeting of the research project, Ms. Watson stated that she
believes all students can learn. She stated that she expects teachers to stick with
students and help them, not to give up on them. She emphasized that the students
generally have a C+ average when they enter NAI. Ms. Brooks, another
administrator, said, “I just think that for the amount of time I work here, I really like
what we do; I wish it could be duplicated so that other schools, other kids can get the
benefit of what we’re doing.” These all parallel Dr. Heath’s statements quoted
above.
Faculty also made comments in line with the mission. They mirrored Dr.
Heath’s statements more than the mission statement as it is written in program
documents. When I interviewed the teachers, I got comments such as these: “It’s not
just kids, it’s families who bought into this, and they deserve it.” “It’s a huge
common misperception at Foshay that we’ve got all the gifted kids, and we don’t.”
69
“I wish we could go to other private universities and model this program.” “In a lot
of cases I see me in all the students…It makes me feel like, you know, I can’t give
up…” “You know you’re partly a teacher but you have a parental role. Because if
they have any kind of problem, you know, they will come to you…Two years ago I
bought one student bus tokens for half a year, because he couldn’t walk home
because he would get shot at.” These comments show the teachers adhere to the
mission. They believe average students join NAI, that they can’t give up on them,
that families have to be considered as well, and that teachers should attend to the
whole student, including problems outside the classroom.
Next, I looked at the data from student interviews to see if their perceptions
of the program also gave an indication of program mission. Students commented
that NAI teachers had higher expectations and assigned more homework than their
other teachers: “They’re always on us.” “They want us to do better.” “Mr. Manning
goes beyond the book.” “Good, encouraging teachers.” “Mr. Castle is very
committed; he asks for a lot.” One student said that when he doesn’t hand in his
work, his teacher tracks him down. Another student said his teacher “is one of the
best--dedicated, works with you. He cares, wants to make a difference. He comes [to
tutor us] after school.” These comments align with the goal of not giving up on
students. Students felt teachers treated them as if they were more mature. “They
take you seriously.” Students made comments that the program gave them an
opportunity. A student said NAI “opened my eyes to college.” It gave her “a new
70
goal in life.” Another student said, “The program offers opportunities.” These
comments align with the goal of college preparation. Students also made comments
about NAI as an exemplary model. One focus group agreed, “Everybody should
have NAI.” Another focus group suggested, “NAI should get bigger. Get more
schools involved.”
Considering the data, there is a strong indication from the current director,
the faculty, and the students that interactions are aligned to the program mission. In
this way, the program history, particularly the original vision of Dr. Heath, is still
evident and alive in the NAI today. Comments matched Dr. Heath’s quotations even
more than the written mission statements. This shows the continuing influence of
the first director, emphasizing the importance of history on the current functioning of
the educational organization. The mission directly affects student-teacher interaction
because of high teacher expectations and because teachers put great effort into
making sure every student succeeds.
Historical Influence of Previous Administrators
As was introduced above, the influence of the first program director, Dr.
Heath, has been very strong, particularly with respect to the program vision.
However, later administrators have left their mark on the current functioning of the
program as well. Teacher-student interaction today is affected by administrative
decisions of the past. In particular, the leadership troubles of the two years after Dr.
Heath’s departure, 2000-2002, have had a lasting effect.
71
The program is set up to help not only the child, but the parents and family,
through classes for parents in addition to classes for their children. This is based on
the mission to address the whole child. To further the goal of helping the child by
helping the whole family, the program originally had a staff member whose job
entailed counseling and social work with families, according to Dr. Fitch. After Dr.
Heath left, the new director, Dr. March, eliminated the social work staff position.
The funding is no longer available and it has never been reinstated, a move that
impacts the program to this day.
Because there is no staff member dedicated to family counseling, these
counseling duties have been taken up by the remaining staff as well as the faculty, as
they endeavor to follow the original program vision. I observed about 25% of
faculty meeting time was spent discussing student and family problems. Some
examples of statements related to student and family problems follow. “She is really
struggling, really insecure, doesn’t feel strong about her academic skills; she is often
late.” “He had to get his three siblings to school; he was always late.” There were
several instances of teachers blaming boyfriends for female students’ poor classroom
performance. There was mention of a foster child who was fighting with a sibling
and having family problems. Ms. Watson stressed the importance of helping foster
children. In one meeting she commented, “[This student’s] mother is alcoholic and a
drug abuser. She was in foster care. She was beaten badly, was late to class, missing
Saturdays. If we had a counselor she would not have suffered.” Another student
72
was having problems because his father had suddenly died. Now this student is head
of the family and works. He has too much responsibility. Another student is often
absent because he has to go to court. About another student, a teacher commented,
“His mother is young but has degenerative arthritis. She can’t walk, can hardly get
out of bed. He really has his mom at home as an invalid.” Other family problems
discussed included alcoholism, mental illness, and homelessness. In the
homelessness case, a student slept on people’s couches for two years while he
studied at NAI. As Ms. Watson commented in one meeting, “Outside forces
sometimes cause them [students] to drop out.” This comment highlights the impact
of family and other issues on academics, and gives emphasis to the importance of
counseling. The data show that unresolved family problems can directly affect
students’ performance and interaction in class. This strengthens the point in the
original mission to consider the whole student.
The administrative decision to eliminate the school counselor has impacted
the administrative workload. Counseling takes up a significant amount of the
administrative staff’s time. I recorded comments indicating that letters, phone calls
and meetings are all used for counseling. For example, Ms. Watson commented that
one student was getting into a gang and she lectured him for one hour to persuade
him to get out. Parents appear to be routinely contacted when a student is having
problems in school. In faculty meetings I recorded comments about who would
contact or did contact parents and what the results were. Although I recorded some
73
comments about teachers contacting parents, contacting the parents seemed to be
done more by the office staff than the teachers. For example, I recorded a meeting
discussion about a student failing an AP class. She was working at McDonald’s
because her parents had financial problems. She felt pressure from the parents to
work. Ms. Gomez agreed to call in the parents to discuss the situation. In another
case, a teacher commented that, “There’s lots and lots of alcoholism and drug abuse
with the parents, and they go to Ms. Gomez. … In fact they go to her more than she
wants them to go to her, with their sob stories… and she had to change her cell
number.” Parent contacts appear to be a big part of the office staff workload,
particularly for Ms. Gomez. This workload is a result of Dr. March’s decision to cut
the staff counselor and social work interns.
The effect of previous administrators can be observed from the students’
comments as well. Since administrative problems occurred in 2000 through 2002,
and students participate in NAI for six years, the classes of 2006 and 2007 started in
the program during that time. Teachers and staff commented that the class of 2006
as a group had a distinct personality. One teacher said, “The senior class—they were
heinous from 7
th
grade.” Teachers said they complained more than other classes. In
grade level focus group interviews, I observed that the 11
th
and 12
th
grade students
made more negative comments than 9
th
and 10
th
grade students. During my
interviews with 11
th
and 12
th
grade students, I detected a certain amount of distrust or
alienation among some of those students which was not present in the 9
th
and 10
th
74
graders. For instance, a 12
th
grader said she felt betrayed because the promises that
had been made to her when she started NAI had not been kept. She admitted that “A
lot of us had bad attitudes…You hear negative criticism about the class of 2006, but
we work hard.” She also said that “They [administrators and teachers] turn their
back on us.” From my observations, this did not seem to be the case, but perhaps a
negative view of administrators was formed back when the students started NAI and
administration was in turmoil. The events when they started may have colored these
students’ perceptions until their graduation.
The data show that two aspects of NAI history, development of the mission
and a previous administrator, still are evident in program interaction today. The
mission as put forth in statements by Dr. Heath, the first program administrator,
drives the program more than written mission statements. The change in leadership
after the departure of Dr. Heath left a legacy of mistrust among students who started
at that time and left the program without a counseling component. The staff devotes
a proportion of their time to maintain a key element of the original vision by
providing help for students with family and other problems outside school. The
program history and mission provide a foundation for the school culture, which I
describe next.
NAI School Culture
In the area of culture, the biggest challenge for a program such as NAI is to
develop norms and values that will help students succeed in college, in other words a
75
college-going culture. As Ms. Watson said, “You’re not just teaching academics but
[also] how to be scholars. They don’t start that way [as scholars].” I present data on
NAI school culture among the students, faculty and administrators to show how
school culture affects student-teacher interaction.
Student Culture
NAI teachers comment on the special student culture at NAI. One teacher’s
comment was representative. She said when she walks into the NAI classroom,
“They’re all in a row looking at you and they’re absorbing and they’re ready. And
even if they’re sassy, you know they’re eager. They’re ready to go. And it’s the
same thing; 9
th
grade, 11
th
grade, 12
th
grade, they’ve got something extra where
they’re there to learn, even the ones that are low skill. They’ve been indoctrinated
by their peers, by their parents, by the whole culture at NAI, so they know what’s
going on. They know why they’re there, and that bad attitudes aren’t tolerated, and
ignorance isn’t something to be proud of.”
While NAI culture produces motivated, hardworking students, the workload
and time commitment required are big hurdles to overcome. Based on comments
from virtually every student interview, NAI students believe they themselves have an
extremely heavy workload. They feel they work very hard, although the workload is
much lighter than at a more privileged prep school. Only one student I interviewed
told me she was lazy. Almost every student said he or she had considered quitting
because of NAI’s time demands. A typical comment about the workload was, “[It’s]
76
overwhelming. [You] have to give up some work in other classes; [you] don’t have
time.” Their impression of how difficult their NAI workload is is a result of their
experience in their high school context, where they are most likely the ones with the
heaviest workload. They are not coming into NAI from a highly competitive
academic environment and don’t have a frame of reference for what a really heavy
course load looks like; there are few role models for NAI students. Therefore, NAI
has the difficult job of promoting an academic culture that seems like self-
deprivation to students.
Teachers consciously attend to the development of school culture among the
students. In faculty meetings, the subject of student scholarly culture came up
several times. I recorded the following comments. One teacher commented, “We
know we have to change the culture.” Ms. Watson replied, “It’s habits of mind.” A
teacher commented that 9
th
grade students have culture shock at NAI. In another
discussion I recorded comments about how students just get by instead of trying to
excel. This was attributed to low expectations in the home schools. Teachers
commented that NAI can raise expectations. At another meeting there was a
comment that the culture of NAI allows kids to trust. But more often than
discussions specifically about academic culture, teachers discuss student values and
behaviors.
The faculty and staff made comments that show they believe students should
concentrate on their studies and put academics ahead of other interests. As an
77
administrator said,” Those were the boys because they wanted to do the athletic
program. But we told them, you know if you do the athletics, it can interfere with
your grades. And that’s been the conflict all through the program because a lot of
these kids, they want to go for the athletics, or the cheerleaders, and this interferes
with our Saturday program. And so it’s kind of hard.” In a meeting, one teacher
commented that lacrosse was getting in the way of a student’s class work. In the
same meeting, a teacher expressed concern that the Foshay 9
th
graders were planning
to join sports teams in 10
th
grade. In another meeting, a teacher reported that two
students were doing poorly in class as a result of working at jobs. I observed NAI
teachers connecting work and extracurricular activities to poor grades. They wanted
students to value education above other activities.
Teachers often point to non-academic activities as a reason students do
poorly in class; however, students I interviewed did not all embrace this focus on
academics. Almost every student reported wanting to quit NAI at some point, most
often because the workload and time commitment meant they had to give up most
other activities. But the home schools promote extracurricular activities. For
example, in interviews, students said that their counselors and teachers in high
school tell them that they have to have a lot of extracurricular activities to get
accepted to college. In a class I observed at Manual Arts High, the students had just
had a big football rally and were too exited to settle down in class. The NAI
schedule discourages activities because Saturday classes take up students’ weekends.
78
One student said, “Getting used to Saturdays [was difficult]. Soccer is on Saturday
morning.” Students made quite a few similar comments about Saturday classes
reducing their weekend activities. At NAI, the focus is on academics, and
extracurricular activities are discouraged, so there is a conflict between the values
and priorities at NAI and those promoted within the high schools.
In addition to a difference in values, there are different academic expectations
at the home schools. I recorded numerous comments by teachers and students about
the low expectations at the home schools. The most egregious example was given in
the 10
th
grade focus group. According to the group, a substitute teacher at Manual
Arts told the students that they were stupid and would die. A 9
th
grade student said
people at the home school “think we’re uppity.” An NAI teacher said a student
asked him, “Why don’t we all score poorly [intentionally, on a state test] so the
school can get more money?” Students contrasted the low expectations at the home
schools with the high expectations of their NAI teachers, “They are always on us.
They want us to do better.” “In discussion, you have to think in depth and
demonstrate knowledge when talking.”
However, students did not always make positive comments about the high
NAI teacher expectations. For example, here are two negative comments: “I don’t
want to say that they don’t have a life, but…” Another student said, “We have good
teachers but they expect too much. If I don’t turn in my homework, he [my teacher]
stalks me at nutrition.” These comments highlight the challenge of bringing student
79
values in line with scholarly values. Some student comments imply that students
interpret teacher dedication as “not having a life”. Students also negatively interpret
teachers not giving up on them and demanding scholarly performance, such as the
comment about “stalking”. These comments also show that students are not familiar
with or accustomed to these teacher behaviors. It implies a contrast to teacher
behavior at the home schools. The difference between home school and NAI
expectations makes developing scholarly culture a challenge.
NAI succeeds in changing student culture despite the challenges of making
students adopt a new work ethic, new values, and higher expectations. I recorded
comments that showed the gradual acculturation to academics. Students reported
that the expectations were overwhelming at first, but they adjusted. For example,
about the workload: “It bugs you at first, but you get used to it.” A 9
th
grader said,
“It was overwhelming at first, but not now.” A 10
th
grader said she “adjusted to high
school and NAI in the 9
th
grade. In the 10
th
grade I got used to it.” A senior who did
not get accepted to USC said, “You’re so used to school that you just go [to college]
even though it’s not USC.” Students made some comments about other behavioral
changes: “It [NAI] makes you think about what you do so you don’t get in trouble.”
A 9
th
grader commented about classroom behavior and not talking back to teachers:
“You have to bite your tongue; you have to take it.” It seems that over time students
pick up scholarly culture even though they are not consciously aware of it and
sometimes resist it.
80
Adopting the culture at NAI can be rewarding even though students don’t
realize they are developing a new culture. From the student’s point of view, when it
comes to the academic and time demands of NAI, “You get used to it.” Or “You get
attached to it.” Students mention that they grow to like their NAI friends and the
curriculum and pacing of the classes. A student said, “Everybody gets along like
family.” Students in one focus group said they knew some students who quit NAI
and they regret it because of the slower classes in the home schools. “It’s above high
school class in level, so if you quit, you won’t fit in.” Although I have observed
comments from teachers and staff that one student or another dropped the program to
join a sport, or to work, or some other such activity, overall, the students who buckle
down and concentrate on their schoolwork predominate at NAI, so the college-going
mindset is instilled in spite of the obstacles to development of a new culture.
A factor that may be important to promoting a college-going culture is the
NAI after-school tutoring. I observed after-school tutoring in the NAI office and on
outdoor patios near the office on several occasions. Students arriving for tutoring
appeared cheerful, smiling and talking together. They didn’t show any reluctance to
come to tutoring after their regular classes. Tutoring sessions consisted of groups of
students sitting at long tables working together under the supervision of a USC
student. Some tutors interacted with the high school students more than other tutors.
On the whole, the students interacted with each other more than with the tutors.
Students had their math or English work out and talked together as they worked. I
81
also observed students eating on many occasions. The atmosphere was friendly, and
students seemed to enjoy being there. The NAI office appeared to be a welcoming
place for students to go. Sometimes the office provided snacks for students during
tutoring. I heard cheery hello’s to students from office staff, especially Ms. Gomez,
whose office door was closest to the front door. Teachers say that unfortunately,
students do not always use their tutoring time effectively. Teachers commented that
students should come to tutoring prepared with questions and problems to get help
with. I observed a few students doing this, but most of them seemed not to be
focused on a particular issue. Instead, they seemed to be doing their homework
together. Although the tutoring may not be perfect, it may encourage scholarly
culture by creating a positive atmosphere for studying.
Tutoring may also develop scholarly culture because the tutors may serve as
role models, particularly the tutors who were former NAI students. I noted the
serious, hardworking, conservative manner of the tutors. When I asked students who
they could count on for help when they had trouble with coursework, almost all of
them mentioned the tutors first. Although not all of the tutors are NAI alumni, the
alumni seem to be the college students NAI students can identify with. As it
happens, most of the math tutors are NAI alumni, and many of the English tutors are
not. I recorded that students made more comments about the helpfulness of the math
tutors than the English tutors. In addition, although both math and English teachers
also tutor students, the English teachers were mentioned more often as people
82
students turn to for help with coursework. Students talked more about English
teachers than English tutors, but talked more about math tutors than math teachers.
One student said, “Help with math is good… college student tutors relate more.”
Another student said, “Tutors can relate to you.” This student commented that tutors
were young and previously were NAI students. I interpret the greater quantity of
comments about math tutors as a greater rapport with the tutors who are NAI alumni.
These tutors are some of the few role models available to students.
When teachers take the extra time to tutor students, it can also foster
scholarly values and culture. All the teachers tutor students, some putting in a
substantial amount of time. One English teacher commented, “All the kids who got
D’s and F’s from Mr. Castle—I took them on for independent study. It was hugely
time consuming.” I observed Mr. Castle, the 11
th
grade English teacher, at afternoon
tutoring every week. Ms. Gomez told me he was sometimes in until 7:00 pm. In the
area of English, students mentioned teachers more often than USC student tutors as
being the people they turn to for help. Students commented on how much extra time
their teachers put into helping them outside class: “[He’s] dedicated, comes after
school.” Students made numerous comments about how much the teachers care and
how hard they work. Math teachers were mentioned less frequently as people to turn
to for help, but several students mentioned going to an NAI math teacher at their
home school for help at lunch time, even though they did not currently have that
teacher at NAI. Relating this to culture, it seems that when the teachers value
83
students’ learning enough to spend their own free time helping students, students
pick up the value.
Sometimes teachers take on a mentor or role-model status. One of the more
telling incidents was when an NAI student chaired an AP History study group at his
home school. Teachers reported that he prepared an agenda, syllabus, blackboard
postings, and handouts just like his NAI English teacher routinely did. In an
interview, this student told me that he looks up to his English teacher like a brother.
He said his English teacher is “dedicated…works with you, cares, wants to make a
difference, comes after school [to tutor]… He has affected me as a tutor.” Students
notice the dedication of their teachers. More than that, sometimes they adopt
scholarly values such as dedication by following the teacher’s example as a role
model.
Simply the time required to be an NAI student may inculcate NAI culture.
Students are together at NAI from 7
th
grade through 12
th
grade. Dr. Fitch, a former
administrator, observed “the continuity over time. Because if they really do get to
start in 7
th
grade which is where it’s a real must that they start, how many of these
programs get that long exposure to the same kids, the same family?” NAI students
attend many more hours of school than their home school counterparts. First, there
are weekday classes before regular school, from 7:30 to 9:00 in the morning. Then,
there is after-school tutoring once a week, or more often for some students. Next,
students are together in class on Saturday mornings from 9:00 to 12:00 as well.
84
Finally, there are intersession classes during home school vacations. Spending so
much time together with the same companions for six years may be a key factor in
developing scholars.
In sum, after the 9
th
grade, students have substantially adopted NAI’s
scholarly culture. As a new 10
th
grade teacher in his first year in the NAI said, “It’s
what I would have expected school to be thirty years ago. Kids come in; they’re
serious about what they’re doing. It’s markedly different from anything I’ve seen
anywhere else in the seriousness with which the kids take their studies. And
specifically where that shows itself is when I give homework assignments,
sometimes every kid does homework. When I give homework assignments to
Manual Arts students, [it’s] often fifty percent, and that’s with good classes, with
kids I know. Also with attendance, they don’t miss.” As this comment shows, by
10
th
grade, NAI students have picked up the culture and have become scholars.
Faculty Culture
The first thing I noticed when observing teachers was their dedication and
passion. “We’re very child-centered. We’re always going to do everything for our
students.” “I love it. I love the students…” “I believe in this program with every
fiber of my being…You are on the front line. You are hands on making a difference.
And I feel that so much here, that you see the product of your effort right in front of
you every day.” “You feel like you have an impact.” “You have to buy into the
program.” “I love being here…We really believe in the program.” “I took them on
85
as independent study students so that they could make up the D’s and F’s, so that
they could go on to college…so I pretty much gave up all of my lunches for the
semester and worked with them one on one.” In initial interviews with virtually
every teacher, I recorded comments such as these. But this enthusiasm would
quickly evaporate if it weren’t for a cohesive faculty culture.
The NAI has a very collaborative and collegial faculty culture in which
teachers are friendly and open with each other. In an interview, Ms. Watson, the
NAI director, explained her philosophy about teachers: “… Teachers have always
believed their role is as a single teacher, not as a unit of teachers. And so getting
them to think differently--it’s a different mindset. And so [I use] the teamwork
model, cooperation… If you’re going to have goals of the school, everybody has to
have the same goal. You have to know the goal and work towards that goal in a unit,
in a way that works. You may have a great classroom, but if your neighbors don’t,
then that’s your fault too. Because you’re not sharing information, you’re not
allowing that continuity of practice, best practices.” This philosophy is evident at the
friendly faculty meetings. I observed that in meetings the teachers talk more than the
administrators do. I also observed teacher interaction in a different context, when I
went to Foshay to meet Ms. Medina. I ran into Mr. North instead, and he didn’t
hesitate to make a call on his cell phone to locate Ms. Medina. Knowing colleagues’
cell numbers and feeling free to call them at any time implies a degree of closeness.
Closeness and collaboration appear to be a hallmark of NAI faculty culture.
86
A key way that the collaborative and close faculty culture is exhibited is
through a practice called vertical teaming. In vertical teaming, all the math teachers
work as a group, and all the English teachers work together as a second group. The
groups develop the curricula for each grade level collaboratively so that each grade
provides the appropriate lessons to prepare students for the next. I infer this to be a
centerpiece of NAI teaching because of the great number of positive comments both
teachers and administrators made about it. An administrator said, “I think the vertical
teaming really makes it unique, in the sense that the teachers communicate amongst
one another. I think you can sort of look at what should a college preparatory
curriculum look like and that’s what they’re trying to do, and I think that’s very
helpful.”
One long-time teacher describes how vertical teaming started. “It started
three years ago, or maybe four years ago. And we brought in this person from the
College Board to kind of talk about vertical teaming. And we did a three-day
workshop with the English department, actually and the math department I think, for
vertical teaming. And what that did is that rolled into sort of a monthly meeting that
we would have or bimonthly. We had a series of meetings, throughout the school
year to kind of work out curriculum.” Every teacher commented positively about
vertical teaming. “This is unique for someone who’s taught at NAI for as long as I
have, which is now nine years, to sit down and specifically not only talk about NAI
but talk about NAI math… And we I think have a really strong team… We’ve all
87
been here a while, we know a lot of the kids. That opportunity is so unique, to be
able to talk as nine, ten eleven, and twelfth grade teachers.” This collaborative
process directly impacts classroom instruction by fine-tuning the curriculum.
I observed two vertical teaming meetings for both English and math. The
meetings covered a variety of issues, from specific teaching points to the overall
scope of each course and how one grade level leads into the next. For example, in
one English vertical teaming meeting, teachers discussed the need to work on
grammar as a key theme in all English classes. In the second vertical teaming
meeting several months later, the same teachers worked out the specifics of which
grammatical points would be covered at each grade level. The discussion was
informal and proceeded as a team process, with all the teachers contributing and no
apparent leader. The math vertical teaming meetings had a similar team process, but
unlike the English team, the math group appeared to have a chairperson. A key
theme of the math meetings I observed was a discussion of how to make the classes
flow from one year to another. Math teachers also discussed the classroom validity
and use of various standardized tests such as the CAT 6 and STAR, and the
relationship of the test results to student grades.
I observed a continuity and progression of content in both English and math
groups from the first vertical teaming meeting to the second. The English group had
previously produced a document outlining the curriculum for each grade. The math
group is still working on theirs. The documents are important because, as Ms.
88
Brooks said, “I think it helps anytime we bring someone new on board; they know
what to expect. Because a lot of times someone [comes] in not understanding how
we operate, but to give them a document to indicate this is sort of what we’re aiming
for really has been helpful.” The vertical teaming meetings were observed to be very
productive, with all teachers participating in a positive way. I did not observe
yawning, doodling, or silent teachers. This positive working relationship among
teachers is illustrative of NAI faculty culture.
Administrative Culture
From comments I recorded, it seems that NAI administration has been
instrumental in turning the program around and in developing the organizational
culture as a whole. The NAI administrators seem to treat the teachers as equals,
rather than as subordinates. Collaboration is important. As one administrator said,
“I think that’s what makes this program work. We have the collaboration between
the staff and teachers and students and the parents. All of that working together
really makes a difference.”
I observed an organizational culture that emphasizes collaboration not only
among teachers but among teachers and administrators. For example, as I mentioned
earlier, teachers speak more in faculty meetings than administrators do. The two
retreats during the school year were both held at Ms. Watson’s house. I observed
Ms. Watson cook breakfast for the faculty both times. I interpret this as an
indication of closeness and openness between faculty and administration. Teachers
89
have a say in hiring decisions as well. According to Ms. Watson, the NAI director,
“If it were a math teacher…Math teachers from our program will interview the math
teacher for the position. The English teachers will help interview the English teacher
for the position. Because, I said, you all end up working together, for one. They
have to have the same kind of mindset.” I observed a prospective teacher come to
the second retreat and introduce herself. She stayed and interacted socially with the
faculty. This was in preparation for the hiring process, where teachers would give
their input about who to hire. On the whole, teachers seem to have a lot of control at
NAI and I did not observe any indication of an adversarial relationship between
teachers and administrators.
When it comes to administration, I recorded several comments that the
administration is “motherly”. There are three administrators and all are female. I
recorded teacher comments such as, “It seems that the culture of the administration is
to take a parental role with students to some extent.” “Our administrative coordinator
[Ms. Gomez]--She is this mother hen, mother earth figure for the parents.” “Because
it’s almost like three mother figures who are not afraid to shake that finger in their
[students’] face and tug them by the back of their collar, like your mother or your
grandmother would behavior-wise.” This and other teacher comments express
appreciation for the administration’s strong student discipline.
The administration is also very engaged with the teachers in their classrooms.
Ms. Watson, the NAI director, said, “I try to at least see all the teachers at least twice
90
a week, either by poking my head in the classroom or sitting in the class.” I
imagined that the teachers might not be happy with this, but in interviews their
comments were very positive: One teacher said, “I think Kim does a wonderful job.
You know, she’s really involved.” Another NAI teacher summed up what most
teachers said, “In terms of overall school culture, I don’t have the backup [at my
home school] I have here. Here, I’ve got three or four people that I can say, I need
this adult to also talk to you. And it’s truly at Foshay, no one ever comes into my
room to see what I’m doing. Just this morning here at NAI, [Ms. Watson] came and
she was just in the building. She just came and sat for the last ten minutes of class
and she does it all the time. She comes to just see what’s going on and I love it. I
love that she’s there to validate what amazing kids we have and what amazing
teachers we have. She’s not there to check up on someone or reprimand someone,
make sure you’re teaching to the standards, because she knows that we are. She is
there to participate in the core of our program. And she knows. If you asked her
what kind of teacher I am, what kind of style I have, what kind of rapport I have with
my students, where my commitment is, she could tell you in detail. If you asked the
principal or the head of my department at my home school, they wouldn’t have a
clue.” The NAI administrators have a very hands-on culture, and administrative
participation is welcomed by the teachers.
The administrators also take time to interact with students. In addition to
their counseling and class visiting activities discussed earlier, they make an effort to
91
meet students as they board the buses after NAI class every morning. Each time I
observed the boarding of the buses, there was at least one administrator there, saying
hello to the students and talking to them. I asked Ms. Gomez, the office manager,
why she does it. “That’s the time that we get to see them. Like for example, we’re
not in the classroom with these kids, you know. And like in order for us to get to
know them better, and to be able to interact with them, that’s one opportunity to do
it. And that’s my chance to be able to talk to them and give them things that they
might need.” Ms. Gomez says if a student is having trouble, “I speak to them… If I
come across them at the buses sometimes I say, ‘Hey, what’s going on? Is
something going on at home? Why aren’t you working so hard?’ You know, ‘What
could we do to help you?’ That kind of thing. So I do probe. I try to see what it is
that we can do.” Of the three administrators, Ms. Gomez talked the most about
interacting with the students, not only at the buses but whenever she had the
opportunity. “Well, I think what I try to do is I make myself available and open and
approachable; I think that’s a very important key, especially with kids. You know
we’re dealing with a very special population. There are problems at home. So in
order to try to find out and help them in any kind of way, you know you have to be
approachable. So I try to get to know the students as much as possible. It’s kind of
hard because there is quite a number of them, but I do try…I try to promote that they
be positive and that they try to work hard and… I ask them questions about how they
are doing, and if they have problems try to help them find some kind of a solution. I
92
observed that the administrators not only interact collaboratively with the teachers,
but also interact with the students as individuals.
NAI Partnerships
Sociocultural theory places great importance on the role of social interaction
in learning. It generally focuses on student-teacher interaction, but I observed other
influences that were very powerful. Beyond the social interaction between student
and teacher, there are interactions within the NAI organization that affect student
learning. The program was designed to take advantage of social connections or
partnerships to enhance learning outcomes. In this section, I will look at the roles
that partnerships between NAI and family, home schools, and USC play in student
learning.
Partnership with families
I will start with the very positive impact of NAI’s partnership with families.
Through this partnership, parents become a strong motivating force for students to
stay in the program and work hard. The partnership takes place through parent
participation in an NAI program especially designed for them called the Family
Development Institute [FDI]. According to the NAI website (Neighborhood
Academic Initiative n.d.), the FDI includes seminars six Saturday mornings a
semester where parents study a variety of subjects to improve their parenting skills
and educational awareness. Examples of seminar topics include child development,
effective communication, and creating a positive learning environment. According
93
to the website, parents can give input on what topics will be offered, and they are
required to attend 80% of the Saturday seminars. A teacher commented that students
are harder working due to the family involvement required: “The families are so
invested in it [NAI].” Students commented that NAI “talks to your parents, gives
them classes.” “Parents like it—they learn how to save lives, start your own
business, and other things.” “Parents feel like they’re learning too.” The FDI also
includes a parent leadership board with members elected by the parents. The board
meets twice a month to discuss topics such as fund raisers and home school issues.
In these ways, NAI partners with parents to help students achieve in school.
I interviewed students about the impact their parents had on their education at
NAI. First and most importantly, based on student interviews parents are responsible
for insisting that students remain in NAI even when they want to quit. As I
mentioned previously, almost every student wanted to quit NAI at some point. Of
these students, almost all cited their parents’ influence as the reason that they didn’t
quit. “My parents pushed me to stay.” “Mom made me stay.” “Parents want us
here.” As one student put it, “NAI kids are here because of their parents.” In this
way, I observed that parents play a key role in student retention.
The FDI appears to have an impact on parental behavior with respect to their
children’s schooling. Ninth grade students in particular commented on their parents’
active participation in their education. I infer the predominance of these comments
among 9
th
graders compared to higher graders as an indication of a change in parent
94
behavior from 8
th
to 9
th
grades. “[My] parents are proud; they bought me new
shoes.” “Parents help. They take you around to get books.” “My mom said, ‘Do
what they ask; just follow the teachers’ directions.’” According to 9
th
and 10
th
grade
student interviews, parents also nag about doing homework and about grades and test
scores. I found that more than other grades, the 9
th
grade students made negative
comments about the active role their parents were taking in their education. “Parents
take it out on us.” “One student got an essay off the internet and my parents yelled at
me about it.” The ninth graders complained that their parents were following not
only their own test scores but the high school’s scores as a whole. “Mom yelled [at
me] because Manual Arts got higher scores this time.” It appeared from these
students’ comments that parents were paying attention to what was going on not only
at NAI but in high school.
The 11
th
and 12
th
grade students made fewer comments about parents with
respect to homework and grades. They did comment that parents did not allow them
to quit NAI, and that their parents were proud of them. When a student complained
to his parents that NAI got in the way of his sports activity, “My dad said, ‘What’s
going to take you farther, soccer or medicine?’” The same student said, “Parents are
most important. My mom—even though we had conflicts, she has been there for
me.” An 11
th
grade student said, “They [parents] get really mad that we don’t do
homework.” Although the students might complain about it, this discipline on the
part of parents is likely an important factor in student work habits and motivation.
95
Partnerships with home schools
NAI’s partnerships with the home schools are not entirely smooth. The
biggest problem seems to be with the principals. Dr. Fitch, who was NAI director in
2000, said, “Oh, it’s been dreadful. And of course that was part of what I was
coming in on at 2000, because that’s when Mr. O’Hare left Foshay. And so [the new
principal] was there, and [the Manual Arts principal] was new, too at Manual Arts at
the time. So I had a new principal at each school.” There is still turnover in the
school principals, making it harder to maintain a good social relationship with the
schools. For example, during my study, a new principal came on at Manual Arts in
September. I noticed that Ms. Watson took special time to meet the new Manual
principal and show him around the NAI program in order to get his buy-in. As a
current NAI administrator said, “There’s been a lot of changes at the schools…When
you have so much change, and the schools are constantly being bombarded by
change, and they don’t do well in change either.” When the principals change, new
relationships have to be built.
Teachers told me that a few years previously, the current Foshay principal
had started. The previous Foshay principal had been a big supporter of NAI, but the
current principal is not as considerate of NAI needs. The current principal is
struggling to manage the school, and is making decisions that impact NAI. One
decision that has had a big impact on NAI is Foshay’s new shortened day for teacher
training every Tuesday to improve student test scores. One teacher commented on
96
how he was affected by the Foshay principal’s new Tuesday class schedule. “I get
really frustrated because I feel a sense of panic or that I won’t be able to cover what I
need, what I planned for the week. And certainly where I plan to be by the middle of
the semester because we’ve had a lot of these minimum days, and Foshay has
the…shortened day, as they call it, which lets [NAI] out…at 8:40, 8:45 every
Tuesday.” This teacher calculated that he loses at least 20 instructional minutes a
week due to home school scheduling issues. In the same way, this principal’s
scheduling decision impacted all the NAI classes through a reduction of class time.
The structural interface between the NAI program and the home schools
produces disincentives for NAI teachers. I recorded many comments about how the
NAI teachers have to “travel” at their home schools, creating a hardship for them.
Traveling means that a teacher does not have his or her own classroom, but must
change classrooms from period to period. Due to overcrowding at the home schools,
there are always some teachers who have to travel. This entails hauling teaching
supplies and AV equipment from room to room, and is the biggest drawback of
being an NAI teacher. Here is a sampling of representative comments about
traveling: “One of the big downfalls actually at NAI [is] you have to travel when
you get back to your home school. But you also get an extra conference period at
NAI. So that offsets it.” “Some teachers really don’t like traveling. I complain
about it but I can certainly live with it. Some people said they didn’t want it [the
NAI job] because of the traveling.” “You have to put up with certain aspects of the
97
program: the traveling, the walking, the walking in the rain; not having a place to
park; getting back to school late every day. … If you can figure out how to solve all
those issues, you’ll be happy. I think [Mr. Penn], this is his first year. I’m sure he’s
fine. He seems happy. My previous three partners were coming in in the morning
like (looks sad). They loved the idea of the program, they enjoyed the kids, but the
situation wasn’t working out for them. They missed having their own classroom.
We don’t have… we never will have our own classroom. There’s pros and cons to
that.” Even though traveling is a hardship, the NAI teachers accept it as a part of
their job: “You know it would be nice if I didn’t have to travel, and you probably
heard that before. But realistically, that can’t happen. So I just, you know, make the
best of it.” Under the circumstances, it is impressive that several NAI teachers have
stayed with the program for eight or nine years. Although teachers accept traveling
as part of the NAI job, this hardship is a result of the principals’ decisions to assign
NAI teachers to travel.
On the positive side, because half of the NAI teachers also teach at Foshay,
and half teach at Manual Arts, there are more chances for teachers and students to
interact, not only at NAI, but also on the home school campuses. I noted that
students approach their NAI teachers for help on their home school campuses as well
as at tutoring and before NAI morning classes. Some NAI teachers have NAI
students in other classes as well as NAI classes. The extra opportunities for teacher-
98
student interaction can result in additional instructional time, but I observed another
result. Teachers know their students very well.
In the video playback sessions using stimulated recall, with every teacher the
most outstanding feature of their discourse was their comments about students. They
did not just comment about student skills. Teachers discussed students’ parents,
siblings, past courses, hobbies, and all manner of personal details. For example,
while watching the video of her lesson, an English teacher commented on a student,
“She lost a friend to gang violence last year…It really affected her…She was out a
couple of days…She’s in my creative writing class [at Foshay] so I feel like I’ve
gotten to know her.” Pointing out a student in his class video, a math teacher said,
“His brother is at MIT. He’s a sophomore at MIT. He was in the USC program and
he went above and beyond the USC program and got a full scholarship to MIT.” An
English teacher discussed the difference between teaching students from his home
school and the other school: “I’m just beginning to get to know the kids really well,
between the Manual kids and the Foshay kids because I don’t know the Foshay kids
that well…I really have a much firmer grasp of the personalities and abilities of the
Manual kids because I see them more. Generally the better I get along with the kids,
the better I feel I teach.” Another teacher pointed out, “This one girl back here is the
valedictorian of her whole high school.” Teaching at the home schools also has the
advantage of access to parent conferences: “He really struggles with both academic
speaking and writing…I just met with his mom last night at parent conference and
99
emphasized the importance of reading.” Teachers exhibited a deep knowledge of
their students’ lives outside the classroom. This knowledge base is a result of the
home school-NAI partnership because the same teachers teach in both places and
thus have more time to interact with and get to know their students.
Next, I look at the partnership with respect to NAI students. While NAI staff
expressed some concern about students’ treatment at the home schools, students
generally had positive comments. A representative staff comment is, “I think that
even the students at the home schools see the difference in the NAI students. I’ve
heard some little things here and there that sometimes they’re shunned from the rest
of the population at the home school, because quote unquote, you know they’re
“better” or they’re the “college going kids” kind of a thing, you know? So they are
the special group.” Because Foshay is a small school, NAI students are more visible
there. Some representative comments made by Foshay students are, “People think
we’re smart.” “They expect us to be the top.” At Manual Arts, a very large school,
students also reported positively on their treatment as NAI students. “Kids and
teachers at Manual take you seriously.” “The old principal knew us. People look at
us with respect. Security respects us. Teachers expect more from us. They put you
in AP classes.” One student commented about middle school. She said her teachers
and principal in middle school were fond of the program. “They gave NAI students
special treatment in middle school. We had a special nutrition, and everyone knew
who NAI students were.” Kids are placed into more advanced classes at the home
100
school because they are NAI students. Students reported being placed in AP
chemistry and AP composition because of their NAI status. Only one student
commented about negative attitudes, “They think we uppity.” With respect to the
NAI-home school partnership, on the whole, students report having a positive
experience at their home schools.
NAI has a partnership with two high schools, Foshay and Manual Arts. I
looked at the data for evidence of social ramifications of combining students from
two different high schools. While NAI teachers expressed some concern about
students getting along, generally, student comments were neutral on this point.
Students made some comments that their friends mainly come from the same home
school. Students say they see each other more if they come from the same school
and that’s why they have more same-school friends. I did not record any negative
comments by students about those from the other school; neither did I record any
comments by students that would indicate competitiveness between NAI students
from each school. A Manual Arts student said, “We’re mixed with Foshay and
became like a family. We stick together. We depend on each other for math and
English.” I asked teachers if there was any difference between students from each
school, and most of the responses were that there is not much difference. Teachers
said they thought perhaps students from one school considered themselves better
than those from the other, but in interviews, students didn’t mention this. Instead,
there were several comments about NAI students being like family. However,
101
students and teachers did mention comparisons of the test scores for each school, and
as I mentioned earlier, 9
th
grade students told me that their parents were upset when
the “other” school had higher test results. Several 9
th
grade students complained that
their parents put the responsibility onto them to bring up the school test scores.
Overall, the combination of students from two schools seems to have a neutral result.
The final set of data about NAI/home school partnerships shows the adoption
of NAI ideas at the home schools. NAI has influenced the home schools in various
ways. Foshay was influenced most, probably because it is a smaller school, but
especially because the previous principal, Mr. O’Hare, was enthusiastic about NAI.
Ms. Brooks said, “It’s all in the buy-in with the principals.” She elaborated on the
effect NAI has had on Foshay, “For Foshay in particular, they’ve adapted a lot of
their programs based on what we were doing over here. When Dr. Heath [the first
NAI director] and their principal, Mr. O’Hare, was there, Mr. O’Hare saw the
advantage of having this type of program. So he instituted a lot of things that we
adapted here over at the school…When we first initiated NAI 15 years ago, their
school was parallel. They have a middle school that they set up very similar to the
actual NAI academy.” Ms. Middleton commented on a teacher practice that
transferred from NAI to Foshay, “That’s a very NAI… That was from way back.
You line the kids up outside the door. Make sure everybody’s shirts are tucked in,
make sure that they’re looking good and that they’re quiet. Because when they come
in your room, you want… I mean in the old Dr. Heath days it was like very very
102
strict. Very hard core, you know like, good morning, eye contact, and… But what’s
interesting is that that followed over to Foshay. And you’ll notice at Foshay a lot of
teachers have their kids line up outside the door before they come in.” NAI has thus
influenced practices at Foshay in a variety of ways.
Manual Arts high school appears to have been influenced less by NAI.
According to Ms. Brooks, “They have a new principal, and then they have other
resources: MESA is over there, they have EOPC. So they have other programs that
are servicing their campus.” She continued, “At Manual I think it’s a little bit
different. Our students tend to be a whole lot ahead of a lot of students over there as
far as academics are concerned. I know that you know our kids pass the exit exams
with no trouble. I was just recently told that now the principal there wants to have
Saturday academy for kids who are not performing, not passing the exit exam.” The
Manual Arts high principal had just started in September and had visited NAI.
Already he is reported to be thinking of starting a Saturday academy. Perhaps there
will be more transfer of ideas from NAI to Manual under the new leadership.
Overall, although partnerships with the home schools have some weaknesses,
they do have positive aspects as well. Working with principals and their turnover is
difficult, as is teachers having to travel. On the other hand, NAI students report
having a positive experience at their home schools, and ideas from NAI do transfer
to the home schools.
103
Partnership with USC
The last partnership to examine is with USC. Administrators, teachers and
students comment that having classes on campus is extremely important to the
learning experience.
A previous administrator, Dr. Fitch, commented, “From the time they get
involved in the program, it isn’t long until they really do have a second sense of we
belong to that university. We’re Trojans, we’re part of it; we’re there already and we
see what college is like and we walk on the campus and we sit in their classrooms
and we know we can handle it. There’s a sense of confidence by being, you know,
here, and so close to it.” A current administrator, Ms. Gomez, said, “I think it has a
really good, very large impact, very positive impact, and one of the things is it’s a
daily impact. Because they’re on this campus and they see the students, so…you
know, the students that are on campus is like the mirror. And so when they see the
students on campus, the football players, all of these athletes, faculty, staff, then they
see like, “This is where I belong.” So it’s like the university has opened their arms to
these kids, and if they come here, you belong here. So it’s a big impact.”
Administrators tended to stress students’ sense of belonging.
Attending classes on the USC campus has a powerful effect on college-going
culture. Teachers commented that being at USC gives students a sense of being
more mature and belonging to a university. “We’re on the USC campus. They’re
given a lot more independence here. But with that independence, they know how
104
they’re supposed to behave.” One faculty member summed up what most of the
teachers said: “I mean obviously, the whole point is to expose students to the college
campus. That’s why we’re here. That’s such a wonderful aspect of the program.
They’re just in a completely different mindset when they’re here…If you took them
off [the USC] campus, what exposure to USC would they have? I mean that’s a key
ingredient in the program: Look, this is what college is like. Here is where you’re
going to be sitting one day. You’re going to be in these classes. You’re going to see
students. They see students every day walking the hallways out on campus. Former
students of mine walk by. And they’re going to their 8:00 class or they’re going to
their 9:00 class with their big USC T-shirts on. When would they ever be exposed to
that if they were not physically here? And they get so comfortable with campus life
that it removes that big mystery of what college is actually like.”
Students agreed that being on the USC campus was important. “You get to
know campus. You can check out books at the library; you can play on the field.
You have access to come here. I respect school a lot; they [USC] respect us by
offering support. In 10
th
grade, we took art classes in [USC’s] art building.” One
student’s comments sum up what most students said: “Coming to USC is wonderful.
You know what it’s like. You have to get up on time, and be responsible. It’s up to
us—there are no bells. It gets us familiar with campus. You’re not afraid to ask
people if you’re lost. I’ve been here five or six years and know the whole campus.”
105
Studying on campus appears to give students feelings of confidence and
empowerment.
As part of the USC/NAI partnership, USC promises to provide full
scholarships to all NAI students who meet the admission qualifications. Students
often commented on the scholarships. “There’s a scholarship of $40,000 to go to
USC. I look forward to that; it’s inspiring.” “We want the scholarship. It makes
you stay.” However, students were not always clear on the details of the USC
scholarship. I recorded comments such as, “Is it guaranteed?” “How many students
get it?” “Can you use it elsewhere?” “We were surprised that a lot of students who
had good grades didn’t get scholarships.” Even though the details were sometimes
unclear, the scholarship seems to be a source of motivation for many students.
To sum up the social aspects of partnerships, I found the partnership with
parents appears to be a key factor in student retention. Parents insist students stay in
the program and do their homework. The partnership with home schools has
challenges because of turnover in principals which ultimately affects instructional
time at NAI. NAI ideas do transfer to the schools, however, and NAI students
appear to be treated fairly at their schools. The partnership with USC is very
productive in motivating and empowering students to go to college.
Summary
In this chapter I have organized the data into three broad areas: historical,
cultural, and social impacts on learning. The historical data show hat the program is
106
saying true to its original conception, even though it bears some scars from past
administrative problems. The data on culture show a strong and distinct student
college-going culture as well as supportive faculty and administrative cultures. With
respect to partnerships, parent partnerships are extremely important to student
retention and motivation, while partnerships with home schools are somewhat weak.
The partnership with USC is NAI’s reason for existence. All these pieces together
form the NAI, and exemplary pre-college program.
In Chapter 5, I will discuss the significance of the data and make some
recommendations and concluding remarks.
107
Chapter 5: Analysis of the Data
Programs such as the Educational Opportunity Program strive to help
academically talented yet low socioeconomic and minority students gain college
entry. However, average students at educational risk because of their minority or
low socioeconomic status have college dreams too. Often these less promising
students do not have the opportunity to enter a college preparatory track in high
school. The University of Southern California Neighborhood Academic Initiative
strives to reach these average students and give them the same chances that the
students with higher grades have.
During the 2005-6 school year, I studied NAI, focusing on how the program,
and especially its teachers, helped students succeed academically. I interviewed
students, teachers, staff, and parents. I also observed classes, faculty meetings parent
meetings, tutoring, and school activities. Through this process, I attempted to distill
the aspects of NAI that contribute to student academic success and development of
college readiness. These aspects support teachers in helping students struggling with
course work.
At its most basic level, the mission of NAI is to address the problem,
common to many universities, of low representation of poor minority students in
higher education. The main goals of NAI are to prepare students for college and to
help them enter college by providing academically rigorous classes and student
support. It is useful to briefly review NAI’s recent record of accomplishment for
student college going. According to an NAI graduate survey (Appendix E), from the
108
program inception in 1997 through 2004, a total of 328 students graduated from the
program, and 314 went on to higher education, a rate of 96%. USC gives a full
scholarship to all NAI students accepted to the university. Between 1997 and 2004,
113 students, or 34%, received the scholarship. Details about NAI student
enrollment in other colleges and universities are in Appendix A. NAI is a successful
pre-college program as shown by these statistics, but educators and policymakers
still seek to understand what components contribute to its success. Specifically, how
do teachers help students learn the necessary skills to go to college? Using NAI as a
case of a college preparatory program for low SES minority students, the goal of this
ethnographic case study was to describe how teachers interact with students to
produce successful learning outcomes.
In order to understand how NAI prepares students for college, I set out to
examine teacher-student interaction in NAI. I focused on how teachers help students
who are having trouble with coursework. I found that it is not only teacher-student
interaction that makes the program successful, but also this interaction placed within
the entire social context of NAI. In line with sociocultural theory, the social,
historical, and cultural context of NAI had a profound influence on interaction and
learning. Teachers connected with students inside a comprehensive social cocoon
where students could develop their academic skills and ultimately emerge as
scholars. In this chapter, I briefly review the theoretical literature that drove the
study, summarize and analyze the research data in light of the literature, and make
recommendations.
109
Theoretical Foundation
The theoretical foundation for this study is sociocultural theory, which says
that learning is a social, interactive process influenced by the history, culture, and
social setting of the participants (Vygotsky 1978). Further, sociocultural theory is
constructivist, meaning that learning actually constructs or changes a person’s
consciousness (Leont’ev 1981). I will review this theory and illustrate it with
examples from my observations at NAI.
Sociocultural theory posits that knowledge is socially constructed. This
means that everything people know is a product of their background and experience,
particularly the social interactions they have had. People’s mental landscape is a
product of experience (Leont’ev 1981). As a result, students and teachers may have
very different pictures of the school setting and the learning process because they
may come from different social and cultural backgrounds.
To give an example from the data, many students at NAI felt that they were
working incredibly hard, because neither they nor any student they knew at their
high schools had ever worked so hard. In their background, they had no experience
with a college preparatory workload. In contrast, NAI teachers demanded ever more
effort from students, knowing how competitive the college environment was and
how heavy the college workload was. Teachers could remember their own college
experience, and knew that other students at elite schools were doing more
schoolwork than NAI students were. However, NAI students were not able to
110
comprehend this fully because it was not in their life experience unless they knew a
college student.
Consequently, they sometimes rebelled or felt overwhelmed by their NAI
coursework. As one student simply stated, “We’re kids; we should have a life.”
Lareau (2003) points out that the idea that kids should have free time just to play is a
hallmark of lower socioeconomic classes. Middle and upper middle class parents
instead believe that a child’s should spend time in cultivation of talents and academic
skills. Therefore, the college preparatory curriculum is a challenge to students’
fundamental class value systems as well as their intellects.
Au (1998) states that teaching students with diverse backgrounds can present
challenges since standard methods of instruction may not meet student needs. In a
diverse inner-city setting (like NAI), Au emphasizes that factors such as home
language, instructional methods and materials, classroom management, and
interaction with students can affect student learning. Sometimes it is necessary to
adjust standard methods to meet needs of specific students. NAI faces a special
challenge in this respect because if students are to go on to college and succeed, they
have to learn to manage with mainstream, standardized educational structures like
lecture classes. This means that while NAI teachers can adjust their methods to meet
NAI student needs, when these students go to college, no such adjustments will
occur. NAI starts imparting what the program terms “scholarly culture” as soon as
students begin in the 7
th
grade. As mentioned in Chapter 4, Ms. Watson said,
“You’re not just teaching academics but how to be scholars. They don’t start that
111
way.” While adjusting to meet diverse student needs, this long-term acculturation
process helps students from all backgrounds learn to succeed with the standardized
teaching methods they will find in colleges.
Another element of sociocultural theory relates to the activity setting, such as
the classroom environment. The activity setting has an impact on student learning
because learning connects to and depends on the social context or situation students
are in (Rueda & Dembo, 1995). That is the theoretical support for holding classes on
the USC campus rather than at students’ high schools. Almost everyone I
interviewed agreed that holding classes at USC is an extremely important aspect of
NAI. Students learn to be scholars by attending classes in the context of a college
setting.
I have mentioned how social and cultural background impact learning and
how the classroom environment affects learning. The theory also predicts that the
social relationship of teacher and student affects learning. Something that was clear
in every NAI classroom was that teachers paid attention to students and their
learning needs individually. NAI teachers also knew students as individuals. For
example, when teachers talked about students in faculty meetings and in discussion
during the playback of their lessons, they mentioned details about students’ siblings,
parents, hobbies, and activities. I often heard teachers comment about a student’s
older siblings who were in college or who were NAI graduates. The teachers’ depth
of knowledge about individual students showed a close student-teacher relationship.
112
Inside the teacher-student relationship, the teaching moment occurs in what
Vygotsky (1987) calls the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). The main idea of
the ZPD is that learning occurs when a student does not understand something and
the teacher interacts with the student to nudge the student into understanding. It is a
helping or problem-solving moment, more similar to tutoring than to standing in
front of the class lecturing. It involves teacher attention to where the student’s
understanding currently is, where it needs to be, and what to do to move that student
forward gradually.
Most NAI teachers commented on the importance of attending to student
needs by helping them individually. As a testament to the value they placed on this,
many teachers spent extra hours tutoring students individually outside class, either
after school or during vacations. It follows that even more than classroom
instruction, tutoring by both teachers and USC student tutors makes use of the ZPD.
When NAI students meet with a tutor, there is a much greater opportunity for
individual instruction than in the classroom. Ideally, this instruction will more
closely address students’ level and needs. Vygotsky’s ZPD highlights the dyadic
nature of the learning process. Instead of teacher to class, the learning relationship is
teacher to individual student.
So far, I have located the theoretical basis of my study within the framework
of sociocultural theory. The specific relevant aspects of the theory are historical,
social, and cultural aspects of the school context, classroom setting, and relationship
of teacher to student.
113
Review of Methodology
Even though NAI selects 7
th
grade students with average grades to enter the
program, a high percentage of students who finish the NAI program go on to college,
at either USC or other schools (Appendix E). From the inception of the program, of
328 students who graduated, 257 students went on to four-year colleges, of whom
113 were accepted to USC. Fifty-seven additional students went on to community
colleges or vocational schools. Because of this track record, I selected NAI as an
exemplary case of a college preparation program for inner city, low SES minority
students. I employed the qualitative method of ethnographic case study to describe
what happens at NAI, with the goal of finding key factors in the program’s success.
Ethnography was a suitable methodology for this purpose because the method
allowed me to focus on and analyze elements of individual and program culture
(Creswell 1998) to describe how these interacted to produce successful student
outcomes.
The participants in the study included all three NAI administrators, plus one
senior USC administrator who supervises NAI. I also included a former NAI
administrator. Seven of the eight NAI teachers participated in the study, as well as
six parents. I included students from grades 9-12 as participants, with a total of six
9
th
graders, three 10
th
graders, four 11
th
graders, and two 12
th
graders. An NAI
graduate who tutored the students participated, and one of the two home school
principals participated. All participants volunteered to be in the study.
114
I conducted observations, document analysis, videotaping, and interviews
during the 2005-6 school year, starting in August 2005 and continuing through May
2006. I started by meeting with the gatekeeper, the NAI director. I collected
program documents through the administrators, the program website, and public
records. I also observed monthly faculty meetings and observed teachers in class,
twice in NAI classes, and once in other classes the teachers conducted at their home
schools with non-NAI students. I videotaped a one-hour segment of each teacher
conducting an NAI class session. I interviewed NAI teachers individually two times:
first, to learn about them as individuals, and second, to have them review and discuss
the videotape of their lesson. I audio taped and transcribed these interviews. I also
interviewed, audio taped, and transcribed one interview with each NAI administrator,
as well as a former administrator. I conducted a telephone interview of the Vice
President of University Relations, who oversees NAI. I conducted student focus
groups by grade level. In keeping with Lincoln and Guba’s (1985) methods of
naturalistic inquiry, I tried to spend as much time at NAI as I could. I observed the
NAI office, tutoring sessions, Saturday school, two parent board meetings, and the
graduation banquet.
Ultimately, I had about 600 pages of data, consisting of observation notes,
transcripts, and documents. I combed through this data looking for themes, as
described by Creswell (1998). I used sociocultural theory to organize the themes
into broad historical, cultural, and social categories.
115
Methods to Ensure Trustworthiness
In order to ensure trustworthiness of the data, I used triangulation (Lincoln
and Guba 1985). In order to triangulate, I compared my observations and what
teachers, administrators, and students said. I also compared information in
documents. If all of these agreed, I considered the data trustworthy. For example, in
faculty meetings I observed teachers comment on how troublesome the 12
th
grade
students were. In interviews, teachers and administrators reiterated this point.
Surprisingly, in the 12
th
grade focus group, even the students acknowledged that they
were the troublesome group, although they were quick to give justifications for their
behavior. Compared to focus groups of other grades, I observed more negative
comments in the 12
th
grade focus group. Putting all the data together using
triangulation, I found that the data strongly show that the 12
th
grade class had more
complaints and rebellious behaviors than students did in the other grades.
In addition, I used member checking to improve trustworthiness (Lincoln &
Guba 1985). An observer’s background and preconceptions colors observations
(Lincoln & Guba 1985, Patton 2002). To ensure that my observations were
unbiased, I employed member checking. On a very basic level of checking, after the
teacher interviews, I submitted transcripts of their own interviews to teachers for
their confirmation of the accuracy of what they said or meant. On a more
interpretive level, near the end of the study I posed my conclusions to the
participants. When I had a preliminary analysis of the data, I presented it to a focus
group of the NAI faculty and administration for their feedback. The group had a
116
very positive reaction to almost all of my findings, confirming my observations and
analysis through the member checking process. A possible objection to member
checking is that it may reinforce the biases of the participants. In ethnography,
however, the goal is to discern meaning from the participants’ point of view
(Creswell 1998, Lincoln & Guba 1985). Thus, it is important for the conclusions of
the research to ring true to the people under study.
Limitations
Using ethnographic case study methods to examine NAI had some
limitations. There was so much to observe that I had to limit my attention, focusing
on some aspects of the program but not others.
First, I did not examine the student selection process in detail. I collected
data on the basics of how students apply for and enter the program. In the process, I
noted comments by outsiders that NAI selected the cream of the crop of students
from the two feeder high schools, although NAI administrators, teachers, and even
students denied this. I did not follow up on the issue in my study. I also did not
interview the high school counselors, who often are the ones who place students in
classes and thus have an impact on student preparation and selection. Examining the
student selection process in detail could yield additional useful data.
Second, during my home school observations, unexpectedly several students
and a teacher who had left NAI approached me on their own initiative and told me
about NAI. I excluded the data from my study in the interest of keeping focused on
NAI teacher-student interaction. A limitation of the study in this respect is that
117
excluding people who dropped out of the program may exclude different viewpoints.
In addition, there was some indication that even NAI dropouts are doing better than
the average home school students are. Including people who left the program could
shed light on whether NAI has a lasting influence even in the case of students who
leave early.
A final limitation to the study is that I did not examine in detail the impact of
NAI on the home schools. During my study, I recorded several comments that
students, teachers, and administrators at the home schools had changed some of their
behaviors and ideas because of NAI. I also recorded comments about the impact of
good NAI student scores on high-stakes tests at the home schools. It might be useful
to interview home school teachers and administrators not involved in NAI to get a
deeper understanding of how NAI affects home schools.
Data Analysis
In keeping with theory, I organized the data analysis into historical, cultural,
and social themes. My focus was on the sociocultural aspects of student-teacher
interaction with particular emphasis on the Zone of Proximal Development. During
the course of my research, I found that the NAI program turned students into
scholars not only through interaction with teachers in the classroom, but with
multiple program-related interactions after school and on Saturdays as well. My
analysis showed that it was not just student-teacher interaction in class that prepared
students for college, but also interaction with teachers and others within the larger
social context of NAI. Interactions outside class included the after-school tutoring
118
program and the Saturday morning program. NAI did not just provide morning
college preparatory classes; it provided a social and cultural milieu in which students
could acculturate to college norms and values.
Interacting in the NAI context was how students learned to behave as
scholars. The true value of NAI was not that it produced students who learn the
math and English curriculum and earn good SAT scores. The value of NAI was in
the way it taught students how to learn, how to study, how to behave on a university
campus, in short, how to behave in a community of scholars. As one teacher
commented, when NAI students begin their university work, they struggle, but they
rally because they know what to do to succeed in school.
Program History
To understand NAI fully, it is important to consider the reasons for its
inception and its development. In my analysis of program history, I found that the
program was functioning almost as its founders had originally planned.
NAI addresses the problem of under representation of minorities on the USC
campus, particularly at the graduate level. The program starts with 7
th
grade students
and prepares them to enter college. The first director believed strongly that average
students could succeed in this process, so the program does not just select high
achieving students. The first director’s departure was followed by a period of
leadership turmoil that has had lasting effects on the program because of the loss of
the social work/counseling program component. After the current director started in
2002, the program regained its stability.
119
There was one key departure from the original program design, and that was
the loss of the staff social worker and the social work component. This loss affected
the workload of program administrators, as they had to provide counseling as well as
carrying out their other duties. Although I observed the administrators to be
proficient at handling all kinds of student problems and family crises, the increased
workload may eventually take its toll. The social work component is important
because students with problems will have difficulty learning. Students with family or
other outside problems may have less productive interactions with their teachers.
According to Vygotsky (1978), this is because there is an affective filter that can
inhibit learning if a student is too emotional. In order to promote learning, the
learning environment has to lower the affective filter. This is why it is important to
have resources to help students with problems, so that they come to class calm and
able to learn at their best.
One key to the strength and success of NAI was that all the teachers and
administrators adhered to the program mission. I observed in a variety of meetings
how all the NAI employees worked as a cohesive team to further the program goals.
In Chapter 4, I presented many comments that showed the dedication of personnel to
the mission. As a result, interactions between students and NAI personnel were
directed toward the goal of making the student ready for college.
However, with respect to history, it is clear that changes in administrative
personnel affected students, sometimes with effects lasting students’ entire time in
the program. The data showed how past administrative problems may have affected
120
students’ attitudes throughout their stay at NAI. Students who started during a
change in administration made comments that showed more alienation, and they
complained more than students who started later. With the stable leadership I
observed, this was not an issue, but if there is a future change in leadership, it is
important to recognize how delicate the situation is for students.
Program history affected student-teacher interaction in several ways. First,
students interacted with the components of the program. History affected these
components such that the administrators had to handle the counseling aspect. In
spite of the impact on administrative workload, they handled student problems
effectively, and this helped keep student problems from getting in the way of
student-teacher interaction and learning. When students interacted with NAI staff
members, the members were all dedicated to the program’s original mission. As a
result, interactions consistently aimed toward developing students’ scholarly
potential. Finally, students who had been in the program longest had been negatively
affected by past program administrative problems. Their outlook remained less
positive and trusting, even though the problems were resolved early in the students’
stay with NAI.
NAI Culture
The significant aspect of student-teacher interaction at NAI was the program
culture. It affected all interactions within the program, and was the key vehicle for
transforming low SES minority students into college ready scholars. Students
entered the program with the appropriate motivation, because motivation was one of
121
the key criteria for selection to NAI. However, students generally did not have the
necessary skills, work habits, or values for college work. For example, a fair
proportion of students had ESL or other skill issues that put them below their grade
level. They also had difficulty bearing the workload. Many of them wanted to
participate in sports and other extracurricular activities that would interfere with their
academic achievement. NAI changed students through a combination of direct
instruction, discipline, and extensive time together in shared activities. Looking at
the program holistically, NAI formed a supportive social web that acculturated
students to scholarly values and behaviors.
Holding NAI classes on the USC campus was very important. By taking
students out of their high school social milieu and placing them in classes on the
USC campus, NAI could more effectively promote a college-going culture. Many
teachers and students commented on how different it was to be studying at USC,
even though the teachers were the same and the curriculum was very similar in
students’ high schools. The data showed that students became accustomed to the
college campus and started to feel that they belonged there. The college culture
surrounded them, and as teachers said, they visibly carried themselves differently
and behaved differently at USC. The college social context helped impart a
scholarly culture among the students in terms of their comportment and feelings of
belonging.
Students developed a college work ethic as soon as they entered the program.
Teachers had higher expectations of students, as almost all participants commented.
122
In addition, students rose to meet these expectations that they attend class, be on
time, and do homework. Although they complained, they rose to the occasion.
Almost all the teachers commented that the key difference between NAI students and
other students at their high schools was that they worked harder, attended more
consistently, and did homework almost without fail. This work ethic was perhaps
the most essential component of the NAI culture that students acquired.
All the participants--administrators, teachers, and students--were quick to say
that NAI students were average students of average intelligence. Nevertheless, the
students did stand out of the crowd. Instead of more intelligent, perhaps the right
description would be that they were more motivated and better informed. For
example, as one teacher commented, they knew what Cliff Notes were. Through the
NAI, they knew more about college life, college expectations, and about how to
navigate the college application process. They behaved more like college students.
For instance, they formed study groups to help each other. At several faculty
meetings, teachers commented that when they had received a call from a student
with a question, they had heard other students in the background. Upon inquiring,
the caller told the teacher that the students were studying together and had a
collective question. I did not see evidence of any instruction in study group
formation or management, but students seemed spontaneously to form these groups
under the pressure of challenging teacher expectations. In NAI, students acquired
college study skills not only through direct instruction, but also as a product of
adaptation and enculturation.
123
Scholarly culture developed because students spent a great deal of time in
NAI. Not only did they attend classes in the morning for an hour and a half, they
also went to after-school tutoring and Saturday classes. Overall, most student
comments indicated that they did not resent putting in the extra time. I found a
welcoming atmosphere at tutoring and at the NAI office in general. Sometimes I
saw students sharing snacks and food, and friends working together. Teachers
sometimes commented that the students were not always on task during these
sessions, but I observed them reading textbooks and writing in their notebooks as
well as talking. I estimate that they were talking less than half the time, and it
appeared that they were often talking about the study task.
Students seemed to have a positive attitude to tutoring. Because of the social
interaction during tutoring, studying was rewarding, and this was an important step
in developing scholarly culture. On Saturdays, there was also a cheerful social
atmosphere as students came in to their classes and during class breaks. In general, it
seemed that these activities students did together after school and on Saturdays had
more than just a time-on-task purpose. The activities included a positive social
atmosphere that made them intrinsically rewarding, created a stronger bond between
students, and in this way helped foster a scholarly culture.
Social connections and Partnerships
NAI culture derives in part from its partnerships with students’ families, the
high schools, and USC. In order to maximize learning, NAI links students, their
families, high schools, and the university. The connections between these create a
124
unique social setting in which NAI students and teachers interact. A student is not
an entity separate from the family, school, and social setting; instead, sociocultural
theory states that a learner is embedded in a social fabric that affects learning in
profound ways. I will describe three partnerships that are in the most basic way
founded on social connections developed by NAI: partnerships with family, home
high schools, and USC.
I first discuss NAI’s partnership with families. Parent participation is not
optional for NAI; it is a requirement written into the contract parents and students
sign when they begin the program. During the school year, all parents attended a
Saturday morning program called the Family Development Institute six times a
semester. They could also serve on the NAI parent leadership board. When parents
met together on a regular basis at NAI, it formed a social bond that I observed to be
very cooperative.
While ninth grade students reported that their parents were unhappy with the
content of the Saturday sessions, the students from other grades reported their
parents liked the sessions. The ninth grade students reported that their parents
wanted more information about NAI and helping their children. This indicated that
the parents did not object to going on Saturdays, but wanted material that was more
specific. Collaborating with parents and getting them involved had positive effects.
The data showed that the most important influence of parents was that they
prevented students from quitting NAI. In addition, students reported that parents
were knowledgeable about their schools and supervised their homework and
125
preparation. Ninth graders reported the most parental involvement in their
schooling, which may indicate an increase in parental involvement after starting
NAI.
These positive influences come in spite of some family problems I noted.
Family problems that were discussed in faculty meetings and teacher interviews
included substance, spouse, and child abuse, health problems, financial problems,
crime, incarceration, and death, including homicide. In its partnership with families,
NAI functions as much as it can as a buffer between students and these various
problems. The parent component brings parents into the school culture and helps
promote NAI scholarly culture by bringing it into students’ homes.
I next discuss NAI’s partnership with the home schools. I observed three
administrative challenges in this partnership. The first challenge in the NAI-home
school partnerships was working with school principals. Whenever a new principal
takes over, the social relationship between NAI and a school has to be renewed. A
new principal came on at Manual Arts at the beginning of my study. At faculty
meetings early in the year, NAI teachers and administrators expressed some anxiety
about whether the new principal would have a good impression of their program.
The principal visited NAI, and the NAI administrators explained the program to him.
After this, I did not record any mention of problems with the new principal. Another
indication of the principal’s acceptance of the program was that while the principal
had initially refused to be involved in my study, by the spring semester he was
willing to give an interview and permit me to do research on his campus.
126
The second challenge in the partnership was that home school policies such
as class schedules affected NAI, and there was a constant need for NAI to adjust to
new developments at the schools. For example, one of Foshay’s school policies
tended to hamper the functioning of NAI. During my year of observation, NAI
classes lost at least 20 minutes a week of instructional time due to a change in
Foshay’s class schedule that year. This was a result of the Foshay principal’s
scheduling of weekly minimum days for teacher development workshops. Based on
the many comments I recorded, this posed quite a hardship on NAI in terms of
scheduling classes and buses. In addition, the minimum day and bell schedules at
Manual Arts and Foshay did not always match, and this posed problems as well. The
home schools have many more regular students than NAI students, and so it is not
practical for them to consider NAI in these matters. NAI constantly has to adapt to
this structural aspect of the school-NAI partnership.
A third challenge affects teachers because the schools are not structured to
allow them to easily teach both at the USC campus in the mornings and at the home
school campus for the rest of the day. All the teachers commented that they did not
have their own classrooms and had to travel and haul materials. The arduousness of
this traveling meant that only the most committed and energetic teachers remained as
NAI faculty. It was a sort of survival of the fittest, a structural selection process that
happily resulted in the best teachers remaining in NAI.
Moving from challenges to benefits, the NAI-home school partnership
benefits were most evident when I talked to students. From the students’
127
perspective, the partnership with the home schools was seamless because the NAI
teachers also taught classes at the home schools. Four teachers taught at Foshay, and
four at Manual Arts. Students could find their NAI teachers on campus, and
approach them for help outside of NAI class time. Teachers knew the students well,
including their family and academic lives. NAI teachers advocated for the students
in home school issues, as was apparent from comments at NAI faculty meetings.
While NAI administrators and teachers expressed concern that NAI students might
be singled out in a negative way at their home schools, students made many positive
and few negative comments about their status on the home school campus. NAI
students reported mostly positive treatment by members of the home school
community. Students commented that at their high schools, they felt special and
smart because they participated in NAI.
A final positive aspect of this partnership was that NAI influenced the home
schools in some ways. At Foshay, the previous principal was very pro-NAI, and
non-NAI teachers adopted some NAI activities. In an interview, the new Manual
Arts principal expressed enthusiasm for NAI’s methods, and stated the desire to start
a Saturday academy at his high school. The possibility of NAI inspiring better
educational practices at the home schools is an interesting aspect of the partnership
that needs further exploration. In the final analysis, while the NAI-home school
partnership poses administrative challenges, it is beneficial to students.
The last partnership is with USC. Because the university provides
classrooms and administrative office space, as well as funding for the program, it is
128
essential to NAI’s existence. Socioculturally, the most important aspect for
preparing NAI students for college is putting them on the USC campus. The
partnerships with parents and high schools may produce good learning outcomes, but
in terms of actual college going, the data showed that being on the USC campus is
the empowering factor. NAI teachers and administrators commented emphatically
that when the students were on campus, they carried themselves differently and
behaved more like college students. They had a sense of belonging. According to
sociocultural theory, people learn from their environments. Putting students into a
college environment is a learning process in itself, which goes beyond the curriculum
of NAI courses. The campus and students are different, and the classrooms
themselves are different from high school classrooms. As one teacher said, “They
get so comfortable with campus life that it removes that big mystery of what college
is actually like.”
Students commented that they felt more like adults. For instance, at USC
there were no bells or hall passes. Students felt proud to know their way around the
campus and to be able to use USC facilities such as the library and bookstore, just
like college students. They also were eager to earn the full USC scholarship for NAI
graduates who meet USC’s entrance requirements. From the USC partnership,
students received a message that the university supported them and believed in them.
While USC’s support could be beneficial because of the connections that become
available to students, sociocultural theory would emphasize the social bond to USC
that the partnership creates. The university functions as a mentor to these students.
129
The university context showed them how to behave as scholars and enhanced their
image of themselves as future college students. This social bond was an important
sociocultural factor motivating and empowering students to work hard and apply to
college.
One reason that NAI has been successful in getting a high percentage of
students into college is its partnerships with parents, high schools, and USC. If any
of the three partnerships were broken, NAI would cease to function effectively.
They form a rich social setting that nurtures students and encourages them to
succeed.
Implications for Policy
Instead of focusing on the microcosm of classroom student-teacher
interaction, I widened the view to take in the program as a whole. How does NAI
produce productive student-teacher interaction? The historical, cultural, and social
aspects of the NAI program itself turned out to be the key drivers of interaction and
learning. Interaction between student and teacher produced good learning outcomes
because of the organization of the program. This is why, as several participants
observed, NAI can serve as a model for other college preparation programs. My
findings highlight effective aspects of NAI that are applicable to other programs
striving to increase the college-going rate of low-SES minority students.
First, NAI teachers had a strong sense of mission. The working conditions
and professional development activities instilled this sense of mission in program
employees. The program was very cohesive in this respect. The program director
130
emphasized that she keeps the NAI mission and strategic plan in mind as much as
possible. At the semi-annual teacher retreat the director posted sections from the
program strategic plan on the wall for teachers to read and comment on. Because
NAI ensured everyone in the program was working toward the same goals and had
the same mission, moving from year to year the students experienced consistent
teacher-student interactions. Other programs can take this cue and emphasize the
mission and goals in program activities.
Second, developing a scholarly culture among students was a significant
factor in positive interactions and learning. NAI developed this culture through an
intensive program design that maximized student time in the program, both on a
weekly basis and over the six years students stayed in NAI. Weekly student
participation included one-and-a-half-hour morning classes five days a week,
afternoon tutoring for one or more hours per week, and three hours of Saturday class.
Students spent additional time in NAI classes and activities during semester breaks,
as well as time at fundraisers, picnics, and other social activities. This time allowed
students to bond with each other and form supportive groups. The program design
meant students spent time outside class in the company of teachers and tutors,
resulting in a transfer of academic values to the students. Additionally, teachers and
tutors became role models.
To support a scholarly culture, students could be given an expanded set of
experiences to develop a clearer idea of what the college workload is like. While
holding classes on a university campus was the key element of the NAI experience,
131
more could be done in this area. For instance, the 11
th
and 12
th
graders could visit
college classes in their majors for one day. The NAI tutors or other USC students
could visit NAI classes with their textbooks and written papers to share what kind of
work they are doing. It is also useful to pay particular attention to providing role
models. The tutors and teachers became role models for the students. There were
some tutors who were NAI graduates; students reported very positively about these
people. One stipulation of the NAI student contract is that students return to the
program after graduation to help. Perhaps more NAI graduates could come back and
interact with the students. Pre-college programs need to provide this comprehensive
culture-building component, including the college experience and expanded
interaction with teachers and college student tutors.
Third, maintaining program consistency in interactions with students was
essential not only for teachers, but for administrative staff as well. Students’
previous experiences in NAI colored their perceptions and attitudes throughout their
time in the program. The negative attitudes of the seniors may have stemmed from
events that happened when they started the program. This indicates that a successful
program needs steady management, particularly when students stay in the program
for six years, as NAI students do.
Fourth, to strengthen partnerships with families, it might be helpful to have
some experienced family counselors to help with the workload generated by student
problems. I recorded mention of shootings, parents with substance abuse problems,
domestic violence, parents arrested, and other serious family problems requiring a
132
trained counselor. Counseling is important because as the data show, these outside-
school problems can impact student learning and academic success. It may not be
possible to fund a position at NAI, but perhaps a partnership and a solid social
relationship with a local counseling center would be beneficial. I did record some
mention of this, but perhaps it needs more development. Pre-college programs need
to accommodate the whole student, including the family and other problems outside
school that may affect learning.
Fourth, the faculty and administration had a very friendly and collaborative
culture that facilitated teaching. The faculty participated in program decisions such
as hiring new teachers and implementing the mission and strategic plan.
Administrators and teachers spent time together at retreats twice a year, monthly
faculty meetings, and at vertical teaming sessions. Teachers had a say in all aspects
of the program, and worked with administrators as a team. This created a supportive
culture where all the program members felt they could be open with each other. The
teamwork resulted in curriculum development that was cohesive across grade levels,
as well as good communication about which students needed special help. Pre-
college programs need to ensure an open and collaborative working environment to
maximize positive teacher-student interaction and learning.
Fifth, partnerships with parents, schools, and the university were very
important to student success. Pre-college programs should ensure parent
participation. The NAI created a strong parent partnership by requiring parents to
sign a contract in which they promised to participate in Saturday classes. If a parent
133
was not able to attend, another family member was required to participate, and there
were sanctions for lack of participation. The NAI students reported an immediate
effect of the partnership with parents because parents took a greater interest in their
children’s school progress. This aspect of the program improved parenting skills as
well as taught parents about academic expectations for college going.
Pre-college programs need to be flexible in school partnerships. At NAI,
partnerships with schools, especially principals, were somewhat unstable. A pre-
college program like NAI that is independent of high schools constantly needs to
cultivate its relationship to the students’ high schools. It required constant vigilance
and effort on the part of NAI teachers and administrators to maintain the goodwill of
principals as well as to adjust to changing high school policies. After observing
NAI, I find there might be more effort put into fostering relationships with school
counselors. A pre-college program has to be flexible when it comes to partnerships
with local schools, while not compromising its mission.
A partnership with a local university can be the key component of a
successful pre-college program. The partnership with USC was essential to the
NAI’s success. USC guaranteed full scholarships to any NAI graduates who
qualified for admission. Even ninth grade students had the scholarship as their goal.
USC provided classroom space for NAI classes, allowing students to feel a part of
the university. This empowered students and gave them a sense of belonging to the
university community, unlike taking college preparatory classes on a high school
134
campus. Even though the teachers came from the local high schools, exposure to the
university on a daily basis made a difference to student attitudes and behavior.
Perhaps NAI was in a somewhat delicate position in its partnership with USC
because I did not record mention of many supporters of NAI in the university. It
might be wise to foster socially supportive relationships with more people at the
university. I read the good publicity NAI received in news articles and pamphlets,
but good partnerships depend on people, not just publicity. It is possible that my
research project will have consequences in this area because my committee will
become more familiar with NAI. If more USC students do research at NAI, they will
become a link between NAI and their teachers. This could result in better social
connections if NAI teachers or administrators use it as a way to get to know USC
professors. Pre-college programs should attend to the connections they make to the
university, and should foster relationships with a variety of people on the university
campus. Allowing university students to do research in the pre-college programs can
form the basis of a reciprocal relationship within the university/pre-college program
partnership.
Recommendations for Future Research
Here I will mention some avenues for further research that appeared in the
process of my study. Some of the areas of research developed from data I collected
but did not analyze because I wanted to keep the study focused on teacher-student
interaction, as I described in the limitations section of this chapter. Other research
ideas point to facets of NAI that need more in-depth study.
135
The data I collected revealed some interesting questions. First, the student
selection process for NAI was the subject of some disagreement among the various
people I interviewed. NAI insiders and outsiders differed in their impression of
whether the program recruited average or gifted students. Insiders believed that the
students entered as average and later appeared gifted due to the impact of NAI. Do
students enter gifted, or does NAI make them gifted? Examining the student
selection process in detail could shed light on this issue.
Second, there were several comments about how NAI affected home schools.
NAI teachers and staff expressed the hope that NAI would have a positive effect on
the schools, and several pointed to positive changes because of NAI. An avenue for
research is to study the home schools to find what effects NAI might have.
Third, studying students who are on probation or who left NAI could yield
useful information. At meetings, teachers often expressed concern for students who
were falling behind and tried to understand what life circumstances could be the
cause. Studying students on probation can determine why they end up in this
situation and how best to help them. Studying students who are on probation or who
drop can also address the question of how to reduce the attrition rate. Some NAI
teachers observed that the program has a lasting influence even in the case of
students who leave early. Studying students who left the program can determine the
influence even a few years of NAI might have.
Fourth, the student and parent Saturday programs are subjects for further
study. My research indicated that parents played a very strong role in making
136
students stay in NAI and in overseeing their schoolwork. It would be useful to study
the parent component at NAI, particularly the Saturday program, to see how it
influences parents and subsequent student performance. The student Saturday
classes are another aspect to explore. Teachers and administrators commented that
they were not entirely satisfied with the Saturday curriculum for the students. They
planned to revise it; this process would be a good subject for research.
Fifth, the vertical teaming process used by the teachers to develop curriculum
is an area for study. Teachers and administrators expressed enthusiasm for this
process, which I had the opportunity to observe at the teacher’s retreats. Since
students attend NAI classes from ninth through 12
th
grades, teachers say it is
important to develop a smooth articulation in the curriculum from year to year. This
is an important goal of the vertical teaming process. It may serve as a curriculum
development model for other programs.
Finally, while I used sociocultural theory as the theoretical basis for this
study, different theoretical lenses could bring new insights. For instance, Bourdieu’s
(1973) theories of cultural and social capital could be useful. The scholarly culture
developed by NAI may be an advantageous change in cultural capital for students.
Mehan, Hubbard, Lintz, and Villanueva (1996) consider the implications of tracking
and untracking students. The design of NAI gives average students a chance to
experience an advanced academic curriculum normally offered only to the upper
track students. Using the lens of tracking could bring new insights about NAI as a
pre-college program.
137
Another useful theoretical lens is Lave and Wenger’s (1991) theory of
situated learning. NAI students participate in college in a peripheral way by
attending classes on a university campus, even though they are not yet university
students. According to Lave and Wenger, “learners inevitably participate in
communities of practitioners and…the mastery of knowledge and skill requires
newcomers to move toward full participation in the sociocultural practices of a
community.” The learning process consists of what the authors call legitimate
peripheral participation; this means that the learner or apprentice starts by observing
the master, then takes on successively more tasks as he or she learns the skills
involved. The intensive nature of student-teacher and student-tutor interaction in
NAI could be viewed as a form of apprenticeship. The university itself could be
analyzed in its role as a mentor. The NAI gives many opportunities for further
research into a wide array of areas.
Conclusion
Overall, student-teacher interaction in the NAI had a strong influence on
learning not only because of its instructional role but also because of its social role.
The teachers spent extra time with students outside class. The students recognized
and appreciated this, even though some students complained. For example, they
made comments like “He has such high expectations of us.” Still, behind the
complaints I detected respect and admiration for the teachers’ dedication. Students
also commented that teachers treated them like adults. Teacher-student interaction
seems to have a strong impact on students in encouraging them to become scholars.
138
Teachers may feel that they receive little thanks for the extra time they put in, but
extra time spent with students is effective beyond its instructional purpose. It
supports the social nature of learning by imparting scholarly values and culture.
In the final analysis, teacher-student interaction at NAI is conducive to
learning and to preparing students for college because of the way the program is
structured and run. The program mission and design supports intensive time spent in
the program by students on a weekly basis throughout their middle school and high
school years. The program takes into consideration the whole student, including the
family and home life. With the student population of NAI, there are often factors
external to school which affect school performance. The NAI staff makes a valiant
effort to ameliorate any family or other external problems students may have.
Students are in close contact with each other, the teachers, and the NAI
administrators, forming a bond and a program culture that supports college going.
The context of the program, supported by its partnership with USC, allows students
to experience the university campus and develop confidence and a feeling of
belonging in higher education. All these factors may contribute to NAI’s record of
having a high percentage of its graduates enter college year after year.
139
References
Abdal-Haqq, I. (Dec. 1998). Constructivism in teacher education: Considerations for
those who would link practice to theory. ERIC Digest. Retrieved March 25,
2005, from ERIC Clearinghouse on Teaching and Teacher Education
database (ED426986).
Au, K. H. (1998). Social constructivism and the school literacy learning of students
of diverse backgrounds. Journal of Literacy Research, 30(2), 297-319.
Baker, A. P., & Xu, D. (1995). The measure of education: A review of the
Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System. Tennessee State Comptroller
of the Treasury, Office of Education Accountability. Retrieved April 1, 2005,
from ERIC database (ED 388 697).
Bartolome, L. I. (1994). Beyond the methods fetish: Toward a humanizing
pedagogy. Harvard Educational Review, 64, 173-195.
Bennett, W. J. (1986). First lessons: A report on elementary education in America.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Bennis, W., & Goldsmith, J. (1997). Learning to lead (Rev. ed.). Cabridge, MA:
Perseus Books.
Bettie, J. (2003). Women without class: Girls, race, and identity. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1973). Cultural reproduction and social reproduction. In R. Brown
(Ed.), Knowledge, education, and cultural change: Papers in the sociology
of education (pp. 71-112). London: Tavistock.
Brooks-Gunn, J., & Duncan, G. J. (1997). The effects of poverty on children.
Children and Poverty, 7(2), 55-71.
Bruner, J. (1985). Vygotsky: A historical and conceptual perspective. In J. V.
Wertsch (Ed.), Culture, communication and cognition (pp. 21-34).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
California Department of Education. (2005, March). 2004 Academic Performance
Index (API) Base School Report. Retrieved May 18, 2005, from
http://api.cde.ca.gov/API2005/2004BaseSch.aspx?allcds=19647331935519
140
Cole, M. (2001). Remembering history in sociocultural research [Electronic
version]. Human Development, (2/3), 166-170. Retrieved February 21, 05,
from http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?
Community Education Academy. (2004-2005). Strategic plan.
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among
five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
DiMaggio, P. (1982). Cultural capital and school success: The impact of status
culture participation on the grades of U.S. high school students. American
Sociological Review, 47, 189-201.
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data
(Rev. ed.). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Fleming, J. C. (1993, January 10). Push students--and never give up on them. Los
Angeles Times.
Fusarelli, L. D. (2004). The potential impact of the no child left behind act on equity
and diversity in American Education. Education Policy, 18(1), 71-94.
Gallas, K., & Smagorinsky, P. (2002). Approaching texts in school: students
understand texts in ways that may not match the "standard.” The Reading
Teacher, 56(1), 54-62. Retrieved May 24, 2005, from University of Southern
California Web Site: http://usc.hostedbyfdi.net/zportal
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research.
In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research
(pp. 105-117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action. Vol. 1. Reason and the
rationalization of society, trans. T. McCarthy. Boston: Beacon Press.
Hebert, T. P., & Reis, S. M. (1999). Culturally diverse high-achieving students in an
urban high school. Urban Education, 34(4), 428-457.
Hill, D. (1995, Nov-Dec). The price of admission. Teacher Magazine, 36-41.
Hones, D. F. (2002). In quest of freedom: Towards critical pedagogy in the
education of bilingual youth. Teachers College Record, 104, 1163-1186.
141
Howard, T. C. (2001). Powerful pedagogy for African American students: A case
of four teachers. Urban Education, 36, 179-202.
Huberman, M. (1996). Moving mainstream: Taking a closer look at teacher
research. Language Arts, 73(2), 124-141.
John-Steiner, V., & Souberman, E. (1978). Afterword. In M. Cole, V. John-Steiner,
S. Scribner, E. Souberman (Ed.), Mind in society (pp. 121-133). Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
Jones, C. (1992, July 19). USC dream team students become scholars in novel
program. Los Angeles Times, p. A1.
Kozulin, A., & Garb, E. (2002). Dynamic assessment of EFL text comprehension.
School Psychology International, 23(1), 112-127.
Lareau, A. (1987). Social class differences in family-school relationships: The
importance of cultural capital. Sociology of Education, 60, 73-85.
Lareau, A. (2003). Unequal childhoods: Class, race, and family life. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral
participation. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Leont'ev, A. N. (1981). The problem of activity in psychology. In J. V. Wertsch
(Ed.), The concept of activity in Soviet psychology (pp. 37-71). Armonk, NY:
M. E. Sharpe.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA:
Sage Publications.
Los Angeles Unified School District. (2003). Foshay LC. Retrieved June 10, 05,
from
http://notebook.lausd.net/portal/page?_pageid=33,54194&_dad=ptl&_schem
a=PTL_EP&school_code=8132
Los Angeles Unified School District. (2003). Manual Arts SH. Retrieved June 10,
05, from
http://notebook.lausd.net/portal/page?_pageid=33,54194&_dad=ptl&schema
=PTL_EP&school_code=8743
142
Los Angeles Unified School District. (2003, February). School Profile: Manual
Arts HS. Retrieved May 18, 05, from Los Angeles Unified School District
Web Site: http://www.lausd.K12.ca.us/Manual_Arts_HS/.
Los Angeles Unified School District. (2005 February). An Annual Report to the
Community: Manual Arts Senior High. Retrieved June 10, 2005, from
http://search.lausd.k12.ca.us/cgi-bin/fccgi.exe?w3exec=sarc4&which=8743
Los Angeles Unified School District. (n.d.). School Profile: Foshay Lc 8132.
Retrieved June 10, 2005, from Los Angeles Unified School District Web
Site: http://search.lausd.k12.ca.us/cgi-
bin/fccgi.exe?w3exec=school.profile.content&which=8132
Los Angeles Unified School District. (n.d.). School Profile: Muir Ms. Retrieved
August 10, 2005, from http://search.lausd.k12.ca.us/cgi-
bin/fccgi.exe?w3exec=school.profile.content&which=8255
Lubman, S. (1994, August 15). USC tries to create a haven for education in the city.
The Wall Street Journal, pp. B1,B4.
McCarthey, S. J. (1997). Connecting home and school literacy practices in
classrooms with diverse populations. Journal of Literacy Research, 29(2),
145-182.
Mehan, H., Hubbard, L., Lintz, A., & Villanueva, I. (1996). Constructing school
success: the consequences of untracking low-achieving students. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
NAEP. (2005). Long-term trend. In National Center for Education Statistics.
Retrieved July 16, 05, from National Assessment of Educational Statistics
Web Site: http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/ltt/results2004
Neighborhood Academic Initiative. (n.d.). The Neighborhood Academic Initiative.
Retrieved April 22, 2005, from University of Southern California Web Site:
http://www.usc.edu/ext-relations/nai
Neighborhood Academic Initiative. (n.d.). Background & information. Retrieved
September 15, 2005, from University of Southern California Web Site:
http://usc.edu/ext.relations/nai/aboutnai.html
Office of External Relations (2004 April 16). USC Community Education Academy:
A Proposal to the Kellogg Foundation. Los Angeles: Unpublished.
143
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Povey, H. (2002). Promoting social justice in and through the mathematics
curriculum: Exploring the connections with epistemologies of mathematics.
Mathematics Education Research Journal, 14(3), 190-201.
Resnick, L. B. (2004). Teachers matter: Evidence from value-added assessments.
Research Points: Essential Information for Education Policy, 2(2), 1-4.
Rogoff, B. (1986). Adult assistance of children's learning. In T. E. Raphael (Ed.),
The context of school-based literacy (pp. 27-40). New York: Random House.
Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking. New York: Oxford University Press.
Rowan, B., Correnti, R., & Miller, R. J. (2002). What large-scale research tells us
about teacher effects on student achievement: Insights from the Prospects
Study of Elementary Schools. Teachers College Record, 104, 1525-1567.
Rueda, R., & Dembo, M. (1995). Motivational processes in learning: A
comparative analysis of cognitive and sociocultural frameworks. In M.
Maehr & P. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement:
Culture, motivation, and achievement (Vol 9) (pp. 255-289). Greenwich,
CN: JAI Press.
Smith, K. (1993, January 25). Program motivates teenage students. University of
Southern California Daily Trojan, pp. 1-3.
Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (2001). Manufacturing hope and despair: The school and kin
support networks of U.S.-Mexican youth. New York: Teachers College Press.
Steele, D. F. (1999). Learning mathematical language in the Zone of Proximal
Development. Teaching Children Mathematics, 6(1), 38. Retrieved May 24,
2005, from University of Southern California Web Site:
http://usc.hostedbyfdi.net/zportal
Stough, L. M., & Palmer, D. J. (2003). Special thinking in special settings: A
qualitative study of expert special educators. Journal of special education,
36(4), 206-222. Retrieved May 11, 2005, from http://questia.com
Sullivan, M. (1997, May 15). Neighborhood kids bound for USC, thanks to college
prep program. USC Chronicle, Retrieved November 5, 2005, from University
of Southern California Web Site: http://usc/edu
144
Taylor, M., King, J., Pinsent-Johnson, C., & Lothian, T. (2003). Collaborative
practices in adult literacy programs. Adult Basic Education, 13(2), 81-99.
Tharp, R. G. (1993). Instructional and social context of educational policy and
reform. In N. Minick & C. A. Stone (Eds.), Contexts for learning:
Sociocultural dynamics in children's development. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Tharp, R. G., & Gallimore, R. (1988). Rousing minds to life: Teaching, learning,
and schooling in social context. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Tierney, W. G., & Hagedorn, L. S. (Eds.). (2002). Increasing access to college:
Extending possibilities for all students. Albany: State University of New
York Press.
Tucker, C. (1991, June 1). We can make that kid a star. Transcript, 10, 1+.
U.S. Department of Education. (n.d.). No Child Left Behind. Retrieved July 17,
2005, from U.S. Department of Education Web Site:
http://www.ed.gov/nclb/landing.jhtml
University Of Southern California Neighborhood Academic Initiative. (n.d.). Results.
Retrieved June 13, 2006, from University of Southern California Web Site:
http://usc.edu/ext-relations/nai/results.html
University Of Southern California. (2005). Neighborhood Academic Initiative:
Background & information. Retrieved November 21, 2006, from
Neighborhood Academic Initiative Web Site: http://www.usc.edu/ext-
relations/nai/aboutnai.html
Veenman, S., Denessen, E., van den Akker, A., & van der Rijt, J. (2005). Effects of
a cooperative learning program on the elaborations of students during help
seeking and help giving. American Educational Research Journal, 42, 115-
151.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language (Rev. ed.). Cambridge, MA: The
MIT Press.
145
Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). Thinking and speech. In R. W. Rieber & A. S. Carton
(Eds.), the collected works of L. S. Vygotsky: Vol. 1. Problems of general
psychology (pp. 37-285). New York: Plenum.
Wertsch, J. V. (1985). Introduction. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), Culture,
communication, and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives (pp. 1-18).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the Mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Willis, P. (1977). Learning to labor: How working class kids get working class jobs.
New York: Columbia University Press.
Wright, E. O. (2000). Class counts: Comparative studies in class analysis (Student
edition ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved October 1,
2006, from University of Wisconsin-Madison Web Site:
http://ssc.wisc.edu/~wright/selected-published-writings.htm#class%20counts
Zinchenko, V. P. (1985). Vygotsky's ideas about units for the analysis of mind. In J.
V. Wertsch (Ed.), Culture, communication, and cognition: Vygotskian
perspectives (pp. 94-118). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
146
Appendix A: USC Neighborhood Academic Initiative Organizational Chart
July 21, 2005
Executive Director
Assistant Director
Saturday Academy
Administrative Coordinator
Student Workers
Temporary
Employees
Graduate Student
JEP Student Volunteers
Saturday Academy English
Teachers / Math Tutors
NAI Teachers
Foshay & Manual Arts
High Schools
Middle School Liaison
147
Appendix B: Research Protocols
Teacher Interview
Research Questions
Considering teacher responses to students, what are the effects of a teacher’s
cultural experiences at work, in teacher education and training, and in
childhood as a student?
How does a teacher’s social class affect his or her responses? Specifically,
does family status, parents’ status, or grandparents’ status have an impact?
How does school organizational culture affect teacher responses?
What other factors affect a teacher’s responses?
1. Where did you grow up?
2. What did your parents do? Your grandparents?
3. Could you describe your race, ethnicity, or culture?
4. Do you speak any other languages? If so, how did you acquire them?
5. Are you currently married? If so, what does your spouse do? Do you
have children?
6. How would you describe your childhood experiences in school?
7. Why did you decide to teach?
8. Tell me about the training you received to be a teacher. If the
interviewee has children: Does being a parent have an impact on your
teaching?
9. Have you taken part in inservice training?
10. Has there been any special training for NAI?
11. How did you become a teacher at NAI?
12. Tell me about the NAI students. How do they compare to other
students you teach or have taught? How were they selected for NAI?
Do they ever struggle with the course material? If so, what do you
do?
13. How would you characterize the school atmosphere at NAI? How
does your work at NAI compare to other teaching positions you have
or have had?
14. Is there anything you do differently in the NAI classroom compared
to other schools? If yes, why?
15. Is there anything else you would like to tell me?
148
Student Interview
Research Questions
What are the effects of a student’s social and cultural experiences on
learning?
How does a student’s social class affect his or her responses? Specifically,
does family status, parents’ status, or grandparents’ status have an impact?
How does school organizational culture affect students?
1. Where did you grow up?
2. What are your parents’ jobs? Your grandparents?
3. Could you describe your race, ethnicity, or culture?
4. Do you speak any other languages?
5. Who do you live with?
6. Outside NAI, how would you describe your experiences in school?
7. How did you become an NAI student?
8. Tell me about the school atmosphere at NAI. What is it like to be an
NAI student?
9. Tell me about the NAI teachers. How do they compare to other
teachers you have or have had?
10. What happens if you have trouble understanding some of the class
material?
11. Is there anything you do differently in the NAI classroom compared
to other schools?
12. Is there anything else you would like to tell me?
149
Administrator/Staff Interview
Research Questions
How does school organizational culture affect teacher-student interaction?
1. Where did you grow up?
2. What did your parents do? Your grandparents?
3. Could you describe your race, ethnicity, or culture?
4. Do you speak any other languages?
5. How would you describe your childhood experiences in school?
6. How did you come to be a staff member/administrator at NAI?
7. Considering your education, what is most applicable to your job here?
8. What do you see as your role at NAI? How do you interface with the
teachers?
9. What atmosphere or school culture do you promote? What impact
does being a part of USC have on NAI?
10. Tell me about the NAI teachers. How do they compare to other
teachers you have worked with? How were they selected for NAI?
11. Describe the ideal NAI teacher. Do any features of NAI help teachers
attain this ideal?
12. Tell me about the NAI students. How do they compare to other
students? How were they selected for NAI?
13. What are the unique features of the NAI curriculum? How does NAI
maximize student learning?
14. Do students ever struggle with the course material? Are there any
standard measures taken if a student is not doing well in class?
15. Is there anything else you would like to tell me?
150
Parent Board Member Interview
Research Question
How does school organizational culture affect teacher-student interaction?
1. Tell me about your family.
2. Where did you grow up?
3. Could you describe your race, ethnicity, or culture?
4. Do you speak any other languages?
5. What is your job? What were your parents’ jobs?
6. How did you come to join the parent leadership board?
7. What is the function of the board? Can you give an example of some
recent board work?
8. What is your role as a member of the board? Can you give an
example?
9. Can you describe the NAI for me? What do you see as its strengths
and weaknesses?
10. What are your expectations for the NAI students? Teachers?
Administrators?
11. Is there anything else you would like to tell me?
151
School Principal Interview
Research Question
How does school organizational culture affect teacher-student interaction?
1. Tell me about your school. What do you see as its strengths and
weaknesses?
2. Tell me about the students. What challenges do they face? What
strengths do they have?
3. Tell me about the teachers. What challenges do they face? What
strengths do they have?
4. How do you see your role as principal? What kind of school
atmosphere do you promote?
5. Are you familiar with USC’s Neighborhood Academic Initiative? (If
no, stop here.)
6. Tell me about the NAI teachers. How do they compare to other
teachers here? How were they selected for NAI?
7. Tell me about the NAI students. How do they compare to other
students here? How were they selected for NAI?
8. Does the teacher and student participation in NAI have any impact on
your school?
9. Is there anything else you would like to tell me?
152
Stimulated Recall Protocol
Research Questions
1. Considering teacher responses to students, what are the effects of a teacher’s
social and cultural background?
2. How does a teacher’s social class (family status, parents’ status, or grandparents’
status) or gender affect his or her responses to students in need?
3. How does school organizational culture affect teacher responses to students in
need?
4. What other factors affect a teacher’s responses?
Procedure: One class session will be videotaped. After the taping, the
researcher will meet with the teacher and replay the video. Questions will be asked
before, during, and after video replay. Responses will be audiotaped. The procedure
will take approximately 45 minutes.
1. Please tell me briefly about your plans or objectives for this lesson.
2. I’m interested in your perceptions of and interactions with the
students.
3. (Start playing video) Please feel free to stop the videotape any time
you recall your perceptions or thoughts during the class.
4. What were your thoughts or feelings at this point?
5. What made you talk to this student?
6. What was your comment or instruction to the student? Why?
7. Were you satisfied with the results of your intervention? Please
explain.
8. (End video) How do you feel the students performed during this
lesson? Are there any specific students you would like to comment
on?
9. Are there any issues that came up in class that you will follow up on?
10. Do you have any other comments?
153
Appendix C: School Staffing Profiles
Foshay Learning Center
Foshay Staffing Profile
Certificated Management 6
Certificated Teachers 146
Certificated Others 5
Certificated Assignments by Department
Bilingual-ESL 6 Foreign Language 3
Art 1 Health Careers 1
Computer Science 1 Industrial Education 1
Business Education 2 Mathematics 21
Music 3 Physical Education 7
Special Education 18 Science 8
English 17 Social Science 14
Teaching Experience in
LAUSD
Assigned to This Location
Less Than 1 Year 19 Less than 1 Year
1 Year 42 1 Year 8
2-5 Years 30 2-5 Years 63
6-10 Years 19 6-10 Years 21
11 Or More Years 47 11 Or More Years 41
(Los Angeles Unified School District, 2005)
154
Manual Arts High School
Manual Arts Staffing Profile
Certificated Management 6
Certificated Teachers 93
Certificated Others 5
Certificated Assignments by Department
Bilingual-ESL 4 Foreign Language 0
Art 0 Health Careers 0
Computer Science 0 Industrial Education 0
Business Education 0 Mathematics 12
Music 1 Physical Education 8
Special Education 6 Science 7
English 15 Social Science 10
Teaching Experience in
LAUSD
Assigned to This Location
Less Than 1 Year 15 Less than 1 Year
1 Year 30 1 Year 7
2-5 Years 16 2-5 Years 34
6-10 Years 18 6-10 Years 26
11 Or More Years 25 11 Or More Years 22
(Los Angeles Unified School District, 2005)
155
Appendix D : Model of College Preparation Program Effectiveness(1)
(1) Tierney, W., Hagedorn, L.(2002). Increasing Access to College: Extending Possibilities for All Students. Albany:
State University of New York Press.
156
Appendix E: NAI Graduate Survey 1997-2004(2)
1997 % 1998 % 1999 % 2000 % 2001 % 2002 % 2003 % 2004 % Total
Total Graduates 46 55 39 45 46 32 32 33 328
USC 22 47.8 25 45.5 16 41.0 8 17.8 11 23.9 4 12.5 15 45 12 36 113
Other Private 4-Yr
College
0 0.0 2 3.6 5 12.8 10 22.2 9 19.6 8 25.0 3 9 3 1 40
UC System 2 4.3 3 5.5 3 7.7 10 22.2 9 19.6 5 15.6 8 24 8 2 48
Cal State System 2 4.3 5 9.1 5 12.8 11 24.4 10 21.7 5 15.6 4 12 7 2 49
Other State Systems 1 2.2 0 0.0 2 5.1 2 4.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 6 0 0 7
Total Enrollment of 4-yr
Colleges
27 58.7 35 63.6 31 79.5 41 91.1 39 84.8 22 68.8 32 100 30 90 257
Community College 15 32.6 14 25.5 7 17.9 2 4.4 4 8.7 8 25 0 0 3 1 53
Vocational College 0 0.0 3 5.5 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 3.1 0 0 0 0 4
Total Enrollment of Post-
Secondary Education
42 91.3 52 94.5 38 97.4 43 95.6 43 93.5 31 96.9 32 100 33 100 314
Unknown/Working/Military 4 8.7 3 5.5 1 2.6 2 4.4 3 6.5 1 3.1 0 0 0 0 14
(2) These figures do not reflect the number of students who do not go to USC their first year, but transfer in their
second or third years.
Source: Neighborhood Academic Initiative (n.d.)

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study examined how the teachers of the University of Southern California Neighborhood Academic Initiative responded to students in grades 9-12. The research focused on how organizational, social, and cultural factors drove student-teacher interaction within a pre-college program for low SES minority students. The study identified and described organizational, social, and cultural factors as they emerged in teacher interaction with students. The research questions were: 1) How does a teacher's social and cultural background appear in his or her responses to students? 2) How does school organizational culture appear in teacher responses to students? 3) What other factors affect a teacher's responses?

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Linking theory and practice in teacher education: an analysis of the reflective-inquiry approach to preparing teachers to teach in urban schools

PDF

A world of education: the influence of culture on instructional style and perceived teacher effectiveness

PDF

A study of student affairs administration professional preparation in Chinese higher education

PDF

How teacher preparation programs prepare White teachers to teach in urban school settings

PDF

The effects of a series of after school family writing workshops on students' writing achievement and attitudes

PDF

Embedded academic support for high school student success: an innovation study

PDF

An analysis of the selection and training of guiding teachers in an urban teacher education program

PDF

Factors impacting the effectiveness of mentor teachers in a national teacher residency

PDF

Impact of required parental involvement on African American male students and families: a qualitative study of the USC-NAI program

PDF

Teachers’ knowledge of gifted students and their perceptions of gifted services in public elementary schooling

PDF

Exploring the undergraduate Latina/o experience: a case study of academically successful students at a research institution

PDF

A father, a son, and a storybook: a case study of discourse during storybook reading

PDF

Examining the applications of data-driven decision making on classroom instruction

PDF

School connectedness and teacher reflective practices

PDF

4th space teaching: incorporating teachers' funds of knowledge, students' funds of knowledge, and school knowledge in multi-centric teaching

PDF

Factors associated with second language anxiety in adolescents from different cultural backgrounds

PDF

Building teacher competency to work with middle school long-term English language learners: an improvement model

PDF

Urban mathematics teacher retention

PDF

Exploring the effects of media on the self-concepts and achievement of African American high school students

PDF

Relational leadership: underrepresented student perspectives on diversity courses

Asset Metadata

Creator Robertson, Heather (author)

Core Title Teachers helping students: a sociocultural perspective

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

Publication Date 03/28/2007

Defense Date 10/30/2006

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

Tag at-risk students,college preparation,OAI-PMH Harvest,school culture,sociocultural approach

Language English

Advisor Jun, Alexander (committee member), Mora-Flores, Eugenia (committee member), Pruitt, Greta (committee member)

Creator Email heatherr@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m235

Unique identifier UC195981

Identifier etd-Robertson-20070328 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-164044 (legacy record id),usctheses-m235 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Robertson-20070328.pdf

Dmrecord 164044

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Robertson, Heather

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Repository Name Libraries, University of Southern California

Repository Location Los Angeles, California

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu