University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

K-12 dress codes and gender equity: an examination of policy and practice of dress code implementation

(USC Thesis Other)

K-12 dress codes and gender equity: an examination of policy and practice of dress code implementation

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

1

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY: AN EXAMINATION OF POLICY AND
PRACTICE OF DRESS CODE IMPLEMENTATION

by

Jillian Raymond

__________________________________________________________________________

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

May 2019

Copyright 2019 Jillian Raymond

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

2
Dedication
For my daughter Mika Ray, may you always be bold.

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

3
Acknowledgements
To my parents, I could not have done this without all the parenting you both did for me-
— even when I was difficult. I wish you were alive to see me graduate and I know you would
call me Dr. Jillian if you were! You always told me I could accomplish anything I put my mind
to, and I am forever grateful for the love and support you both showered me with.
To my dedicated partner and love Brennan. Even as I sit writing this you are making me
dinner and it is the support and faith you give to me that inspires me to stay motivated and be the
best version of myself every day and in all I do. I could not have survived this program without
your patience.
To my USC Cohort, my dissertation Chair, Dr. Freking and Committee members, Dr.
Datta and Dr. Brady, and the Professors and Support staff from Rossier School of Education —
you are the definition of a Trojan Family. Laughs, tears, frustrations, triumphs, but most of all a
sense of intellectual and worthy searching for each of us to find our path to bring about change.

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

4
Table of Contents
Dedication 2
Acknowledgements 3
List of Tables 5
List of Figures 6
Abstract 7
Introduction to Problem of Practice 8
Organizational Context and Mission 8
Importance of Addressing the Problem 9
Purpose of the Project and Questions 10
Research Questions 11
Organizational Performance Goal 11
Stakeholder Group of Focus and Stakeholder Goal 12
Review of the Literature 13
Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences 15
Qualitative Data Collection 30
Findings 33
Recommendations 41
Conclusion 53
References 54
Appendix A: Participating Stakeholders with Sampling Criteria for Focus Groups 60
Appendix B: Protocols 62
Appendix C: Credibility and Trustworthiness 65
Appendix D: Ethics 66
Appendix E: Limitations and Delimitations 68
Appendix F: Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan 69

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

5
List of Tables
Table 1. Organization Mission and Goal and Stakeholder Goal 11
Table 2. Knowledge Influences that Influence Stakeholder Goals 19
Table 3. Motivation Theories and Assessment Relating to Stakeholder Goals 23
Table 4. Assumed Organizational Influences 27
Table 5. Stakeholder Demographics 33
Table 6. Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations 42
Table 7. Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations 45
Table 8. Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations 49
Table F1. Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes 71
Table F2. Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation 72
Table F3. Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation 73
Table F4. Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program 76
Table F5. Components to Measure Reactions to the Program 77
Table F6. Immediate Feedback Survey 78
Table F7. Delayed Feedback Survey 79

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

6
List of Figures
Figure 1. Interactive conceptual framework 28
Figure 2. Knowledge ranking of dress code language 34

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

7
Abstract
This study evaluated the implementation of a gender-neutral dress code at a secondary school in
rural northern California. Using the methodology of qualitative research, focus groups were
conducted with the school site teachers to investigate the knowledge, motivation and
organizational influences of the implementation of the gender-neutral dress code. The teachers
represented a purposeful sample. Criteria included years of experience, parental status, and
gender self-identification. Because schools are serving an increasingly diverse population of
students, including gender non-conforming, it is important to have gender equity in school
policy. The aim of the analysis is to provide recommendations for gender-neutral dress code
implementation based on teachers’ insights to barriers and breakthroughs of the policy in the
areas of gender as diversity, sexism and its perpetuation in secondary education, and
administrative support in following through on policy implementation that is designed to shift
school culture.

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

8
Introduction to Problem of Practice
In the field of public education there are a myriad of issues to both celebrate and critique.
One specific area that deserves attention is school dress code and its enforcement. The
stakeholders involved are an extensive group: school board members, principals, teachers,
students, and community members all of whom are impacted by the dress code guidelines,
enforcement, and unintended perpetuations of societal status quo norms (Anderson, 2002;
DeMitchell, Fossey, & Cobb, 2000; Pomerantz, 2007). Harbach (2016) argues that dress code is
connected to our society’s battle to overcome sexism and discrimination. DeMitchell et al.
(2000) found that 85% of principals believe some sort of dress code is essential at school for
ensuring safety, yet a discrepancy exists in how codes are applied. According to Pomerantz
(2007) and Raby (2010) the use of vague language and the targeting of females is not aligning
with the intended goal of school safety but rather the evidence suggests that school dress codes
reinforce heteronormative middle-class values and undermine female students (Crockett &
Wallendorf, 1998; Harbach 2016). This phenomenon has been found at Lake High School
(LHS). A pseudonym has been assigned to protect the organization. This study was conducted
to evaluate the implementation of a gender-neutral dress code by investigating the knowledge,
motivational, and organizational influences of the stakeholders.
Organizational Context and Mission
LHS is a four-year comprehensive public high school located in the mountains of rural
Northern California. The mission of LHS can be succinctly stated to prepare students for a
productive life after graduation. The school has a graduate profile and a vision they want every
student to achieve by the end of their Senior year. This goal requires flexibility in developing
and sustaining a wide variety of choices so that each student has the opportunity to reach their
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

9
personal academic and personal goals. The aforementioned goal is accomplished through
explicit an implicit curriculum. One area of the implicit curriculum that has the potential to
hinder or facilitate the school’s vision is the dress code.
In the 2016/2017 school year, fueled by students, staff, and societal pressures, LHS
rewrote its dress code policy to be free of gender labels and discriminatory language. This
policy was adopted and included in the school’s code of conduct. Even though this policy was
adopted, do the teachers have the knowledge, motivation, and organizational tools to implement
a new policy that is leaps and bounds from the old practices? Students come to school for social
experiences and acceptance and dress is one of the ways they achieve such experiences. School
policy and its relationship to society create a context where unique circumstances impact the
behaviors of the student population and the stakeholders. The targeted stakeholder group for this
dissertation was the teachers.
Importance of Addressing the Problem
The consistent enforcement of an equitable school dress code is important to address for a
variety of reasons. Historically underserved populations are affected by discriminatory and
gender binary dress codes (Anderson, 2002; Glickman, 2016). There are circumstances
specifically undermining females as distractions and this practice reinforces victim blaming
(Pomerantz, 2007). The consequences of not solving this problem are a further perpetuation of
negative stereotypes, sexism, and status quo societal norms (Harbach, 2016; Skiba & Peterson,
2003). Student populations are becoming increasingly diverse in the demographic areas of
gender nonconforming, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status and the dress code should promote
school safety for all its students (District of Columbia Public Schools, 2015). To address
inequities in dress code policy and enforcement, LHS has adopted a new dress code and the goal
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

10
of 100% implementation by Spring 2019. The needs of the stakeholders to achieve this goal are
at the heart of this study. The evaluation of a school’s dress code is essential to conduct to
provide evidence that in fact gender-neutral language and non-discriminatory policies are
implemented.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
LHS has implemented a new gender-neutral dress code. If the policy is implemented but
not evaluated, it undermines the purpose. For the dress code’s gender-neutral and non-
discriminatory language to be effective, the teachers, the stakeholders, need to be consistently
and confidently enforcing it. Guided by the literature in the field, the Clark and Estes (2008)
KMO framework, and the research questions, this study evaluated the implementation of a
gender-neutral dress code.
The framing of the research study, including the concepts, questions, and underlying
research is known as the theoretical, or conceptual framework (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Because subjectivity, as outlined by Glesne and Peshkin (1992), is not suppressed in research,
but rather the researcher brings primary experiences to the research, critical subjectivity is
needed as a framework to guide and focus the study. In addition, the Clark and Estes (2008)
Knowledge Motivation and Organizational (KMO) framework, is suited to study stakeholder
performance within an organization. This gap analysis process is based on understanding
stakeholder goals in relationship to the organizational goal and identifying assumed performance
influences in the areas of knowledge, motivation and organization based on general theory,
context-specific literature and an existing understanding of the organization. The KMO
framework fits the definition of conceptual framework as it is constructed through the
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

11
understanding of the stakeholder-specific KMO assumed influences. The stakeholder-specific
KMO assumed influences are addressed in a later section.
Research Questions
1. What are the teacher’s knowledge and motivation related to enforcing a gender-
neutral and non-discriminatory dress code?
2. What is the interaction between organizational culture and teacher knowledge and
motivation to facilitate successful implementation of the gender-neutral dress code?
Organizational Performance Goal
Table 1
Organization Mission and Goal and Stakeholder Goal
Organizational Mission
Lake High School is dedicated to offering all students access to personally challenging and
individualized educational programs. This focus requires developing a wide variety of choices
so that each student has the opportunity to reach his or her personal academic goals with a
moral imperative to focus on equity and access.
Organizational Global Goal
By Spring of 2019, LHS will have a 100% implementation in classrooms and on-campus
facilities of its gender-neutral non-discriminatory dress code.
Stakeholder Goal
By Spring 2019, all teachers will implement the newly adopted gender-neutral and non-
discriminatory dress code to address students’ attire.

During the 2015/2016 school year LHS’s Code of Conduct committee redrafted the
school’s Code of Conduct, including dress code, to best meet the needs of its students, and align
the policy with its mission and vision. However, in the Spring of 2016, student and staff
objections to the dress code’s language, including the use of the word “distracting” and the
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

12
disproportionate restrictions for female students prompted the school site to revisit the code.
Results from student surveys, related to dress code restrictions and enforcements revealed that
students did not feel safe, respected, or in the case of female respondents, that their education
was as important as their male counterparts. These experimental results did not align with the
school’s mission to provide a safe learning environment for all its students. In addition, staff
reported a spectrum of comfort levels with enforcing the dress code restrictions contributing to
an inconsistency in enforcement that did align with the school’s mission. These steps were the
catalyst for LHS to draft and adopt a gender-neutral dress code policy. By Spring of 2019, LHS
will have implementation in classrooms and on-campus facilities of its gender-neutral non-
discriminatory dress code.
Stakeholder Group of Focus and Stakeholder Goal
Although a complete analysis would involve all stakeholder groups, for practical
purposes, one stakeholder group, teachers, was the focus this study. Teachers have been chosen
for a few reasons. The first is that the new dress code is an opportunity for teachable moments to
interact with students about dress to help reduce the more traditional approach to the dress code
of control, conformity, and discrimination. Second, teachers facilitate students’ academics and
since the school’s goal is to ensure personal academic success for all, the teachers must be
equipped to address dress concerns that interfere with the educational process. Lastly, teachers
can assist the administration and support staff by managing the dress code in the classroom in a
consistent manner that contributes to all students feeling safe and respected. The stakeholders
have a tremendous responsibility to the students and community to seize this opportunity to
make and implement safety expectations that eliminate gender biases, stereotypes, and
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

13
discrimination. By Spring 2019, all teachers will implement the newly adopted gender-neutral
and non-discriminatory dress code.
Review of the Literature
Dress Code in Secondary Education Settings: A Historical Context
Dress code can be defined as a school policy stating what students are not allowed to
wear (Anderson, 2002). A conversation around dress code in public education is not a new
phenomenon, but rather has been in educational dialogue since the Vietnam Era, and now is
largely focused on body image and gender rather than just student’s freedom of speech
(Glickman, 2016). Schools can adopt a dress code and protect first amendment rights by drafting
a policy that reflects an understanding of its complexity (Anderson, 2002; Gilbert, 1999;
Harbach, 2016). In addition, dress codes have a duty to protect students from violence and
maintain effective educational settings (Anderson, 2002; Workman & Freeburg, 2006).
Furthermore, because clothing is a transmission of culture and reflects modern trends, dress
codes are linked to that culture and modernity, both of which must be understood to unpack dress
code in today’s schools (Harbach, 2016; Miller, Watson, & Rutledge, 2007).
(Hidden) Curriculum and Implicit Bias and Culture in Secondary Education
What is taught in public education falls into two main categories, the explicit standard
curriculum, and the implicit or hidden curriculum that translates the value, culture, and biases in
patterns and phenomenon (Effrat & Schimmel, 2003; Wren, 1999). Wren (1999) defines the
explicit curriculum as “consciously planned course objectives,” and the hidden curriculum as
what students experience by “informality and lack of conscious planning” (p. 594). Dress code
regulations are a part of a school’s code of conduct and fall under Wren’s (1999) definition of
hidden curriculum. The informal and unplanned lessons that impact students from the school’s
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

14
culture can have negative consequences (Wren, 1999). The hidden curriculum impacts and
informs bias and gender expectations for students in secondary education. Clothing is seen as a
social message and has the power to send messages, both explicit and implicit (Miller et al.,
2007). Workman and Johnson (1994) argued that gender bias can influence the way teachers
perceive the achievement and success of students based on the selection of a style of dress that
conforms to expectations. In contrast, some school leaders define the hidden curriculum as a
close examination of any instruction that builds relationships between staff and students (Jerald,
2006). Hidden curriculum is part of school culture and permeates the settings in which students
and staff operate (Jerald, 2006; Wren, 1999).
Cultural value patterns are transmitted and perpetuated through systems. Education is
one of the most influential, and its dress code standards sends messages beyond the clothes.
Miller et al. (2007) and Harbach (2016) argue that clothing and student dress is a transmission of
culture. Patton (2014) explained how race, gender, and sexuality combine to expose overt and
hidden meanings in policy regarding attire.
Negative Stereotypes, Sexism, and Status Quo Societal Norms
The relationship between dress code and the further discrimination of historically
marginalized populations is evident in document analysis, mainstream movements, and case
studies (DeMitchell et al., 2000; Glickman, 2016; Harbach, 2016; Raby, 2010). Research shows
that schools have a role in promoting school safety, but gender-specific dress code language
contributes to unequal power dynamics among students and staff. A current examination of
dress code and the use of certain terms such as “appropriate” and “distracting” are in the
mainstream conversation around youth, sexuality, and gender rights (Harbach, 2016; Pomerantz,
2007). An ethnographic study conducted over a two-year period affirms the strength of the
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

15
message dress codes send to females and the role of schools in dictating what is okay, and that
standard being perpetuated through codes of conduct and playing out in normalizing gender
binaries and gender appropriateness (Rysst, 2010). Pomerantz (2007) argued that dress code
language shows which body types are acceptable when cleavage is listed as a safety violation.
The distraction of males by females because they are showing skin reinforces sexism and gives
the message that girls should cover up or change to meet the needs of the male students
(Pomerantz, 2007; Raby, 2010; Rysst, 2010). Glickman (2016) showed that the dress code has
become a way to maintain dominant patterns and reinforce the status quo. In addition, the
language of “distracting” in dress code is left up to the interpretation of the enforcer. In a focus
group study, Raby (2010) found that the interpretation by staff to enforce what is “appropriate”
dress shared how the interpretation lends itself to inconsistencies and promoting an imposed
correct way of being feminine or female at school. Dress codes are targeting females and body
shaming and inconsistencies and inequalities in enforcement show narrow forms of feminine
sexuality perpetuating negative stereotypes and status quo norms (Glickman, 2016; Raby, 2010).
Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences
Knowledge Influences
An organization with aligned mission, vision, and goals has a tremendous chance of
success in meeting performance outcomes. In addition to alignment, in order for an organization
to reach its goals it is essential to consider the issue of knowledge (Rueda, 2011). It is important
to analyze not only what knowledge people need, but also what skills are necessary to reach
performance outcomes. Clark and Estes (2008) identity “knowledge and skills” as one of the
critical three factors that can cause performance gaps. Once knowledge and skill gaps are
identified, there are research-based approaches that exist that can be implemented to close said
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

16
performance gaps (Clark & Estes, 2008). Understanding knowledge as a construct is a key first
step; resources exist to help leaders unpack the complexities of knowledge dimensions
(Anderson et al., 2001; Rueda, 2011).
The four dimensions of knowledge are factual knowledge, conceptual knowledge,
procedural knowledge, and metacognitive knowledge (Anderson et al., 2001). The first
knowledge type is factual knowledge and is understood simply as facts or knowledge that is
basic and specific to certain domains (Rueda, 2011). Factual knowledge can be retrieved easily
for recall once mastered, such as multiplication facts, vocabulary definitions, or state capitals.
The second knowledge type is conceptual knowledge. Anderson et al. (2001) and Rueda (2011)
define conceptual knowledge as an interrelationship between basic structures and the knowledge
of categories, models, or principles. For example, memorizing the definition of a noun is factual
knowledge, but knowing the different parts of speech and how they are used is conceptual
knowledge. While all four knowledge dimensions are important, for the purposes of this review
and analysis of relevant stakeholder goals, the focus will primarily be on factual and conceptual
knowledge.
The study focused on the stakeholder’s factual and conceptual knowledge regarding the
dress code. First, the stakeholders need to know the text and expectations of the dress code at
LHS (factual). Second, the stakeholders need to be able conceptualize the text and expectations
of the dress code in the larger school climate and context. The presence or absence of factual
and conceptual language can help inform the analysis process and get at the root of the
performance gap.
Sexism and its perpetuation in secondary schools. One area where a knowledge gap
exists in secondary education relates to sexism and the system’s role in perpetuating it through
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

17
discriminatory policies and rules, and more specifically inconsistent enforcement. The shifts
need to take place not only in current school settings but also in teacher preparation programs.
This knowledge influence addresses the gap of schools implementing a gender-neutral and non-
discriminatory dress code and supports the stakeholder goal.
School dress codes reinforce status quo gender expectations, sexualizing female students
and alienating non-gender conforming students. Raby (2010) conducted a focus group study
with secondary students highlighting that rules imposed against revealing too much skin target
female students in enforcement of the dress code and not male students. In addition, focus group
participants shared how females with larger breasts and overall larger body types would be dress-
coded more often than females with thinner bodies, and that other inconsistencies exist,
highlighting favoritism towards students who wear the “right” clothes and have the “right” body.
Harbach (2016) claimed that when females are disproportionately dress coded for showing too
much skin it sexualizes them. Dress codes that outline what specifically females are not allowed
to wear such as tight pants, midriff baring tops, or spaghetti straps is discrimination. Dress codes
are written to teach students what type of dress is appropriate in society for females and males to
wear to be successful in life after leaving high school, which reinforces one type of dress and
leaves out students who are gender non-conforming (Glickman, 2016).
Teacher preparation programs and diversity. In analyzing a knowledge gap, such as
gender as a diversity topic, it is important to trace back to the source of teacher expectations,
licensing, and methodology: the credential programs and how they do, or rather do not, address
diversity. Sherwin and Jennings (2006) found that sexual diversity and gender was largely
overlooked in the 77 public university programs they researched. Research on teacher
preparation programs in the mid 1990s revealed a lack of specific attention to diversity and
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

18
revealed the importance of cultural context and its impact on students. The knowledge gap to
address a gender-neutral population needs to be addressed (Avery & Walker, 1993). Pozo,
Martos, and Morillejo (2010) conducted a study of 962 secondary school students. Their
research highlighted how schools can contribute to social change in a positive way, promote
gender equity, and reduce violence against women.
Table 2 provides the organizational mission, organizational goal, and information specific
to knowledge influences, knowledge types, and knowledge influence assessments. As Table 2
indicates, one factual influence and two conceptual influences were used to gain insight about
the knowledge the staff at LHS need to reach their intended goals.

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

19
Table 2
Knowledge Influences that Influence Stakeholder Goals
Organizational Mission
Lake High School is dedicated to offering all students access to the most rigorous and relevant
educational programs possible. This focus requires flexibility in developing a wide variety of choices
so that each student has the opportunity to reach his or her personal academic goals.
Organizational Global Goal
By Spring of 2019, LHS will have a 100% implementation in classrooms and on-campus facilities of its
gender-neutral non-discriminatory dress code.
Stakeholder Goal
By Spring 2019, all teachers will implement the newly adopted gender-neutral and non-discriminatory
dress code to address students’ attire.
Knowledge Influence
Knowledge
Type Knowledge Influence Assessment*
Teachers need to know
gender-neutral language
and its importance in the
dress code expectations at
LHS.
Factual and
conceptual
Semi-structured focus groups (see Appendix B for
protocols)
1. Are you familiar with the school’s dress code?
2. Which ones stand out to you? Why?
Teachers need to know
that sexism can be
perpetuated in secondary
schools through the hidden
curriculum of school
culture.
Conceptual Semi-structured focus groups (see Appendix B for
protocols)
1. Describe your experience with gender roles,
perhaps in your upbringing, current family,
work environment, or society in general.
2. How do you think cultural and social norms
influence gender in school settings?
3. How do you understand gender and its
relationship to power structures?
4. How do you think cultural and social norms
influence gender in school settings?
5. How do you understand gender and its
relationship to power structures?
6. Explain the difference between sex (biological)
and gender.
7. How do you connect gender with diversity?
8. Explain how gender and gender differences
relate to your definition of diversity.

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

20
Motivation Influences
There is a myriad of factors that influence a person’s motivation and engagement such as
interest, confidence, and values. Clark and Estes (2008) identified motivation as one of the
critical three factors that can cause performance gaps. This section will be reviewing literature
that focuses on motivation and related influences that are pertinent to the achievement of
stakeholder goals. Motivation can be defined as starting, persisting, and investing mental effort
into a task (Rueda, 2011). It is the cause for almost 50% of performance problems, is
deceptively complex, and is inextricably bound to knowledge. Motivation is important to
analyze because it can be modified, and that provides solutions to problems that stem from
motivation gaps. Two motivational theories, self-efficacy theory and value theory, will be
discussed and applied in the context of LHS and the stakeholder goals.
Self-efficacy theory. In order for the stakeholder’s goals to be met the staff need to
believe they can do it. In this case, it is defined as interacting with students in a non-punitive
manner and engaging in conversations that for some may be challenging when implementing the
newly-adopted dress code designed to decrease perpetuation of gender stereotypes and
discrimination. The motivation theory of self-efficacy, and collective self-efficacy, are essential
paradigms to analyze to get the stakeholders steps closer to achieving their goal and removing
motivation barriers. Bandura (1986) defines self-efficacy as “people’s judgments of their
capabilities to organize and execute the course of action required to attain designated levels of
performances” (p. 391). In short, people’s beliefs about how well they, or in the case of
collective self-efficacy, a group, can do a task.
Self-efficacy is different than self-esteem because self-efficacy is more specific to
situations. For example, at LHS staff might have high self-efficacy around delivering content
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

21
and assessing student work, but a low-self efficacy around addressing garments and school attire
in a conversational and teachable manner. In addition, administrative teams might have belief
that one or several staff members can successfully implement the newly-adopted dress code, but
overall the admin might see the whole staff having a low collective self-efficacy. There are
numerous influences on self-efficacy such as past experiences with success/failure, observation,
and personal context and outcomes. To increase the self-efficacy around dress code and its
successful implementation high feedback and monitoring is essential and will contribute
positively to the achievement of stakeholder goals.
Value theory. Rueda (2011) defined value theory as the “importance one attaches to a
task” (p. 42). In examining LHS’s goals in relationship to value theory, it is important to
understand specifically the cost and utility value staff place on dress code implementation and
enforcement and how that motivation impacts the success, or failure, in meeting performance
outcomes. Cost value is the theoretical cost of the activity in terms of time, effort of other
dynamics (Rueda, 2011). For example, does a teacher perceive the cost value to be high to take
time to consult with a student regarding their dress to help teach them what is expected in a
formal environment, such as school, or is the act of doing so less valuable to them in comparison
to an extra practice problem or homework graded? In essence, not do they have the time, but do
they believe the time it takes is worth the cost? In addition to cost value, utility value plays a
significant role as a motivational influence. A global goal at LHS is to ensure “college and
career readiness.” If utility value is applied, the staff must reflect on if they believe that
enforcing a gender-neutral and non-discriminatory dress code is useful for achieving a future
goal, such as college and career readiness.
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

22
Skiba and Peterson (2003) provide an increased why to teachers about the importance of
taking time to teach the “social curriculum” which relates to motivational theories. The why
helps motivate individuals and it outlines solutions and positive correlations with changes in
adult behavior. Rosenholtz and Simpson (1990) address motivation when it highlights schools’
management of student behavior and how that impacts teachers’ commitment. Commitment to
school and the implementation of conduct and policy can influence varying stages to motivation
and motivation to comply with organizational responsibilities.
Attribution Theory. In addition to self-efficacy and value, attribution theory contributes
to motivational analysis. Anderman and Anderman (2016) defined attribution as a theory that
examines individual beliefs about why certain events occur. In addition, attribution theory can
be understood as forming one’s own beliefs about the cause of an experience (Anderman &
Anderman, 2016).
Table 3 identifies motivational influences that focus on self-efficacy, value, and
Attribution Theory. These influences are used to more fully understand how motivation affects
the teacher’s ability to meet the goals of implementing and maintaining consistency with a
gender-neutral and non-discriminatory dress code.

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

23
Table 3
Motivation Theories and Assessment Relating to Stakeholder Goals
Organizational Mission
Lake High School is dedicated to offering all students access to the most rigorous and relevant
educational programs possible. This focus requires flexibility in developing a wide variety of choices
so that each student has the opportunity to reach his or her personal academic goals.
Organizational Global Goal
By Spring of 2019, LHS will have a 100% implementation in classrooms and on-campus facilities of its
gender-neutral non-discriminatory dress code.
Stakeholder Goal
By Spring 2019, all teachers will implement the newly adopted gender-neutral and non-discriminatory
dress code language to address students’ attire.
Assumed Motivation Influences Motivational Influence Assessment
Self-efficacy — teachers believe students should
have their own sense, or it’s the family’s job, to
dress for school in an appropriate way without the
school needing to “teach.”
Semi-structured focus groups (see Appendix B for
protocols)
1. Whose job do you think it is to teach
public dress expectations?
Cost value — time spent on dress code and
discipline is the office’s job, takes away time
(mental and class) from academics.
Semi-structured focus groups (see Appendix B for
protocols)
1. In your classroom and on campus how do
you enforce the current school dress code
policy?
Utility value — teachers need to see the value in
teaching language registers juxtaposed with dress
registers to students as part of our school-wide
policies instead of crime/punishment model.
Semi-structured focus groups (see Appendix B for
protocols)
1. What strategies have you found most and
least effective when enforcing dress code?
2. Explain the level of trust/comfort you
have in addressing students about their
attire.
Attributions — teachers’ individual beliefs are
affected by environmental and personal factors
and have the potential to contribute to gender bias
and dress code.
Semi-structured focus groups (see Appendix B for
protocols)
1. Where do think the strongest influences
come from that impact our students and
their dress?

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

24
Organizational Influences
In examining performance outcomes and conducting gap analysis, three main areas to
examine are knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences (Clark & Estes, 2008).
According to Clark and Estes (2008), organizational barriers include problems where “missing
tools, inadequate facilities, or faulty processes or procedures, prevent, or delay work” (p. 44).
Furthermore, Buckingham and Coffman (1999) identified organizational influences, such as
meeting basic needs and creating a sense of belonging, that help act as a catalyst to help people
become who they already are. All of the aforementioned factors contribute to the organization’s
culture, some of which are measurable and visible, and others more nuanced and harder to see
(Schein, 2017). Since organizational culture is complex, organizational influences can be seen
through the lens of cultural models and cultural settings (Schein, 2017).
Cultural models and settings. Cultural models and settings can be understood using an
iceberg metaphor. Cultural models are what exist below the surface of the water and may or may
not be observable. In contrast, cultural settings sit above the waterline and include items that are
aligned with goals and more easily seen and or measured (Hall, 1976). The relationship between
cultural models and settings is not static but rather a fluid interconnectedness of their influence
and relationship on one another (Rueda, 2011). In order for leaders to use culture as an asset and
not a barrier, they must get at the cultural depths of the organization and be aware of
stakeholder’s beliefs and values, as well as underlying assumptions (Schein, 2017). For the
purposes of this study, the organization, LHS’s cultural model includes staff engagement and the
expectations of the organizational culture and communication and culture of trust built on
existing value patterns and status quo systems. The cultural settings include basic needs being
met and supervisor follow-through, both of which are essential to understanding performance
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

25
that impacts goal achievement (Clark & Estes, 2008). Table 4 provides the assumed cultural
model and cultural settings influences on performance at LHS and are discussed in greater detail
below.
Cultural model assumed influences: resistance and trust. An organizational barrier is
resistance. Agócs (1997) explained that resistance can be institutional and individual. In the
study of LHS and its performance outcomes, there needs to be a general acceptance and
willingness amongst staff to implement dress expectations and language registers as a school-
wide policy to create a cultural shift and shared understanding. The resistance may lie at both
the individual/stakeholder and institutional level, the larger school context. One form of
resistance pertinent to the study is the refusal to implement a change that has been adopted by the
organization (Agócs, 1997). Resistance on an individual level can stem from what Duhigg
(2016) found as two essential elements to create effective teams: social sensitivity and
psychological safety. If those two elements are lacking, the individual resistance can emerge due
to a lack of trust and strong leadership. There needs to be a culture of trust between teachers and
students so conversations about garments, dress expectations, and language expectations are
productive, respectful, and teach, rather than punish/shame. Organizational change literature
illustrates that trustworthiness is built through open communication and demonstrating concern
(Korsgaard, Brodt, & Whitener, 2002).
Another way to address resistance is through an opposing organizational characteristic-
engagement. Berbary and Malinchak (2011) defined engaged workers as those who not only get
the big picture and mission, but are learning professionals, intellectually respected, and
emotionally connected. If an organization can see that a culture of resistance is a barrier, then a
shift towards a culture of engagement presents a possible solution to this organizational barrier.
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

26
In terms of LHS, the organization needs to engage staff in order to create a cultural shift that will
support acceptance and willingness toward a new dress code policy.
Cultural settings assumed influences: basic needs and supervisor follow-through. A
cultural setting can be understood as the more concrete and visible ways we understand a social
context (Rueda, 2011). In the study of LHS and its organizational influences, the visible, or
measurable, act of teachers documenting dress code conversations and/or concerns is part of a
cultural practice. Organizational change literature highlights the importance of employees’
needs being met at the basic level (Buckingham & Coffman, 1999).
At LHS, staff needs sufficient time within their instructional day to adequately address,
with confidence and consistency, dress concerns and document conversations. If the
organization provides basic teacher needs, so that they don’t need to spend their limited time on
basic concerns around supplies and rosters, they will have more time for dress code and collegial
participation. The importance of the aforementioned organizational influences being addressed
helps move the organization closer towards its goal (Clark & Estes, 2008).

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

27
Table 4
Assumed Organizational Influences
Organizational Mission
Lake High School is dedicated to offering all students access to the most rigorous and relevant educational
programs possible. This goal requires flexibility in developing a wide variety of choices so that each student has
the opportunity to reach his or her personal academic goals.
Organizational Global Goal
By Spring of 2019, LHS will have a 100% implementation in classrooms and on-campus facilities of its gender-
neutral non-discriminatory dress code.
Stakeholder Goal
By Spring 2019, all teachers will implement the newly gender-neutral and non-discriminatory dress code
language to address students’ attire.
Assumed Organizational Influences Organizational Influence Assessment
Cultural Model Influence 1: Resistance
The organization needs general acceptance and
willingness amongst staff to implement dress
expectations as a school-wide policy to create a
cultural shift and shared understanding.
Semi-structured focus groups (see Appendix B for
protocols)
1. Are you familiar with the school’s dress code?
2. Which ones stand out to you? Why?
Cultural Model Influence 2: Trust
The organization needs to have a culture of trust
between teachers and students so conversations about
garments, dress expectations, and language
expectations are productive, respectful, and teach,
rather than punish/shame.
Semi-structured focus groups (see Appendix B for
protocols)
1. In your classroom and on campus how do you
enforce the current school dress code policy?
2. Explain the level of trust/comfort you have in
addressing students about their attire?
Cultural Setting Influence 1: Basic Needs Being Met
The organization needs to allow staff sufficient time
within their instructional needs to adequately address,
with confidence and consistency, dress concerns and
document conversations in AERIES to close the
“loop” of school policy communication for admin and
staff to see/use for support/resources.
Semi-structured focus groups (see Appendix B for
protocols)
1. What strategies have you found most and least
effective when enforcing dress code?
Cultural Setting Influence 2: Supervisors following
through with support and policies
The organization needs to provide staff with effective
collegial participation and support and consistency in
attire expectations to maintain goals and visions and
ensure success of a policy implementation (Berger,
2014).
Semi-structured focus groups (see Appendix B for
protocols)
1. How are you supported by the admin team in
enforcement of the dress code?
2. How have you used AERIES to document dress
code concerns and enforcement/dialogue with
students? How has the admin team followed
up with you based on your documentation?
3. Explain how you have communicated concerns
regarding attire, student garments, and dress
code violations to the admin team.

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

28

Figure 1. Interactive conceptual framework

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

29
The figure represents the interaction, and interactive theory, between the K, M, and O
influences that supports the move of the teachers to a place of transformation, and the
organization to its performance goal. According to Maxwell (2013) an interactive theory,
however “tentative or incomplete” presents the “ideas and beliefs that you hold about the
phenomena studied” (pp. 39–40). The teachers will only be able to meet the goal if the
influences are made to connect and be seen as fluid and not in isolation. In addition, Maxwell
(2013) defends the importance of a theoretical framework and its role in setting the context of the
study so that the results can be understood clearly. In the case of this study, the shift to enforcing
a gender neutral and non-discriminatory dress code policy is a shift in power dynamics and a
shift in equity.
Figure 1 shows moving from KMO influences to KMO interactions. In the figure the
blue circle represents the organization and it is all encompassing of the interactions that lead to
stakeholder, in this study the teachers’, goals. The teachers are inside the circle because they are
a part of the organization and their values, behaviors, and contributions directly impact the
organization. The purple circle represents the teachers’ knowledge and motivation influences.
The teachers’ knowledge influences are interactive (double sided arrows) with the motivation
influences as well as the teacher transformation (red circle). For example, the greater the
knowledge influences are addressed the more motivated teachers will be as they come closer to a
transformative experience to have the language, space, and safety to discuss gender diversity and
its relationship to the language used in our school’s dress code policy and its enforcement. The
orange circle represents the innovation which can be explained as the approach to bridging
influences that contribute to performance gaps and seeing a problem as an opportunity and if the
stakeholders are equipped with knowledge and their motivational influences are addressed then
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

30
change is possible. The “two camps” are hovering above and outside and within the context
purposefully because the use of polarity management will be a strategy to bring stakeholders
together on an issue that has two camps.
Once that transformation, or paradigm shift takes place, the teachers may need additional
support in the area of Knowledge influences, Motivational influences, or the Organization may
experience shifts in its cultural models or settings, but the interaction with the goal remains the
focus and the interaction can go back, with a critical theory lens, to the influences and be
revisited as data is collected and analyzed simultaneously to best inform the study and its
outcome.
Qualitative Data Collection
The purpose of this study was to evaluate if the newly-adopted gender-neutral dress code
is being implemented. The stakeholder group of focus for this study, the teachers, have multiple
identities and this must be considered in method design (Lewis, 2011). Not only are they
teachers, but some are parents, and all are community members, and all have values, beliefs, and
lenses with which they view the world. To facilitate effective organizational change,
stakeholders must have the same understanding of the change effort and the researcher must
consider social influences (Lewis, 2011). For this study, the use of focus groups was selected
because it provides an in-depth examination with information-rich participants that meet a set of
criteria aligned with the influences and interactions outlined in the study’s conceptual framework
(Creswell, 2008). Furthermore, the information-rich participants were able to contribute to the
gap in knowledge (K) and motivation (M), and organization (O). This KMO analysis is designed
to illuminate a problem of practice and turn research into tangible results (Clark & Estes, 2008).
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

31
Focus Groups
Conducting focus group interviews instead of individual interviews was an intentional
choice for this study. Because focus groups, according to Krueger and Casey (2009), are
ultimately a social experiment and create conversational, spontaneous, and natural atmospheric
conditions, they are favored over individual interviews for such a socially rooted topic. Focus
groups have limitations such as securing participants’ confidentiality in a group dynamic,
managing equal voice, and missing data that can come from an in-depth experience one-on- one
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Focus groups protocol. Semi-structured focus group were conducted. Participants were
recruited by phone, and then follow-up email, based on their prior interest and reaction to LHS’s
code of conduct and dress code as a policy. Probing questions, for example Patton’s (2002)
detail-oriented probes “who,” “where,” “what,” “when,” and “how” were used to obtain a
complete picture of some activity or experience” (p. 373). Focus group research data is created
from the dynamics of the group setting and can provide unique information not offered in
individual interviews (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Two half-hour-long focus groups were
conducted. One had five participants and the other had six. More information is provided in
Appendices A-E related to stakeholder criteria, trustworthiness, and ethics. The focus groups
were guided by 12 pre-drafted specific questions that were designed and connect to the study’s
conceptual framework (see Appendix B), but the focus groups evolved into a conversation that
was still guided by the research topic (Patton, 2002). The first series of questions addressed the
factual and conceptual knowledge of the stakeholders, the middle section addressed stakeholder
motivation, and the last section addressed organizational accountability. In addition, the
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

32
questions were designed to cover four of the six recommended type of questions in qualitative
research: experience/behavior, opinion/values, feeling/emotion, and knowledge (Patton, 2002).
Focus group procedures. Two main factors influenced the time and timing of this data
collection: one, the nature of the topic and two, practicality. Since the topic is a cultural
phenomenon, the dynamic of focus groups aligned to create conversation and social dynamic
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2006). Secondly, there was a limited amount of time. In respect to the
research questions and data collection, the Fall of the 2018/2019 school year was the goal. The
start of the school year is when organizational policies are reviewed and reiterated to the
stakeholders and the typical dress code seasons are Fall and Spring due to the warmer weather.
Conducting focus groups for data collection at this time hit at the pulse of the topic and the
stakeholder’s freshest experience and information. The goal was to conduct two, one-hour focus
groups. The focus groups were conducted at one of the school site’s conference rooms to make
it most convenient and neutral for the teachers. The data was captured via an iPhone recording
device and researcher fieldnotes.
Focus group process. During the focus groups each participant had the opportunity to
answer the opening and introductory questions designed to be ice-breakers and build group
rapport (Krueger & Casey, 2009). Then each question was asked to the group to build
conversation with built in probes and transitions that kept the flow going. As the moderator the
goal was to keep people engaged and on topic and probe for what Weiss (1994) outlines as your
research aims: “detailed descriptions, multiple perspectives, process, holistic description, events,
and intersubjectivity” (pp. 7–8). Additional content and information regarding the participating
stakeholders, including sampling criteria, study protocols, credibility and trustworthiness, ethics,
and limitations can be found in the document’s appendices.
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

33
Findings
The purpose of this project was to evaluate the implementation of the school site’s
gender-neutral dress code and answer the research questions. Through the use of qualitative
focus groups, data was collective, transcribed, cleaned and coded. Codes and patterns that
emerged through the analytical process included: language and concepts, gender, value, school
accountability, and personal biases. Presented in this section is data analysis regarding the
assumed knowledge, motivation, and organization influences that act as barriers to implementing
a gender-neutral non-discriminatory dress code. All the respondents fit the stakeholder criteria
outlined in a previous section.

Table 5
Stakeholder Demographics
Identifier Years teaching Parental Status Preferred Gender Pronoun Gender Race
R1 20 N She Female White
R2 2 Y She Female Latina
R3 20 Y He Male White
R4 1 Y He Male White
R5 21 Y He Male White
R6 17 Y She Female Latina
R7 17 N She Female White
R8 20 Y She Female White
R9 12 N She Female Latina
R10 17 Y She Female White
R11 25 Y He Male White
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

34
Knowledge Findings
This study analyzed factual and conceptual knowledge. Factual knowledge can be
understood as terminology; conceptual knowledge can be understood as theories; and
metacognitive knowledge can be understood as consciousness of one’s own cognition (Rueda,
2011). For the purposes of this study, factual knowledge is knowing the actual dress code
language. Conceptual knowledge is covered by two influences. One, understanding how
language related to body parts and gender binaries reinforces sexism and gender stereotypes.
And secondly, how gender is a part of the larger concept of diversity.
Factual knowledge findings. The data suggests that respondents had low factual
knowledge of the dress code language, and more specifically that the respondents had a low
awareness of its existence. A ranking question was asked, “On a scale of 1 to 10 how familiar
are you with current gender-neutral dress code?” Out of the 11 respondents the average score
was 4.1. The data suggests that the respondents have a factual knowledge barrier.

Figure 2. Knowledge ranking of dress code language
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

35
Conceptual knowledge findings. Teachers need to know that sexism can be perpetuated
in secondary schools through the hidden curriculum of school culture. Gender binaries are
covertly reinforced when language and practices only include male and female and fail to
address non-binary gender identities. Disproportionate pressures can be placed on females to
have to behave or respond in a particular way or face consequences while males do not face such
pressures. This knowledge influence was validated in the respondents’ discussion related to
dress code and systems of enforcement. The data revealed attitudes towards females and dress
including the pattern of victim blaming. Data supported perceptions that students can wear
whatever they want but they have to deal with the social consequences their choices bring; what
happens which is a victim-blaming attitude/value-pattern that disproportionately impacts
females. Additionally, respondents discussed and debated the policy of asking females if they
should have to answer a question about wearing Spanx at school dances, yet there was no
discussion of asking male students about their undergarments. The data revealed an attitude of
blaming the short-dress wearer. Respondents focused on the females and the short dress length
and what would happen as a result of wearing a short dress. The focus only on the female and
not the behavior of the male students reinforces a gender stereotype and unequal power dynamic.
The checking of a girl’s undergarments is a violation of privacy and harassment and it is
not a part of the school dress code policy. In addition, language used consistency by the
respondents in this topic area such “choosing to show” allude to that if something were to happen
it was the girls’ fault because they chose a short dress. Not only did the data reveal attitudes
about dress that pointed towards sexism but classroom practices and habits around language.
One respondent shared how in her class she treated her female students differently in
expectations and discipline:
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

36
I found myself expecting different things from girls and boys. I would come down much
harder on the girls. I was coming down pretty hard on the girls and kinda just saying oh
they are just being boys. So gender affects everything you do. I’m not proud of it.
The respondent is engaging in a self-reflective process that shows their language and behavior
has an impact and consequence beyond just the words. The act of treating male and female
students differently can perpetuate sexism in school and society.
The language and discipline practices are part of a school’s hidden curriculum and the
data point to ways that hidden messages can reinforce values and beliefs that align with sexism.
One respondent’s experience highlighted the reinforcement of gender binaries and the role they
have played in that reinforcement. The respondent has a student in their class whose gender
identification is the opposite from their biological sex. In sharing their experience learning and
working with this student, especially in terms of gender pronouns, it was highlighted that the
teacher can name the challenge of how easy it is to fall into old habit of just saying the assumed
pronoun without thinking. In addition, the respondent shared how easily they saw the other ways
they genderize their students and reinforce a binary system.
Hidden curriculum is a covert transmission of school culture, values, and beliefs. The
messages sent are reinforcing sexism and gender stereotyping in language and action. The data
show examples of how language used in discipline, policy, and instruction can have a hidden
meaning and send an unintended message. Through the focus group process the respondents saw
the role their rhetoric has in a self-reflective way.

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

37
Conceptual knowledge findings.
Diversity. Teachers need to know what they know about gender as diversity. The data
revealed gaps in conceptual knowledge of diversity. All respondents had a level 1 (Bloom’s) and
mainly surface definition and equated diversity with “differences” and check-the-box
demographic criteria. One respondent gave the example of a having a “blonde” colleague as
diversity and went on to say, “it doesn’t matter the difference as long as there is a difference you
have diversity.” It is important to note here that at times what is said in the data can be more
revealing than the data itself. During the questions on diversity the above-mentioned respondent,
a White male said, “I don’t know why all of you are here I should just be answering the
questions.” The focus group reacted with nervous laughter and murmurs. The thread of
responses that showed a gap in understanding of the theories and structures of diversity followed
by a comment that may have been meant as a joke, illuminated the need for education around
diversity as a concept.
Additional responses on diversity pointed to a level 1 understanding. One respondent
began to explain diversity as “it’s all just a part of . . .” and simultaneously three other
respondents chimed in “differences.” And yes, diversity can be synonymous with differences,
but diversity has a depth, historical context, and role to play in privilege and power dynamics
which makes it more than a factual word to be able to define but more of a conceptual construct
to be understood and unpacked. An additional respondent revealed low to no conceptual
understanding when they shared this in response to asking about how gender is related to
diversity: “you like you are a woman or what no that’s your biological sex I don’t even have the
vocabulary to express what I am trying to think.” The self-reflective awareness of knowing what
one doesn’t know is important to the knowledge gap analysis because it can be a starting point to
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

38
address the gap and performance outcomes and relates to attribution, which will be discussed in a
later section.
Motivation Findings
Cost and utility value. The findings showed that the stakeholders had a varying degree
of cost value to take time to implement dress code. Some find it irrelevant and others thought
about it and addressed it in their classroom. One respondent asked, “is this even an issue?” And
others shared specific examples of using the dress code and how it was effective. If a policy is to
be implemented school-wide, the area of cost and utility value is significant because the
modeling and motivation of leaders can be a positive and influential strategy to increase value
among stakeholders
The use of the word irrelevant by respondents indicates that there are other topics the
stakeholders find more valuable to spend time on and the dress code is low on their cost value
priority. Yet in contrast respondents shared examples of how they have taken time in their
classroom to address dress code with students: “I can think of one or two times this year where I
have said to a student that that’s a little too informal for this particular setting.” The data show
respondents taking time within their instructional minutes to have conversations with students
about their dress in a gender-neutral and non-punitive way. In contrast to irrelevance, these
respondents demonstrate a relevant value towards dress code implementation and that they have
strategies to address concerns.
Attribution theory. The third and final motivational influence that the data addressed
was attribution. Attribution theory can be explained as forming one’s own belief about the cause
of the experience (Anderman & Anderman, 2016). The data revealed how personal biases were
factors that created a variety of approaches and perspectives to the dress code. Examples of
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

39
personal biases and lived experience inform how the respondents implement and see the dress
code. The personal influences each respondent brings to the analysis of dress code and its
implementation ranged from gender dynamics they have observed and experienced in their own
lives. For example, some respondents shared specific and binary gender roles and the
importance of maintaining those, while others shared less traditional forms of gender from their
own upbringing and family.
Out of the 11 respondents 9 shared a personal analysis of gender roles from their lives.
These personal biases and lived experiences contribute to attribution because one can only make
sense of the world and how to interact in it based on what they know and have experienced. Our
lives inform our perspectives and the perspectives of gender binaries, traditional roles, and lived
experience inform our motivation. In Weiner’s model of attributions, as explained in Anderman
and Anderman (2016), stakeholders are affected by environmental and personal factors. Applied
to the dress code and its enforcement, the data revealed a wide spectrum of factors that inform
the stakeholder’s lens in understanding the role of gender. In addition to knowledge and
motivation, organization elements are important to address for this study.
Organizational Findings: Cultural Models and Settings
One way to organize thinking and analysis around organizational culture is through the
use of cultural models and cultural settings (Schein, 2017). In this study one cultural model
influence identified was resistance. Resistance can be defined as refusal to implement a policy
(Agócs, 1997). An organizational barrier to the dress code implementation is resistance from the
stakeholders. One focus group revealed what can be interpreted as passive resistance, meaning
they are not actively protesting the dress code, but by not enforcing it, they are in fact resistors.
In response to if/how they have dealt with dress code and/or had conversations about dress with
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

40
their students this school year the respondents shared that they have not used the dress code at all
this year and one shared they went other it in a “vague” way. The school site has made it policy
to have and enforce a dress code. The data reveals that these respondents, over the course of five
months of instructional time had zero issues with dress. Either the site is an anomaly in the US,
or they are passively resisting.
This passive resistance directly relates to the cultural setting of the importance for
supervisors to follow up with support and policies. If no one is paying attention to a policy, it
can easily be ignored. The second focus group shared a contrasting experience to the first in that
three of the five respondents have utilized the dress code at least once this year. What aligned
between the two was that no one respondent shared communicating with the administration team
or receiving any support from the administration team to teach, implement, or enforce dress
code. Answers such as this from one respondent, “Do we still [have a dress code]? Isn’t it that
living document [air quotes] that happens all the time? I don’t know I haven’t looked at it
[shrugs and chuckles],” highlight how each individual has been left to apply and implement the
dress code alone and not as a systemic uniformed policy.
Patterns and themes such as resistance and relevance were revealed in the data as well as
an individual accountability and not an organizational one. Respondents remarked on enforcing
dress code by saying it stayed, “just between me and the student,” and “it was a quick comment
and it didn’t happen again.” The foundational stones, Berger (2014) argues are leaders and
supervisors who are essential components in organizational culture shift and in this study the
lack of that organizational supervision and support is a barrier to achieving goal outcomes.
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

41
Recommendations
The guiding questions for this study asked about the stakeholder’s knowledge and
motivation related to enforcing a gender-neutral and non-discriminatory dress code and what is
the interaction between organizational culture and teacher knowledge and motivation to facilitate
successful implementation of the gender-neutral dress code? Presented in this section are the
knowledge, motivational, and organizational recommendations to assist in the implementation of
the gender-neutral dress code at LHS.
Knowledge Introduction
The knowledge influences addressed factual and conceptual knowledge. Within this
study the knowledge influences, which are all needs, include the stakeholder’s need to know
what the gender-neutral language of the dress code is and its importance, the stakeholder’s need
to know that sexism is perpetuated through the hidden curriculum of secondary education, and
that the stakeholder needs to know what they know and do not know about diversity. The three
aforementioned influences have been validated through the qualitative focus group study. The
three are prioritized with the same importance since they are interconnected and must all be
addressed to meet the stakeholder goals.

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

42
Table 6
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Knowledge
Influence
Validated,
Partially
Validated,
Not
Validated
(V, PV, NV) Principle and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Teachers need to
know what gender-
neutral is language
and its importance in
the dress code
expectations at LHS
(F and C).
V Factual knowledge
includes terminology that
aids in effectively
implementing or carrying
out a given task (Rueda,
2011).
Provide job shadowing in which
teachers can directly observe a
colleague or other trusted expert
perform the steps of the
intervention strategy.
Information and Education
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
Teachers need to
know that sexism can
be perpetuated is
secondary schools
through the hidden
curriculum of school
culture (C).
V Conceptual (declarative)
knowledge increases when
an individual learns how
facts relate to form
relationships or structures
that function together
(Krathwohl, 2002).
Provide education that includes
theories behind different tiers of
intervention and the activities
that correspond to each tier.
Education (Clark & Estes,
2008).
Teachers need to
know what they know
about gender as
diversity (C).
V Conceptual (declarative)
knowledge increases when
an individual learns how
facts relate to form
relationships or structures
that function together
(Krathwohl, 2002).
Provide education that includes
theories behind different tiers of
intervention and the activities
that correspond to each tier.

Knowledge Recommendations
Mayer’s (2011) definition of learning has knowledge as a key goal and breaks down the
learner’s experience as the main element of that knowledge acquisition. Mayer (2011) argues
the learning involves a change in the learner’s knowledge and that change is caused by
experience. This definition aligns well with what Schraw and McCrudden (2006) advocate for in
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

43
their principle of learning that explains the importance of information being learned in a
meaningful way and connected with prior knowledge. In addition, the experience or transfer,
promotes learning, thus creating knowledge (Mayer, 2011). Utilizing Information Processing
Systems (IPS) is essential to meeting the stakeholder goals and address the knowledge influences
in this study. In order for implementation of a gender-neutral dress code to be successful, factual
and conceptual knowledge influences need to be addressed.
One factual knowledge influence that acts as a barrier to implementing a gender-neutral
dress code is the teachers need to know what gender-neutral language is and its importance in the
dress code expectations at LHS. According to Rueda (2011) factual knowledge includes
terminology that aids in effectively implementing or carrying out a given task. The findings
from this study’s qualitative focus groups revealed that teachers do not have knowledge of the
terminology or in fact very existence of the organization’s dress code, thus making the task of
implementation impossible. The factual knowledge of the actual policy needs to be provided and
in fact the very existence and awareness of policies within an organization is how cultural shifts
begin (Schein, 2017). Addressing this knowledge gap can lead to organizational effectiveness
(Clark & Estes, 2008). Only 10% of the respondents shared an experience that they were
exposed to the dress code and its importance at the annual opening staff meeting. Introducing a
policy at a staff meeting backfires due to cognitive overload. All of the respondents were at the
same meeting, but the information did not stick due to the fact that participants’ working
memory capacity was overloaded (Kirschner, Kirschner, & Paas, 2006). In contrast, engaging
the learner in meaningful learning and decreasing extraneous cognitive load would aid in factual
knowledge acquisition and help close this knowledge gap (Kirschner et al., 2006). It is
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

44
recommended that information be provided in isolation to address the factual knowledge gap
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
The relationship between dress code and the further discrimination of historically
marginalized populations is evident in document analysis, mainstream movements, and case
studies (DeMitchell et al., 2000; Glickman, 2016; Harbach, 2016; Raby, 2010). The sexism that
is perpetuated in secondary education dress code is a conceptual knowledge gap found through
the focus group inquiry. According to Krathwohl (2002) conceptual knowledge increases when
an individual learns how facts relate to form relationships or structures that function together.
Due to the sensitive and socially charged nature of the knowledge gap, expectancy value theory
is most apt to help move the needle. According to Eccles (2006) learning and motivation are
enhanced if the learner values the task. The findings revealed a spectrum of value for the
implementation of a gender-neutral dress code so a strategy must be employed to increase the
stakeholders invested and value of the shift in language. It is recommended that education and
job aides are provided to address the conceptual knowledge gap (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Gender as diversity falls into conceptual knowledge influence and gap. The findings of
this study reveal that not only do teachers not have a conceptual understanding of diversity and
they don’t know what they don’t know about it. It is recommended that teachers receive
education to address the conceptual and metacognitive knowledge gap (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Motivation Introduction
Although learning and motivation have a reciprocal relationship, it is important to
examine motivation problems on their own to make sure the right solutions are recommended.
Motivation is complex and inherently cultural (Rueda, 2011). This study analyzes four
motivation influences that are grounded in the theories of self-efficacy, attribution, cost value,
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

45
and utility value. The following narrative and Table 7 align each influence with its connected
theory and recommendations are provided to help the organization reach its targeted goal.

Table 7
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Motivational
Influences
Validated,
Partially
Validated, Not
Validated
(V, PV, NV) Principle and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Self-efficacy — teachers
believe students should
have their own sense, or it’s
the family’s job, to dress for
school in an appropriate
way without the school
needing to “teach.”
NV
Cost Value — time spent
on dress code and discipline
is the office’s job, takes
away time (mental and
class) from academics.
V Higher expectations for
success and perceptions of
confidence can positively
influence learning and
motivation (Eccles, 2006).
Materials and
activities should be
relevant and useful to
the learners, connected
to their interests, and
based on real-world
tasks (Pintrich, 2003).
Utility Value — Teachers
need to see the value in
teaching language registers
juxtaposed with dress
registers to students as part
of our school-wide policies
instead of
crime/punishment model.
V (or lack of) Rationales that include a
discussion of the importance
and utility value of the work
or learning can help learners
develop positive values
(Eccles, 2006; Pintrich,
2003).
Increase staff (team)
confidence and
emotional climate of
campus (Clark &
Estes, 2008).
Attribution — Teachers’
individual beliefs are
affected by environmental
and personal factors and
have the potential to
contribute to gender bias
and dress code.
V Provide sufficient
scaffolding and tools to
facilitate learning and
performance, then gradually
withdraw scaffolds as
learning progresses and
performance improves (Scott
& Palincsar, 2006).
Building supportive
and caring personal
relationship in the
community of learners
(Pintrich, 2003).

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

46
Motivation Narrative
Self-efficacy. This assumed motivation influence was not validated in the data gathering
and is recommended as a topic for future study. In the subsequent text, the three motivational
influences that were validated in the data gathering and data analysis will be discussed.
Cost value. Cost value can be defined as the cost of completing a task calculated by
time, effort, or other dimensions (Rueda, 2011). The findings showed that the stakeholders had a
varying degree of cost value to take time to implement dress code; some thought about it and
addressed it on a regular basis in their classroom, while others have not thought about it since it
was mentioned briefly at our annual start of the year staff meeting. This motivation influence is
a high priority because the research shows that consistency in school policy is its most effective
attribute. Eccles (2006) argues that motivation increases if the stakeholders value the task. It is
recommended that strategies are implemented to include rationale about the importance and
value of the task (Pintrich, 2003).
Pajares (2006) argues that models who are credible and similar can foster positive values,
therefore the organization can start with the stakeholders who do have value and motivation to
implement dress code and use them as examples to show how the cost value pays off in the long
run. This targeted population can act as the models and their behaviors can be acknowledged to
help motivate others through the use of rewards and incentives, such as photos and narrative
blurbs displayed on our staff room bulletin boards.
Utility value. Cost and utility value are both motivational influences that are barriers to
organization change (Clark & Estes, 2008). While cost value is defined as the time or effort a
task entails, utility value is defined as how useful one believes a task is for achieving a future
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

47
outcome or goal (Rueda, 2011). The findings of this study reveal low utility value in regard to
dress code implementation. The low utility value creates a barrier to goal achievement.
To address low utility value the research suggests including a discussion of the
importance and utility value of the work or learning can help learners develop positive values
(Eccles, 2006; Pintrich, 2003). A recommended solution is to increase stakeholder confidence
and the emotional climate of the campus (Clark & Estes, 2008). It is recommended that the
organization model the value by making time for discussions and role-playing scenarios in staff
meetings and follow-up such activities with Likert scale questions to assess confidence and
climate of the campus.
Attribution theory. In motivation theory attribution has a myriad of interpretations and
in general terms it corresponds to the beliefs held about success and failures (Rueda, 2011).
Most specifically, and more relevant to this study is that attribution theory can be explained as
forming one’s own beliefs about the cause of an experience and how environmental and personal
factors inform making sense of situations (Anderman & Anderman, 2016). The stakeholders are
then involved in that sense-making and the dress code is no exception.
Students’ concept of dress is informed and influenced by society and part of schools’ role
is to combat those influences and provide an alternative that fits into the larger goal of college
and career readiness. Therefore, to reach the goal of gender-neutral dress code implementation
faces a motivational barrier of individuals responding to the same scenario in different ways
(Anderman & Anderman, 2016; Rueda, 2011). The data found that external, social, and personal
biases were the factors that created barriers in motivational behavior. Pintrich (2003)
recommends providing opportunities that offer choice and control. A recommended
implementation strategy would be to allow for choice and control in how dress code
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

48
conversations and enforcement occur as long as the gender-neutral and non-discriminatory
language is respected.
Organization Introduction
Organizational culture and climate can impede systemic change and hinder performance
goal achievement (Clark & Estes, 2008). The formal data gathered in the focus group interviews
conducted with the stakeholders guide the recommendations for organizational change. The
stakeholders must close the achievement gap working within the organization's culture and
ultimately changing that as well over time (Clark & Estes, 2008). Rueda (2011) highlights the
complexities of organizational culture since it is both visible and invisible elements of an
organization’s practices, behaviors, habits, and overall feel. One way to organize thinking and
analysis around organizational culture is through the use of cultural models and cultural settings
(Schein, 2017). Cultural settings can be understood as the parts of the organization that you can
see; for example, reports, printed policies, and bulletin boards. In contrast, cultural models are
the parts of the organization that are invisible and are represented through actions guided by
beliefs and values.

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

49
Table 8
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Organization
Influence
Validated.
Partially
Validated,
Not
Validated
(V, PV, NV) Principle and Citation
Context Specific
Recommendation
Cultural Model Influence
1: Resistance
The organization needs
general acceptance and
willingness amongst staff
to implement dress code as
a school-wide policy
Y #1: Organizational
effectiveness increases
when leaders identify,
articulate, focus the
organization’s effort on
and reinforce the
organization’s vision; they
lead from the why.
Adults are more motivated
to participate (and learn)
when they see the
relevance of information,
a request, or task (the
“why”) to their own
circumstances. They are
goal oriented (Knowles,
1980).
A staff/student
engagement day is
necessary to see the
impacts of language
on our females,
trans, and
historically
marginalized
populations and
how the further use
of gendered
language and
traditional
impositions of dress
expectations harm
and shame students.
Cultural Model Influence
2: Trust
The organization needs to
have a culture of trust
between teachers and
students so conversations
about garments, dress
expectations, and language
expectations are
productive, respectful, and
teach, rather than
punish/shame.
N The data did not
confirm or
disconfirm. Topic
recommended for
further study.

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

50
Table 8, continued
Assumed Organization
Influence
Validated.
Partially
Validated,
Not
Validated
(V, PV, NV) Principle and Citation
Context Specific
Recommendation
Cultural Setting Influence
1: Basic Needs Being Met
The organization needs to
allow staff sufficient time
within their instructional
needs to adequately
address, with confidence
and consistency, dress
concerns and document
conversations in AERIES
to close the “loop” of
school policy
communication for admin
and staff to see/use for
support/resources.
Y The data did not
confirm or
disconfirm. Topic
recommended for
further study.
Cultural Setting Influence
2: Supervisors following
through with support and
policies
The organization needs to
provide staff with effective
collegial participation and
support and consistency in
attire expectations to
maintain goals and visions
and ensure success of a
policy implementation
(Berger, (2014).
Y #8: Organizational
effectiveness increases
when leaders monitor and
evaluate the effectiveness
of all aspects of their
organization and use valid
and reliable data to drive
decision-making.
The organization
needs to monitor
and share data that
moves stakeholders
to a more effective
place.

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

51
Organizational Influences Narrative
Cultural model: resistance. One of the cultural models the organization needs to
address to meet its goal is resistance. The organization needs to foster a general acceptance and
willingness amongst stakeholders to implement dress expectations as a school-wide culture shift
(Schein, 2017). Adults are more motivated to participate (and learn) when they see the relevance
of information, a request, or task (the “why”) to their own circumstances and they are goal
oriented (Knowles, 1980). The alignment of the organization influence and the principle of
leadership guide the stakeholders to meeting their goal of implementation which in turn can
address the global goal of equity and inclusion. According to Wren (1999) the informal and
unplanned lessons that impact students from the school’s culture can have negative
consequences. The “why” behind the dress code should be formally addressed and staff held to
accountability standards such as understanding the meaning of equity, diversity and access in
your organizational context to enhance the capacity to improve organizational climate and
outcomes (Bensimon, 2007). The data revealed resistance to the dress code in several clear
ways. One, a lack of knowledge of its very existence, the disregard to implement it, and the lack
of communication with administration regarding its implementation and purpose. It is
recommended that indicators are identified to show progress towards implementation goals to
establish accountability and equity.
Policy implementation is a step towards culture shift (Clark & Estes, 2008). Hidden
curriculum in schools can be an opportunity for staff and students to build relationships (Jerald,
2006). The cultural model of resistance is best addressed with a cultural shift and the building of
relationships (Korsgaard et al., 2002). The indicators recommended will be organized in a “dress
code scorecard” to create community accountability and provide feedback to stakeholders to
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

52
reflect on their behavior and goal orientation (Bensimon, 2007). In addition, Agócs (1997)
argues there is always some level of resistance to organizational change initiatives, therefore
adopting a motivational strategy of feedback, accountability, and communication is necessary to
alleviate change fatigue and institutional resistance (Agócs, 1997; Korsgaard et al., 2002).
Cultural setting: leadership accountability and follow-through. Using an iceberg as a
metaphor for organization culture, resistance is below the surface and harder to see, and the
cultural settings are at the tip in the form of visible and often tangible elements (Clark & Estes,
2008; Hall, 1976). The lack of leadership accountability and follow-through is an organization
barrier at the tip of the iceberg (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). The organizational routines,
practices, factors and behaviors need to be questioned to move to a more cohesive functioning
state (Rueda, 2011). For the focus of this study, the data revealed that no stakeholder felt
accountable to implement the dress code in any formal or informal way that came as a result of
institutional implementation or leadership accountability. The aforementioned accountability
scorecard is one strategy to address this problem. Secondly, it is recommended to communicate
alignment of this policy with mission and vision and present it as a microcosm for overall
cultural settings. This two-prong approach will address the cultural model barrier of resistance
to school-wide consistency in implementation.
An implementation and evaluation plan, which can be found in Appendix F, was
designed using the New World Kirkpatrick Model (2016) taking the recommendations and
turning them into an actionable plan for LHS.

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

53
Conclusion
Public schools and the even narrower public-school classroom act as microcosms for
community and society. The questions and critiques around school dress code are not unique to
LHS nor 2019, but rather have existed in past decades and exist in every community school in
some way shape or form. Popular culture, social media, and the rebirth of the women’s wave all
contribute to questioning school policy that may discriminate or perpetuate negative stereotypes.
The goal is to move from a place of ignorance to one of values and inclusivity for all humans.
The problem of practice of dress code implementation evaluation had a myriad of lenses
from which to analysis and research. This study’s research questions adopted a gap analysis
framework from the Clark and Estes (2008) KMO framework and sought to answer, what are the
knowledge and motivational influences of the stakeholders to enforcing a gender-neutral dress
and what is the interaction between organizational culture and those influences? The data
validated some of the assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences and the
data did not confirm others. The interaction between the organizational culture, one in which
accountability to professional standards of implementation are low, is an important topic for
future study. The importance of identifying and validating stakeholder knowledge and
motivation couched with organizational influences is that it provides an awareness of gaps and
provides opportunities for solutions. The recommendations align with the heart of the interactive
conceptual framework and aim to facilitate teacher transformation as well as increasing
motivation and filling knowledge gaps. As society continues to break with convention and
challenge status quo norms, the research surrounding dress code will benefit all stakeholders by
advancing equity and inclusion through language and behavior.

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

54
References
Agócs, C. (1997). Institutionalized resistance to organizational change: Denial, inaction, and
repression. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(9), 917–931.
Anderman, E., & Anderman, L. (2006). Attributions. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/attribution-theory/
Anderson, L. W. (Ed.), Krathwohl, D. R. (Ed.), Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E.,
Pintrich, P. R., . . . Wittrock, M. C. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and
assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (Complete
edition). New York, NY: Longman.
Anderson, W. (2002, Fall). School dress codes and uniform policies. Policy Report, 4. Eugene,
OR: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management.
Avery, P., & Walker, C. (1993). Prospective teachers’ perceptions of ethnic and gender
differences in academic achievement. Journal of Teacher Education, 44(1), 27–37.
Baker, L. (2006). Metacognition. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/metacognition/
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice
Hall.
Bensimon, E. M. (2007). The underestimated significance of practitioner knowledge in the
scholarship of student success. The Review of Higher Education, 30(4), 441–469.
Berbary, D. F., & Malinchak, A. A. (2011). Connected and engaged: The value of government
learning. The Public Manager, 40(3), 55–59.
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

55
Berger, B. (2014). Read my lips: Leaders, supervisors, and culture are the foundations of
strategic employee communications. Research Journal of the Institute for Public
Relations, 1(1), 1–17.
Biech, E. (2016). Foreword. In J. D. Kirkpatrick & W. K. Kirkpatrick, Kirkpatrick’s four levels
of training evaluation. Alexandria, VA: ATD Press.
Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research
Journal, 9(2), 27–40.
Buckingham, M., & Coffman, C. (1999). First, break all the rules. New York, NY: Simon and
Schuster.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Creswell, J. W. (2008). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Crockett, D., & Wallendorf, M. (1998). Sociological perspectives on imposed school dress
codes: Consumption as attempted suppression of class and group symbolism. Journal of
Macromarketing, 18(2), 115–131.
DeMitchell, T. A., Fossey, R., & Cobb, C. (2000). Dress codes in the public schools: Principals,
policies, and precepts. Journal of Law and Education, 29(1), 31–49.
District of Columbia Public Schools. (2015, June). Transgender and gender non-conforming
policy guidance. Washington, D.C.: District of Columbia Public Schools. Office of Youth
Engagement.
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

56
Duhigg, C. (2016, February 25). What Google learned from its quest to build the perfect team.
New York Times Magazine. Retrieved from
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/magazine/what-google-learned-from-its-quest-to-
build-the-perfect-team.html
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/
Effrat, A., & Schimmel, D. (2003). Walking the democratic talk: Introduction to a special issue
on collaborative rule-making as preparation for democratic citizenship. American
Secondary Education, 31(3), 3–15.
Gilbert, C. B. (1999). We are what we wear: Revisiting student dress codes. Brigham Young
University Education and Law Journal, 1999(1), 3–18.
Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.). Boston, MA:
Pearson.
Glesne, C., & Peshkin, A. (1992). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. White
Plains, NY: Longman.
Glickman, D. J. (2016). Fashioning children: Gender restrictive dress codes as an entry point for
the trans school to prison pipeline. Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law, 24(2),
263–284.
Hall, E. T. (1976). Beyond culture. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books.
Harbach, M. J. (2016). Sexualization, sex discrimination, and public school dress codes.
University of Richmond Law Review, 50, 1039–1062.
Jerald, C. D. (2006, December). School culture: “The hidden curriculum.” Washington, D.C.:
The Center for Comprehensive School Reform and Improvement.
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

57
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation.
Alexandria, VA: ATD Press.
Kirschner, P., Kirschner, F., & Paas, F. (2006). Cognitive load theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/cognitive-load-theory/
Knowles, M. S. (1980). The modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy to andragogy.
New York, NY: Cambridge.
Korsgaard, M., Brodt, S., & Whitener, E. (2002). Trust in the face of conflict: The role of
managerial trustworthy behavior and organizational context. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 87(2), 312–319.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice,
41(4), 212–218. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2009). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lewis, L. K. (2011). Organizational change: Creating change through strategic communication
(Vol. 4). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Miller, T., Watson, S., & Rutledge, V. (2007). Message tees and hidden curriculum: Perceptions
of pre-service teachers. Educational Research and Perspectives, 34(2), 91–103.
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

58
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. Retrieved from
http://education.com/reference/article/self-efficacy-theory/
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Patton, L. D. (2014). Preserving respectability or blatant disrespect? A critical discourse analysis
of the Morehouse Appropriate Attire Policy and implications for intersectional
approaches to examining campus policies. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in
Education, 27(6), 724–746. doi:10.1080/09518398.2014.901576
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667–686.
Pomerantz, S. (2007). Cleavage in a tank top: Bodily prohibition and the discourse of school
dress codes. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 53(4), 373–386.
Pozo, C., Martos, M. J., & Morillejo, E. A. (2010). Do students in secondary education manifest
sexist attitudes? Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 8(2), 541–
560.
Raby, R. (2010). “Tank tops are ok but I don’t want to see her thong.” Girls’ engagements with
secondary school dress codes. Youth and Society, 41(3), 333–356.
Rosenholtz, S. J., & Simpson, C. (1990). Workplace conditions and the rise and fall of teachers’
commitment. Sociology of Education, 63(4), 241–257.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. New York, NY:
Teachers College Press.
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

59
Rysst, M. (2010). ‘I am only 10 years old’: Femininities, clothing-fashion codes, and the
intergenerational gap of interpretation of young girls’ clothes. Childhood, 17(1), 76–93.
Schein, E. H. (2017). Organizational culture and leadership (5th ed.). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/informationprocessingtheory/
Scott, S., & Palincsar, A. S. (2013). The historical roots of sociocultural theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/sociocultural-theory/
Sherwin, G., & Jennings, T. (2006). Feared, forgotten, or forbidden: Sexual orientation topics in
secondary teacher preparation programs in the USA. Teaching Education, 17(3), 207–
223.
Skiba, R., & Peterson, R. (2003). Teaching the social curriculum: School discipline as
instruction. Preventing School Failure, 47(2), 66–73.
Weiss, R. S. (1994). Learning from strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview
studies. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Workman, J. E., & Freeburg, B. W. (2006). Safety and security in a school environment: The
role of dress code policies. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 98(2), 19–24.
Workman, J. E., & Johnson, K. K. (1994). Effects of conformity and nonconformity to gender-
role expectations for dress: Teachers versus students. Adolescence, 29(113), 207–223.
Wren, D. (1999). School culture: Exploring the hidden curriculum. Adolescence, 34(135), 593–
596.

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

60
Appendix A: Participating Stakeholders with Sampling Criteria
for Focus Groups
Participating Stakeholders
Lake High School (LHS) has a goal that all teachers will implement the newly-adopted
Dress Expectations and use gender-neutral and non-discriminatory language to address students’
attire. This goal was born out of student dissent, staff support, and design thinking for change.
In this study to evaluate whether or not LHS was meeting its goal, the stakeholders, the teachers,
have been chosen strategically because they have the most student-contact time and are
responsible for implementing school code of conduct policies, including dress code, as a part of
their role as teachers. There are 65 full-time teachers at LHS and a purposeful information-rich
sampling occurred to determine the participants for the qualitative focus groups for the study.
Focus group sampling criteria and rationale. Teachers were selected based on set
criteria for the focus groups: years they have worked at the school site — veteran (more than 12
years) versus established (4–11 years) and newcomers (4 years or less) — gender self-
identification, age, and parental status. The goal was to have a balance of experience and each
criterion relates to the stakeholder goal and the conceptual framework’s overall interaction
between the goal, the teacher’s transformation and KMO influences. The teachers, the
stakeholders, are embedded with the organizational context as part of the interactive conceptual
framework because they are not separate from the organizational context, but rather intimately
intertwined in it and its organization influences which have been identified as: resistance, trust,
basic needs being met, and supervisor support and accountability.
Considering the knowledge, motivation, and organization influences, the criteria relate to
factors that would contribute to said influences and answer the aforementioned research
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

61
questions. For example, if you are a parent, that influences how you see dress, dress code and
enforcement because it was found in early experimental research that teachers commonly said,
“well, my children don’t dress like that,” further illuminating subjectivity in research and how
one does not remove themselves ever from the research and research needs to consider critical
subjectivity (Glesne & Peshkin, 1992).
The sampling strategy for focus groups was a purposeful sampling based on the above-
mentioned criteria to have information-rich participants that can address the study’s research
questions and the identified teacher’s KMO influences (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In order to
facilitate the richest descriptive data during the focus groups, a sample size of 6–8 was selected
to meet the goal of in-depth, participant rich data (Krueger & Casey, 2009).
Criterion 1. Teachers were selected based on years they have worked at the school site:
veteran (more than 12 years) versus established (4–11 years) and newcomers (4 years or less).
Criterion 2. Gender self-identification, age, parental status.

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

62
Appendix B: Protocols
Thank you for volunteering to participate in this focus group. The use of focus groups, in
the nature of qualitative research, provides an in-depth examination with information of
participants that meet a set of criteria aligned with the influences and interactions outlined in the
study’s conceptual framework (Creswell, 2008). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the
implementation of the gender-neutral and non-discriminatory dress code. A few reminders
related to ethical considerations and your protection as participants are: I will use pseudonyms,
the data will be confidential, you can decide not to answer any question you don’t wish, and you
can withdraw from the study at any time. The results will be used in my doctoral dissertation as
part of the Organization Change and Leadership program at USC.
The questioning will follow a semi-structured format as to allow the use of specific
questions that are open-ended and lend themselves to researcher probing and flexibility in the
order, style, and overall content of the questions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Focus Group Questions
1. Please share the number of years you have been at this school site, number of children
if you have any, and preferred gender pronoun.
“Thank you. Now I’d like to continue by asking some questions about gender.”
2. Explain the difference between sex (biological) and gender.
3. How do you connect gender with diversity?
4. Explain how gender and gender differences relate to your definition of diversity.
5. Describe your experience with gender roles, perhaps in your up-bringing, current
family, work environment, or society in general.
6. How do you think cultural and social norms influence gender in school settings?
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

63
7. How do you understand gender and its relationship to power structures?
“Excellent, thank you. Now I’d like to switch gears and ask you some questions about dress
code.”
8. Whose job do you think it is to teach public dress expectations?
9. Are you familiar with the school’s dress code?
10. Which ones stand out to you? Why?
“I’m noticing you’re mentioning the ones for boys more (or girls more based on their response).
Why do you think that is?
11. In your classroom and on campus how do you enforce the current school dress code
policy?
12. What strategies have you found most and least effective when enforcing dress code?
13. Explain the level of trust/comfort you have in addressing students about their attire.
14. Where do think the strongest influences come from that impact our students and their
dress?
“I appreciate everyone’s input and participation. Now I’d like to switch the questioning to the
role of the administrative (admin) team in supporting teachers and enforcing school policy,
specifically dress code. When I say admin team I am referring to principal, vice principals and
counseling staff.”
15. How are you supported by the admin team in enforcement of the dress code?
16. How have you used AERIES to document dress code concerns and
enforcement/dialogue with students? How has the admin team followed up with you
based on your documentation?
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

64
17. Explain how you have communicated concerns regarding attire, student garments,
and dress code violations to the admin team.
“Well, we have covered gender, dress code and admin accountability. Thank you so much for
your input and responses. At this time are there any final thoughts or comments that you wish to
share? Basically, anything that needs to be said that wasn’t said?”

Thank you.

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

65
Appendix C: Credibility and Trustworthiness
In order to increase and maintain the credibility and trustworthiness of the study several
specific strategies were employed. The first strategy was rich data (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). Extremely detailed and descriptive notes were taken as well as verbatim
transcribing of audio recordings which helped increase the study’s credibility (Maxwell, 2013;
Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Second, was to recognize researcher bias and deal with it (Maxwell,
2013). Since subjectivity, as outlined by Glesne and Peshkin (1992) is not suppressed in
research, but rather the researcher brings their primary experiences to the research, critical
subjectivity is needed, and a framework to guide and focus the study helped increase credibility.
A sub-strategy to recognizing bias is to look for data that supports alternative explanations
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Third is triangulation (Bowen, 2009; Maxwell, 2013; Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). Bowen (2009) argues that the qualitative researcher should use at least two
methods of data collection to corroborate findings and reduce bias — ultimately improving
credibility. The last strategy is an audit trail suggested by Merriam and Tisdell (2016). This
process includes the researcher keeping a journal on the process of conducting research including
reflections, questions, and decisions made that address problems or ideas. The combination of
rich data, recognizing bias, and an audit trail improves the credibility of this qualitative research
study (Bowen, 2009; Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

66
Appendix D: Ethics
As a researcher investigating human subjects I cannot take the topic of ethics lightly.
Glesne (2011) argued that ethical considerations are inseparable from data collection and
interaction with participants. To ensure the safety of the participants l submitted my study
proposal to the University of Southern California Institutional Review Board (IRB) and received
approval on October 18th, 2018. I followed their rules and guidelines regarding the protection of
the rights and welfare of the participants in this study. Ethical considerations that were covered
in the IRB application included: approach to informed consent, ensuring participation is
voluntary, confidentiality of the data and of the participants, gaining permission to record, and
storing and securing the data (Rubin & Rubin, 2012). To obtain consent for the focus group
portion of the study a consent form was provided at the start of the session and required
participants’ signatures. In keeping with the principles of qualitative research and ethics, the
consent form ensured that the participants knew that their participation was voluntary, and that
they could exit the study at any time. In addition, their names are being kept anonymous and
confidential to protect their role as teachers who work at the organization that is being studied.
Furthermore, there was no coercion in the form of monetary or any capital gain from
participation.
The benefits to the participants are that they were able to actively contribute information
to an existing policy and its implementation at their school site. Their voices will be heard, and
ideas shared in a setting that Weiss (1994) argues gives depth to people’s interior experiences.
In addition, even though there will be no monetary gain, at the conclusion of the study I gave a
gift card to each participant as a thank you.
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

67
As a member of the teaching staff of the organization I studied, a few key ethical
considerations, beyond that of the ones mentioned above, guided my study. Merriam and Tisdell
(2016) argue that ethical considerations relate to trustworthiness. Since I conducted a focus
group of my peers, it was essential that they knew they coould trust me to protect their
confidentiality as well as accurately listen to show respect for their input, do no harm, and honor
the promise of how the results will be used (Krueger & Casey, 2009; Rubin & Rubin, 2012).
The dialogue around dress code can bring up sensitive memories and circumstances for teachers,
so I safeguarded sensitivity and triggers by reminding participants of their voluntary participation
and right to leave at any time. Participant consent to be audio recorded was included in the
consent form that was provided at the start of the focus groups. The recording of the focus
groups and field notes were locked up in a safe cabinet and the results are only being used in
analysis to answer the research questions. Recognizing that bias can be integrated at all levels of
the research study, a self-reflection of identity and bias was conducted to ensure the most
objective research possible. The recording of identity and researcher bias was kept two ways;
one was by observers’ comments in field notes and two, by keeping a researcher’s journal during
the data gathering experience.
In sum, with respect to working with human subjects and the integrity of rigorous
academic research, all ethical considerations were adhered to as well as the consideration of how
I might as the researcher be impacted. The IRB is protection for the participants, USC, as well
as me as the investigator to ensure an ethical and robust study.

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

68
Appendix E: Limitations and Delimitations
The study could have been strengthened by having conducted a quantitative survey of the
whole staff to complement the analysis of the focus group data. I have a positive relationship
with my school site and all staff members which could have influenced respondents’ responses
(“the friend-factor”). Without the limitation of time and resources future study could include the
students, parents, and community as stakeholders to see the problem of practice from a myriad of
perspectives.

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

69
Appendix F: Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
The New World Kirkpatrick Model was used to create an integrated implementation and
evaluation plan for this study (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The model provides four levels
of training evaluation that includes results, behavior, learning, and reaction. According to Biech
(2016), these four levels have proven themselves worthy and are one way to ensure that the
organization pays attention to the needs and gaps to address performance outcomes. This
implementation plan is guided by one of five foundational principles of the Kirkpatrick model,
“The End is the Beginning” (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016, p. 36). The plan begins with
Level 4 and ends with Level 1. Each narrative and table provide the tools the organization needs
for training evaluation (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations
In this study the organization’s mission, succinctly stated, is to prepare all graduates of
Lake High School (LHS) with the necessary skills to be college and career ready in the 21st
century. The organization’s goal is to have implementation of its gender-neutral and non-
discriminatory dress code in all classrooms and school events. The problem of practice that
framed the study is that school dress codes traditionally disproportionately target females and
reinforce gender stereotypes.
The stakeholder group’s goal is to implement the gender-neutral dress code. The
reasoning behind the goal’s selection is if the gender-neutral dress code is implemented it
supports the school’s mission by teaching equity and gender inclusivity through policy which
research has shown to be a way to shift culture. The goal relates to the achievement of the
organization’s mission and goal because it is a systemic policy that removes stereotypes, gender
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

70
labels, and still maintains a school policy of dress expectations for a formal environment which
supports the goal of college and career readiness.
The expectations for the desired outcomes of the recommendations for the stakeholders
include a school policy that acts as a barometer for school gender inclusivity, an example for
future policy and language choice in drafting any policies moving forward, and a shift away from
traditional binary labels to include all students, families, staff, and community.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
The Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) literature was the guide used to create Table F1
which provides the results and leading indicators, both external and internal, used to articulate
the behaviors needed to evaluate the goal attainment — “Leading indicators provide personalized
targets that all contribute to organizational results” (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016, p. 60). As
LHS strives to meet its goal of gender-neutral and non-discriminatory dress code
implementation, the work of monitoring the internal outcomes is the catalyst for the realization
of the external outcomes.

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

71
Table F1
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
1. Positive press will appear in the
newspaper and related social
media about the progressive dress
code and its positive impact on
students and families.
One–two PR / Op-
ed pieces a year
Invite community in on
debate and dialogue.
2. Searches on social media will
reveal critical engagement from
school and community and dress
and gender.
Weekly searches
and reporting via
our student TV
show VTV.
Student committee to be
social media ambassadors
to share with community.
3. Open-house fashion show to
demonstrate diversity, gender
nonconformity, and formal school
options.
Fall and Spring
Welcome show.
Boosters, cafecitos, and
other parent organizations
assist and organize to
involve community as
stakeholders.
Internal Outcomes
1. Decreased “dress code” violations
in our online discipline system.
Tracking and
monitoring entries.
Query keywords.
2. Increased “dress conversations”
and admin follow-up in our online
discipline system.
Tracking and
monitoring entries.
Query keywords.
3. Viewing and dialogue around
documentary Shame with teachers
and students.
Attendance and
participation from
staff and students.
Half-day event with follow-
up poster session and
poster campaign.

Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. The stakeholder group of focus for the study was the teachers. Their
behaviors related to the implementation of the dress code are essential to meet the stakeholder
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

72
and organization’s goal. The first critical behavior is that teachers will attend the Human Rights
Campaign (HRC) Gender Inclusivity Training as part of their contractual professional
development. LHS will host the training and open the sign-ups to all staff via email. The
training will address factual and metacognitive knowledge gaps identified in this study’s data to
move the needle on goal achievement. The second critical behavior is that teachers will increase
their use of LHS’s online communication system AERIES to document dress concerns. This
behavior is one measure of professional accountability and provides content for all stakeholders
for modeling and reflection. The third critical behavior is that the administration will use
teachers’ examples via email and at staff meetings to keep the policy of dress code front and
center and provide models.

Table F2
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metric(s) Method(s) Timing
1. Attend the HRC
Gender Inclusivity
Training.
Staff will attend and
participate.
Through email. One time
training
2. Increased usage of the
AERIES online
system to document
dress concerns and/or
conversations.
The number of entries
in AERIES related to
dress code increases
but discipline
decreases.
Stakeholders will submit
entries and monthly
examples provided at
staff, meetings to show
text and scenarios.
Monthly
3. Administration
reviews and shares the
dress code
conversations and
concerns via email.
Teachers receive
emails sent with
examples.
Through email. Monthly

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

73
Required drivers. The stakeholders and administration at LHS need to be working in
tandem to fully support the motivational gaps of value and organizational gaps of resistance. If
teachers are seeing the work of others on campus as a model and the administration is taking the
time to discuss and support dress code policy, it creates a more accountable and communicative
relationship. Table F3 indicates the recommended drivers to support the ideal behaviors
aforementioned for LHS to meet its performance outcomes.

Table F3
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Method(s) Timing
Critical
Behaviors
Supported
1, 2, 3
Reinforcing
Review content learned at HRC training with staff at department and
staff meetings.
Bi-monthly 1
Scenario shared via email to remind and provide example of importance
of dress code.
Monthly 1, 2, 3
Teacher pair/share opening activity at staff meeting using AERIES
entries of dress code as topic.
Every other
month
2
Encouraging
Dress code quotes or posters around school to highlight formula dress
identified.
On-going 1, 2
Handwritten notes of feedback to model stakeholders in their mailbox
from Administration acknowledging their AERIES entries.
On-going 1, 2
Rewarding
Public acknowledgement via email with memes and GIF to dress code
implementation model stakeholders.
On-going 1, 2, 3
Monitoring
Administration will follow-up with stakeholders that have zero entries to
address potential KMO gaps that are lingering.
On-going 1, 2

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

74
Organizational support. The administration of LHS and the stakeholders will be
dedicated to working in tandem to achieve the desired outcomes, but the administration will be
diligent in monitoring the stakeholders’ critical behaviors such as attendance at the HCR training
and use of the online AERIES system. The stakeholders will in turn be diligent in monitoring
the administration’s job of emailing dress code anecdotes and using time at every other monthly
staff meeting to have the dress code policy in the agenda.
Level 2: Learning
Learning goals. After the administration facilitates the recommended solutions the
stakeholders will be able to:
1. Recall the text of the dress code policy and explain the importance of its gender-
neutral language (KF, KC).
2. Explain how gender is more than just male/female but rather it is a construct with
depth and importance to our students, staff, and society (KC).
3. Explain what they know and do not know about gender, diversity, and how it is
related to dress code (KM).
4. Address students with gender-neutral language (KF, KC).
5. See the value in gender-neutral dress code implementation (Cost and Utility Value).
6. Use the online system to record dress code conversations or concerns (Resistance).
7. Learn from and experience peer examples via email and staff meeting content (O).
Program. The previous section outlines the learning goals which will be achieved with a
structured implementation plan at LHS designed to meet the goal of gender-neutral dress code
implementation. Teachers, as the stakeholder group, will experience authentic learning through
experience (Rueda, 2011). The HRC training will provide common language and content to
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

75
understand the significance of gender-neutral language in schools, school policy, and
community. The follow-up from administration will be part of the shift in school culture and
teacher transformation. During the HRC training teachers should be provided with jobs
aides/coaching in the form of peer accountability and support to make the knowledge acquisition
non-evaluative, but an objective learning process. In addition, administration should front load
with the upcoming resources and behaviors such as the use of the online AERIES documentation
systems and the future role of emails and staff meeting minutes to share and address the dress
code.
Evaluation of the components of learning. Throughout the evaluation it is necessary to
pause, monitor, and adjust for skill, knowledge, attitude, and confidence successes. If learners
are equipped with skills and knowledge, and confident in applying new material learned, the
desired performance outcomes are more likely to be sustainable. Table F4 lists the evaluation
methods and timing for the components of learning.

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

76
Table F4
Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge — “I know it.”
Knowledge checks through partner activities and table discussions with
other HRC training participants and the expert trainer.
During the HRC
training
Exit ticket with assessment questions that address language and content. At the end of the
training
Teacher pair/share reflections conversations at staff meeting about dress
code and use of AERIES as a tool.
Monthly staff meeting
Share out at staff meeting with anecdotes and examples. Monthly staff meeting
Procedural Skills — “I can do it right now.”
During the partner activities and table discussions learners will
demonstrate their ability.
During the HRC
training
Exit ticket will show acquisition of language and information. At the end of the
training
Demonstration of application of content is evident in staff meeting
pair/share reflection conversations.
Monthly staff meeting
Demonstration of application of content is evident in staff meeting
anecdotes and examples.
Monthly staff meeting
Attitude — “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Discussion of the learners’ value of the task. During the training
Administration’s monitoring of the use of AERIES increased number of
dress code entries.
On-going
Dress code conversations, reflections, examples, and content at monthly
staff meeting.
Monthly staff meeting
Confidence — “I think I can do it on the job.”
Observations of participants at HRC training. During the training
Exit ticket assessment. After the training
Action taken via dress code conversations and entries in AERIES. On-going
Commitment — “I will do it on the job.”
AERIES entries with content and knowledge from their training and
peers.
On-going
Content shared at staff meetings of actionable evidence. Monthly staff meeting
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

77
Level 1: Reaction
Level 1 measures how the participants responded to the training’s format, content, and
presenter (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). In this level an organization can quickly and
inexpensively assess using formative measures the worth of a training. Kirkpatrick’s Four levels
of evaluation training is so exceptional because many evaluation models stop at Level 1 and just
gather initial reactions, but the Kirkpatrick model extends that to learning, behavior, and results
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). In Table F5 the components to measure reactions to the
training are organized.

Table F5
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Observations of teachers by administration and peers. During HRC training
Levels of attendance. During HRC training
Levels of participation measured through asking/answering questions and
table discussions.
During HRC training
Relevance
Informal conversations with teachers by administration and peers. During HRC training
Training evaluation. Immediately after the
HRC training
Customer Satisfaction
Informal conversations with teachers by administration and peers. During the HRC
training
Training evaluation. 10 days to 2 weeks
after the HRC training

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

78
Evaluation Tools
Immediately following the training, the participants will be asked to compete a Paper
Participant Survey. The evaluation tool will allow the administration to conduct an immediate
evaluation of the participants’ value and opinions about the training content. This is an example
of Level 1 evaluation from Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016). Table F6 outlines the survey
questions.

Table F6
Immediate Feedback Survey
Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree
Strongly
Agree
1. The training was relevant to me and the
work I do.
1 2 3 4 5
2. The training was interesting to me. 1 2 3 4 5
3. The training added value to me. 1 2 3 4 5
4. I can immediately apply what I have
learned.
1 2 3 4 5
5. I am confident in applying what I have
learned.
1 2 3 4 5
6. The training allowed for personal time
to reflect.
1 2 3 4 5
7. The training allowed opportunity to
practice newly learned content.
1 2 3 4 5

Immediately following the program implementation. Immediately following the
program implementation, the administration should facilitate at the next staff meeting a partner
K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

79
pair/share with the prompt, “Now that it has been __ weeks since the HRC’s training, reflect with
your peer how the content has been applied in your class, specifically with implementing gender
neutral language in enforcing dress code.” In addition, administration should monitor for
AERIES entries related to dress code. These measures relate to Kirkpatrick Level 2, learning,
and can help see where the teachers have mastered new content.
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. Ten days to weeks after the
HRC training a delayed feedback survey will be administered. Table F7 outlines the survey
questions.

Table F7
Delayed Feedback Survey
Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree
Strongly
Agree
1. The training proved to be relevant to me
and the work I do over a period of time.
1 2 3 4 5
2. I would attend a follow-up more
advanced version of the training.
1 2 3 4 5
3. The training proved to be valuable to
me over a period a time.
1 2 3 4 5
4. I was able to consistently apply what I
learned.
1 2 3 4 5
5. I am still confident in applying what I
have learned.
1 2 3 4 5
6. I have continued to personally reflect. 1 2 3 4 5
7. I have continued to find opportunities to
practice the content I learned.
1 2 3 4 5

K-12 DRESS CODES AND GENDER EQUITY

80
Data Analysis and Reporting
The survey results collected from the immediate and delayed surveys will be analyzed
and presented to staff in the form of charts and graphs. These visual aids will provide
transparent and anonymous data to inform the organization of stakeholders’ addressed or
persistent motivation and knowledge gaps. In the Kirkpatrick New World Model (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016) the formative and summative data collective is an essential step. In addition
to the surveys, administration will be gathering AERIES entries and any discipline situations
related to dress code to bring to the staff’s attention at every other staff meeting.
Summary
The overall purpose of this evaluation is to assess the implementation of the gender-
neutral dress code at LHS including the stakeholders’ knowledge and motivation barriers, as well
as the organization’s cultural climate and its relation to those barriers. The New World
Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) is designed as an evaluation tool that
creates data and identifies root causes through the implementation and evaluation plan. Starting
with the end, Level 4 Results, the evaluation covers Reaction, Learning, and Behavior. This
holistic approach aligns with the study’s KMO analysis and framework. Each in their own right
have a structured and research-based approach that requires questioning the organization,
practices, and desired results with the focus on measurements that are identifiable and contribute
to change. This implementation and evaluation plan will assist LHS in moving the needle on its
problem of practice and ultimately get it closer to reaching its goal.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The challenges teachers face effectively implementing science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) curricula: an evaluation study

PDF

Role of college program administrators in addressing gender gap in computer science

PDF

The impact of culturally responsive teaching on the suspension rate of African American students: an evaluation study

PDF

The implementation of a multi-tiered system of support at Downtown Unified School District: an analysis of teacher needs

PDF

Tough conversations and missed opportunities: implementing district policies for racial equity

PDF

The underrepresentation of Latinas as K−12 school district superintendents: an evaluation study

PDF

Equity and access: the under-identification of African American students in gifted programs

PDF

Strengthening community: how to effectively implement a conflict resolution and peer mediation program on a secondary school campus: an evaluation study

PDF

Human resources and equity: the influence of HR on addressing the underrepresentation of women in higher education leadership

PDF

Teacher diversity training: a qualitative study to examine novice teacher influences

PDF

Facilitation of postsecondary opportunities for secondary students with special needs: an evaluation study

PDF

Barriers to gender equity in K-12 educational leadership: an evaluation study

PDF

Teacher perceptions of evaluation policy in Hawaii

PDF

Reforming student discipline policies in elementary schools: an improvement study

PDF

Effects of mentoring on public school administrators: an evaluation study

PDF

Supporting emergent bilinguals: implementation of SIOP and professional development practices

PDF

An evaluation of project based learning implementation in STEM

PDF

Reconstructing the literary canon: an innovation study

PDF

Female teacher’s implementation of NGSS through Science2Minds

PDF

Gender inequity and leadership in the large state militia: an innovation study

Asset Metadata

Creator Raymond, Jillian (author)

Core Title K-12 dress codes and gender equity: an examination of policy and practice of dress code implementation

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 04/22/2019

Defense Date 03/20/2019

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

Tag dress code,dress code equity,dress code implementation,dress code policy,gender,gender equity,gender equity in school policy,gender neutral dress code,gender stereotypes,OAI-PMH Harvest,school culture,secondary education dress code,sexism

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Freking, Frederick (committee chair), Brady, Melanie (committee member), Datta, Monique (committee member)

Creator Email jillianmaestra@gmail.com,raym168@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-140936

Unique identifier UC11675730

Identifier etd-RaymondJil-7214.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-140936 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-RaymondJil-7214.pdf

Dmrecord 140936

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Raymond, Jillian

Type texts

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

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA