University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Effective factors of high performing urban high schools: a case study

(USC Thesis Other)

Effective factors of high performing urban high schools: a case study

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

EFFECTIVE FACTORS OF HIGH PERFORMING URBAN

HIGH SCHOOLS: A CASE STUDY

by

Stephania Loan Vu

______________________________________________________________

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 2008

Copyright 2008 Stephania Loan Vu
ii
DEDICATION
To my mother Loan Ninh and father Son Vu with all of my love.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would first like to extend my most sincere appreciation to my dissertation
committee. Dr. Stuart Gothold, working with you has been an inspiring professional
experience. Your calm manner and plethora of knowledge have pushed me to think
even deeper about the urgent issues in urban education. Next, Dr. Dennis Hocevar
for offering his vast knowledge, especially with advice in regards to the data
collection for this study. Further, to Dr. Kathy Stowe for her guidance and expertise
throughout this process. Also, to Dr. Celia Oyler, one of the most inspirational
educators I have had the privilege of learning from. Thank you to all of you!
Further, it is compulsory to acknowledge my family who have timelessly
challenged me through intellectual discussions—some not friendly, but all
worthwhile, I love you! To my three sisters Angela, Jacyntha, and Cat and my
brother, Hai, I could not imagine completing this program without your unwavering
support. To my nephew, Connor, thank you for making every day more worthwhile
than the one before. May you grow up to a brighter future, seek equality, and love
people unconditionally. Next, to my extended family—aunts, uncles, and cousins—I
adore and cherish each and every one of you. Finally, to my parents, Loan and Son,
who had bigger dreams for me than I ever imagined. This degree is a manifestation
of everything you two have given up in order for me to live and enjoy my best life. I
am forever indebted to you.
Next, to all of my dear friends who remind me never to rest with the status
quo and that there are still urgent equity issues in education that need to be
iv
addressed. My friends in California, New York, and beyond have been a rigid
backbone for me, providing me with encouragement, companionship, and love. I
truly could not have survived this experience without any of you!
To all of my colleagues, especially the English Department at Doig
Intermediate—I am thankful that all of you are motivating professionals and
collaborators. To my administrators, Margaret Feliciani and Michael Kennedy, I
have truly learned from the best! Your verbal advice and professional manners have
taught me a lot about the best of leadership in urban public schools. Most
importantly, to every student I have had the pleasure of meeting, all of you motivate
me to improve my craft of teaching and I constantly reflect on how to be a better
teacher.
Finally, after three arduous years of study, I can continue to travel the world!
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION …………………………………………………………… ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ………………………………………………. iv
LIST OF TABLES ……………………………………………………….. vi
LIST OF FIGURES ………………………………………………………. vii
ABSTRACT ……………………………………………………………… viii
CHAPTER 1 – THE PROBLEM AND UNDERLYING THEORY
OF THE FRAMEWORK ………………………………………………… 1

CHAPTER 2 – REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ……………………… 13

CHAPTER 3 – RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ………………………… 39

CHAPTER 4 – FINDINGS ……………………………………………….. 59

CHAPTER 5 – SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS ……………. 88

REFERENCES ……………………………………………………………. 98
APPENDICES …………………………………………………………….. 103
vi

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. HSSSE respondents by grade level ………………………………… 34

Table 2. HSSSE respondents by community type ………………………….. 34

Table 3. Differences between population of HSSSE respondents,
State of California, and Los Angeles and Orange Counties ……………….. 36

Table 4. High Performing High School’s ethnic population ……………….. 49

Table 5. Creswell’s (2002) Steps for Data Analysis ……………………….. 56

Table 6. Demographic comparison of HPHS to
the national HSSSE respondents …………………………………………… 72

Table 7. Similarities between HPHS and national HSSSE respondents …… 74

Table 8. Differences between HPHS and national HSSSE respondents …… 75
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. HSSSE respondents by race/ethnicity ……………………………… 35

Figure 2. Conceptual framework ……………………………………………… 44

Figure 3. API Base and Growth Data ………………………………………….. 48

Figure 4. API Statewide and Similar Schools Ranking ………………………. 50

Figure 5. High Performing High School Dropout Rate ………………………. 51
viii
ABSTRACT
There is much alarm over the condition of public schools in the United
States. More and more students are dropping out of school, never earning a high
school diploma. There has been some research done on failing high schools, which
is where many students drop out, and most of these students are students of color
living and attending schools in urban neighborhoods. Given the long track record of
failing schools, federal mandates which have been enacted such as the No Child Left
Behind Act expect schools to make progress every single year. Although urban high
schools have made little progress as a whole, there are some that are defying the
odds and outperforming according to the federal mandates.
The purpose of this case study is to identify a high performing high school
that is located in an urban area to see what factors contributed to its academic
success. More specifically, this case study will investigate if student engagement is
one of the factors that contributed to the school’s academic achievement. From this
study, themes emerged that led to recommendations to improve student achievement
in all schools, not just urban ones.
Two research questions were developed to guide this study by the thematic
dissertation group comprised of 10 doctoral students from the University of Southern
California. Data was collected in the form of documents review, interviews, surveys,
and observations. Triangulation using Marzano’s (2003) five effective school-wide
factors were utilized to compile and organize findings.
ix
A summary of the findings in response to the two research questions reveal
that the factors that contribute to the academic achievement at High Performing High
School include:
Finding #1: Clear District goals and Expected School-wide Learning Results.
Finding #2: High-level classes and higher expectations equate to higher
academic achievement.
Finding #3: Commonality between units, assessments, and strategies lead to
equity between classrooms and throughout the school.
Finding #4: Professional Development Opportunities are plentiful and
meaningful.
Finding #5: School-wide Programs target student’s needs.
In addition, there were many examples throughout the school that
demonstrated Marzano’s (2003) five school-level factors of what works in schools
including a guaranteed and viable curriculum, challenging goals and effective
feedback, parent and community involvement, a safe and orderly environment, and
collegiality and professionalism. Lastly, the findings suggest that a strong
relationship between student engagement and student achievement does not exist at
this particular high performing high school.
1
CHAPTER ONE
THE PROBLEM AND UNDERLYING THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Introduction
This chapter provides background information regarding the research
problem that is the focus of this study: namely, the widening achievement gap
between high performing schools, usually found in suburban areas and low
performing schools, most often in urban areas. A statement of the problem, purpose
of this study, research questions, as well as the significance of this study will be
described. Additionally, the methodology, assumptions, limitations, and
delimitations of the study will also be addressed. Finally, a list of frequently used
words and their definitions are presented as well as the overall organization of this
case study is presented.
Background of the Problem
Since President George W. Bush signed the No Child Left Behind legislation
into law on January 08, 2002, national and annual benchmarks have been set
regarding student achievement. However, even before this particular bill was signed,
there was much alarm over the state of public education across the United States,
especially with regards to low performing urban high schools. A report conducted
by WestEd (2004), a nonprofit education agency, revealed that since the education
accountability movement, schools have been making steady progress towards better
student achievement, but the progress they are making is slow. More specifically, in
California, dropout rates among high school students are on the rise. In fact, dropout
2
rates among high school students are most staggering among students attending high
schools located in urban areas.
Since the 17
th
century, the main purpose of schools in America had been to
strengthen the student’s religious faith and teach general skills. Early in our
educational history, only affluent children attended schools and the school calendar
reflected the values of an agrarian society. Children were expected to go to school
during colder months, when working on the farms was not possible and they did not
attend school during summer months because then they were required to tend the
fields.
However, as we are well aware, there have been dramatic changes in
schooling, since its inception in the 17
th
century. These changes came about because
of complex and large issues that subsequently arose in education, such as
segregation, “separate but equal” laws, and many, many others. National efforts to
reform education in the United States have first and foremost attempted to equalize
the opportunities for educational access for all students.
As a result of A Nation at Risk, a national report on the state of public schools
published in 1983, professionals have begun to realize the disparities among public
schools, with the starkest difference found between public schools in suburban, high-
income areas and those in urban, low-income areas. As a result of this study, it
became apparent that all children were not receiving an equal education. In fact,
what was once the “minimum competency” has now become the “maximum
competency,” and standards for all students have been lowered (A Nation at Risk,
3
1983). Research in the field further recognized that there were schools during the
mid-1980s, mostly in urban areas, that were not teaching the same material as those
in the more affluent suburban areas. In fact, these urban schools had not changed
much as they went into the 21
st
century.
The most recent educational reform effort is the No Child Left Behind Act. In
January 2002, President Bush signed the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), a
federal law that holds states, school districts, and individual schools accountable for
student achievement with the ultimate goal of closing the achievement gap, and the
discrepancy between what students were learning and how they were performing in
content areas, between all schools.
In 1999, the Public School Accountability Act (PSAA) was passed as a major
reform movement in California that led to even more accountability in the state. The
PSAA includes a Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) system that is used to
test students’ proficiency in the state standards on the California Standards Test
(CST), and creates an academic performance index (API), a score from 200-1000
that all public schools in California receive. An API score is an interim score used to
help schools meet targets every year to ensure that by the year 2013-2014, all
students meet proficiency. In addition to receiving an API score, schools also
receive a similar school ranking, where schools are ranked against other schools that
share the same demographic profiles to see if these schools are making progress
when compared with similarly situated schools.
4
To measure a schools annual progress and to gauge student’s progress
towards proficiency, the California Content Standards were established. This
progressive step towards consistent growth is measured by stated benchmarks and
ultimately attempts to ensure that all students, whether those in suburban or urban
areas, acquire the same level of knowledge, at every grade level, across the entire
state. These content standards were aimed at equalizing high schools to guarantee
that what teachers were teaching and what students were learning would be uniform
throughout the entire state (Conley, 2005). No longer would the disparity between
suburban and urban schools be tolerated, as standards were developed to close these
inconsistencies between suburban and urban schools. According to the California
Department of Education (2004), standards were created to identify what every
student should be learning at every grade level and in every academic content area.
Moreover, these standards were developed between 1997 and 2005 to ensure that all
students in California are learning the same material and progressing toward
proficiency in all of the standards. Although there is still much debate over state
standards, with one controversy being that states develop their own standards and
have varying standards, the reauthorization of NCLB is quickly approaching and will
hopefully equalize state standards.
Statement of the Problem
Although education has come a long way in its attempt to attain systemic
equalization, there is still a struggle to improve schools, specifically high schools,
and even more specifically, those in urban areas. Children who attend urban high
5
schools are not graduating at the same rates as children in suburban schools.
Additionally, a large majority of children in these urban schools are children of
color, specifically Black and Latino.
Despite the failing conditions of many California urban, public high schools,
there are some schools that defy the common, almost expected results and have
actually shown improved academic achievement as evidenced by their similar
schools ranking on their Annual Yearly Progress. This study seeks to examine a
high performing urban high school that defies the notion that many of these schools
are doomed to fail. This study strives to unveil what is happening in one school as
part of a meta-analysis of ten total case studies to identify what makes this school
high performing so that others may emulate this high school’s methods.
The essential inquiry of this dissertation was premised on a simple notion that
increased student engagement leads to increased student achievement—a premise
which is included as one of the research questions. The more students are engaged
in their classes, the more they participate in school activities, the higher their
academic achievement will be. Research conducted by Finn (1993) showed that
there was a direct correlation between student engagement and student achievement
since engaged students feel a connection to the school and to their learning. This
study on student engagement and factors that contribute to high performing high
schools is especially vital because there has been little research done in high
performing or outperforming high schools in urban areas.
6
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this case study is to examine what factors contribute to
increased student academic performance at an urban high school. More specifically,
this case study seeks to discover if student engagement plays a role in the successful
outcomes at an urban high school. To determine if there is a link between student
engagement and academic performance, this study will look at one high performing
urban high school.
Although research in the field has shown the importance of student
engagement in relation to academic achievement (Finn, 1993), not many studies have
been done at the high school level and even fewer done in urban high schools.
Therefore, this multiple methods case study, which is one of ten, will focus on one
high performing urban high school as part of a meta-analysis study.
Research Questions
Two research questions guided this study:
1. What perceived factors contribute to academic achievement in a high
performing urban high school?
2. Is there a link between student engagement and student achievement in a high
performing urban high school?
Significance of Study
A thorough review of the literature revealed that one important reason to
conduct this specific research study was the paucity of research on student
engagement in high schools, especially with a focus on those that are high
7
performing and in urban areas. Another important reason to conduct this study is to
investigate what other factors at the school contribute to its success. This study is
significant because it focuses on an urban high school. Research would suggest that
within urban high schools, there are many adverse factors that cannot be controlled.
Therefore, by focusing on how this school has been resilient and high performing,
the results of this study can potentially lead to other schools implementing strategies
found at this school site.
Methodology
A case study method was used to conduct this study. The researcher chose
one high performing urban high school, as defined by the dissertation group, and
intensely studied this site to determine if there was a phenomenon that could be
described about this high performing urban high school. The process of this study
was used to find constructs, themes, and patterns that would be used to describe the
phenomenon being studied (Gall, Gall, & Borg, 2003).
Assumptions
For this study, the following assumptions were made:
1. People were interested in this study because this site was deemed a high
performing school.
2. People that were interviewed have given open and honest responses.
3. Every person observed and interviewed had sufficient knowledge about his or
her school.
8
4. The measurement tools, such as the survey, interviews, document review, and
observations were credible and valid indicators of the constructs that were
studied.
5. The results of this study, along with the results of nine other similar studies,
could be applied or transferred to other schools in the State of California.
6. Data was accurately recorded and analyzed.
Limitations
This study had the following limitations:
1. This study was limited to the subjects who volunteered and agreed to
participate in this study.
2. This study is limited to a specific number of participants who were
interviewed and observed.
3. The observations and interviews that were collected for this study were done
in a 10-week period, which limits the amount of time spent on this study.
4. Students completed an adapted version of the High School Survey of Student
Engagement because of insufficient funds to fully support this study.
Delimitations
The following were identified as delimitations for this study:
1. This study is confined to one high performing urban high school that was not
selected at random.
2. All research was conducted at the site level; however, district, state, and
national policies also affect the high performance of this urban high school.
9
3. Documentation was limited to specific instruments: surveys, observations,
interviews, and document review.
Definition of Terms
Academic Performance Index (API) - Measures the academic performance and
growth of schools. It is a numeric index (or scale) that ranges from a low of 200 to a
high of 1000. A school's API Base is subtracted from its API Growth to determine
how much the school improved in a year (CDE, 2007).
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) - A part of NCLB, this is used as a benchmark for
schools, districts, and states to show the academic progress is being made every year.
California Department of Education (CDE) - State department that presents
information about various education programs in the State of California.
California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE) - State law, enacted in 1999,
authorizing the development of the California High School Exit Examination
(CAHSEE), which students in California public schools would have to pass to earn a
high school diploma. The purpose of the CAHSEE is to improve student
achievement in high school and to help ensure that students who graduate from high
school can demonstrate grade-level competency in reading, writing, and mathematics
(CDE, 2007).
California English Language Development Test (CELDT) - A test given to students
whose first language is not English to determine their levels of English proficiency
and annually assess their progress towards proficiency in the English language.
Students are tested in four areas: reading, writing, listening, and speaking. CELDT
10
levels include: Beginning, Early Intermediate, Intermediate, Early Advanced, and
Advanced.
California Standards Test (CST) - An annual test, taken in the 2
nd
-11
th
grades, that is
used to measure students’ progress towards proficiency in the California State
Academic Content Standards. Proficiency levels include: Far Below Basic, Below
Basic, Basic, Proficient, and Advanced.
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) - A federal law that funds basic
public school programs. Since 2001, it is referred to as the No Child Left Behind
(NCLB) Act.
High performing/outperforming - The terms high performing and outperforming are
used interchangeably in this dissertation. The dissertation group decided that schools
that had a Similar School Ranking that were at least two deciles higher than their
Statewide Ranking were considered high performing.
High School Survey of Student Engagement (HSSSE) - A survey created by Indiana
University to measure student engagement levels in high schools.
Program Improvement (PI) - Schools that do not make their AYP are identified as
Program Improvement schools. According to NCLB, for every year a school is in PI
status, schools are required to implement different services and/or interventions.
Student Engagement - As described in the HSSSE (2005), student engagement refers
to the time and energy students devote to educationally purposeful activities and how
schools use effective educational practices to induce students to make wise
decisions.
11
Title I - Schools that have at least 40% of their students on free or reduced lunch
qualify to receive additional funding through this federal program.
Urban high school - The definition that was created by this dissertation group was
that of a high school in a highly populated area, an ethnic majority that was non-
white, considered a Title I school, with at least a 25% English Language Learner
population.
Organization of the Study
Chapter 1 of this study has presented an introduction to the case study, the
background of the problem, the purpose of the study, the research questions to be
answered, the research hypothesis, the significance of the study, a brief description
of the research methodology, the assumptions, limitations, delimitations, and a
glossary of terms used throughout this dissertation.
Chapter 2 of this study is a review of relevant literature. The chapter
addresses the following topics: a chapter overview, history of public education in the
United States, reform movements in education, high schools today, effective
performance factors according to Marzano (2003), and student engagement.
Chapter 3 presents the methodology used in this study, including the research
design, population and sampling procedures, descriptions of the instrumentation,
their selection and development as well as an explanation of their validity and
credibility. A rationale that includes strengths and limitations of each design element
is also discussed. Data collection and analysis are also discussed in this chapter.
Chapter 4 presents the findings of the study.
12
Chapter 5 presents an analysis of the study, which includes the significance
of the study and its implications for practice as well as any conclusions and
recommendations that can be made as a result of this study.
Conclusion
There have been many national, state, and district educational reform
movements that have initiated over time. Currently, schools are faced with the
mandates required by the No Child Left Behind legislation. There is a widening
achievement gap between high performing schools, located in suburban areas, and
lower performing schools, located in urban areas. Although these federal mandates
set standards for all schools, there are still many urban schools that are under
performing. However, the purpose of this case study is to examine a high
performing urban high school and reveal what is working at this school site. A
review of the literature in the next chapter will provide more information about the
history as well as the current state of education.
13
CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Introduction
This chapter is a review of related literature and begins with the history of
public education. Reform movements are then discussed and followed by high
schools today, and effective performance factors. Next, a review of the literature
relating to student engagement is presented, followed by information and a
description of the High School Survey of Student Engagement.
Presently, there is much alarm over the state of public high schools in the
United States, especially regarding the high dropout rates and inadequate preparation
of students for the workforce (Friedman, 2002). In fact, as a result of the staggering
dropout rates and ill preparation, many high school students in the United States will
not be competitive for jobs, especially in comparison to students in other countries
(Friedman, 2002). In the United States, reading and writing scores have remained
flat and have not significantly improved in recent years. Similarly, math and science
scores have not shown much improvement over the last two decades (Codding &
Rothman, 1999). Because of the lack of preparation for the workforce and lack of
improvement in academic content areas, many people believe that public high
schools are ineffectual and are not producing successful citizens. However, before
we begin to understand our current situation, we must understand the history of
public schools in America as well as important reform efforts that have shaped
14
education. By examining the history of education, we will be able to understand the
roots of a lot of educational issues as well as the genesis of our current system.
History of Public Education in the United States
Public education dates back to the 17
th
century in the New England colonies,
where children went to school mainly to strengthen their religious beliefs and acquire
some general knowledge. During this time, the school calendar was designed around
an agrarian culture where children attended school during the fall, winter, and spring
seasons and did not attend during the summer season because they were needed to
work in the fields (Fowlkes & Lavelle, 2001). Ultimately, the purpose of education
in the 17
th
century was to bring communities together under religious teachings
(Massachusetts Public Law of 1647). In addition to teaching and uniting a
community around religion, schools up until the mid-1800s were localized, only
serving children in the immediate area, and only accessible to children from the
upper classes in society. Those who were from the privileged classes and male were
allowed to go to school because they were thought to be the superior members of the
species (Fowlkes & Lavelle, 2001).
However, in the mid-1800s, Horace Mann published the Common School
Journal in which he wrote that only a system that educated all people would produce
a productive society with decent, law-abiding citizens. As a result of Mann’s
journal, a free public education became available to every child by the beginning of
the 20
th
century. Compulsory attendance was a movement that made education
available to all, regardless of a student’s background (Thattai, 2006).
15
Presently, the purpose of public schools has been transformed to fulfill
different needs in contemporary society. Where schools were once used as a tool to
unite citizens within a religious context, our purposes have now been altered to
provide a sound education to all and to ultimately produce informed and productive
citizens (Fowlkes & Lavelle, 2001). Consequently, schools today have changed
significantly in their purpose. Still, as we have seen, historically, schools have not
kept up with the times in terms of form and function. Many schools still follow a
traditional calendar, which many educators feel is outdated, and education is still not
equitable for all (Perelman, 1992).
Schools today continue to resemble, in many ways, the traditional schools
that began many years ago. These traditional schools are usually broken down by
grades with elementary schools ranging from kindergarten through sixth grade,
intermediate schools that cover seventh and eighth, and high schools that include
ninth through twelfth grades (Conant, 1959). These schools are designed, as Conant
(1959) imagined, to provide comprehensive preparation for students in the 20
th

century. However, many schools have lost this focus, and research has shown that
students in the United States are not being adequately prepared for the workforce
demands of the 21
st
century (Friedman, 2002). Therefore, to fully understand
today’s situation in public high schools, we need to examine the history of education.
From that history, one may begin to understand why certain changes came about and
further, to better understand the nation’s goal of creating high performing schools
across the United States.
16
As a result of A Nation at Risk, a national report on the state of public schools
published in 1983, professionals have begun to realize the disparities among public
schools, with the starkest difference found between public schools in suburban, high-
income areas, and those in urban, low-income areas. As a result of this study, it
became apparent that all children were not receiving an equal education. Although it
was recognized that not every child was receiving an equitable education,
educational standards in the United States came to be dramatically lowered as
opposed to being raised. In fact, what was once the “minimum competency” has now
become the “maximum competency,” and standards for all students have decreased
(A Nation at Risk, 1983). Subsequently, research in the field made it clear that many
schools during the mid-1980s, mostly in urban areas, were not teaching the same
material as those schools in more affluent suburban areas. In fact, these urban
schools had not changed much as our society entered the 21
st
century.
Reform Movements in Education
Because of the inequities within American education, many educational
reform movements have taken shape in the United States. Historically, reform has
taken place in a variety of ways, such as a free, public education for all, compulsory
attendance, bilingual education, school funding, and most recently the accountability
movement initiated by the No Child Left Behind Act. All of these efforts have had
two primary goals in mind: increasing student achievement and equalizing education
for all.
17
A Nation at Risk
When A Nation at Risk (1983) was published, there was still a severe lack of
resources for many students in schools in poorer areas in comparison to those in
more affluent ones. Ironically, students in poorer areas were expected to achieve
academically, to be on par with more affluent areas, but were not given the necessary
resources to do so. There seemed to be no accountability system set up where
teachers and administrators knew exactly what every student had to be competent in
before advancing a grade the following year. This growing achievement gap,
through the lack of standards that students were being held to, was the reason why
additional reform efforts had to be initiated and enforced. The realization of the
disparities between schools was the result of the next and most present reform effort,
the No Child Left Behind Act.
No Child Left Behind
As a result of the disparity between schools, low standards would no longer
be tolerated in any public school in the United States according to President George
W. Bush. In January 2002, President Bush signed the No Child Left Behind Act
(NCLB), a federal law that would hold states, school districts, and individual schools
accountable for student achievement with the ultimate goal of closing the
achievement gap, the discrepancy of what students were learning and how they were
performing in content areas, between all schools.
The goal of NCLB is to have high academic standards for all students and to
increase federal funding for schools that need more monetary assistance; however,
18
one of the salient criticisms of NCLB is that increased funding has not come through.
Furthermore, NCLB seeks to hold schools accountable for meeting national
standards, which would be measured by individual state tests that measure
proficiency in specific content standards. As a result of these tests, schools would be
given an annual score called an adequate yearly progress (AYP) score with a
maximum score of 1000. By the academic year 2013-2014, every school, according
to NCLB, has to be proficient in all standards, or face punitive measures. Schools
are required to meet their AYP score every year and if they do not, they are
considered, at least in California, a “Program Improvement (PI)” school.
Additionally, if a school is in PI status for more two years, parents have the option of
sending their children to different schools, and if the school does not continue to
meet their AYP, additional actions are taken, such as providing supplemental
education services, restructuring staff, and adopting new curricula. If, after all of
these actions have been implemented, and a school still fails to meet its AYP score,
the school may be taken over by State officials or even shut down.
In addition to NCLB, individual states have also developed their own sets of
academic standards for each grade level and content area, and each student in every
state is expected to be proficient in all of those standards. For instance, in the state
of California, to ensure that all students are leaving high school with specific skills,
the state has adopted California Content Standards, the Public School Accountability
Act (PSAA), and the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE). The goal of
each of these reform movements has been to better prepare students, especially those
19
in high school, for the competitive workforce (Committee on Education and the
Workforce, 2004).
The California Content Standards were developed to gauge a student’s
progress towards proficiency. This progress was measured by stated benchmarks
and ultimately attempted to ensure that all students, whether those in suburban or
urban areas, were expected to acquire the same knowledge in every grade level
across the entire state. These content standards aimed to equalize high schools to
guarantee that what teachers were teaching and what students were learning would
be uniform throughout the entire state (Conley, 2005). No longer would the disparity
between suburban and urban schools be tolerated and standards were developed to
close these inconsistencies between suburban and urban schools. The California
academic content standards were created to identify what every student should be
learning at every grade level and in every academic content area (Wise, L., Taylor, L.,
Xialoei, W., Becker, D.E., Thacker, A., 2006). Moreover, these standards were
developed between 1997 and 2005 and are used to ensure that all students in
California are learning the same material and progressing toward proficiency in all of
the standards. Many feel that we are at a much better place in education now because
higher expectations for all students have been set. At this moment, the most
imperative concern is in ensuring that all schools are meeting the standards which
have been established (Conley, 2005).
20
Public School Accountability Act
In addition to the California Content Standards, in 1999, the Public School
Accountability Act (PSAA) was passed as a major reform movement in California
that led to even more accountability in the state. The PSAA includes the
Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) system that is used to test student’s
proficiency in the state standards on the California Standards Test (CST), and creates
an academic performance index (API), a score from 200-1000 that all public schools
in California receive. An API score is an interim score used to help schools meet
targets every year to ensure that they will meet the 2013-2014 score stated above. In
addition to receiving an API score, schools also receive a similar school ranking, in
which schools are ranked against other schools that share the same demographic
profiles to see if these schools are making progress when compared with similarly
situated schools.
California High School Exit Exam
The California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE) has been used to
determine if students have acquired sufficient knowledge to graduate from high
school. This test was first developed in 1999 by then state Senator, Jack O’Connell,
and was put into practice for incoming freshmen in 2004. On the CAHSEE, students
are tested in two academic content areas: English Language Arts and Mathematics.
The English portion of the test is based on the proficiency levels for 10
th
grade
standards and the Mathematics portion tests proficiency on 8
th
grade standards.
According to the California Department of Education, 10
th
grade proficiency on
21
English Language Arts and 8
th
grade proficiency in Mathematics is sufficient to
graduate from high school (Wise, L., Taylor, L., Xialoei, W., Becker, D.E., Thacker, A.,
2006). Students begin taking the CAHSEE during their 10
th
grade year of high
school and are required to pass both sections to graduate from high school. As of
June 2, 2006, over 41,000 high school seniors, including many Hispanics, African-
Americans, and English Language Learners, have been denied high school diplomas
because of their inability to pass the CAHSEE exam, (California Department of
Education, 2006).
Innovative Schools
At the same time that educational reform was taking place through such
vehicles as accountability and NCLB, non-traditional schools were beginning to
emerge as a way to raise student achievement. These schools were considered
“innovative” and emphasized small learning communities (Cushman, 1999).
Breaking away from the traditional, comprehensive, public high school, which had
been outlined in James Conant’s (1959) seminal work, The American High School
Today, and which many researchers today describe as too broad, over-crowded, and
simply outdated, these new non-traditional schools started to change and adapt to fit
the differing needs of students today. These needs were being met with smaller
learning communities, more specialized curricula, and a focus on developing
relationships between students and teachers (Toch, 2003).
While many traditional comprehensive high schools have anywhere between
1000-6000 students or more, these smaller learning communities have only several
22
hundred students. According to a study conducted by WestEd, a nonprofit
educational research committee, for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, public
high schools are often unable to meet the needs of their students because there are
simply too many students for any of them to have an “authentic” high school
experience where each student feels like a part of a community (Huebner & Corbett,
2004). Furthermore, in traditional high schools, students often feel lost, become
unmotivated academically, and do not want to contribute their time to the school
(Huebner & Corbett, 2004). Studies have been conducted, such as Jeremy Finn’s
(1993) work “School Engagement and Students at Risk,” in which the results of
these studies showed that often students did not feel a connection to the high school
they were attending because of the large number of students and the lack of
individualized attention that each student received (Gewertz, 2006). The study,
conducted by WestEd, identified high performing high schools that were considered
to be innovative (Huebner & Corbett, 2004)). WestEd described innovative schools
to be those that were doing things differently than comprehensive high schools,
whether it was having smaller classes and less students attend the school, engaging
students in non-traditional ways, or having a specific focus such as High Tech High
in San Diego, California, a chain of schools with a theme of utilizing the latest
technology to further prepare students for the workforce (Huebner & Corbett, 2004).
According to the WestEd study (Huebner & Corbett, 2004) each of the five
successful high schools studied had several commonalities:
23
Finding 1: All of the school served ethnically and socioeconomically diverse
students.
Finding 2: Many of the students who were entering these schools were
performing below grade level or standards upon entrance.
Finding 3: Students were enrolled in a rigorous and engaging curriculum.
Finding 4: Schools developed supportive learning environments and
maintained such an atmosphere.
Finding 5: Students were highly engaged in learning.
Finding 6: Students at every single site were achieving academically.
These findings have initiated new reform efforts in education that are still
taking place today. Trying to accommodate students with a more personalized
approach to learning in high schools has so far proven successful according to the
WestEd report. However, because this study is relatively new, a few more years
need to pass to see if these innovative high schools with smaller, more personalized
learning environments continue to be successful (Huebner & Corbett, 2004).
High Schools Today
Although we have seen an abundance of educational reform movements in
the United States, some still argue that despite all of these reform efforts, high
schools have not changed dramatically in recent years (Codding & Rothman, 1999).
From examining the history of education in the United States, as well as the systems
in place today, we have learned that there are still major disparities that exist
between schools, especially at the high school level. High school dropout rates are
24
still high; whereas thirty years ago the United States made up 30% of college
students worldwide, today that number has fallen to only 14% and continues to
decline each year (Knapp, 2006). Unfortunately, high school graduation rates are the
lowest among Black and Hispanic students, at about 50% (Greene & Forrester,
2003). In addition, not only are students in the United States being inadequately
prepared for the workforce, but also students in other countries are academically
outperforming students in the United States and are increasingly educationally with
each generation (Knapp, 2006). To be better prepared for college, students need to
be able to meet higher expectations, track their own academic progress and take on
responsibilities that lead to desired academic performance levels (Conley, 2005).
With this information, we need to take a closer look at the status of high schools
today and then look at how some schools have managed to be academically
efficacious.
Some high schools today have dilapidated learning conditions for students.
These schools exist mostly in poor, low-income, urban areas. Schools in these areas
face challenges, such as inadequate funding, outdated curricula and resources, and
low API and AYP scores. As a result of these conditions, these schools have some
of the highest dropout rates. In fact, many high school students have attested that the
reason they dropped out of high school was because the material that they were
learning was not relevant to their interests and classes did not engage them in
meaningful lessons (Gewertz, 2006).
25
The state of public schools in America can be examined through a look at the
city of San Francisco, which had a family contest the conditions of public schools
there in 2000. In the Williams vs. California case, the court held that not all public
school students had equal access to instructional materials, safe learning facilities,
and highly qualified teachers (California Department of Education, 2005). Under
California Education Code 35186, the court maintained the following:
1. Schools must maintain sufficient textbooks and instructional materials;
2. Schools facilities must be clean, safe, and maintained in good repair; and
3. There should be no teacher vacancies or misassignments (the placement of a
certificated employee in a teaching position for which the employee does not
hold a legally recognized certificate or credential).
Following this important case, schools in California took strides towards equality
because now schools were forced to maintain the necessary instructional resources,
building facilities and maintenance, and teachers qualified to teach specific content
areas. The state was held accountable for these changes and it had to take measures
to ensure that all students received the basic necessities for learning.
Aiming High: High Schools for the 21
st
Century, formerly known as Second
to None, is the State of California’s latest visionary reform effort for high schools
today. Moreover, Aiming High is used as a resource to help schools develop a
standards-based curriculum to ensure that their students achieve high academic
standards. Additionally, the four resources this program provides high schools are 1)
defined standards and outcomes and how schools and individual students are
26
assessed for them; 2) delineation of how to identify, teach, and assess academic
standards and local outcomes successfully; 3) supports that enable students to meet
high standards and outcomes; and 4) data for continual improvement of the system
(California Department of Education, 2006).
According to the annual report, The Condition of Education, conducted by
the Secretary of Education, schools are beginning to change. For example, children
in grades K-8 are gaining access to more after-school academic programs to help
prepare them for high school (Spellings, 2007). However, most of the students
participating in academic programs after school are still coming from middle-class
and affluent families (Spellings, 2006). Additionally, in public high schools, the
ratio between students and teachers has increased (from 16.7 to 17.7), giving
teachers less time to interact individually with students.
Additionally, The Condition of Education also addressed the topic of school
violence and safety, specifically in public high schools, because it is a concern for
many. A school that does not have theft, crime, and other safety challenges is a
school that can promote learning at its fullest. These non-threatening environments
help students focus more on their learning, as they do not have the stress than other
students in unsafe environments face. Between 1992 and 2002 theft, violent crimes,
and serious violent crimes all decreased in schools. However, after 2002, some of
these rates started to increase. According to the report, high school-aged students
were most at risk to be victims of both violent and seriously violent crimes.
27
Furthermore, a greater percentage of White and Black students were victims of theft,
compared to Hispanic students.
Although school safety is a huge factor in determining the condition of high
schools today, school finance is also an important matter to discuss. According to
The Condition of Education report, total expenditures were highest for students in
low-poverty districts ($10,768 per student) and lowest for middle-poverty districts
($8,839 per student). District poverty was determined by “finding the percentage of
related children ages 5-17 from all district families with an income below the poverty
threshold, and then dividing these districts into five categories with equal proportions
of the total enrollment” (Spellings, 2006). Since 1995, total expenditures per student
have risen dramatically with the largest increase in spending for high-poverty
districts. Financial data on high schools must be further assessed to understand the
relationship between positive financing and student achievement.
High schools today are extremely complex and there are still many ways they
can be improved. However, there are specific performance factors that have been
identified as contributing to an effective school and they are discussed below.
Effective Performance Factors
According to Marzano (2003), the five effective school-level factors of
successful schools include a guaranteed and viable curriculum, challenging goals and
effective feedback, parent and community involvement, safe and orderly
environment, and collegiality and professionalism. Marzano (2003) uses these five
28
factors to define what makes a successful school and ultimately improves student
achievement.
A guaranteed and viable curriculum is what Marzano (2003) considers the
most important factor, as it directly affects a student’s academic achievement. To
ensure a guaranteed and viable curriculum, one must have a combination of the
opportunity to learn and time to teach specific standards. Essential content standards
must be taught to all students and all instructional time must be protected and valued.
Furthermore, challenging goals and effective feedback include setting high
expectations for your students and constantly monitoring their work to ensure that
they are making ongoing progress towards their goals (Marzano, 2003). Effective
feedback is extremely necessary for students because they need to be aware of their
growth, yet at the same time they must also know what they need to improve in the
future. Thus, effective feedback must be done in a timely manner and be specific to
each student’s needs. Individual students need to be cognizant of what they need to
do to gain proficiency of the state standards; therefore, throughout the school year,
students need to be monitored and given regular feedback. When students are given
immediate feedback, the information is relevant to them and they can correct their
mistakes accordingly. They can also use the timely and specific feedback as a
mechanism to set future goals for further academic growth.
The third school-level factor that contributes to successful schools, according
to Marzano (2003), is parent and community involvement. To have a successful
school, it is vital that the entire community is engaged, invested, and incorporated in
29
the school’s culture. To gain parent and community involvement, a school must first
communicate with these two stakeholders, parents and the community.
Communication is one of the most important factors to get parents and the
community connected. Some examples of how schools can communicate with
parents and the outside community include newsletters (in multiple languages),
translators, community liaisons, bulletins, and invitations to school groups such as
School Site Council. By reaching out to parents and the greater community, there
will be more support when schools are trying to raise student achievement since
everyone is involved in the decision making process.
The fourth school-wide factor consists of a safe and orderly environment.
This type of environment is necessary for both teaching and learning to occur
(Marzano, 2003). Safety at schools is a major concern with parents and many
believe that schools are indeed safer than most neighborhoods. To achieve a safe
and orderly environment at school, four actions must be taken. These include
establishing: 1) Rules and procedures for behavioral problems, 2) Clear school-wide
rules for general behavior, 3) Enforcing consequences when rules and procedures are
broken, and 4) A program that teaches students self-discipline and responsibility
(Marzano, 2003). As stated above, teachers need to feel safe in their working
environment to educate students, and likewise, students need to feel safe in their
learning environment to attain high academic achievement.
The last school-wide factor presented by Marzano (2003) includes
collegiality and professionalism. Collegiality and professionalism should define the
30
way that adults within the school interact with each other. In order to have a school
engage in collegial discussion with a professional demeanor, the school must first
establish norms of conduct and behavior that engender collegiality and
professionalism. Secondly, they must establish governance structures that allow for
teacher involvement in discussion and policies for the school. They must finally
engage teachers in meaningful staff development activities (Marzano, 2003).
Teachers must feel that they can communicate with each other in a manner that
encourages growth as professionals to give and receive effective feedback always
with the mindset that student achievement is the purpose of all constructive
discussions. As for staff development, a staff must always realize that education is a
dynamic field in which personal improvement must always be sought. Staff
members must engage in doing so by participating in professional development.
Student Engagement
As outlined by Marzano (2003) and discussed above, there are specific
factors that are relevant to the achievements of high performing schools. In the
literature reviewed, parental engagement is often mentioned, but rarely mentioned is
the notion of student engagement. Thus this case study emphasizes and focuses on
student engagement. The goal of this case study is to see if increased student
engagement is relevant to student achievement rates in high performing urban high
schools. Also, this study strives to look at student engagement levels at a specific
high performing school to discover if there is a link between the level of student
engagement and the higher performance of the school. It is known that student
31
engagement is crucial to student achievement in school (Marks, 2000), but what role
does student engagement play in the overall academic success of a school?
A study conducted by Finn (1993) examined how school engagement related
to student achievement. Finn (1993) described student engagement as student
participation in class as measured by their attendance, their response to the teacher’s
requests, and attention paid to the teacher. The more the students engaged
themselves in the classroom, the more they felt connected to the school and learning.
This study looked at over 15,000 8
th
graders and discovered that minority students,
as well as those with a low socioeconomic status, are often the least engaged in
schools (Finn, 1993).
Some studies, such as the one conducted by Finn (1993), have shown that
increased student engagement leads to increased student achievement. However,
there is still not enough research done on this topic to show a direct correlation,
especially in urban high schools. Increasing student engagement may help students
who are transitioning from junior high to high school, especially since they are
numerous risks involved during this transition. Often times, risks as well as
resilience can be used to define what students are going through in moving from 8
th

grade into high school (Catterall, 1998). Instead of putting students at risk for
dropping out, especially in low-income areas because they feel culturally alienated,
we need to look at how we can engage these students throughout their high school
experience (Ogbu, 1992).
32
A large-scale study, the High School Survey on Student Engagement
(HSSSE) was developed from the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE)
by Indiana University. The HSSSE has been used as a tool to examine what role, if
any, student engagement plays in high schools. This case study will narrow the
focus of this national study to only include high performing urban high schools. This
survey is used to collect data about student’s engagement using a single instrument
across all high schools, regardless of the setting (HSSSE, 2005).
Students who are more engaged in their classes feel less alienated at school
and achieve at higher levels academically (Norris, Pignal, and Lipps, 2003).
Students need to feel a connection to their school, especially their teachers, but they
have to see that the material they are learning is meaningful and interesting (Conley,
2005). When students can make meaning of their learning and see the value in it,
they become more engaged in the material because there is a connection to it. This
connection will continue into college since the student’s course of study is more
specialized and they choose a specific major to focus on. Therefore, to increase
student engagement in the classroom, the learning materials must be relevant and
challenging (Conley, 2005).
High School Survey of Student Engagement
According to the HSSSE (2005) survey, student engagement is defined as the
time and energy students dedicate to educational activities. Since 2004, over
300,000 students have completed this survey, which includes an anonymous survey
taken by students in the 9
th
-12
th
grades in successful high schools. Teachers
33
administer these surveys, which take about 20 minutes, and are then scanned and
analyzed by Indiana University. After this process, individualized score reports are
given to each school.
With this information, schools can see their school’s average in student
engagement and compare them with similar schools and make any necessary changes
to their current structure to increase student engagement, thus raising student
achievement. Additionally, schools can also use this data to compare themselves to
other schools--ideally, those that are demographically similar-- to see what specific
schools are doing to raise their student engagement levels. Although over 300,000
high school students have completed the High School Survey of Student
Engagement, further analysis is needed, especially looking at different populations
such as high school student engagement in urban areas. This case study will be one
of ten studies conducted in high performing urban high schools.
In the most current reports released about the 2007 High School Survey of
Student Engagement (2007), it is revealed that 110 schools throughout 26 states have
responded to the survey. Of the 2006 respondents, the following tables represent the
demographics of those that were surveyed.
34

Grade % of Respondents
9
th
27%
10
th
29%
11
th
25%
12
th
19%
Table 1: HSSSE respondents by grade level (HSSSE, 2006)

Location HSSSE Respondents
Rural 23%
Town 10%
Suburban 33%
Urban 34%
Table 2: Respondents by Community Type (HSSSE, 2006)

35
Figure 1: Respondents by Race/Ethnicity (HSSSE, 2006)

Since the HSSSE’s inception, more and more students from urban schools
have been added to this national survey. Although more urban students are
contributing to the survey, most of the survey respondents do not resemble the urban
student population we have in California, especially those located in parts of Los
Angeles and Orange County. California, as a state, has a higher percentage of
students learning English and an even higher percentage of these ELLs in Los
Angeles and Orange Counties, when compared to HSSSE respondents from other
areas of the country. Correspondingly, California has more students who are eligible
for free and reduced lunch than the HSSSE respondents and even more in Los
Angeles and Orange Counties. This data is evidenced by the table below.
36
Category
HSSSE
Respondents
California
Population
Los Angeles & Orange
Counties Population
English Language
Learners
15% 24.9% 29%
Eligible for free or
reduced lunch
21% 50.7% 57%
Table 3: Differences between HSSSE Respondents: California, and Los Angeles and
Orange County populations in 2006 (HSSSE, 2006 & California Department of
Education, 2006).

Although the classifications of the students who come from urban schools on
the HSSSE are different than those in urban high schools in California, specifically
Los Angeles and Orange Counties, this case study will attempt to find if there is a
connection between student engagement and high performance, specifically in the
urban high school.
Some of the questions on the HSSSE survey include:
1. How do students spend their time?
2. How do students interact with teachers?
3. How engaged are students in class assignments and discussions?
4. How much do students write?
5. How often do students discuss ideas and work on projects outside of
class?
6. What do students say about their experiences with diversity?
7. How do students view their school?
37
8. Do students have a voice in what they do at school?
9. How do students feel about learning, grades, and schoolwork?
The questions on the HSSSE are divided up into three dimensions of engagement: 1)
Cognitive/Intellectual/Academic Engagement “describes students’ effort, investment,
and strategies for learning—the work students do and the ways students go about
their work (Yassie-Mintz, 2007, p. 7), 2) Social/Behavioral/Participatory
Engagement “captures students’ actions in social, extracurricular, and non-academic
school activities, including interactions with other students (Yassie-Mintz, 2007, p.
8), and 3) Emotional Engagement which “emphasizes students’ feelings of
connection to (or disconnection from) their school” (Yassie-Mintz, 2007, p. 8).
In the 2006 HSSSE findings, the following were reported:
• Girls report being more engaged across all three dimensions than boys.
• White students and Asian students report being more engaged on all three
dimensions than students of other races.
• Across academic tracks, students in honors/college preparatory/advanced
classes report being more engaged on all three dimensions than students in
other tracks.
• Students in general/regular education classes and students in
career/vocational classes report approximately equal levels of engagement on
all three dimensions.
38
• Students who are not eligible for free or reduced lunch programs report
higher levels of engagement on all three dimensions than students who are
eligible for free or reduced lunch programs.
• Students report being less engaged on all three dimensions in each successive
grade from grades nine through twelve—i.e., across grade levels, students in
grade 9 report being most engaged on all three dimensions, students in grade
10 report lower levels of engagement than students in grade 9, students in
grade 11 report lower levels of engagement than students in either grade 9 or
10, and students in grade 12 report lower levels of engagement than students
in all other grades.
Conclusion
As a result, there are so many different challenges to overcome in our attempt
to equalize urban schools with those located in suburban areas. This literature
review illustrates that having statewide standards and national standards is an attempt
to move in the right direction to provide an equal education for all students.
However, this case study seeks an answer to the question of whether there is a
connection between increased student engagement and high academic performance
in high schools, especially those in urban areas. If so, there should be a movement
across the United States to promote active engagement from all students and this will
help to close the achievement gap.
39
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Introduction
The purpose of this chapter is to describe the research methodology of this
study. In this chapter, the following are described: research questions, research
development, conceptual model, population sample, instrumentation, data collection,
and data analysis mechanisms. As previously stated in the problem statement and
the review of the literature, historically, schools in urban areas and high schools
more specifically, have not done well academically in comparison to their suburban
counterparts. However, there are some schools that are defying this tradition of
failure and are outperforming expectations. The purpose of this study is to identify
what factors contribute to high performance in urban high schools and to see if there
is a link between increased student engagement and high academic performance.
This case study is one study out of ten developed by a thematic dissertation team.
Subsequent studies may be used to support common themes found in this case study
as well as contribute to a larger meta-analysis done on student engagement in high
performing urban high schools.
Research Methodology
A case study approach was selected as the research methodology for this
study. This method was chosen because it allowed for in-depth exploration of the
topic and to enable the results to be described as a phenomenon (Creswell, 2003 &
Patton, 2002). The case study’s “purpose is to gather comprehensive, systematic,
40
and in-depth information about each case of interest” (Creswell, 2003, p. 447). In
addition, Gall et al. (2003) have described the differences between qualitative and
quantitative data collection, depicting qualitative data as based on:
1. The assumption that social reality is constructed by those who participate
in it;
2. The assumption that social reality is continuously constructed in local
situations;
3. Assigned human interactions a major role in explaining causal
relationships among social phenomena;
4. Allowed researchers to become personally involved with participants in
the research;
5. Conducted studies in natural settings;
6. Studied internal phenomenon to “get under the skin” of a phenomenon
7. Discovered constructs and themes, concepts, and theories during and after
data collection;
8. Used verbal, symbolic, and pictorial data to depict the social
environment; and
9. Used analytic induction to analyze data and to wave a story to explain
phenomena.
Therefore, by using the case study method, the researcher can gather
information about student engagement as observed in its natural context, a high
school setting, and to gain a clear perspective about it through interviews with
41
participants such as teachers and administrators. A multi-method qualitative
approach suited this study because it allowed for triangulation, using information
from surveys, interviews, observations, and document reviews, to compose themes in
attempting to understand the phenomenon.
Research Development
The thematic dissertation group worked collaboratively to design a general
research model for this study. Group members met from December 2006-August
2007 and initially reviewed literature surrounding the topic of student engagement.
The ten group members discovered that there was not much literature published on
student engagement and the role it plays in successful urban schools. The lack of
literature on student engagement in high performing urban high schools subsequently
led each member to further investigate this component. As a group, a problem
statement and the corresponding research questions were developed and were
defined until the two were decided upon. The thematic group also developed the
instrumentation tools utilized for the study, which included review of documents,
surveys, interviews, and observations. Following these processes, each member of
the thematic group selected one urban high school to research using the same
selection criteria.
Problem Statement
The thematic group jointly developed the following problem statement:
“historically, students in urban high schools have underperformed academically in
comparison to their suburban counterparts. Nonetheless, some urban high schools
42
have achieved significant gains. Unclear is what contributes to high performance in
these schools.” Not knowing what contributes to high performance, two research
questions were formulated.
Research Questions
According to Creswell (2005), “research questions assume two forms: a
central question and associated subquestions” that are broad and open (p. 105).
Utilizing Creswell’s formulation, the following two research questions were
developed to guide this study:
1. What perceived factors contribute to academic achievement in a high
performing urban high school?
2. Is there a link between student engagement and student achievement in a
high performing urban high school?
Selection Criteria
As instructed by the thematic group’s advisor, clinical professor Dr. Stuart
Gothold, selecting and approaching a school that was high performing would allow
more schools to be interested in participating in the study. As stated earlier, urban
schools were specifically chosen because of the lack of literature surrounding student
engagement in these schools. Also, because these schools are located in urban areas,
where many external factors cannot be controlled, their resiliency and high
performance offered hope to provide a model for other schools to emulate.
Every high performing urban high school selected for this study had to meet
the following three criteria:
43
1. The school must qualify to be a Title I school. This means that 40% or
more of the students must qualify to receive free or reduced lunch.
2. The ethnic make-up of the school had to be diverse, meaning that there
had to be a significant number of non-white students.
3. The school’s similar school ranking, published annually by the California
Department of Education, had to be two or more deciles higher than its
statewide rank.
After a school was chosen, each member of the group was instructed to make
initial contact with the school, which, in this case, meant contacting the school
principal. The researcher met with the principal of this school site in April 2007 and
the researcher explained that her school had ranked two or more deciles higher on
their similar school ranking and was a Title I school with a large population of
students of color, therefore meeting the selection criteria as a high performing urban
high school. During this meeting, visitation dates, times, and frequency of visits
were discussed as well as a rough timeline for conducting the study. A follow-up
electronic mail was sent to the principal to verify that her school site agreed to
participate in the study, and a confidentiality agreement was signed as well regarding
data collection and reporting.
Conceptual Framework
Marzano (2003) has described that effective schools were positively impacted
by school culture, leadership, and curriculum and instruction. Moreover, there are
other factors that contribute to a school’s culture such as globalization, national,
44
state, and district influences, accountability, and urban-like risk factors. However,
after the review of the literature, it was unknown whether or not student engagement
clearly impacted urban schools and lead to higher performance. As the result of a
discussion of Marzano’s work and the uncertainty of the role student engagement
plays in high performance, the following conceptual model was developed by the
thematic group.

Figure 2. Conceptual Framework developed by thematic group.
45
According to the conceptual framework, there are four outside factors that
play a role in schools but cannot always be controlled by each school. Those factors
include globalization, national, state, and district influences, accountability, and
urban-like factors. Friedman (2005) expresses globalization as the intertwining of
markets, technology, information systems, and telecommunications systems.
Globalization clearly affects not just schools but the entire world and how everything
develops. Another outside factor includes national, state, and district influences,
which are the decisions made by the leaders of the United States, California, and
various school districts. Individual schools cannot always control these decisions.
Accountability, specifically the mandates from No Child Left Behind, is another
factor. Accountability refers to “those with oversight authority or, more globally, to
the general public; or to demonstrating compliance with established laws, rules,
regulations, or standards; or to distributing rewards and sanctions tied to results”
(Heim, 2005, p. 1). The school does not control these rules and sanctions. The last
outside factor are urban-like factors, which can include housing prices, the
neighborhoods students live in, crime rate, employment possibilities, and others. A
school has very little control over the neighborhood it is located in and the urban-like
factors that affect it.
46
Population
Location of the High Performing High School
High Performing High School (HPHS)
1
is located in a city in north Orange
County, which covers an area of approximately 948 square miles. According to the
last census report, conducted in 2000, there were approximately 54,978 people living
in the city the high school is located in; approximately 64% are White, 25.8% Asian,
10.7% Hispanic, 1.1% Black, and 5.2% Other
2
. 27.6% of the population is foreign
born and 35.4% of households speak a language other than English. As reported in
the 2000 census, the poverty rate in this city was 4.3%. Although the city in which
the school is located in has a majority of middle-class Americans, many of the
students at High Performing High School come from surrounding cities that are
dramatically less affluent, which will be described later in the school’s specific
demographics.
Overview of Urban Unified School District
High Performing High School is located within the Urban Unified School
District (UUSD). There are over 48,600 students in UUSD that encompasses 28
square miles of territory and serves students from seven different cities in the area.
This district consists of nine high schools. The ethnic composition of this school
district consists of 52% Hispanic, 28.8% Asian, 1.1% Pacific Islander, 1.2% Filipino,
1.0% African American, and 0.2% American Indian. Approximately 60% of the

1
High Performing High School (HPHS) is used as a pseudonym for the high performing urban high
school chosen and mentioned in this study.
2
Numbers may not add up to 100% because of individuals that reported more than one race.
47
students in UUSD speak a language other than English. Additionally, 46.7% of
students are English Language Learners where 32.1% speak Spanish, 11.7%
Vietnamese, and 0.8% Korean (EdData District Reports, 2005-2006). 61.3% of
students in the district qualify for free or reduced lunch. The district is a Title I
district. In 2004, UUSD was also the recipient of the Broad Prize for Excellence in
Urban Education.
Providing valuable learning experiences to every student is a part of the
culture in the UUSD and to accomplish this, the district has implemented two
specific learning goals to attain the highest academic achievement from each student.
The district’s two goals are: 1) Students in the UUSD for 5 years or longer will meet
grade-level proficiency in core academic subjects as measured by the California
Standards Test and 2) All English Learners will advance one level per year in
English Language Proficiency until they are English proficient, as measured by the
CELDT (Urban Unified School District Goals, 2004).
All of the high schools in this district have full six-year WASC accreditation
and none are in Program Improvement status. In fact, all of the high schools in this
district have met their AYP for two or more consecutive years and API scores have
grown across the entire district, with one high school having API scores of 800 or
more.
Overview of High Performing High School
High Performing High School is a Title I high school with a large, immigrant,
English Learner (EL) population. Its 2006 API score was 678 and it has met both its
48
school-wide and comparable improvement targets. In fact, Urban High School’s API
scores have continually increased and surpassed growth targets since the 2002-2003
academic years (see graph below).

Figure 3. API Base and Target Growth Data 2002-2006

According to the California Department of Education’s report on school
demographics (2007), EL students comprise 48% of 2,219 students that attend the
school. In addition, 70% of students receive free and reduced lunch and the
demographics of the school are as follows:
49

Ethnicity
Percentage at High
Performing High School
Hispanic or Latino 70%
Asian 22%
White (not of Hispanic origin) 6%
African American 1%
Filipino 1%
Table 4. Ethnic Population at High Performing High School

Furthermore, 2% of students participate in the Gifted and Talented Education
program. High Performing High School has a mobility rate of 5%, which means that
5% of the student population does not end or begin the school year at the same site in
one academic year.
The average parent education level at HPHS, according to the California
Basic Education Data System (CBEDS), is a 2.19, which shows that some parents
have completed some college work but not much. Although these numbers may
seem high, the school serves many students in neighboring cities where home prices
and household incomes are much lower with multiple families living in one home.
HPHS was chosen as a high performing urban high school because its similar
schools rank is two or more deciles higher than its statewide rank. That means that
HPHS is outperforming other schools in the State of California that have similar
50
demographics. Not only has the school been achieving high academic standards,
since 2002, its similar schools ranking has always been greater than two deciles
above its statewide rank.
API Rank
Figure 4. API (statewide and similar schools) Rank for High Performing High

As mentioned in Chapter 2, the ultimate form of disengagement is dropping
out of high school. At High Performing High School, the dropout rate of students is:
51
High Performing High School Dropout Rate
0
1
2
3
4
5
2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006
Academic Year
Students

Figure 5: Dropout rate at High Performing High School

Sample of Participants
As previously stated, High Performing High School has approximately 2,219
students. Enrollment includes 640 freshmen, 603 sophomores, 550 juniors, and 426
seniors. Ethnically, the majority of students are non-White with the majority being
Hispanic, which comprises 70% of the population. HPHS has one principal and two
assistant principals. Additionally, the school employs 87 teachers and all of the
teachers are fully credentialed (High Performing High School’s Report Card, 2006).
The teaching staff is comprised of the following ethnicities: 73.6% White, 13.8%
Hispanic, 10.3% Asian, and 2.3% African American. Moreover, the school employs
17 part-time paraprofessionals, which include classroom and library aides and 9 full-
52
time and 5 part-time office or clerical workers, which include the administrator’s
secretary and other clerical-related positions.
Instrumentation
“Case data consist of all the information one has about each case: interview
data, observations, the documentary data (e.g. program records or files, newspaper
clippings), impressions and statement of others about the case, and contextual
information—in effect, all the information one has accumulated about each particular
case goes into the case study” (Patton, 2002, p. 449). Although quantitative studies
are more popular, choosing a qualitative method for this study allows for “thick and
rich” description (Patton, 2002). Because of the qualitative nature of this study, the
thematic group developed five types of data collection instruments. These data
collection instruments included the following: document review, surveys, interviews,
and observations. A description of each data collection instrument is below and all
instruments are located in the appendix.
Document Review
In order to meet the criteria as a high performing urban high school, various
documents pertaining to the school needed to be reviewed. A list of these documents
was compiled by the thematic group and was available to the researcher through state
websites, district and school websites, as well as the school site. Specifically, the
following documents were reviewed for this study: 1) State of California Department
of Education website to find the school’s API score, statewide and similar schools
rank, and graduation rates; 2) California Basic Educational Data System to find
53
parent education levels, staff demographics, and others; 3) District website to find
information about the district’s population and goals; and 4) The school’s report card
to get specific information about the site’s population and leadership.
Surveys
Three surveys were created by the thematic group: one for students, one for
teachers and one for administrators, all adapted from the High School Survey of
Student Engagement (HSSSE), a larger study conducted by Indiana University. As
recommended by Dr. Dennis Hocevar, a clinical Professor in Learning and
Instruction at the University of Southern California, the thematic group, because of
the school’s lack of resources to administer the actual survey, created an altered
version of the larger HSSSE study for students. All three surveys consisted of 13-15
questions varying in topics that reflected the primary content from the initial High
School Survey of Student Engagement. All of the surveys asked various
stakeholders to assess the level of student engagement at their school site.
Interviews
Nine open-ended interview questions were created by the thematic
dissertation group based on the High School Survey of Student Engagement. These
nine questions were framed in a way that follow-up questions could subsequently be
posed. The following people were determined to have the most pertinent
information about the school in regards to student engagement as well as other
factors that make the school successful: principal, assistant principal(s), teachers, and
extra-curricular leaders. A minimum of five interviews were conducted from the
54
aforementioned personnel to gain insight into whether student engagement played a
role in the high academic performance at the school as well as to find other factors
that may impact student achievement. Electronic consent forms were logged by the
researcher. Interviews with all subjects were scheduled in advance with an exact
time and location, usually determined by what was suitable for the interviewee. All
participants that were interviewed were given sufficient time to answer and elaborate
on each question. The questions focused on perceptions of student engagement in
the high performing high school.
Observations
Observations were made over a two-month period in October and November
of 2007. A majority of the observations were in classrooms but many others were
made around the school and at various school activities and meetings. An
observation log created by the thematic dissertation group was used to transcribe
anecdotal records on what the researcher observed in four different school contexts:
school culture, curriculum and instruction, leadership, and student engagement. In
addition, there was also a column for any additional observation that did not fit the
four different school contexts. All observations were conducted with Patton’s (2002)
recommendations in mind for the researcher to be inconspicuous.
Data Collection
The cohort developed a process for collecting data and the researcher was
responsible for all of the data collection at her school site. First, documents were
55
examined because they were the easiest to attain since most were in the domain of
public information and readily available on the internet.
At the first staff meeting of the year, the researcher was introduced to the
staff and gave a description of the study and the different sources of data she needed
to collect. At the second staff meeting, the researcher distributed the teacher and
out-of-classroom personnel surveys and asked all participants to return the surveys
within one week of receiving the survey.
Five classroom teachers whose classrooms varied in content area and levels
(AP, college preparatory, and special education) volunteered their students to
participate in this study. With the consent of the principal, students were
administered an adapted version of the HSSSE which took place during the first 15
minutes of the class period. Surveys were collected immediately after students were
finished completing them.
Interviews were scheduled between the months of October and November
with the principal, three assistant principals, activities director, and five teachers
from varying content areas and levels. All interviews were conducted after school or
during a preparatory period and were tape-recorded.
Data Analysis
The researcher used the following steps, as outlined in Creswell (2003, p.
191-195) to analyze data:
56

Step 1 Organize and prepare the data for analysis.
Step 2 Read through all the data.
Step 3 Begin a detailed analysis with coding process.
Step 4 Use coding process to generate a description of the setting or people as
well as categories or themes for analysis.
Step 5 Use narrative passages to convey findings.
Step 6 Interpret the data according to the researcher’s understanding.
Table 5: Creswell’s (2002) steps for analyzing data

To detail each step of the data analysis and interpretation process, each step
may include:
Step 1: Organize and prepare the data for analysis. This includes transcribing
interviews, using folders to arrange and separate the data.
Step 2: Read through all the data. This includes obtaining a “general sense”
of the data by beginning to reflect on it. More specifically, the researcher has to look
for general ideas and themes and credibility of the information. During this stage, it
is important to make notes in the margins of the data to record the researcher’s initial
thoughts.
Step 3: Begin a detailed analysis with a coding process. Data will be
“chunked” into corresponding themes and color coded with one color representing an
emergent theme.
57
Step 4: Use a coding process to generate a description of the setting or people
as well as categories or themes for analysis. This description involves a detailed
rendering of information about people, places, or events in a setting.
Step 5: Use narrative passages to convey findings.
Step 6: Interpret the data according to the researcher’s understanding.
The researcher used these steps to make meaning of all the data that was
collected and those findings are outlined in chapter four.
Validity
As described in Creswell (2003), validity is the “strength of qualitative
research” and “is used to [determine] whether the findings are accurate from the
standpoint of the researcher, the participant, or readers of an account” (p. 195-196).
The validity of this research uses triangulation to check the accuracies of the
findings.
Triangulation employs different data sources of information “by examining
evidence from the sources and using it to build a coherent justification for themes”
(p. 196). By using triangulation, the researcher verified that the same emergent
themes are found when answering the two research questions.
Member-checking is also used to prove validity. This process takes themes
back to participants to determine whether participants feel that they are accurate.
This will be done by verbally asking and checking with participants to make sure
that their responses are fully understood.
58
Using “thick and rich” descriptions will also prove the study’s validity. By
providing readers with deep and abundant information about the setting and
responses, readers will feel a part of the experience.
Conclusion
The purpose of this chapter was to discuss the research methodology of this
case study. Using the case study methodologies presented in Gall et al. (2003),
Creswell (2003), and Patton (2002), a solid process was developed to collect and
analyze research. The following forms of data were collected: document review,
surveys, interviews, and observations. The collected data was analyzed and coded.
The validity of the study was checked by using triangulation, member-checking, and
utilizing thick and rich descriptions. Findings will be outlined in chapter four.
59
CHAPTER FOUR
RESEARCH FINDINGS
Introduction
The purpose of this chapter is to describe the research findings of this study.
In this chapter, data is first analyzed in the context of each research question. Next,
results will be discussed within the context of Marzano’s (2003) five school-level
factors of effective schools which include a guaranteed and viable curriculum,
challenging goals and effective feedback, parent and community involvement, a safe
and orderly environment, and collegiality and professionalism. Quantitative data
from the adapted High School Survey of Student Engagement will be correlated with
qualitative data, which includes one-on-one interviews, observations, and data
analysis in relation to the posed research questions. Triangulation of the data
received from the document review, observations, interviews, and the adapted
surveys were used to detect constructs, themes, or causal patterns.
The first part of this chapter presents the findings analyzed by research
question. The second part of this chapter will identify emergent themes based on
Marzano’s (2003) five school-level factors for effective achievement in schools. The
last section provides a conclusion for the research findings.
Findings by Research Questions
First Research Question
The first research question asked: What perceived factors contribute to
academic achievement in a high performing urban high school? In response to this
60
question, there were five perceived factors which emerged from the research that
could be identified as contributing to academic achievement at this school.
Factor #1: District Goals and Expected School-wide Learning Results (ESLRs)
The school district where High Performing High School is located has two
clear district goals. These goals were developed district-wide and are used to
measure student academic performance. Goal #1 states: “Every student in the Urban
Unified School District will advance one proficiency level every year as measured
on the California Standards Test (CST). After five years, every student in the Urban
Unified School District will be proficient (Urban Unified District Goals, 2003).”
Goal #2 states: “Every English Language Learner (ELL) will advance one
proficiency level every year as measured on the California English Language
Development Test (CELDT). After five years, every student will be proficient in the
English Language (Urban Unified District Goals, 2003).” These two goals are
posted in the front office, in every classroom throughout the school, and in the front
of each student’s academic calendar. At the first staff meeting, these goals were
introduced as the focus of the staff meeting. These goals are used to measure each
student’s academic performance every year. The school’s goal is that every student
at the school advances one proficiency band every single year. It seems that all
stakeholders are aware of these two goals.
In addition to these stated district goals, High Performing High School has
also developed Expected School-wide Learning Results (ESLRs). The ESLRs were
developed as a part of the WASC accreditation and were agreed upon by teachers,
61
parents, students, and administrators. “Seven years ago,” the principal recalls,
“when we developed our self-study team for our accreditation, we all got together
and we decided what [our] students [were going] to learn. That developed into our
ESLRs.” When the ESLRs were first created, the school set aside time during third
period to discuss what each ESLR truly meant. Then “over the years, this has
become engrained into the faculty.” Last year, when the school went through
another WASC accreditation, the ESLRs were revisited and the question was asked,
“Should we change these?” and the answer was “No, why should these change?
These are things that are basic and what every student should have when they
graduate from High Performing High School.”
The ESLRs articulate that, “[a]t the time of graduation from High Performing
High School, all students will be expected to be responsible citizens, academic
achievers, self-disciplined individuals, and effective problem-solvers.”
In some of the classrooms that I visited, the ESLRs are even printed at the top
of the day’s agenda. These ESLRs are also reviewed during faculty meetings to
ensure that the focus is always clear and on student achievement. Having goals that
are concentrated, measurable, and omnipresent, as well as learning results that all
students must accomplish are both perceived factors in why the school is
outperforming other schools on the California Standards Test. All stakeholders at
the school are aware of these goals since they are posted around the school, in
student’s academic planners, and as a daily focus in classes and at meetings. In
62
addition, all stakeholders know what is expected of them and that is to increase
student achievement.
The district goals seem to contribute to the student achievement at the school
because they are clear and measurable. After students take the CSTs in May, one
can see if they have advanced a proficiency level. If students did not advance even
one proficiency level, then an intervention class can assist the student in either Math
or English, the two focal points of the CSTs. The goals help to assess if students are
achieving academically and serve as a marker to evaluate the student’s needs in
regards to additional classes or programs.
Factor #2: High-level classes and higher expectations equal high academic
achievement
Students at High Performing High School take vigorous classes to give them
the opportunity to go to college. During the 2006-2007 academic years, all remedial
science and math classes were no longer available at the school. That means that all
incoming freshmen were enrolled in Geometry and Biology. High Performing High
School’s goal is to provide every student with the opportunity to go to college.
Therefore, while looking at the master schedule, courses such as Life Science and
Pre-Algebra were expunged from the list of course offerings. These high
expectations give students a more rigorous curriculum since all of their classes are
now college preparatory classes.
During an interview with the principal, she stated that “believing in the kids,
providing more opportunities for the kids to take the higher level classes” is a part of
63
the high expectations the school has for students. Additionally, she says that it’s
important not to “create barriers [but to] have an open door policy so [students] can
take the honors and AP classes and it’s not restricted to the students who score at [a
certain] level.” The next question posed was: “So if a student came up to you and
said, ‘I’d like to be in AP History,’ your answer would be…” She immediately
responded, “I would say, ‘Let’s sit down and talk about it. Let’s look at your past
performances and what your testing has been,’ because we don’t want to set them up
for failure either. What we do is look at [the student as a] whole and if they’re
borderline we say, ‘Let’s give it a try.’” The objective is to always fall on the side of
challenging students with more rigorous classes. A science teacher also echoed the
same sentiment, expressing, “Students are constantly pushed and supported…
because if they were pushed and never supported, they would just fall. They get
pushed to where they should be and then some go further.”
Factor #3: Commonality between Units, Assessments, and Strategies
“Over the past ten years,” the principal recounts, “the thing that has
tremendously changed about High Performing High School is that our faculty is
working together, smarter in terms of common units, common assessments, and
looking at data.” The district has also provided pacing guides for every department
to ensure that the same material is being covered in every class to every student.
Every quarter, the district has outlined specific chapters from the textbook that need
to be covered in order for students to be ready for the CSTs in May. Additionally,
the school has common assessments called benchmarks in which every student is
64
evaluated using the same assessment tool, usually a standardized test, in a specific
content area on the same day. The district also administers district benchmarks that
are given to every student throughout the district on the same day once every quarter.
The results of this test are posted on a data analysis system called Data Director,
which will be explained in detail in another finding.
The principal describes that “[s]ix years ago, we noticed that our CST scores
were flat but everybody’s working hard but they’re not working smart. That’s when
we decided to bring in an outside consultant and that’s when we started the common
units, common assessments, looking at data and directing the program towards the
students’ needs versus what they don’t need. Also identifying high stakes standards
and making sure they are [being] covered.”
Four collaboration days throughout the school year are used in which
departments have time to lesson plan and further develop common units and
assessments. The 2006-2007 academic year was the first year in which collaboration
time was implemented. According to the district’s collective bargaining agreement,
“the purpose of collaboration time is for teachers to work together toward the
improvement of student achievement. The District and the Association agree that all
teachers, K-12, will collaborate on a regular and ongoing basis. The teachers and
administrators will mutually determine the topics for collaboration time” (Urban
Unified District Education Association, 2006). Many teachers believe that this
collaboration time contributes to the high academic achievement at the school
because it gives teachers a chance to lesson plan communally with the standards and
65
expectations in mind. On the teacher survey, one respondent noted that “strong
collaboration with and in between departments” was a factor that contributed to
student achievement. When asked what the principal is most proud of at her school,
she mentioned “the collaboration between teachers, working together.”
In addition to common units and common assessments that take place during
collaboration time, there are talks in individual departments about common grading.
The district office implemented structured collaboration time, perhaps from teacher
input and research. Each school had to submit an individualized collaboration plan
to the district a year before the times were approved. Although the implementation
of structured collaboration time has only begun this year, there have been talks about
revisiting the current plan to add additional collaboration days. Developing common
grading would mean that teachers would adhere to a similar grading scale and that
specific things would need to be accomplished by every student to earn an A and so
on. This similar grading between teachers and departments would make it more
equitable for students.
The principal of the school stated that “AVID strategies are just good
teaching strategies. So we’ve been extending those strategies out to the entire
school; for example, Cornell notes or interactive notebooks… For teachers, using
common strategies, engaging strategies helps level the playing field. If you are just
standing there teaching, yes, those oral kids are really getting it, but the kids that
needs that tactile, more visual, or hands-on, then you are leveling the playing field
because you are teaching to all the [learning] modalities.”
66
Factor #4: Professional Development Opportunities
High Performing High School and the Urban Unified School District believe
that ongoing professional development is essential to keeping teachers up-to-date on
effective strategies. Many of these professional development opportunities were
developed by the district office to support teachers. Teachers volunteer to attend
monthly professional development opportunities or they are released during the
school day. If teachers attend after-school professional development, they are paid
an hourly rate. When teachers attend professional development during the workday,
the district leads the development and teachers are mandated to attend these per their
union and district agreement. Teachers are provided with release time to observe
other classrooms. They are also released on days to attend professional development
opportunities for various teaching strategies such as direct instruction, reciprocal
teaching, differentiation, and many others. There is a professional development
calendar that is published and distributed by the school district every month, and
there are at least three pages of professional development opportunities for teachers
that range from utilizing specific technology in the classroom to analyzing data to
classroom management.
Furthermore, the science department chairperson also stated that one aspect
of professional development, namely, visiting classrooms, is vital. She describes
how “I do go around and watch other teachers teach and I am so impressed with the
level of expertise of the teachers. It’s phenomenal. For example, even some of the
new teachers, it seems like they come from school with so many strategies that they
67
can use for the types of student that we have. To me, it’s something that I’ve never
learned in school and had to pick up after time.” The teacher believes that “twenty-
four years later, you can never use anything you did the year before. If you go back
ten years, you don’t use anything. The population changes and the curriculum
changes.” While interviewing this teacher, even though she has been teaching for
over twenty years, she admitted to me that she is still learning everyday.
Factor #5: School-wide Programs
During an interview with a science teacher, she explained that “the school is
so successful largely in part of the tremendous amount of resources. One of the most
important resources that we have is the people that run so many of the programs. So
many of them are so passionate about what they do, passionate about student
success. They bring the kids close to them and they truly, truly, truly want to do the
best job they can: including teachers and administrators. It’s those things that make
a school function.” Some of the programs that are implemented at High Performing
High School are Advancement via Individual Determination (AVID), math
companion classes, and Freshmen Academy. These programs were brought into the
school by the principal with the help of many teachers who have shaped and refined
each program. Many of the teachers devote their time to lead the programs, teach the
classes and attend professional development to further develop the programs.
Advancement via Individual Determination (AVID)
“The mission of AVID is to ensure that ALL students and most especially the least
served students who are in the middle:
68
• Will succeed in rigorous curriculum,
• Will complete a college preparatory path,
• Will enter mainstream activities of the school,
• Will increase their enrollment in four-year colleges, and
• Will become educated, responsible participants and leaders in a democratic
society” (AVID Online, 2007).
The AVID program was started five years ago at High Performing High
School. Currently, there are nine sections of AVID, which serves as an elective for
students. To enter into the AVID course, students must apply, go through an
interview process, and get chosen to show potential to go to college. Upon entering,
students and parents must also sign a contract.
During one of my observations, I was sitting in an AVID class and the
students were doing tutorials. Tutorials are a pedagogical strategy that are used on
Tuesdays and Thursdays in an AVID class. Students are required to bring a question
about one of their classes to tutorial and as a group, other students work to dissect the
problem for the student who brought the question to help him or her better
understand it. During this classroom observation, I noted how students are broken
into various content areas for tutorials. There are about five students in each group.
The students come with prepared questions, specific to a certain content area. They
work in a group with a tutor from a nearby college and they get to collaborate on the
question together to come up with an answer. The tutors go around the table and
they help the students communally answer all questions. Students get to collaborate
69
with one another. The tutors also provide additional information for students and
they get the chance to have information clarified. At the end of the tutorial, the
teacher introduced me as a researcher from USC and gave the students opportunities
to ask me questions about college and my education. The questions that most
concerned the students revolved around how to pay for college and what grades they
had to earn. Listening to the students ask questions about college made me realize
how curious they were about college and how much they already knew about going
to college.
With the state mandating that all students pass the California High School
Exit Exam, higher stakes testing, and the realization that students need to be prepared
for higher education to secure a future in which many jobs require higher education
degrees, the principal with the support of fellow administrators and teachers
determined that the school needed to be given multiple resources and interventions to
academically succeed. “The vision and mission is to make it a college-going
culture,” the principal explained. She continued, “we truly understand that not every
student is going to go to college but the opportunity should be there so they are not
pegged in 9
th
grade, ‘Okay this kid is going into the workforce. This kid is going to a
two-year college. This one’s going to a four-year college.’ If you make it open to
everybody, then as they progress through the system, then decisions are made based
on their strengths and areas of need so we’re not making that decision right away.”
Creating this college-bound culture has not always been a part of the school. Since
70
the inception of the AVID program, more and more students as well as teachers and
parents are talking about going to college.
Extended library hours
An informal survey of the students showed that many did not have a quiet
place to study after school or complete homework. Many students have told teachers
that they cannot study because they have brothers and sisters at home and it’s hard
for them to concentrate on schoolwork. Also, students have many other distracters,
like friends, games, and television that are present in their home environments. As a
response to the students’ requests, the principal, with the help of teachers supervising
the library, decided to keep the library open for extended hours after school from
3:00-6:30 or 7:00 so that students can have a quiet place to complete their
homework, read and prepare for the next school day. In addition, many students
from academic clubs, such as the National Honor Society, California Scholarship
Federation, and the Advanced Placement Club volunteer their time to tutor students
who come to the drop-in library hours.
Students have also dedicated their time to provide after school tutoring to
students who need additional help in classes. After a meeting, I walked into the
library to witness the extended library hours and there were approximately fifty
students in the library, typing up essays they had due at the end of the week, studying
for upcoming tests, and receiving tutoring. Teachers sign up for additional duty to
monitor students in the library and it seems like many are taking advantage of this
opportunity.
71
Freshman Academy
According to the principal and various teachers that were interviewed, data
has shown that freshmen are having a hard time adjusting to high school. In
previous years, there were a great number of students who were not passing their
Algebra I, Biology, or English I courses after the first quarter. Instead of being
reactive to this situation, the school has taken a proactive approach and has enrolled
students into a program called Freshman Academy. The students are identified after
their 8
th
grade year. To qualify, students had to have scored below basic on the
CSTs. The Freshmen Academy is an elective course for freshmen students at the
school. During the first year of the program, 125 students were identified as having
academic difficulty in intermediate school. The principal describes, “We want to
provide a support system that will help students with their entire subject areas
including study skills, dealing with social issues, and anything else that may come
up.” According to an assistant principal, the Academy is “geared toward students
who have scored either Basic or Below Basic on the CSTs to provide students with
the necessary study skills and tools to prepare students for the rigor of high school.”
Second Research Question
The second research question asked, Is there a link between student
engagement and student achievement in a high performing urban high school? To
measure student engagement, an adapted version of the High School Survey of
Student Engagement was given to a sample size of 100 students to solicit their
72
answers about whether or not student engagement played a role in student
achievement. Faculty and administrators were given a similar survey.
Respondents of the adapted survey at High Performing High School differed
from those surveyed nationally in the following ways.

Question Students Response National HSSSE Survey
Responses
1. What grade are you in? 99% of responses are in
10
th
or 11
th
grades.
54% of respondents are in
10
th
or 11
th
grades.
2. What is your racial or
ethnic identification?
68.7% reported Latino 54% reported White
3. Is English the main
language in your home?
54.5% reported no 15% reported no
4. Are you eligible for free
or reduced lunch?
65.3% reported yes 21% reported yes
Table 6: Comparison of High Performing High School respondents on the adapted
HSSE compared to the national average.

Students at High Performing High School took an adapted version of the
High School Survey of Student Engagement and their results on similar questions
were compared to the national average from students who completed Indiana
University’s High School Survey of Student Engagement. The similarities as well as
73
the differences in the survey responses from High Performing High and the national
average are listed below.
Similarities
A similarity between both surveys was the amount of time students spent on
written homework assignments per week. On the national survey, 43% of
respondents report spending 0 or 1 hour per week doing written homework and
44.4% of students at High Performing High reported having the same amount of
homework (Yassie-Mintz, 2007). Additionally, 83% of students surveyed nationally
reported spending five hours or fewer per week doing written homework and 83.8%
of students at High Performing High reported spending five hours or less on written
homework assignments as well. Although these numbers are similar to the national
average, they reflect that students at High Performing High do not spend a lot of time
on academic work per week. One possible explanation could be that the amount of
time students spend on academic work could be low because students do not feel that
what they learn in school can be related to the real world. For example, 52.1% of
students felt that they are not encouraged to provided opportunities to solve real-
world problems. At first glance, students may not realize why it is necessary to
spend a lot of time on academic work because they do not feel that schoolwork
connects to the real world.
Below is a table that shows the similarities between National HSSSE and
High Performing High School Respondents:
74

Question National HSSSE
Respondents
High Performing
High School
Responses
1. You are encouraged and provided
meaningful opportunities to develop clear,
sequential, career goals and prepare for
appropriate post-secondary education or
training.
73% said very
often or often.
76.7% responded
very often or
often.
2. You are encouraged and provided with
meaningful opportunities to make your
community a better place.
48% reported
some or never
48% reported
some or never
3. How many hours do you spend on
written assignments per week?
83% reported 5
or less hours per
week.
83.8% of students
reported 5 or less
hours per week.
Table 7: Similarities between National HSSSE and High Performing High School
respondents.

Differences
The first difference between the national survey and the adapted survey taken
by students at High Performing High School was that students at High Performing
High feel safer at their school than those that took the national survey. On the
national survey, 78% of students felt safe at their school, and at Higher Performing
High, 87.9% reported that they felt safe. Feeling safe is extremely important on a
school campus because students can focus on learning.
The second difference is that students at High Performing High do not feel
that most adults on campus treat them fairly. Although the majority of students,
75
58.2%, do feel that they are being treated fairly either very often or often, that is
lower than the 72% of students reported on the national survey. It is also important
to consider the 41.9% of students at High Performing High that report sometimes or
never being treated fairly.
Below is a table that shows the differences between National HSSSE and
High Performing High School Respondents:

Question National HSSSE
Respondents
High Performing High
School Responses
1. School safety is clearly a
priority at your school.
78% said yes. 87.9% said yes.
2. You must spend a lot of time
studying and on school work.
80% reported very
often or often.
55.6% reported very
often or often.
3. Most adults on campus treat
students fairly.
72% said very often
or often.
58.2% said very often or
often.
Table 8: Differences between National HSSSE and High Performing High School
respondents.

Other Notable Responses
Goal Setting
Students at High Performing High do feel like they are preparing themselves
for post-secondary education or training. More than 76% of students reported that
they are very often or often encouraged and provided with meaningful opportunities
76
to develop clear, sequential, career goals and prepare for appropriate post-secondary
education or training. As the principal described in her interview, “Our mission is to
make sure every student that graduates from this high school has a viable plan.
Whether it’s a four-year college, two-year college or work, I don’t want a kid to
graduate from high school saying, ‘What next?’—that should have been planned out
at the beginning of their ninth grade year. So we want to make sure they have a
viable plan after high school with a college going culture.”
Effective Writing
Effective writing skills are necessary beyond high school for higher
education as well as the workforce. About 85.9% of students reported that they are
very often or often encouraged to write effectively. Since students are often
challenged to take more rigorous classes and the school is really starting to give
every student the opportunity to go to college, effective writing strategies have been
emphasized in classes. As I observed an English class, the teacher was sharing
poetry pieces that students had written. This particular morning, she shared five
poems from various students. As the teacher was reading these poems aloud,
students were listening attentively and even asked the writer questions when the
teacher was done reading. This showed me that students take pride in their writing
and even have the curiosity to ask questions about their peers’ writing.
School Involvement
Students noted on the adapted survey that 38.4% of students have only
sometimes or never been asked to participate in extra-curricular activities and an
77
even higher number, 61.2%, felt that they have only sometimes or never been asked
to participate in school leadership or governance. Currently, there are about 300
students who participate in school-related sports and activities. That number is
approximately 14% of the student body. The school does offer many clubs and
sports for students so the school may need to look at why students are not
participating. In addition, many teachers are involved with extra-curricular activities
on campus. The principal noted that she was proud of the fact that there are “[m]any
staff members who get involved with students doing other things than just teaching.
We have many clubs that teachers do and not get paid for; it’s during their extra
time. Many of the staff are looking at families and communicating with them.”
Findings by Marzano’s Five School-Level Factors
In What Works in Schools, author Robert Marzano (2003) describes five
school-level factors that contribute to a school’s performance, which include a
guaranteed and viable curriculum, challenging goals and effective feedback, parent
and community involvement, a safe and orderly environment, and collegiality and
professionalism. Below are the findings I discovered at High Performing High
School that epitomize Marzano’s five school-level factors.
Guaranteed and Viable Curriculum
Students are provided with a six period school day with many opportunities
to learn throughout the school day. Also, a zero period is offered to students at 7:00
A.M. to provide them with additional learning opportunities. Students take classes in
the core content areas as well as elective and physical education classes. The school
78
day begins at 8:00 A.M. and ends at 2:38 P.M. As mentioned above, extended
library hours are offered to provide students with a quiet environment to type essays,
complete homework or study for tests, and after-school tutoring is available until 6
or 7 in the evening, depending on the day of the week.
The curricula used for the core content areas are chosen from the state-
approved curriculum framework developed by the California Department of
Education and is adopted every six or seven years.
Challenging Goals and Effective Feedback
Grades
Students receive quarterly grade reports throughout the school year. These
grade reports are mailed home to students throughout the school year. The second
and fourth quarter grade reports are also known as first and second semester grades,
respectively. The semester grades are what goes on official transcripts and
eventually sent to colleges and universities. At the middle of each quarter, progress
reports are mailed home to students and parents. These grades usually serve as
warnings for students who are failing, missing assignments, receiving low-test
scores, or missing too many days of school. Throughout the year, teachers also
notify students of their grades during class. Progress, quarter, and semester grades
all provide students with feedback throughout the school year on how they are
achieving academically in each content area.
79
Data Director
Data Director is a data analysis tool for teachers to guide instruction and
administrators to develop programs on an “as needed” basis. Teachers and
administrators use data director to analyze results from the California Standards Test,
California English Language Development Test, district benchmarks, and school
benchmarks. The data from these assessments are used to re-teach various standards
and to drive instruction in the classroom. During the first staff meeting of the year,
each department presented information to the entire school about how well students
did on various assessments such as the CSTs or Advanced Placement tests. Each
department also set goals for these assessments for the upcoming school year.
Additionally, reports on Data Director can also be printed out for each individual
student so that she or he may also see the progress being made in each content area.
TeleParent
The school has utilized the TeleParent home calling system for the past two
years. The TeleParent device “is an automated parental notification system that
allows both schoolteachers and administrators to send student-specific and general
messages home whenever necessary over the telephone or Internet” (TeleParent
Website, 2007). This calling system is able to translate messages a teacher or
administrator wants to relay to parents in the language predominately spoken in the
home. The use of TeleParent has helped increase communication between the school
and parents, as well as increased parent participation at the school.
80
District Goals
Since the district’s goals are clear and focused, it sets high expectations for
every student at High Performing High. These goals are also aligned with the
national goals set by No Child Left Behind that all students will reach proficiency in
the year 2014. Although these goals may seem challenging, it sets high expectations
for teachers, students, and schools alike.
Parent and Community Involvement
Parental and community involvement opportunities at High Performing High
School are plentiful. Parent participation in meetings is high and parents stay after to
ask more specific questions regarding their daughters and sons. Parents are also part
of the School Site Council and they voice their opinions regularly.
District Attorney Meeting
About three months into the school year, students who are identified as
“habitually truant,” which means that they have five or more unexcused absences or
truancies, are required to attend a meeting presented by the assistant district attorney
of Orange County. At this meeting, students are notified of the actions that the
school, the district, and eventually the district attorney’s office must take to ensure
that every student is attending school every day. The increased involvement from
the district’s attorney’s office in recent years hopes to alleviate truancies at the
school.
81
Parent Advisory Meeting
Parent Advisory Meetings are a series of workshops parents can attend to
help them with difficult parenting situations. The parent advisory meetings are in
English, Spanish, and Vietnamese. The meeting that I attended was in Spanish and
was led by a Spanish-speaking English Language Development teacher at High
Performing High School. The topic of the evening’s workshop was “How to
Discipline Your Child.” The meeting was held on a Tuesday evening in December
and approximately eighty parents were in attendance. During the meeting, there
were various scenarios presented to the parents and they had to describe what they
would do in each situation. The presentation was extremely interactive and parents
felt comfortable sharing because many spoke out and included their own thoughts
and opinions. The presenter then discussed various parenting styles from the
authoritarian to those that are too passive. Parents were also given information about
how to turn bad behavior and negative feedback into good behavior and positive
feedback and engage in discussions with their children. Parents then had time at the
end of the meeting to fill out a form about how they were going to use what they
learned at the meeting at home. Many of the parents shared aloud with the rest of the
attendees about how they were going to implement what they just heard with their
own children.
Back-on-Track Meeting
Back-on-Track meetings are provided for students according to each grade
level to ensure that they are taking the right classes and to explain how earning
82
credits and passing the California High School Exit Exam will lead to earning a high
school diploma. At the beginning of the meeting, the principal discusses why it is
important to start helping students as early as possible. The assistant principal then
goes through a PowerPoint presentation to helps students get back on track with a
School and Parent Collaboration Plan. The supplemental counselor then presents
information about the graduation requirements. Every student needs to complete 220
credits to graduate.
The counselor then describes the California High School Exit Exam and
explains that students are required to earn 350 points in each subject area. Students
must pass both the English and Math sections. Students first take this test during the
spring of their 10
th
grade year. Students get a total of six attempts.
Parents are then shown a copy of a student’s transcript and shown how to
interpret it. In order to help their children, parents are told to contact their respective
teachers regularly, check progress reports and grading dates, send their children to
after-school tutoring, check their daily planners, and stay informed of school-related
activities and meetings.
At the end of the meeting the principal says that everyone is responsible for a
child’s success at High Performing High School and the school offers help so that
parents can take advantage of that help.
Safe and Orderly Environment
A large majority, 93.5%, of teachers surveyed said that they believe that
school safety is clearly a priority on the campus at High Performing High School.
83
Students echoed that and 87.9% of students surveyed felt that their safety at school
was a high priority. Many times that I was on the school campus, I noticed that the
campus was orderly. During passing periods, most of the students knew exactly
where they needed to be and there were few disruptions. There were often
administrators or campus security out and about during passing periods ensuring that
students got to class on time and were not tardy.
In the classroom I visited one day, students seemed like they were focused
and knew what to do the second they came into the classroom. There was little idle
time in this classroom. The warm-up activity provided students with instruction
when they entered the classroom. When students did talk with the partner seated
next to them, it was to discuss the problem or solicit help or clarification about the
subject.
College Going Culture
As previously above, the AVID program’s presence on the campus during the
last five years has changed the culture of the school to one that focuses on going to
college. In the classes that I walked through, there were banners representing
various colleges and universities. Of the respondents on the adapted survey, 68.7%
of students said that they wanted to earn Bachelors, Masters, Professional, or
Doctoral degrees. In addition, at the end of the parent advisory meeting, the AVID
coordinator stood up and congratulated a family because their child was just
accepted into a four-year university. Recognizing various families at school-wide
meetings is extremely powerful, especially since their daughter was just accepted
84
into a four-year university. It also sets the expectations for other families to
encourage their children to strive for college. When one family is recognized for
having a child receive admission to a higher education institution, it may encourage
others to emulate that.
Additionally, on the school’s website it also lists college information, such as
A-G requirements, the various types of colleges and universities, financial aid
information, and scholarship information. One of the first posters I saw as I walked
into the office was a poster about “How to Go to College” in both English and
Spanish. In the last five years, more and more students, parents, and other members
of the school community are talking about students attending four-year colleges and
universities.
Collegiality and Professionalism
Leadership
Leadership at the school consists of a principal, three assistant principals, an
athletics director, and an activities director. Additional leadership positions include
chairpersons from each department. Many teachers described the leadership at the
school as caring and student-centered. One assistant principal noted that one factor
that contributes to student achievement is “the dedication of the staff as a whole. We
have a strong leader… when you start at the top, she really believes in our kids. She
tries to create an environment that is a college-going environment. She was the one
that brought in AVID. She was the one that strengthened AVID. It is through her
85
efforts that we brought in several other programs too, to help the students who were
low achievers, such as Freshman Academy.”
Weekly General Administrative Council (GAC) meetings are held once a
week where the principal, the principal’s secretary, assistant principals, counselors,
and activities and athletic directors discuss the upcoming two weeks of the school
calendar. During this specific meeting, each activity on the weekly bulletin is
reviewed and discussed. Each GAC member can then add various activities that
need to be added to the school’s master calendar. This is also a time for the
administrator to discuss duty coverage and logistics. During this meeting, academic
topics are also discussed, such as scheduling conflicts including Adult Education
classes and CAHSEE intervention courses. Each weekly meeting lasts for
approximately an hour and is a time for the administrators, counselors and directors
to discuss upcoming events and solve any challenges.
Faculty and Staff
The assistant principal noticed that the “dedication of the teachers” is what
she is most proud of about the school. She continues: “The teachers work very late
hours. You can pretty much walk around campus early in the morning or late in the
afternoon and they are in their classrooms grading papers or you see them walking
out with their big crates of work. A lot of them have just gone out of their way to
make sure they have their own websites and their own availability online.” A
teacher also noted that the teachers are a factor in the high academic performance in
86
evidence at the school. She explains that some of the teachers “have high
expectations and foster a sense of community in the classroom.”
Collaboration
Four Wednesdays throughout the school year are set aside for department-
wide collaboration. Various topics are discussed during collaboration times, such as
grading, teaching strategies, lesson planning, and data analysis. Teachers use this
time to share ideas and pose challenges that they are facing. It is a sheltered time for
teachers to discuss student achievement and how to improve their teaching craft in a
collaborative way. Although the school has allowed for collaboration to occur four
times throughout the year, many teachers would like to increase that amount in the
coming years.
Conclusion
This research study revealed that there are five findings which contribute to
the high academic performance at this urban high school.
Finding #1: Clear District goals and Expected School-wide Learning Results.
Finding #2: High-level classes and higher expectations equate to higher
academic achievement.
Finding #3: Commonality between units, assessments, and strategies lead to
equity between classrooms and throughout the school.
Finding #4: Professional Development Opportunities are plentiful and
meaningful.
Finding #5: School-wide Programs target student’s needs.
87
Furthermore, the school demonstrates many of Marzano’s (2003) five school-
level factors of what works in schools including a guaranteed and viable curriculum,
challenging goals and effective feedback, parent and community involvement, a safe
and orderly environment, and collegiality and professionalism.
In response to research question #2, as to whether or not there is a correlation
between student engagement and student achievement, I would conclude that after
reviewing the data from the adapted HSSSE survey, there is not a strong correlation
between the two. Further, studies must be done to either support or refute this
statement, as I will discuss in the recommendations section of Chapter 5.
88
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Introduction
The purpose of this chapter is to summarize the findings of this study and to
make recommendations for further study. The first part of this chapter will review
the purpose of this study. The second part will list the findings of this study. The
third part will be a statement of conclusions about the research questions and the last
part of this chapter will include recommendations for further research.
Purpose of the Study
This case study, which is one of ten conducted by a thematic dissertation
group at the University of Southern California, sought to determine what factors
were responsible for increased student achievement at a high performing urban high
school. Urban high schools have generally underperformed on standardized tests in
comparison to their suburban counterparts. This study identified one high
performing urban high school, which was even outperforming the State’s
expectations, and further research was done to examine the factors that contributed to
the school’s high academic performance. These factors would hopefully be
transferable to other urban schools so that urban schools can strive to close the
achievement gap between suburban schools. Additionally, this study wanted to see
if a connection existed between student engagement and student achievement.
According to a review of the literature, there seems to be a strong connection
89
between the two factors but most of the studies that have been conducted relevant to
these issues have not dealt with urban schools, specifically high schools.
Through multiple methods of data collection such as document reviews,
school observations, interviews, and conducting an adapted version of the High
School Survey of Student Engagement, this case study found that there is no strong
connection between student engagement and student achievement at High
Performing High School and that a multitude of other effective factors contributed to
the high academic performance. The researcher believes that the findings of this are
transferable to other urban high schools.
Summary of Findings
Findings were compiled by triangulating various types of data, which
included the review of documents, teacher, student, and administrator surveys,
classroom observations, and teacher and administrator interviews. Data was
collected from August 2007-December 2007 at one high performing urban high
school.
A summary of the findings in response to the two research questions include
those factors that contributed to the academic achievement at High Performing High
School, which include:
Finding #1: Clear District goals and Expected School-wide Learning Results.
The district had clear, measurable goals for all students in the district. Goal #1 stated
that every year each student in the district would advance by one proficiency band as
measured by the California Standards Test, and after five years in the district,
90
students would be proficient. Goal #2 focused specifically on English Language
Learners (ELL) and stated that every year, ELL students would advance by one
proficiency band as measured by the California English Language Development Test
(CELDT) until students were fluent and English proficient (FEP). Additionally, the
school also had learning results that were expected of every student before she or he
graduated from high school. Those ESLRs projected that all students would be
responsible citizens, academic achievers, self-disciplined individuals, and effective
problem-solvers. These goals and ESLRs were posted throughout the campus and
even in student academic planners.
Finding #2: High-level classes and higher expectations equate to higher
academic achievement. All students at the school are enrolled in classes that will
satisfy college requirements. Last year was the first year in which remedial classes,
such as General Science, were not offered to students. All incoming freshmen are
enrolled in classes that count towards college A-G requirements. This leads to
higher levels of classes and eventually higher expectations of what students can
accomplish. These higher-level classes, paired with the higher level of expectations,
contribute to higher academic achievement.
Finding #3: Commonality between units, assessments, and strategies lead to
equity between classrooms and throughout the school. The district with the input of
consult teams, comprised of teachers, have pacing guides for each core content area
so that every teacher is expected to cover the same material in a specific timeframe
to prepare students for the California Standards Test in May. Additionally,
91
collaboration time that takes place four times a year helps teachers lesson plan and
share common effective strategies to be used in the classrooms.
Finding #4: Professional Development Opportunities are plentiful and
meaningful. The district provides multiple professional development opportunities
that include implementation of the curriculum, using effective teaching strategies,
asset building for students, and a multitude of other prospects. Teachers will either
get released during the school day for professional development opportunities or get
paid a stipend for attendance out of the contracted school day. There is even a week
called Super Week, held the week before school starts, when various professional
development seminars take place around the district. Teachers just need to sign-up
ahead of time to participate in these.
Finding #5: School-wide Programs target student’s needs. The principal uses
data to assess where students need more assistance and then develops programs to
help students. The Freshmen Academy was developed to help incoming freshmen
who were having difficulties with academics in junior high school. This is a
proactive way to help students in their early years of high school. Additionally,
programs such as AVID assist students in going to college and educates students on
college information such as applications, scholarships, and campus visits.
Moreover, there are many examples throughout the school that show how
High Performing High School demonstrates Marzano’s (2003) five school-level
factors as to what works in schools including a guaranteed and viable curriculum,
challenging goals and effective feedback, parent and community involvement, a safe
92
and orderly environment, and collegiality and professionalism. A guaranteed and
viable curriculum is used at the school since those were approved by the State of
California. Challenging goals, such as ensuring that all students will be proficient
after five years in the school district, show that there are high expectations for all
students. Parent and community involvement was seen at many evening meets
where parents were educated to help their children at home. During the meeting with
the assistant district attorney about students who were habitually truant, parents were
engaged and involved and many stayed after the session to ask additional questions.
Additionally, the police department has a clear involvement in the school and three
officers even spoke at a faculty meeting about how they would continue to build a
stronger working relationship with the school. Collegiality and professionalism
started at the top with the principal. She was extremely professional in the
researcher’s experience, since the very first e-mail exchange. Furthermore, the
culture of collaboration shows that the level of collegiality and professionalism is
high since teachers were able to work together.
As an answer to research question #2 which asked if student engagement is
related to student achievement, the findings suggest that there is a strong tie with
some aspects of student engagement, such as students being encouraged to write, but
examining the data from the entire survey, I would conclude there is not a strong
relationship between student engagement and student achievement at High
Performing High School. Although a strong relationship between student
achievement and student engagement was not found, a longitudinal study would be
93
able to determine if there truly is some type of correlation. Since the ultimate form
of disengagement is dropping out of school and High Performing High School has a
low dropout rate, the school is doing something in terms of engaging students.
Some similarities between respondents of the National High School Survey
of Student Engagement and the adapted survey included that students at High
Performing High School spent about the same amount of time with those nationally
surveyed—where the majority of students spent 5 hours or less a week on
homework.
The differences between the national survey and the adapted HSSSE survey
included the demographics of the students surveyed. The majority of students who
took the adapted survey were Latino as opposed to the mostly White students
responding on the national survey. Additionally, there was a major difference in
terms of the student’s home language and whether that was mostly English—54.5%
of those at HPHS reported “no” as opposed to 15% that reported “no” on the national
survey. Another notable difference was that students at HPHS feel a lot safer at their
school compared to the national average. Unfortunately, more students at HPHS do
not feel that they are being treated fairly when compared to the national average.
Another significant finding from the adapted survey showed that students do feel like
the school helps them set goals for their future and they feel confident about their
writing.
94
Conclusions of the Study
There are many effective factors that contribute to a high performing urban
school as noted specifically at High Performing High School. The thing that stood
out the most was that the school’s goals, both the district and school-wide learning
results, were extremely clear and every stakeholder seemed to be aware of these
goals. These goals and learning results are used to drive decisions made at the
school so they ensure that student achievement is at the forefront of every decision.
Having a leader that is positive and teachers who care also contribute to the culture
of the school where the belief in and expectations for every student are high.
Additionally, this study showed that there is not a significant relationship between
student engagement and student achievement at this school, but further studies would
be able to strongly reiterate or refute this conclusion.
Recommendations and Implications
The findings and recommendation for this study have been presented to High
Performing High School and is a focus of the school according to the school’s
WASC report. The extent that these findings are transferable to other schools, there
are clear implications for administrators and teachers:
1. Teachers need to increase collaboration time. The scheduled four times
out of the school year may not be sufficient for teachers to effectively collaborate
and share ideas. Since there are only a few days set aside during the year for
structured collaboration time, many teachers are meeting after school and/or before
school. To help reduce the time spent outside of the school day to collaborate, which
95
can be spent tutoring students or grading papers and providing feedback to students,
the school needs to come to a consensus to add more collaboration days per year.
Including more collaboration time will help teachers work smarter because
professional discussions take place and ideas are shared all to further increase
student achievement.
2. Teachers and administrators need to ensure that instruction is occurring
bell-to-bell. This means that there is no idle time for students and that they are
constantly learning in class at all times. As observed in the science class I visited,
students were engaged in the lesson from the second they walked into the classroom
because those expectations were made clear from the beginning of the school year.
In another English classroom, there was some idle time mostly at the beginning of
the period and towards the end. During this idle time, students are not focused on
learning material, and this needs to be eliminated to fully maximize on instructional
time. It also makes sense since the district has developed pacing guides. There is
some pressure on teachers to cover a lot of material for a standardized test; however,
if instructional time is being maximized and students are learning every minute of
the period, then more material would be covered and that would alleviate some stress
for teachers. Ensuring that instruction is occurring bell-to-bell can be included in
lesson planning and staff development.
3. Students need to be encouraged to participate in school activities and
athletics, especially those with leadership opportunities. A majority of students
responded to the survey conducted for this research study, stating that they were not
96
being encouraged to participate in leadership positions at the school. Seeing equal
representation of students in leadership positions sends a very clear message that
there is equity in the way that leaders are chosen since they are representing the
student body.
4. Teachers should strive to increase the amount of effective, immediate
feedback to students. Many students reported not getting timely feedback from
teachers on assignments. The importance of immediate and effective feedback is
two-fold. One, students can use their feedback as a tool for reflecting on their work
and to determine how much they should focus on each subject or skill. Two,
teachers can use the feedback as data to drive instruction in their classroom. This
feedback data will help teachers determine what skills need to be re-taught or
reviewed. Providing effective and immediate feedback can be something teachers
discuss and implement during staff development.
5. The administration should continue to support teachers in the classroom
and provide meaningful feedback and encourage collaboration between and
throughout departments. This support could include attending collaboration
meetings, seeking out meaningful professional development opportunities, and
making classroom visitations often.
Suggestions for Further Research
1. Further studies should include a longitudinal study with the adapted survey
to see if there is a further relationship between student engagement and student
achievement over time.
97
2. Further studies should include a comparison between a high performing
urban high school with a school that is performing at its expectancy level in regards
to student achievement and student engagement. By looking at a school that is
outperforming and comparing it to a school that is performing at state standards, one
can investigate if there are differing levels of student engagement.
Conclusion
There is an urgent need for change to take place in all failing high schools,
especially those located in urban school districts. This study is important because it
identified effective factors of high performing urban high schools—those that are
exceeding expectations set by the State of California according to the California
Standards Test. What is being done in the specific urban high school which was the
object of this research study can be transferable to other institutions simply because
our children, especially those that are historically underserved, deserve it and
providing a quality education is a charge that we must all hold ourselves accountable
to.
98
REFERENCES
American Institutes for Research. (September, 2003). California’s Public Schools
Accountability Act (PSAA): Evaluation Findings and Implications. Retrieved
March 15, 2007 from, http://www.edsource.org/pub_abs_psaa03.cfm

AVID Center. (2007). Our mission. AVID Online. Retrieved February 17, 2007
from, http://www.avidonline.org/info/?ID=2232&criteria=%22mission%22

California Department of Education. (2005). 2004-2005 California High School Exit
Exam Results. Retrieved on February 14, 2007 from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/nr/ne/yr06/yr06rel93.asp.

California Department of Education. (2007a). 2006-07 APR Glossary - Base API.
Retrieved April 20, 2007, from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ap/glossary07b.asp

California Department of Education. (2007c). 2006 Base Academic Performance
Index Report. Retrieved March 15, 2007, from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ap/

California Department of Education. (2002). Aiming high: High schools for the 21
st

century. Sacramento: California Department of Education.

California Department of Education. (2007). California basic educational data
system. Retrieved on February 17, 2007 from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sd/cb/reports.asp.

California Department of Education. (2007). DataQuest Reports. Retrieved on
February 17, 2007 from
http://dq/cde/ca/gov/dataquest/page2.asp?Level=State&Subject=Profile.

California Department of Education. (2005). Notice of class action settlement:
Williams v. State of California education lawsuit. Sacremento, CA:
California Department of Education.

California Department of Education. (1992). Second to none: A vision of the new
California high school. Report of the California High School Task Force.
Sacramento: California Department of Education.

California Department of Education. (2006). Similar Schools Report, 2006
Academic Performance Index (API) Base Report. Retrieved March 27, 2007
from, http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/

99
Catterall, J.S. (1998). Risk and resilience in student transitions to high school.
American Journal of Education, 106 (2), 302-333.

Codding, J.B. & Rothman, R. (1999). Just passing through: The life of an American
high school. In D.D. Marsh & J.B. Codding (Eds.). The new American High
School (3-17). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Conant, J. B. (1959). The American high school today: A first report to interested
citizens. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Conley, D. (2005). What we must do to create a system that prepares students for
college success. Retrieved on February 14, 2007, from
http://www.wested.org/cs/we/view/rs/810

Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches (2
nd
ed.). Thousand Oaks: CA: Sage Publications.

Ed-Data District Reports. (2005-2006). Retrieved March 30, 2007 from,
http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us/welcome.asp

Ed-Data School Reports. (2005-2006). Retrieved March 30, 2007 from,
http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us/welcome.asp

Finn, J. (1993). School engagement and students at risk. Washington, DC: National
Center for Education Statistics.

Finn, J. (1989). Withdrawal from school. [Electronic version]. Review of Educational
Research, 59(2), 117-142.

Finn, J.D. & Voekl, K.E. (1993). School characteristics related to student
engagement. [Electronic version]. The Journal of Negro Education,6 (3),
249-268.

Friedman, T. (2005). The world is flat. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.

Gall, M.P., Gall, J.P., & Borg, W.R. (2003). Educational research-An introduction
(7
th
ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Gewertz, C. (2006). H.S. dropouts say lack of motivation top reason to quit.
Education Week, 25 (26), 1-14.

Goals 2000: Educate America Act. Retrieved February 7, 2007, from
http://www.ed.gov/G2K/g2k-fact.html
100
Greene, J.P. & Forster, G. (2003). Public high school graduation and college
readiness rates in the United States. New York, NY. Manhattan Institute for
Policy Research .

High School Survey of Student Engagement. (2005a). A Special Report from the
High School Survey of Student Engagement. Getting Students Ready for
College: What Student Engagement Data Can Tell Us. Retrieved May 5,
2007, from
http://www.ecs.org/html/IssueSection.asp?issueid=108&s=Selected+Researc
h+%26+Readings

High School Survey of Student Engagement 2005. (2005b). What we can learn from
high school students. Retrieved February 7, 2007, from
http://ceep.indiana.edu/hssse/pdf/hssse_2005_report.pdf

High School Survey of Student Engagement. (2007). About HSSSE. Retrieved April
25, 2007, from http://ceep.indiana.edu/hssse/html/about.htm

Huebner, T.A., and Corbett, G.C. (2003). Rethinking high school: Five profiles of
innovative models for student success. San Francisco, CA. A study by
WestEd for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Knapp, C. (2006). Tough choices or tough times: The report of the new commission
on the skills of the American workforce. Washington, DC: National Center
on Education and the Economy.

Marks, H. (2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in the
elementary, middle, and high school years. [Electronic version]. American
Educational Research Journal,37(1), 153-184.

Marzano, R. (2003). What works in Schools: Translating research into action.
ASCD: Alexandria, VA.

Massachusetts. (2007). In Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved February 10, 2007,
from Encyclopedia Britannica Online: http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-
79361

National Center for Education Statistics. (2007). The condition of education 2007.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A Nation at Risk.
Retrieved February 3, 2006, from
http://www.ed.gov/pubs/NatAtRisk/risk.html.

101
No Child Left Behind (2001). Retrieved February 15, 2007, from
http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/index.html

Norris, C., Pignal, J. & Lipps, G. (2003). Measuring school engagement. Education
Quarterly Review, 9(2), 25-34.

Ogbu, J.U. (1992). Theory into practice: Adaptation to minority status and impact
on school success. Literacy and the African-American Learner, 31 (4), 287-
295.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3
rd
ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Perelman, L.J. (1992). School’s out: Hyperlearning, the new technology, and the end
of education (1
st
ed.). New York: William Morrow.

Spellings, M. (2007). Building on results: A blueprint for strengthening the No Child
Left Behind Act. Retrieved February 3, 2007, from
http://www.ed.gov/nclb/overview/intro/reauth/index.html.

Teleparent Website (http://www.teleparent.net).

The National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk:
The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: U.S. Department
of Education.

Toch, T. (2003). High Schools on a Human Scale: How Small Schools Can
Transform American. Boston: Beacon Press.

United States Census Bureau. (2005). FactfinderFact Sheet. Retrieved March 3,
2007 from, http://www.census.gov/

United States Department of Education (2004a.) Glossary of Terms. Retrieved May
3, 2007, from http://www.ed.gov/nclb/index/az/glossary.html#12

United States Department of Labor. (2004). Committee on education and the
workforce report. Retrieved on February 17, 2007 from
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/edlabor_dem/rel122105.html

Urban Unified School District Education Association. (2006).

Urban Unified School District Goals. (2004).

102
WestEd. (May 2004). Student Achievement in California: Steady Progress Made,
Faster Improvement Needed. Retrieved May 5, 2007, from
www.wested.org/online_pubs/cde.studentachieve.pdf

Wise, L., Taylor, L., Xialoei, W., Becker, D.E., Thacker, A. (2006). Review of the
appropriateness of the California high school exit exam content standards for
high school accountability. A study for the California Department of
Education. Sacramento, CA: Human Resources Research Association.

Yazzie-Mintz, E. (2006). Voices of student engagement: A report on the 2006 high
school survey of student engagement. Retrieved March 7, 2007,
http://ceep.indiana.edu/hssse/pdf/HSSSE_2006_Report.pdf
103
APPENDIX A
Document Review

How we would identify high performing schools?
API score
Similar School Ranking

What do we need to know?
CAHSEE passage rate
Discipline (suspensions, expulsions, rewards)
School sponsored activities
Attendance
Graduation rates
Student Demographics (SES, free/reduced lunch, mobility, ELL)
Parent education level
Course grades (GPA)

How would we find this information?
California Department of Education (Data Quest- http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/)
WASC Report- Self study report & recommendations
School Accountability Report Card
District Website
School Website
School Handbook
Student/Parent Handbook
104
APPENDIX B
Observation Log

Date: ______________________________ Page ________ of ________

School Class Leadership Meetings Out-of-classroom Activities

School
Culture
Curriculum &
Instruction
Leadership Student
Engagement
Additional
Observations

105
APPENDIX C

Focus: Factors Impacting Student Achievement at Urban High Schools

Interview Questions
Suggested personnel to interview: Principal, Assistant Principal(s), Superintendent,
Support staff, Parent groups and community groups, Extra-curricular Activities
Leaders (minimum of 5 interviews)

Questions

1. Tell me about this school.

2. What are you most proud of at this school? What areas would you like to improve
within the school?

3. What is the vision or mission of the school? Are there common goals in which all
stakeholders are focusing upon? If so, please tell me about them.

4. What are the factors that you feel contribute to student achievement at your
school?

5. What role do you feel student engagement (defined by cohort group) contributes
to student achievement at your school?

6. What do you feel are the strengths of the school?

7. Would you consider your school high performing? Why or why not? If so, how?

8. Is your school unique? If so, how?

9. How does the school prepare students beyond high school?
106
APPENDIX D

Survey of High School Administrators Regarding Student Engagement

This survey asks questions about how you perceive the high school experience for
the students at your high school. The information provided by these surveys will be
compiled to be shared with site and district stakeholders. Thank you for your
thoughtful responses.

1. What areas do you supervise?
2. Are you _____ Female ______ Male
3. What is your racial or ethnic identification?
(Mark all that apply.)
______American Indian/other Native American ______Asian American
or Pacific Islander
______Black/African American ______White
______Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin ______Other, specify:
___________
______Prefer not to respond
4. Is English the main language used in the majority of your students’ homes?
_____ Yes _____ No _____ I do not know

5. Do the majority of your students have a computer with Internet access at
home?
____ Yes ____ No ____ I do not know
6. During this school year, about how many writing assignments are students
given?
0-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 9-10 11+

a. Written papers/reports of
more than 5 pages
b. Written papers/reports of 3 to
5 pages
c. Written papers/reports of fewer than 3 pages

7. How much reading are students assigned in a typical school week?
# of hours of assigned reading

____0 ____1 ____2-3 ____4-5 ____6-7 ____8-10 ____11+

107
8. During this school year, how often do teachers utilized strategies to
encourage all students to participate in class?
____Very often ____Frequently ____Sometimes ____Never
9. During this school year, how often are students given prompt, personal
feedback on assignments?
____Very often ____Frequently ____Sometimes ____Never
10. School safety is clearly a priority on this campus?
____I agree ____I disagree
For numbers 11a-11k, check the response that best identifies the extent to which
this high school emphasizes the skill or learning activity mentioned.

Question Very
Much
Quite
a bit
Some Very
little
a. Students must spend a lot of time studying
and on schoolwork.

b. Students are provided with the support
needed to succeed in school.

c. Students are encouraged to participate in
school events and activities (athletics, music,
etc.)

d. Students are encouraged to get involved in
school leadership and governance.

e. All adults on campus treat students fairly.
f. Students are encouraged and provided
meaningful opportunities to learn work-related
skills.

g. Students are encouraged to write effectively.
h. Students are encouraged and provided the
support to use information technology.

i. Students are encouraged and provided
opportunities to solve real-world problems.

j. Students are encouraged and provided
meaningful opportunities to develop clear,
sequential career goals and prepare for
appropriate post-secondary education or
training.

k. Students are encouraged and provided
meaningful opportunities to make their
community a better place.

108
12. What are the factors that you feel contribute to student achievement?
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

Thank you for completing this survey.
109
APPENDIX E
Survey of High School Teachers Regarding Student Engagement

This survey asks questions about how you perceive the high school experience for
the students at your high school. The information provided by these surveys will be
compiled to be shared with site and district stakeholders. Thank you for your
thoughtful responses.

1. What subject area do you teach?
____________________________________________
2. Which category represents most of the classes you teach?
_____ General/Regular _____ Special Education
_____ Remedial _____ Honors/College Prep
_____ Career/Career Technical Education

3. Are you _____ Female ______ Male
4. What is your racial or ethnic identification? (Mark all that apply.)
______American Indian/other Native American ______Asian American
or Pacific Islander
______Black/African American ______White
______Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin ______Other, please
specify: ___________
______Prefer not to respond
5. Is English the main language used in the majority of your students’ homes?
_____ Yes _____ No _____ I do not know

6. Do the majority of your students have a computer with Internet access at
home?
____ Yes ____ No ____ I do not know
7. During this school year, about how many writing assignments have you
given?
0-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 9-10 11+
a. Written papers/reports of
more than 5 pages
b. Written papers/reports of 3 to
5 pages
c. Written papers/reports of
fewer than 3 pages

110
8. How much reading do you assign in a typical school week?
# of hours of assigned reading
____0 ____1 ____2-3 ____4-5 ____6-7 ____8-10 ____11+
9. During this school year, how often have you utilized strategies to encourage
all students to participate in class?
____Very often ____Frequently ____Sometimes ____Never

10. During this school year, how often have you given prompt, personal feedback
to students on assignments?
____Very often ____Frequently ____Sometimes ____Never
11. School safety is clearly a priority on this campus?
____ I agree ____ I disagree
For numbers 12a-12k, check the response that best identifies the extent to which
this high school emphasizes the skill or learning activity mentioned.

Question Very
Much
Quite
a bit
Some Very
little
a. Students must spend a lot of time studying
and on schoolwork.

b. Students are provided with the support
needed to succeed in school.

c. Students are encouraged to participate in
school events and activities (athletics, music,
etc.)

d. Students are encouraged to get involved in
school leadership and governance.

e. All adults on campus treat students fairly.
f. Students are encouraged and provided
meaningful opportunities to learn work-related
skills.

g. Students are encouraged to write effectively.
h. Students are encouraged and provided the
support to use information technology.

i. Students are encouraged and provided
opportunities to solve real-world problems.

j. Students are encouraged and provided
meaningful opportunities to develop clear,
sequential career goals and prepare for
appropriate post-secondary education or
training.

111
k. Students are encouraged and provided
meaningful opportunities to make their
community a better place.

13. What are the factors that you feel contribute to student achievement?
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
112
APPENDIX F
Survey of High School Students Regarding Student Engagement
This survey asks questions about how you perceive the high school experience at
your high school. The information provided by this survey will be compiled and
analyzed. Thank you for your thoughtful responses.

1. What grade are you in? (Circle one) 9 10 11 12
2. Which category represents most of the classes you take?
_____ General/Regular _____ Special Education
_____ Remedial _____ Honors/College Prep
_____ Career/Career Technical Education

3. Are you _____ Female ______ Male
4. What is your racial or ethnic identification?
(Mark all that apply.)
______American Indian/other Native American
______Asian American or Pacific Islander
______Black/African American
______White
______Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin
______Other, please specify: _______________________
______Prefer not to respond
5. Is English the main language used in your home?
_____ Yes _____ No _____ I prefer not to state

6. During the school year, how many writing assignments are you assigned?

0-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 9-10 11+
a. Written papers/reports of
more than 5 pages
b. Written papers/reports of 3 to
5 pages
c. Written papers/reports of
fewer than 3 pages

113
7. How many hours do you read for school each week?

____ 0 ____ 1 ____ 2-3 ____ 4-5 ____ 6-7 ____ 8-10 ____ 11+

8. During the school year, how often are you given feedback from teachers on
assignments?

____Very often ____Frequently ____Sometimes ____Never

9. School safety is clearly a priority at your school.

____ I agree ____ I disagree
10. Fill in the response that best identifies the extent to which your high school
emphasizes the skill or learning activity mentioned.
Very
often
Often Some Never
a. You must spend a lot of time studying and on
school work.

b. You are provided the support needed to succeed
at school.

c. You are encouraged to participate in school
events and activities (athletics, music, etc.)

d. You are encouraged to get involved in school
leadership and governance.

e. All adults on campus treat students fairly.
f. You are encouraged and provided meaningful
opportunities to learn work-related skills.

g. You are encouraged to write effectively.
h. You are encouraged and provided the support
to use information technology.

i. You are encouraged and provided opportunities
to solve real-world problems.

j. You are encouraged and provided meaningful
opportunities to develop clear, sequential, career
goals and prepare for appropriate post-secondary
education or training.

k. You are encouraged and provided meaningful
opportunities to make your community a better
place.

114
11. Are you eligible for free or reduce-priced lunch?
_____ Yes _____ No _____ I do not know / Decline to state

12. How far do you think you will go in school? (Choose one)
____ Not finish high school
____ Certificate of completion without a diploma
____ High school diploma/GED ____ 2-year college degree
(Associate’s)
____ 4-year degree (Bachelor’s) ____ Master’s degree
____ PhD/ advanced professional degree ____ Don’t Know

13. Would you like to say more about any of your answers to these survey
questions?
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

Abstract (if available)

Abstract There is much alarm over the condition of public schools in the United States. More and more students are dropping out of school, never earning a high school diploma. There has been some research done on failing high schools, which is where many students drop out, and most of these students are students of color living and attending schools in urban neighborhoods. Given the long track record of failing schools, federal mandates which have been enacted such as the No Child Left Behind Act expect schools to make progress every single year. Although urban high schools have made little progress as a whole, there are some that are defying the odds and outperforming according to the federal mandates.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

A case study of factors related to a high performing urban charter high school: investigating student engagement and its impact on student achievement

PDF

A case study to determine what perceived factors, including student engagement, contribute to academic achievement in a high performing urban high school

PDF

A case study of an outperforming urban high school: the relational pattern between student engagement and student achievement in a magnet high school in Los Angeles

PDF

Student engagement in high performing urban high schools: a case study

PDF

Outperforming expectations: a case study of an urban high school

PDF

Factors contributing to the high performance of an urban high school

PDF

Student engagement in high-performing urban high schools: a case study

PDF

Student engagement in a high performing urban high school: a case study

PDF

A case study of student engagement in a high performing urban continuation high school

PDF

Student engagement in a high-performing urban high school: a case study

PDF

Factors that may lead to an urban high school‘s outperforming status: a case study of an institution‘s achievement in the age of accountability

PDF

A study of an outperforming urban high school and the factors which contribute to its increased academic achievement with attention to the contribution of student achievement

PDF

Factors including student engagement impacting student achievement in a high performing urban high school district: a case study

PDF

Closing the achievement gap: breakthrough in the urban high school

PDF

A case study: school-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from high-performing, high poverty urban schools

PDF

School-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from high-performing, high-poverty schools

PDF

Implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from high performing, high poverty urban schools

PDF

Factors which may contribute to academic achievement in an outperforming urban high school with a career technical education curriculum

PDF

School-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from high-performing, high-poverty urban schools

PDF

School-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lesson from a high performing high poverty urban elementary school

Asset Metadata

Creator Vu, Stephania Loan (author)

Core Title Effective factors of high performing urban high schools: a case study

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 04/01/2008

Defense Date 03/19/2008

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

Tag effective factors,high performing,OAI-PMH Harvest,urban high schools

Place Name California (states), USA (countries)

Language English

Advisor Gothold, Stuart E. (committee chair), Hocevar, Dennis J. (committee member), Stowe, Kathy Huisong (committee member)

Creator Email stephanv@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m1077

Unique identifier UC171757

Identifier etd-Vu-20080401 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-49669 (legacy record id),usctheses-m1077 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Vu-20080401.pdf

Dmrecord 49669

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Vu, Stephania Loan

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