University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

IEP stakeholder communication and collaboration and its effects on student placement

(USC Thesis Other)

IEP stakeholder communication and collaboration and its effects on student placement

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 1

IEP STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION AND COLLABORATION AND
ITS EFFECTS ON STUDENT PLACEMENT

by

Micah Stork

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 Micah Stork

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 2
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
My dissertation committee deserves all of the thanks in the world.
Dr. Monique Datta
Dr. Anthony Maddox
Dr. Deanna Campbell

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 3
DEDICATION

To Kerri, Jacob, and Ryan:

Thank you so much for loving and supporting me through this process.

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgments 2
Dedication 3
List of Tables 8
Abstract 9
Chapter One: Introduction 10
Problem of Practice 10
Organizational Context and Mission 10
Organizational Goal 11
Related Literature 12
Importance of the Evaluation 13
Description of Stakeholder Groups 14
Stakeholder Groups’ Performance Goals 14
Stakeholder Group for the Study 16
Purpose of the Project and Questions 17
Methodological Framework 17
Definitions 18
Organization of the Project 18
Chapter Two: Literature Review 20
Educational Stakeholder Communication and Collaboration 20
Influences on the Problem of Practice 22
Historical Perspective 22
Impact on the IEP/Transition Process 23
Demographics 25
Growing Special Education Population 25
Cultural Changes and Communicative Barriers 26
Bureaucratic Effects on Communication and Collaboration 28
Time Constraints and Prioritization 28
Time Prioritization Affects on the Medical Field 29
Lack of Input 31
Least Restrictive Environment 32
The Clark and Estes Gap Analytic Conceptual Framework 33
Stakeholder Knowledge and Motivation Influences 34
Knowledge and Skills 34
Knowledge Influences 35
Teacher Understanding of Empathy 36
Teacher knowledge of communication and
collaboration affects 37
Motivation Influences 39
Attribution Theory 40
Confidence that EL Collaboration Affects
Student Placement 41
Expectancy Value Theory 43
The Value of Cultural/Linguistic Empathy
Professional Development 44
Organizational Influences 46
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 5
Cultural Domains 47
Cultural Model Influences and Ensures a Culture
of Collaboration between School
Administration and ATP teachers 48
Cultural Model Influences and Creates Teacher
“Buy In” for Program Improvement 49
Cultural Setting Influences and Provides ATP
Teachers with Ample Time to Collaborate
with EL Parents 49
Conceptual Framework:The Interaction of Stakeholders’
Knowledge and Motivation and the Organizational
Context 52
Figure A. Conceptual Framework of Parent/Teacher
Communication and Collaboration 54
Conclusion 55
Chapter Three: Methodology 57
Research Questions 57
Participating Stakeholders 58
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale 58
Criterion 1 58
Criterion 2 58
Criterion 3 59
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale 59
Data Collection and Instrumentation 60
Interviews 61
Documents and Artifacts 62
Explanation for Choices 63
Data Analysis 63
Credibility and Trustworthiness 64
Validity and Reliability 65
Ethics 66
Limitations and Delimitations 68
Chapter Four: Results and Findings 70
Participating Stakeholders 71
Findings 73
Research Question 1 (Stakeholder Knowledge and Motivation) 73
Knowledge Results and Findings 73
Cultural/Linguistic Empathy 74
Parent/Teacher Perceptions 76
Motivation Results and Findings 77
Attributions 78
Utility Value 79
Research Question 2 (Interaction between Knowledge,
Motivation, and Organizational Influences) 80
Organizational Results and Findings 80
Teacher Mistrust 81
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 6
Building Trust 82
Stakeholder Participation 83
Culture of Collaboration 84
Stakeholder Time Constraints 85
Increased Time for Parent Involvement 87
Student Academic Placement 88
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Synthesis 90
Document Analysis Findings 95
Email 1 95
Email 2 96
Email 3 96
Chapter Five: Recommendations 100
Purpose of the Project and Questions 100
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences 101
Knowledge Recommendations 103
Introduction 103
Declarative Knowledge Solutions 105
Motivation Recommendations 106
Introduction 106
Attribution Influence 109
Utility value theory (expectancy value theory) 109
Organization Recommendations 110
Introduction 110
Process Solutions 112
Resource Solutions 114
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan 114
Implementation and Evaluation Framework 115
Organizational Purpose, Needs, and Expectations 116
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators 117
Level 3: Behavior 119
Critical Behaviors 119
Required Drivers 121
Organizational Support 124
Level 2: Learning 126
Learning Goals 126
Program 127
Evaluation of the Components of Learning 128
Level 1: Reaction 130
Evaluation Tools 132
Immediately Following the Program Implementation 132
Delayed for a period after the Program
Implementation 133
Data Analysis and Reporting 134
Summary 135
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach 136
Limitations and Delimitations 137
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 7
Future Research 138
Conclusion 139
References 141
Appendix A: Informed Consent Form 149
Appendix B: Interview Protocol 152
Appendix C: Level 1 Survey 154
Appendix D: Level 2 Survey 155
Appendix E: Level 1-4 Survey 157
Appendix F: ATP Learning Support Program Assessment Review 158

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 8
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Organizational mission, organizational performance goal, and
stakeholder goals 15

Table 2: Knowledge influences, types, and assessments for knowledge gap
analysis 39

Table 3: Motivational influences and assessments for motivation gap
analysis 46

Table 4: Organizational influences and assessments for motivation gap
analysis 51

Table 5: Qualitative participants 72
Table 6: Primary and sub-themes based on KMO research results and
findings 98

Table 7: Summary of KMO influences and their validation of previous
literature 102

Table 8: Summary of knowledge influences and recommendations 104
Table 9: Summary of motivation influences and recommendations 108
Table 10: Summary of organization influences and recommendations 111
Table 11: Outcomes, metrics, and methods for external and internal
outcomes 118

Table 12: Critical behaviors, metrics, methods, and timing for evaluation 121

Table 13: Required drivers to support critical behaviors 123

Table 14: Evaluation of the components of learning for the program 129

Table 15: Components to measure reactions to the program 131

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 9
ABSTRACT

Communication and collaboration between parents and teachers in the special education
Individualized Education program (IEP) process is an important aspect of our educational
system. A perceived lack of collaboration in this planning process has created contentious
environments between internal and external educational stakeholders that have led to parent
frustration, stakeholder mistrust, litigious environments, and student academic placement issues.
Many elements have contributed to these perceived breakdowns in communication, including,
cultural/linguistic changes, time issues, and school district collaboration policies and protocols.
The researcher conducted this evaluation study to examine the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational (KMO) influences affecting teacher’s ability to proactively communicate with
parents in an adult transition special education program. Through a focused qualitative inquiry
into the KMO influences, the researcher was able to identify and validate influences affecting
teacher behaviors as they pertained to relationships between internal and external educational
stakeholders. These influences focused on teachers utilizing cultural/linguistic empathy with
parents who primarily spoke foreign languages, teacher participation in cultural empathy
professional development, and the creation of a time sensitive collaborative environment
between teachers and school district administration. Based on the findings, the inquiry furnished
recommendations that should be implemented to close the KMO performance gaps affecting
both ATP teachers and the school district. Lastly, the New World Kirkpatrick Model was
employed to evaluate the effectiveness of the recommendation directed interventions and their
outcomes as they pertain to the ATP program improvement model.

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 10
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

Problem of Practice

Communication and collaboration between parents and Individual Education Program
(IEP) teams has created challenges in the IEP/transition planning process. These challenges have
become barriers that hinder communication between parents and school district stakeholders.
Researchers stated that miscommunication between educational stakeholders is a problem
because it creates an environment of mistrust between parents and teachers (Bryan, Stiles,
Burstein, Ergul, & Chao, 2007). The barriers to communication have led other researchers to
conclude that stakeholder collaboration is necessary for proactive transition programming
(Neece, Kramer, & Blacher, 2009). In addition, Greene (2014) confirmed that one of the root
causes contributing to these misunderstandings are language barriers between parents and
teachers. Furthermore, other researchers stated that school district deadlines imposed on teachers
forced them to prioritize administrative duties over parental collaboration (Morningstar, Kim, &
Clark, 2008). These researchers concluded that this prioritization caused teachers to feel that
they were not treating parents as equal stakeholders in the transition planning process. Teachers’
perceptions were that communicating with parents from different cultural and linguistic
backgrounds would lead to increased time spent in the IEP planning process, adding an elevated
burden to their already busy schedules. These perceptions have lead teachers to feel that without
cultural and linguistic empathy, they would be unable to accommodate parents’ concerns about
collaboration in the transition planning process.
Organizational Context and Mission
To protect anonymity, pseudonyms were used for both the school district and the adult
transition program. The Adult Transition Program (ATP) is part of the Large Urban School
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 11
District (LUSD) and is a program for students with moderate to severe disabilities who have
completed high school. The mission of ATP is to help students with disabilities increase their
level of independence through community-based instruction (CBI), vocational training (VT), life
skills (LS), and functional academics. ATP is a federally mandated voluntary program open to
all LUSD special education students who exited high school with a certificate of completion in
lieu of a diploma and is open to them until they turn 22 years of age. Currently there are 91
females and 98 males in the ATP program making the total student population 189 students.
ATP is run by 20 LUSD employees: 18 teachers, one administrative assistant, and one
administrator who work together to ensure each students’ transition experience leads to their
highest level of personal independence.
Organizational Goal
ATP’s goal is that the program would attain appropriate placements for its students at a
rate of 80%. The program administrator established the goal based on new school district
policies in January 2017, after a group of parents advocating for their children threatened the
school district with a lawsuit. Their primary complaint was that they were not being treated as
equal stakeholders in their children’s transition planning and that the lack of input had affected
their placement in their least restrictive environments (LREs). According to Crockett (2014)
approximately 50% of special education students in the United States were currently placed in
inappropriate academic settings.
The achievement of ATP’s goal was measured by the LUSD Special Education
Department through monthly audits consisting of observation, data collection, and parent
interviews through June 2018. It is essential that this placement goal of 80% be attained for
several reasons. If the Program does not reach its goal, it risks alienating the parent advocacy
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 12
group. This group alienation would create a litigious environment that could serve as a catalyst
for future lawsuits against the school district and spark a rigorous semi-annual audit by the
special education department over the course of the next five years. Evaluating ATP’s
performance would help to identify communication gaps and enable school district stakeholders
to collaborate with parents more effectively. Furthermore, it would help to ensure that parents
were being treated as equal stakeholders in transition planning and that they were given enough
time to provide input that could be used to ensure their children are placed in their LREs.
Related Literature
Communication between parents and Individual Education Program (IEP) teams has
created challenges in the transition planning process. Research showed that there are several
factors that lead to this lack of collaboration amongst stakeholders (Davies & Beamish, 2009;
Greene, 2014; Park, 2008). These factors include linguistic differences, school district pressures,
and school district priorities.
Greene (2014) stated that decades of increasing immigration into the United States has
led to an increase in English Language Learner’s (EL’s) (students and parents) involved in the
education process. This increase in immigration has become one of the root causes of the
miscommunication that can arise from communicative barriers between parents and teachers
(Davies & Beamish, 2009). Park (2008) conducted a qualitative study on the views of
teacher/parent attitudes regarding linguistic differences and their involvement in the transition
planning process. Park discovered that many teachers lack cultural and linguistic empathy for
parents and are less apt to collaborate with them because of the perceived language barriers. The
researcher concluded that language barriers between educational stakeholders have created
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 13
misunderstandings in the Individual Education Program (IEP) process and have negatively
affected the interpersonal relationships between parents and teachers.
Ankeny and Lehman (2010) surveyed teachers about school district roles in transition
planning. These researchers discovered that school districts have put ever-mounting pressure on
teachers to meet administrative deadlines. Every teacher surveyed wanted to focus more on
building interpersonal relationships between students, parents, fellow colleagues, and less time
on administrative duties and deadlines (Ankeny & Lehman, 2010). The researchers also
concluded that school districts have focused their resources on the administrative aspects of
IEP/transition planning and less on parental involvement and input. The prioritization on
administrative duties over parental involvement has made many parents feel that they are being
undervalued in the transition planning process (Bryan et al., 2007).
Importance of the Evaluation

The communication problem in the IEP collaboration between educational stakeholders is
important to address because it creates parent frustration with the placement, planning, and
implementation of their child’s IEP plan (Gillan & Coughlan, 2010). Left unresolved, parents
would continue to rely on IEP teams for their children’s transition plans, leading to inappropriate
placements that fail to represent students’ Least Restrictive Environments (LREs, Park, 2008).
Immigration and the steady rise of EL learners mandate that educational stakeholders work
together in more collaborative settings to better understand each other’s wants and needs
(Greene, 2014). Davies and Beamish (2009) stated that these collaborative environments were
integral for the parents to be given the proper amount of input they deserve in the transition
planning process. Parental participation is crucial, because it promotes the parents’ ability to
advocate for their children, enabling them to better obtain the resources they need (Park, 2008).
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 14
Crockett (2014) concluded that breakdowns in communication would remain if educators
continued to focus on administrative factors involved with the IEP process and less on team
planning. Readjusting this focus would enable parents to more actively advocate for their
children and remove the barriers that currently exist in the transition planning process (Park,
2008).
Description of Stakeholder Groups
The stakeholder groups associated with ATP were comprised of teachers, parents, the
LUSD Special Education Department, and an administrator. Teachers act as case carriers for
students with special needs by leading the IEP meetings, completing the IEP paperwork, and
implementing the transition plan. Parents are the primary advocates for their children and give
important information during the IEP process, which focuses on the wants and needs of their
child. The LUSD Special Education Department creates policies, protocols, and oversees all of
the district programs covering special education. Lastly, the administrator’s primary role in ATP
is to set program goals, oversee personnel, and handle litigious situations. In conclusion, every
IEP stakeholder has a responsibility in the planning and implementation of student transition
plans and must work together collaboratively to ensure that they are appropriately placed in their
LREs.
Stakeholder Groups’ Performance Goals
By June 2018, 100% of the ATP teaching staff demonstrated that they were effectively
collaborating with parents in the IEP process to address the concerns of the LUSD Special
Education Department. The program administrator established the goal based on new school
district policies in January 2017, after a group of parents advocating for their children threatened
the school district with a lawsuit. Their primary complaint was that they were not being treated
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 15
as equal stakeholders in their children’s transition planning and that the lack of input had
affected their children’s placement in their LRE. The achievement of ATP’s goal of 80% student
appropriate placement was measured by the LUSD Special Education Department through
monthly audits consisting of observation, data collection, and parent interviews through October
2018. It was important that the 80% appropriate placement goal was attained for several reasons.
If the Program did not reach its goal, it risked alienating the parent advocacy group. The group
alienation would create a litigious environment that could serve as a catalyst for future lawsuits
against the school district and would spark a rigorous semi-annual audit by the special education
department over the course of the next five years. The researcher is part of the ATP teaching
staff and conducted the inquiry to evaluate ATP teacher performance. The inquiry helped to
identify communicative gaps and enabled school district stakeholders to collaborate with parents
more effectively. Furthermore, it helped to ensure that parents are being treated as equal
stakeholders in transition planning and that they were given enough time to provide input that
would used to ensure their children are placed in their LREs.

Table 1
Organizational Mission, Organizational Performance Goal, and Stakeholder Goals
Organizational Mission
The mission of the Adult Transition Community (ATP) is to empower all individuals with
disabilities with the skills necessary to achieve their full potential in adult living, through
support and collaboration with families, education, and communities.
Organizational Performance Goal
By October 2018, ATP will attain appropriate academic placements for its students at a rate of
80%.

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 16
Table 1 (Cont’d.)
LUSD Special
Education
Department
ATP Teachers Parents Administrator
By October 2018, the
LUSD special
education department
will begin to conduct
monthly audits of
ATP to determine
progress toward
compliance.

By June 2018, ATP
teachers will
demonstrate that they
are effectively
collaborating with
parents in the IEP
process to address the
ATP student
placement concerns
of the LUSD Special
Education
Department.
By September 2017,
A group of parent
advocates will meet
with representatives
from the LUSD
special education
department, the ATP
teaching staff, and an
administrator to
review monthly audit
data.
By July 2018, the
ATP program
administrator will
report to the special
education department
the progress of the
ATP program in
reaching their goal of
80% appropriate
student placement.

Stakeholder Group for the Study

In the ATP Program, the success of all students is dependent on the contributions of all
educational stakeholders. Each one of these stakeholders plays a pivotal role in the
organizational goal of 80% student-appropriate placement, however it is important to gauge how
effectively teachers are collaborating with parents in the IEP process to address the concerns of
the LUSD Special Education Department. Therefore, the stakeholder group of focus for this
study was the ATP teachers. The stakeholder’s goal was that by June 2018, 100% of the
teaching staff would effectively collaborate with parents based on the monthly audits conducted
by the special education department. Audit compliance included synthesizing data and working
in collaboration with all educational stakeholders to create and implement an action plan for
student placement for all students enrolled in ATP. Failure to accomplish this goal would lead to
possible litigious action by a parent advocacy group and will start a rigorous bi-annual audit by
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 17
the special education department over the next five years. It would also inhibit the
organization’s ability to provide appropriate placements at a rate of at least 80%.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project was to evaluate the degree to which teachers were
participating in program improvement to support the LUSD ATP in reaching its goal of
achieving appropriate placements for its students at a rate of at least 80%. The analysis would
focus on knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences related to achieving this
organizational goal. While a complete evaluation project would focus on all ATP stakeholders,
for practical purposes the stakeholders of focus are the LUSD ATP teachers.
As such, the questions that guided this study are:
1. To what extent are LUSD ATP teachers meeting their goal of being compliant with the
LUSD goal of achieving appropriate placements for its students at a rate of at least 80%
by October 2018?
2. How are the teacher’s knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences of ATP
teachers related to achieving the LUSD organizational goal of achieving appropriate
placements for its students at a rate of at least 80% by October 2018?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?
Methodological Framework
Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis, a systematic, analytical method that helped to
clarify organizational goals and identify the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences that would be adapted to the evaluation model and implemented as the conceptual
framework. This methodological framework was a qualitative case study with descriptive
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 18
statistics. Assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that impact ATP’s
organizational goal achievement were generated based on personal knowledge and related
literature. The influences were assessed by using interviews, document analysis, literature
review, and content analysis. Research-based solutions were recommended and evaluated in a
comprehensive manner.
Definitions
Adult Transition: Programs that are mandated by the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA) 1990 to address the needs of students to prepare them for adult roles in
society (Accardo & Whitman, 2008).
Individual Education Program: A written statement for the education of a child with
disabilities that stated their educational goals. This document was developed and implemented
according to criteria originally presented in the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of
1975 (Accardo & Whitman, 2008).
Least Restrictive Environment: A term referring to the most inclusive and integrated
educational setting based on students’ individual needs (Accardo & Whitman, 2008).
Transition Services: Mandated post-secondary school special education programs that
stressed community based instruction, vocational training, life skills, and functional academics
(Accardo & Whitman, 2008).
Organization of the Project
Five chapters were used to organize this study. Chapter One provided the reader with the
key concepts and terminology commonly found in a discussion about parent/teacher
collaboration and its effect on student appropriate placement. The organization’s mission, goals
and stakeholders and the framework for the project were introduced. Chapter Two includes a
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 19
review of current literature surrounding the scope of the study. Topics of barriers to
communication, collaboration, policies, time concerns, and least restrictive environments will be
addressed. Chapter Three presents details of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences to be examined, as well as methodology when it comes to the selection of participants,
data collection, and analysis. In Chapter Four, the data and results are assessed and analyzed. In
Chapter Five, solutions, based on data and literature, as well as recommendations for an
implementation and evaluation plan are included.

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 20
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
The literature review will examine how communication and collaboration between
parents and Individual Education Program (IEP) teams has created challenges in the
IEP/transition planning process. The review begins with general research on the importance of
communication and collaboration between educational stakeholders. This section is followed by
an overview of literature on current challenges educational stakeholders face in the IEP planning
process. The review will give an in-depth analysis on the factors that create proactive IEP
planning and its effects on student placement. This section includes current research on the
cultural/linguistic, accountability, time, and prioritization concerns that affect educational
stakeholders’ attitudes and practice. Lastly, the review will focus on the Clark and Estes’ (2008)
GAP Analytic Conceptual Framework, focusing on knowledge, motivation, and organizational
(KMO) influences involved with teachers’ ability to increase communication and collaboration
with parents in the IEP/transition planning process.
Educational Stakeholder Communication and Collaboration

Communication and collaboration between teachers and the parents serve as the bedrock
for educational communities in which students learn and thrive (Mahmood, 2013; Patterson,
2005; Schultz, Sreckovic, Able & White, 2016; Summer & Summer, 2014). Research studies
have concluded that both student academic and functional growth are hindered without
consistent and well thought out dialogue between internal and external educational stakeholders
(Patterson, 2005; Work & Stafford, 2013). Summer and Summer (2014) discovered that students
who were products of proactive-communication-centered learning communities, were more
likely to achieve academic success than those who were not. The researchers concluded that the
latter was due to the higher levels of attention that both stakeholders paid to students,
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 21
benchmarking, learning growth, and developmental goal setting. These levels of increased
attention between educational stakeholders have become of greater importance with the
implementation of special education programs in our educational community (M. Garcia,
personal communication, December 10, 2017).
In 1975, the United States officially integrated special education into our educational
system through the passage of the Education for All Handicapped Children’s Act (EHA)
(Accardo & Whitman, 2008; Coates, 1985; Patterson, 2005; Povenmire-Kirk, Lindstrom, &
Bullis, 2010). This mandate has served as the organizational framework for special education
services and mandated that educational stakeholders hold IEP meetings on a yearly basis
(Patterson, 2005). Povenmire-Kirk et al. (2010) stated that IEP planning consists of
collaboration between internal and external educational stakeholders including parents, students,
teachers, administrators, advocates, and attorneys. The collaboration between these stakeholders
is vital to effective IEP planning and implementation; however, with the increases of EL learners
coupled with the time constraints imposed on teachers, collaboration between these two parties
has been strained (Ankeny & Lehman, 2010; Davies & Beamish 2009; Greene, 2014; Park,
2008). These contentious relationships have negatively impacted student placement and overall
academic success.
Through proactive communication between parents and teachers, ideas may flow freely
and incidents of negative interaction are decreased (Accardo & Whitman, 2008). Accardo and
Whitman (2008) defined communication as the ability to convey thoughts or messages through
speech and (or) body language. The researchers also characterized collaboration as the
interaction of different groups to create ideas and solve problems. In the field of education, these
two aspects play an important role in developing ideas and understanding the viewpoints of
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 22
different parties involved. The use of communication and collaboration between educational
stakeholders has been shown to be an essential aspect of the education process and serves as an
important bridge between parents and teachers (Patterson, 2005).
Influences on the Problem of Practice
Special education holds an important place in the history of education in our country
(Patterson, 2005). In this section, the researcher discusses the history behind special education
that have created the modern day mandates, policies, processes, and protocols that govern this
section of our educational system. Through a thorough review of the demographic and
bureaucratic effects on special education, the researcher will show how multiple factors have
shaped and continue to mold the communication and collaboration between parents and teachers
in the IEP process. This communication and collaboration has also been shown to have both
positive and negative effects on student academic placement (Crockett, 2014).
Historical Perspective
Communication and collaboration between internal and external educational stakeholders
is not a new idea and has increasingly grown in importance over the last 50 years (Park, 2008;
Patterson, 2005). Patterson (2005) stated that teachers have been providing feedback to parents
on student progress since the creation of the teacher/parent relationship. Patterson (2005) also
stated that the importance of teacher/parent communication has steadily increased since the end
of World War II, which marked the beginning of what they consider the modern era of our
educational system. Patterson (2005) concluded that communication and collaboration between
teachers and parents became a mandate for the first time in 1975 with the passage of the
Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EHA). Furthermore, Park (2008) stated that EHA
has served as the organizational framework for special education since its inception. Park (2008)
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 23
identified that the primary goal of the law was to ensure Free and Appropriate Public Education
(FAPE) for students with special needs commensurate to that of their typical peers. Park (2008)
concluded that the law forced states to comply by requiring that students be placed in their most
inclusive environments which represented their Least Restrictive Environment’s (LREs).
Summer and Summer (2014) expanded on the concept of LRE by stating that EHA
created a collaborative educational planning process to help ensure students received their FAPE
in their LRE. The primary focus of EHA was the requirement for school districts to hold yearly
Individual Education Plan (IEP) meetings so that educational stakeholders could plan goals,
evaluate special services, and discuss any other issues pertaining to a student’s education.
Summer and Summer (2014) concluded that IEP meetings were meant to be arenas where
parents and teachers would serve as equal stakeholders in IEP planning and implementation
process. The researchers also concluded that IEP meetings would serve as an environment
where parents could express their wants and needs for their children. The evolution of the
importance placed on parent/teacher communication that lead to the federal EHA mandate
created our modern day special education system and its focus on teacher/parent communication
and collaboration. The changes this law has endured have created both positive and negative
impacts on our special education system.
Impact on the IEP/Transition Process
Since the inception of EHA in 1975, the law has evolved and been renamed through
multiple changes reflecting the ever-changing political, academic, and social views affecting
special education in the United States. Povenmire-Kirk et al. (2010) stated that in 1990 EHA
was renamed The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) to reflect the negative
political and societal connotation with the word “handicapped.” The researchers discovered that
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 24
the law now included mandated state run educational services for students with special needs
from birth through kindergarten. These services included 13 disability qualifications for special
education services: deafness, emotional disturbances, orthopedic impairment, visual impairment,
speech impairment, deaf-blind, multiple disabilities, intellectual disability, learning disabilities,
traumatic brain injury, hearing impairment, mental retardation, and other health impairment
(Povenmire-Kirk et al., 2010). The researchers also stated that the last major revision to IDEA
came in 1997 when parents and groups representing students with special needs, demanded post-
secondary services for students receiving special education services. Povenmire-Kirk et al.
(2010) concluded that the result was the addition of mandatory Individual Transition Programs
(ITP’s) and transition services for students ages 18-22.
Ramanathan (2008) conducted a study where the researcher reviewed prior studies and
government data about the benefits and shortcomings of IDEA. The researcher stated that the
communication and collaboration between educational stakeholders was the catalyst and
spearheaded the evolution of IDEA. Furthermore, the researcher stated that IDEA forced school
districts to be bureaucratically and professionally accountable for the education of children with
special needs. The researcher concluded that the law only mandated IEP frequency, how that
was accomplished, and the rigor of the process was up to the individual states and (or) school
districts.
In another study, Marchese (2000) conducted a mixed-methods survey of over 100
parents who were well aware of IDEA on their views of the mandate. Marchese stated that the
majority of the parents surveyed wanted the law to include mandated stakeholder communication
and more meetings to discuss the goal progression of students. Marchese concluded that the
majority of parents who had children with special needs wanted an increase in the information
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 25
they received from teachers about their children’s education program. With the evolution of
EHA/IDEA came many improvements for the families and students with special needs, however,
there are many gaps not covered by the law. This has led both researchers and educational
stakeholders to conclude that further communication and parent collaboration could decrease the
communication gap between educational stakeholders.
Demographics
In the United States, the education system is facing a trend of ever changing
demographics of our student population (Chavez, Duran, Baker, Avila, & Wallerstein, 2008;
Johnson & Lichter, 2016). Johnson and Lichter (2016) stated that students who are able to
receive special education services was increasing at all-time high numbers, straining an already
vulnerable special education system. Furthermore, a steady increase in immigration has led to a
rise in students from minority cultures, which has changed the ways in which school district
stakeholders communicate and collaborate with parents and students. This rise in an ethnically
diverse population has also changed the way teachers deliver academic instruction to their
students.
Growing Special Education Population
Since the birth of the EHA mandate, the number of students who qualify for special
education services has grown at a faster rate than most school districts in this country can handle
(Lytle & Bordin, 2001; Ruppar & Gaffney, 2011). Lytle and Bordin (2001) conducted a
qualitative study where they interviewed five special education initial intake teams about their
perceptions of the process. The researchers concluded that every one of the teams noted that
their special education intakes had increased significantly within the past four years. To build on
this research, another set of researchers conducted a study where they interviewed one special
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 26
education intake team about a multitude of issues affecting their jobs (Ruppar & Gaffney, 2011).
Ruppar and Gaffney (2011) stated that every member of the team said they were not able to
spend as much time as they would like on their intakes because of the increasing number of
students referred for special education. These researchers concluded that because in the rise of
the special education intakes, school district personnel were not able to appropriately manage
their student caseloads (Ruppar & Gaffney, 2011). This increase in special education also came
at a time when we are seeing a significant demographic shift in our educational system.
Cultural Changes and Communicative Barriers
Increases in immigration have led to an increase in parents and students from minority
cultures into our education system adding more English Language Learners (EL) into our special
education system (Chavez et al., 2008; Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001; Greene, 2014; Johnson
& Lichter, 2016). Chavez et al. (2008) performed a study where they analyzed United States
immigration statistics from 2000-2004. The researchers stated that during this time period over
approximately 11 million documented and undocumented immigrants came to the United States.
Chavez et al. (2008) concluded that in 2004 the total immigrant population in the United States
was approximately 50 million, and would continue to increase. Johnson and Lichter (2016)
expanded on this research when they conducted a research study where they analyzed US census
data relating to immigration from 2000 to 2010. The researchers identified that the majority of
immigration were from Hispanic countries, increasing the Hispanic population from 10% to 22%
of the total population. The researchers concluded that this rise in immigration lead to an 8%
increase in EL students during the same time frame. This increase in EL students has had a
significant impact on our educational system, both in the way it is run and how our teachers
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 27
communicate with parents and students from different cultures (M. Garcia, personal
communication, December 8, 2017).
Nowhere in education has parent/teacher communication and collaboration been as affected as it
has been in special education (Bryan et al., 2007; Cruz & Patterson, 2005; Gallimore &
Goldenberg, 2001; Greene, 2014). Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) conducted a qualitative
study of EL parents on IEP planning, meetings, and implementation. The majority of parents
interviewed revealed that their cultural differences with the school district stakeholders’ were
pronounced (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). The researchers also stated that the parents
believed that teachers should have taken a more proactive effort to understand their cultural
differences and increase their levels of cultural empathy. Greene (2014) conducted a survey of
over 50 high school teachers on their views of the communication and collaboration levels in the
IEP process with parents who were linguistically diverse. The researchers concluded that the
majority of the teachers surveyed, felt that their communication with EL parents was less than it
was with parents who spoke English as their primary language.
Bryan et al. (2007) surveyed over 120 EL and non-EL students and their parents about
their role in the IEP process. The researchers stated that a disproportionate amount of EL
participants responded that teachers were not spending enough time with them in the
IEP/transition process. The researchers concluded that a common theme of the study was that
EL students and their families wanted teachers to be more culturally empathetic with them in IEP
planning and treat them as equal stakeholders in the educational process.
In an additional study, Cruz and Patterson (2005) reviewed numerous studies on cultural
empathy in educational settings. The researchers identified that teachers who exhibit cultural
empathy to their EL parents and students were more likely to develop rapport than those who did
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 28
not. Cruz and Patterson concluded that teachers who develop cultural and linguistic empathy
were more likely to build stronger relationships with their EL parents and increase the academic
performance of their students. Understanding cultural issues that affect the IEP process play an
important role in the communication and collaboration between parents and teachers.
Bureaucratic accountability issues that affect teacher time prioritization have further exacerbated
this barrier to proactive parent/teacher collaboration.
Bureaucratic Effects on Communication and Collaboration
School districts are bureaucratically accountable to the federal and state government to
comply with the IDEA mandate. McKernan (2012) stated that through a cascading effect, school
districts hold teachers and other school district stakeholders professionally accountable for
planning and implementing IEP’s for students with disabilities. Challenges associated with IEP
planning currently exist that hinder this process and have resulted in parent frustration.
Therefore, parent/teacher collaboration is necessary to ensure that students receive their most
rigorous and inclusive education in their appropriate classroom placements.
Time Constraints and Prioritization
Teacher time prioritizations have affected collaboration between parents and teachers in
the IEP process (Bacon & Causton-Theoharis, 2013; Davies & Beamish, 2009; Morningstar et
al., 2008). Davies and Beamish (2009) conducted interviews of over 300 parents on their views
of their roles in the IEP process. The researchers stated that a majority of the parents felt that
teachers worked hard and wanted the best for their children. Davies and Beamish concluded that
parents felt as if they were not viewed as equal stakeholders and believed they weren’t given
enough of a voice in the IEP planning process.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 29
Bacon and Causton-Theoharis (2013) expanded on this research by conducting a survey
of over 70 EL parents’ perceptions of the IEP process for their students with special needs. The
researchers stated that almost every one of the participants felt as if IEP meetings were not as
collaborative as they should be and wanted to play a more important role in the IEP process. The
researchers concluded that parents believed that teachers spent more time dealing with
bureaucratic paperwork over collaborative planning and implementation.
Furthermore, Morningstar et al. (2008) conducted a large qualitative survey of special
education teachers on their views of the IEP planning process. The researchers learned that the
majority of teachers felt that they did not have enough time to deal with parents due to the large
amount of paperwork deadlines and pressures stemming from the school district. The
researchers stated that teachers felt this lack of time affected EL parents more negatively than
non-EL parents because of the perceived lack of time associated with meeting with parents who
spoke a language different from their own. Morningstar et al. identified that most teachers
associate dealing with EL parents as a time hindrance due to their correlation between IEP
meetings and EL parents taking longer due to the language barriers. This led the researchers to
conclude that teachers wanted more parent input, but did feel they had the time and blamed their
school districts for making them prioritize bureaucratic duties over building rapport with parents.
These time prioritizations have affected parent perceptions on their lack of input in the IEP
process and created hostile environments between parents and school district stakeholders.
Time Prioritization Affects on the Medical Field
Time prioritization has also had a profound effect on the medical industry. Similar to
education, doctors are now facing time constraints caused by administrative accountability, a
focus on bureaucratic paperwork, profit margins, and cultural/linguistic barriers. Ogden et al.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 30
(2004) conducted a study where they surveyed 1500 patients about their opinions on the quality
of service they had received from their physician. Based on this survey, the researchers
identified that over 70% of the respondents were unhappy about the amount of time their
physicians had spent with them on their last visit. Ogden et al. stated that a majority of the
respondents were not satisfied with the amount of attention their doctors’ had paid to their
particular condition. The researchers concluded that this perceived lack of attention had caused
apprehension and uneasiness on the part of the patients. Powell-Sears (2012) expanded on this
inquiry by conducting a study on minority perceptions of health care. The researchers
interviewed over 70 respondents about their feelings of trust, communication, and respect they
had about their doctors. Over 80% of those interviewed felt that they trusted their doctor,
however, a slight majority of those patients believed that their doctors rushed them through the
process, and lacked respect for their particular situations. Powell-Sears concluded that a slight
majority of those who were unhappy with their doctor was due to linguistic differences.
Furthermore, West (2012) conducted a qualitative study on levels of care for minorities and their
views on cultural empathy. Those participants overwhelmingly responded negatively about their
experiences with physicians who did not speak their first language. In contrast, a majority of
those respondents were happy with their healthcare if their doctors spoke their native language.
The researchers also stated that the respondent’s primary complaint was that their doctors lacked
empathy for their conditions. West concluded that those who could not speak fluently with their
physicians felt that their care was impersonal and viewed it more like a business transaction than
a medical visit.
Lastly, Fossum and Arborelius (2004) conducted a qualitative study where they
interviewed health system doctors about their job satisfaction. The researchers stated that a
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 31
majority of the doctors interviewed were happy overall with their careers, however most were
not satisfied with how much time they were able to devote to patient care. The researchers also
stated that a majority of the doctors wanted to be able to devote more time to patient care, but
were subject to a time quota system for individual patient visits. Fossum and Arborelius
concluded that most of the doctors surveyed wished that they had more time to devote to patient
care and less time allotted to business protocol and bureaucratic policies.
Through a review of communication and collaboration between patients and their
doctors, the researcher has identified that issues pertaining to time management, cultural/
linguistic empathy, and professional accountability are apparent in more fields than just
education. This led the researcher to continue asking ever evolving questions pertaining to the
inquiries’ problem of practice and should act as an antecedent for further research into
communication issues and their affects on relationships in all professional arenas.
Lack of Input
Parent lack of input in the IEP process negatively impacts students in special education
programs (Gillan & Coughlan, 2010; Neece et al., 2009; Work & Stafford, 2013). Work and
Stafford (2013) conducted a study where they observed numerous IEP meetings involving EL
parents and surveyed them on their levels of input. The researchers stated that parents discussed
how they weren’t given enough time to express their wants and needs for their children. The
researchers also stated that this created frustration amongst the EL parents due to the fact they
felt that they were not being treated as equal members of the IEP team. Work and Stafford
observed that by not giving parents enough time to give appropriate amounts of input in the IEP
process, internal stakeholders were missing out on a valuable opportunity to gain important
insight into a student’s strengths and weaknesses. The researchers went on to conclude that by
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 32
not treating parents as equal stakeholders, teachers and other members of IEP teams were
missing the opportunity to gain student information that could help in the academic placement of
their children.
Furthermore, Gillan and Coughlan (2010) conducted a qualitative survey on parents’
views of the effectiveness of their communication and collaboration with their children’s
teachers. The researchers stated that the majority of the parents felt that they did not have
enough collaboration with teachers. Gillan and Coughlan concluded that this perceived lack of
collaboration has created parent anger, which has led to an escalation in confrontational
environments with teachers.
In another study, Neece et al. (2009) conducted a survey of high profile parents in a large
urban school district. The researchers learned that confrontational environments between
educational stakeholders become barriers to further communication, due to the mistrust parents’
displayed toward their children’s teachers. Neece et al. stated that EL parents comprised the
majority of the participants and were involved in the most adversarial IEP/transition teams. The
researchers also stated that these confrontational environments had a high probability of
becoming litigious situations involving attorneys and (or) advocates. The researcher inquired
about student placement and its role in student academic outcomes because of the correlation
between learning environments and student learning.
Least Restrictive Environment
Lack of communication and collaboration between parents and school district
stakeholders in the IEP process has had a negative effect in student academic placement
(Crockett, 2014; Jones & Hensley, 2012; Kurth, Morningstar, & Kozleski, 2014). Kurth et al.
(2014) analyzed the history of IDEA and the court decisions that have guided the way school
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 33
districts interpret LRE. The researchers identified that differing court decisions have created
ambiguity of the law, so school districts have developed their own meanings. Based on their
review, the researchers concluded that federal special education law should be updated to
provide a concrete framework for student academic placement.
Jones and Hensley (2012) conducted a study where they interviewed special education
students on their opinions of their academic placements. The researchers stated that students that
were happy with their teachers and felt that they were in their appropriate academic placement
generally had higher levels of social and academic achievement than their peers who did not.
Jones and Hensley concluded that this was due to the affect that student environment played in
creating feelings of happiness, increased self-esteem, and overall self-confidence. The
researchers concluded that there was a correlation between the appropriate academic placement
of students in their Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) and overall life success.
Furthermore, Crockett (2014) reviewed past studies on the appropriate placements of
students to analyze how well educational institutions were doing in placing students with special
needs in their LREs. The researcher stated that approximately 50% of special education students
were not currently placed in their most inclusive environments. Crockett concluded that
parent/teacher collaboration, communication, and student academic achievement were primary
factors that affected student placement in their LRE.
The Clark and Estes Gap Analytic Conceptual Framework
Clark and Estes (2008) created a conceptual analytic framework that showed
organizations and their stakeholders how identification of current performance versus
performance goals creates a gap that can be analyzed and used as a framework for reaching their
objectives. The researchers stated that once performance gaps have been recognized,
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 34
organizations should employ in-depth user driven data to discover the knowledge, motivation,
and organizational factors (KMOs) affecting stakeholder performance (Clark & Estes, 2008;
Malloy, 2011). Knowledge factors affecting stakeholder goals include the when, what, why,
where, and who that makes up their knowledge base (Clark & Estes, 2008). Motivational factors
are comprised of (a) choosing to work towards a goal; (b) goal perseverance; (c) stakeholder
mental effort (Clark & Estes, 2008). The researchers also stated that organizational factors
include work policies, protocols, and procedures that affect stakeholder and organizational goal
attainment.
In the next section, the KMOs that impact ATP teacher’s abilities to effectively
collaborate with parents in the IEP process by June 2018 will be discussed. First, an overview of
knowledge factors will be addressed along with the communication and collaboration in an
educational setting, followed by teachers’ understanding of empathy and its affects. Second,
motivational factors associated with the KMO framework will discuss how Attribution and
Expectancy-Value theories affect both student placement and professional development. Third,
organizational factors involving both general and stakeholder specific theories will be discussed.
Stakeholder Knowledge and Motivation Influences
Knowledge and Skills
Knowledge is a complex system of information that enables teachers to develop the skills
necessary to create and reach their goals (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). Through reflection
and review of stakeholder knowledge and skills, performance input indicators would be
identified that could aid organizations in creating performance baselines and goals (Clark &
Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). Clark and Estes (2008) stated that through this gap analysis,
educational stakeholder knowledge and skills could be analyzed and new organizational
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 35
processes for goal attainment could be adopted. Clark and Estes also concluded that through this
gap analysis that the organization’s implementation of new processes would lead to increased
stakeholder knowledge and attainment of organizational goals.
In meeting their goals, organizations would be left to identify the how, what and when of
further teacher knowledge and skills (Carpenter, 2012; Krathwohl, 2002). Identifying new
stakeholder knowledge would serve as a catalyst for future goal creation, process
implementation, and would lead to positive outcomes correlating to new goal attainment
(Carpenter, 2012; Krathwohl, 2002). D. L. Kirkpatrick (2006) concluded that this cycle of
stakeholder knowledge and skill identification was one of the primary forces that guided this
process of consistent and perpetual organizational improvement.
Knowledge influences. Currently the Adult Transition Program (ATP) has an
organizational goal of reaching 80% student-appropriate placements and a stakeholder goal of
100% teacher involvement in improved parent collaboration. In this section, the researcher
reviewed the relevant literature by illustrating the correlation between knowledge and these
organizational and stakeholder goals. Krathwohl (2002) stated that there are four types of
knowledge: factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive. First, factual knowledge is
comprised of isolated, fact centered, information recognition (Krathwohl, 2002; Mayer, 2011).
An example of factual knowledge is teachers’ understanding of their organizational goal.
Second, conceptual knowledge builds on factual knowledge through the organization of multiple
complex knowledge frameworks (Mayer, 2011; Rueda, 2011). Teachers use conceptual
knowledge on a daily basis, by taking what they have learned in the past and integrating it with
new information in order to transfer their knowledge to new situations. Third, procedural
knowledge consists of an individual’s mastery of content, even when explicit instructions are not
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 36
available (Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda, 2011). An example of this is a teacher’s ability to follow
government mandates and school district policies, procedures, and goals. Lastly, metacognitive
knowledge is composed of the awareness an individual possesses about his or her cognitive
insight (Krathwohl, 2002; Mayer, 2011). Baker (2006) would conclude that teachers use
metacognitive knowledge on a daily basis when they reflect on their teaching as a means of
improving their direct instruction.
This study focused on teachers’ abilities to increase collaboration and communication
with parents in the Individual Education Program (IEP)/transition process. Although there are
four structures of knowledge that teachers will use on a daily basis, conceptual knowledge was
the focus of this study. The researcher has identified two conceptual influences affecting the
organizational and stakeholder goals of the ATP program. These influences are: (a) teacher’s
need to understand that cultural and linguistic empathy are required for successful
communication and collaboration with EL families in the IEP/transition process; (b) teachers
need to be aware that not employing cultural/linguistic empathy with EL families has led to
increases in parent frustration and anger with school district IEP stakeholders over inappropriate
placements of students. Through these two conceptual influences, ATP teachers hoped to reach
their goal of 100% teacher participation in reaching the organizational goal of 80% appropriate
student placement.
Teacher understanding of empathy. Teachers in the ATP program had a stakeholder
goal of demonstrating that they are all effectively collaborating with parents in the IEP/transition
process to address the concerns of the LUSD special education department. Teachers must first
recognize that immigration into the United States has increased at unprecedented rates over the
last decade and that this surge in immigration has led to an increase in the number of English
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 37
Language Learners and families into the educational system (Chavez et al., 2008; Greene, 2014;
Johnson & Lichter, 2016). Knowing this, special education teachers in ATP recognized that
interactions with EL families in the IEP/transition process would continue to increase in the
future (Chavez et al., 2008; Greene, 2014; Johnson & Lichter, 2016). Teachers should
understand that employing cultural empathy is necessary for internal educational stakeholders to
effectively communicate with EL families (Chavez et al., 2008; Greene, 2014; Johnson &
Lichter, 2016).
Teachers’ ability to understand the background of changing demographics in the
educational system would enable them to recognize that to be effective in their positions they
need to integrate the wants and the needs of EL families in the IEP/transition process.
Understanding this would force them to transfer their existing knowledge based on prior
experiences, with newly acquired information that they hold in their working and long-term
memory (Baker, 2006; Grossman & Salas, 2011; Krathwohl, 2002; Mayer, 2011; Shraw &
Lehman, 2009). Through this transfer of knowledge, ATP teachers should hold onto their newly
integrated knowledge about cultural empathy and be ready to utilize it in their future dealings
with EL families.
Teacher knowledge of communication and collaboration affects. ATP teachers should
understand that their conceptual knowledge surrounding the importance of cultural/linguistic
empathy should be employed to avoid gaps in communication and collaboration with EL
families (Chavez et al., 2008; Greene, 2014; Johnson & Lichter, 2016). The special education
department set a goal of 80% appropriate student placement in the ATP program. The school
district and a group of EL parents had identified gaps in communication and collaboration
between teachers and parents as a catalyst for parent frustration and anger (M. Garcia, personal
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 38
communication, January 13, 2018). These internal and external stakeholders have also
associated this lack of communication with inappropriate student classroom placements and
school district accountability consequences (M. Garcia, personal communication, January 13,
2018).
Through a review of the conceptual knowledge related to teachers developing cultural
empathy, the researcher stated that ATP teachers should understand the consequences associated
with not employing cultural and linguistic empathy with EL families. Teachers should also
acknowledge that workday time priority has to be given to parent communication over
bureaucratic duties in order for EL parents to be given appropriate amounts of time in the IEP
process (Crockett, 2014; Johnson & Lichter, 2016; Morningstar et al., 2008). The effects of not
devoting ample time and employing appropriate communication and collaboration correlate with
increased anger and frustration on behalf of the external stakeholders and increased odds of
inappropriate student placement (Crockett, 2014; Johnson & Lichter, 2016; Morningstar et al.,
2008). In light of this information, ATP teachers should use this knowledge and employ these
conceptual learning styles coupled with motivational factors to enable them to meet the
organizational goal of the ATP program.
Table 2 displays the organizational mission, the organizational global goal, the
stakeholder goal, the two conceptual knowledge influences, and assessments of these knowledge
influences.

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 39
Table 2

Knowledge Influences, Types, and Assessments for Knowledge Gap Analysis

Organizational Mission
The mission of the Adult Transition Program (ATP) is to empower all individuals with
disabilities with the skills necessary to achieve their full potential in adult living, through
support and collaboration with families, education, and communities.
Organizational Global Goal
ATP’s global goal is that the program will attain appropriate classroom placements for its
students at a rate of 80%.
Stakeholder Goal
By June 2018, 100% of ATP teachers will demonstrate that they are effectively
collaborating with parents in the IEP process to address the concerns of the LUSD
Special Education Department.
Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type Knowledge Influence
Assessment
Teachers need to
understand that cultural and
linguistic empathy are
required for successful
communication and
collaboration with EL
families in the
IEP/transition process.

Conceptual Teachers were asked if they
give appropriate amounts of
time to EL families and
non-EL families in the
IEP/transition process.
Teachers need to be aware
that not employing cultural/
linguistic empathy with EL
families has led to increases
in parent frustration and
anger with school district

Conceptual Teachers will be
interviewed about their
parent/teacher relationships
and their effects on IEP
planning and student
placement.
IEP stakeholders over
inappropriate placements of
students.

Motivation Influences
Researchers stated that motivation consists of the ways in which individuals become
inspired to accomplish their goals (Clark & Estes, 2008; Pintrich, 2003). Clark and Estes (2008)
stated that motivation is the second component of the knowledge, motivation, organization
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 40
(KMO) framework that organizations use in the gap analysis/goal attainment process. The
researchers identified that there are five domains that influence motivation; (a) goals must be
concrete, challenging, and current; (b) stakeholders must value their goals; (c) stakeholders must
have a belief in their effort; (d) they must have confidence in their ability; and (e) stakeholders
must have a positive mood and discover ways to proactively suppress negative emotions
(Bandura, 2005; Dweck & Leggett, 1988; Eccles, 2006; Locke & Latham, 2002; Pekrun, 2011).
Clark and Estes concluded that based on these five influences, motivation is comprised of three
primary aspects that determine stakeholder goal attainment. First, stakeholders must start their
activity and avoid procrastination (Clark & Estes, 2008; Pintrich, 2003). Second, stakeholders
need to display persistence in their activities and avoid external and internal distractions (Clark
& Estes, 2008; Pintrich, 2003). Third, stakeholders must invest mental effort through dedicated
and focused work to reach their goals (Clark & Estes, 2008; Pintrich, 2003).
There are multiple theories on motivation, however for this review the researcher focused
on attribution theory and expectancy value theory (Anderman, Anderman, Yough, & Gimbert,
2010; Eccles, 2006). These two motivational theories were employed to discover educational
stakeholders’ motivations for developing their communication and collaborative skill-sets with
external educational stakeholders. Through analysis of these motivational theories, the
researcher showed that motivational influences greatly affect both LUSD’s organizational and
educational stakeholder goals.
Attribution theory. Attribution theory deals with past events and their effects on past
outcomes, and how they impact an individual’s motivation to accomplish similar tasks in the
present and (or) future (Anderman et al., 2010; Weiner, 1985, 2006). Weiner (2006) stated that
individual’s attributes and their effects on motivation stem from both environmental and personal
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 41
components. For teachers, these environmental factors may include their classroom setting and
the demographics of their student body. Personal attributes affecting teachers could include past
experiences and their levels of success. Researchers would conclude that teachers could be more
motivated to participate in certain tasks if they procured positive results in similar past activities
(Anderman et al., 2010; Eccles, 2006; Weiner, 1985, 2006).
Weiner (2006) stated that individual attributes consist of three dimensions: (a) locus,
(b) stability, and (c) controllability. The locus stems from an individual’s perception of the event
as being internal or external (Anderman et al., 2010). Stability refers to an individual’s
perception of an activity as being within his or her control. Weiner concluded that if a teacher
felt that an attribute was stable it would affect his or her motivation in a positive manner,
whereas unstable perceptions of past events would affect their motivation in a negative manner.
Lastly, controllability refers to whether an individual believes he or she has control over an
attribute (Anderman et al., 2010; Weiner, 2006). Teachers might feel that a meeting was a
success because they had mastered the prep work prior to the meeting. This type of
controllability would likely lead to a positive attribute and enhance motivation for future
endeavors.
Confidence that EL collaboration affects student placement. Attributes play a
significant role in the daily lives of ATP teachers. Based on analysis of both their positive and
negative personal attributions, teachers decide what levels of motivation they will employ in
similar situations (Anderman et al., 2010; Eccles, 2006; Weiner, 1985, 2006). Based on parent
frustration with their engagement in the IEP transition process, the LUSD special education
department conducted an audit and found that appropriate placements for students were sub-par
(H. Hendricks, personal communication, December 17, 2017). Based on these findings, the
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 42
LUSD special education department set a goal of 80% appropriate placements for students. In
leading to this goal, LUSD created a 100% teacher participation goal in increasing their
communication and collaboration with parents.
In line with changing demographics, it would be beneficial for both the stakeholder and
the organizational goal if ATP teachers analyzed how their behaviors have affected their past
success with outside stakeholder groups. Both positive and negative attributes impacting their
collaborative efforts with parents were analyzed so that teachers could be made aware of the
areas in which they could improve (Anderman et al., 2010, Weiner, 2006; Yee & Eccles, 1988).
Eccles (2006) concluded that through this analysis, teachers could reflect on their actions and
motivate themselves to improve so long as the causes were considered unstable, external, and
controllable. During their IEP/transition meetings with both EL and English speaking parents,
teachers could implement their changed attributes and receive feedback from observing co-
workers as based on their program improvement model (M. Garcia, personal communication,
December 13, 2017).
A rise in continuous performance increases by ATP teachers would lead to increased self-
efficacy by ATP teachers and would enhance their motivation for collaborating and
communicating with parents (Anderman et al., 2010, Crockett, 2014; Eccles, 2006). In
accomplishing this task, parents would feel that they play an important role and were valued as
equal stakeholders in the IEP/transition planning process (Crockett, 2014). Increases in teacher
self-efficacy would lead to increases in teacher motivation for accomplishing the organizational
goal of 80% appropriate student placement (Parajes, 2006). Jones and Hensley (2012) and Kurth
et al. (2014) concluded that through reflection, motivation, and self-efficacy, individuals may be
better equipped to effectively participate in processes that involve IEP/transition planning.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 43
Expectancy value theory. A primary motivational theory that helps learners to
understand the catalysts behind motivation is expectancy value theory. Expectancy value theory
consists of two primary aspects: expectancy “can I do it” and value “do I want to do it” (Eccles,
2006; Pajares, 2006; Pintrich, 2003; Shraw & Lehman, 2009). Through review of their
attributions from prior activities, learners develop self-efficacy for their motivation related to
new tasks, affecting their expectancy in a positive manner (Eccles, 2006; Pajares, 2006). Eccles
(2006) concluded that if a learner is confident about their expectancy associated with the task,
they are more likely to have higher levels of motivation and increased success in their new
activities. The focus of value perceived by a learner is on the rewards associated with
accomplishing tasks (Pajares, 2006). Through learner recognition of the value in the activity,
they will carry increased motivation to accomplish those tasks (Pajares, 2006).
In expectancy value theory, value is related to four constructs: (a) intrinsic interest,
(b) attainment value, (c) utility value, and (d) the perceived cost of engaging in the activity
(Eccles, 2006). Eccles (2006) stated that intrinsic interest deals with a learner’s internal
motivation to complete a task. Bandura (2005) concluded that teachers’ intrinsic interest for goal
accomplishment would revolve around their sincere desire to meet the learning expectations of
their students. Attainment value refers to the correlation between the value of the goal and a
learner’s identity (Bandura, 2005; Eccles, 2006). Teachers might place a high value on
professional development, so they participate in as many professional learning opportunities as
possible to fulfill that psychological need (Bandura, 2005; Eccles, 2006; Pintrich, 2003). Utility
value centers on the importance a learner places on an activity with regards to their future goals
(Bandura, 2005; Eccles, 2006). Utility value builds off of attainment value in that it adds
individual professional goals that are in line with the psychological needs of a learner (Eccles,
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 44
2006; Pajares, 2006). Lastly, the perceived cost of engaging in the activity relates to the anxiety,
social, and failure consequences that the learner anticipates when engaging in the activity
(Eccles, 2006; Pajares, 2006; Pintrich, 2003). Every learner associates these negative feelings as
possible consequences of participating in new activities (Bandura, 2005; Eccles, 2006; Pajares,
2006; Pintrich, 2003). This ability to remain positive helps to suppress negative feelings,
offering greater chances for increased motivation and future learning (Bandura, 2005; Eccles,
2006; Pajares, 2006; Pintrich, 2003).
The value of cultural/linguistic empathy professional development. Teachers in the
ATP program were required to meet the organizational goal of 80% student appropriate
placement through 100% participation in their stakeholder program improvement goal. To
accomplish these goals, ATP teachers identified the importance of communication and
collaboration with EL parents and its interrelationship with the student placement process
(Crockett, 2014; Morningstar et al., 2008). Expanding on that construct, teachers should also
understand that their motivation would also increase from extrinsic sources such as education
and (or) training. The researcher concluded that ATP teachers reviewed the value of
professional development opportunities related to cultural/linguistic empathy.
Changing demographics have increased the number of EL students in the educational
system (Chavez et al., 2008; Johnson & Lichter, 2016). The researchers concluded that this
increase has affected the number of EL parents that ATP teachers communicate with in their
IEP/transition planning. Communication and collaboration issues arising between teachers and
parents due to language barriers have demonstrated the need for school district and (or) outside
agency training on cultural and linguistic empathy (Crockett, 2014; Gallimore & Goldenberg,
2001; Morningstar et al., 2008). Teachers should recognize the need for this training and be
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 45
motivated to attend and proactively learn and integrate the new information into their working
and long-term memory (Shraw & Lehman, 2009). Through mastery of the new content, teachers
will experience improved self-efficacy and become intrinsically motivated to transfer what they
have learned in their interactions with EL parents (Eccles, 2006; Pintrich, 2003; Pajares, 2006).
The researcher concluded that this increased motivation to increase their EL parent collaboration
would then become a positive attribute that would lead to motivation to experience more PD and
perpetuate the motivation/learning cycle. This improved teacher motivation helping teachers
increase their cultural empathy awareness would help to increase parent/teacher interactions and
would help teachers to meet their stakeholder goal (Crockett, 2014; Eccles, 2006; Pajares, 2006).
Meeting the stakeholder program improvement goal of 100% teacher participation in improved
parent communication would satisfy EL parents and their need to be treated as equal
stakeholders in the IEP/transition process. Accomplishing this stakeholder goal would help to
ensure that students were placed in their LREs and that the organizational goal of 80%
appropriate student placement was attained.
Table 3 shows the organizational mission, the organizational global goal, the stakeholder
goal, the two assumed motivational influences, and assessments of those motivational influences.

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 46
Table 3

Motivational Influences and Assessments for Motivation Gap Analysis

Organizational Mission
The mission of the Adult Transition Program (ATP) is to empower all individuals with
disabilities with the skills necessary to achieve their full potential in adult living, through
support and collaboration with families, education, and communities.
Organizational Global Goal
ATP’s global goal is that the program will attain appropriate classroom placements for its
students at a rate of 80%.
Stakeholder Goal
By June 2018, 100% of ATP teachers will demonstrate that they are effectively
collaborating with parents in the IEP process to address the concerns of the LUSD
Special Education Department.
Assumed Motivation Influences

Motivational Influence Assessment

Attributions-
Teachers should feel that increased
communication and collaboration with EL
parents during the IEP/transition process is
beneficial for student classroom placement
and academic success.

Interview item:
“Do you feel that collaboration with EL
parents in the IEP/transition process affects
student placement?”

Utility Value (Expectancy Value Theory)-
Teachers need to see the value in
professional development opportunities
focused on cultural and linguistic empathy.
Interview item:
“Would school district provided
professional development in
cultural/linguistic empathy help you to
increase collaboration and communication
with EL parents?”

Organizational Influences
In this section of the literature review, the researcher intends to show the organizational
influences that affect ATP teachers’ ability to achieve their stakeholder goal so that they are in
alignment with the ATP organizational goal. Researchers have stated that organizational
influences affecting stakeholders include the policies, protocols, and procedures that have been
created within an organization that affect stakeholder performance outcomes (Clark & Estes,
2008; Gallimore & Goldenberg, 201l; Schneider, Brief, & Guzzo, 1996). These factors have
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 47
been found to greatly impact stakeholder performance outcomes (Schneider et al., 1996). Clark
and Estes (2008) stated that organizational influences do not work in autonomy and are
integrated with knowledge and motivational influences to affect stakeholder outcomes. The
researchers also discovered that organizational influences were one of the primary catalysts for
the creation of stakeholder knowledge and motivation.
Organizational influences stem from underlying assumptions that were created by an
original leader in the incubation stage of an organizations existence (Buckingham & Coffman,
1999; McGee & Johnson, 2015). McGee and Johnson (2015) stated that these assumptions
become the rules of engagement for stakeholder behavior, relationships, and set the tone for the
cultural norms of every organization. The researchers also concluded that cultural assumptions
have a profound impact on employee perceptions of their value to an organization and their
commitment to fulfilling their obligations with regards to an organization’s mission, values, and
culture. Buckingham and Coffman (1999) went on to stress the value of positive cultural
assumptions and discovered a correlation between positive assumptions and the health of an
organization. The researchers concluded that organizations that were committed to employee
self-worth and proactive to the needs of their stakeholders were more likely to be successful than
those organizations that did not.
Cultural domains. Researchers have stated that an organization’s culture is comprised
of two primary domains, cultural models and cultural settings (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001;
Schein, 2004). Schein (2004) stated that cultural models represent the shared principles and the
rules that govern how organizational stakeholders are to interact with one another. The
researcher also stated that cultural settings build on the idea of the cultural model and takes it one
step further. The researcher argued that cultural settings occur when organizational stakeholders
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 48
understand their cultural model and come together to perform a performance task. An example
of a cultural model would be ATP stakeholders understand the rules governing their school site
and their employment. The cultural setting in ATP would be best observed by watching teachers
and other stakeholders work together to plan and implement IEP’s.
Cultural model influences and ensures a culture of collaboration between school
administration and ATP teachers. Educational environments where teachers and their
administrators trust each other create educational environments that are the most conducive for
student academic success (Chavez et al., 2008; Johnson & Lichter, 2016; Langley et al., 2009;
Lytle & Bordin, 2001; Morningstar et al., 2008; Ruppar & Gaffney, 2011). Morningstar et al.
(2008) stated that when administrators or teachers feel as if their ideas or input are undervalued it
could turn into a combative setting and take attention away from instruction. Morningstar et al.
identified that respectful, professionally accountable relationships between teachers and
administrators could reduce distractions and help educational stakeholders to focus on behaviors
that are contributive to increased student academic outcomes.
The ATP teachers felt as if they were not being supported by their administrators at
appropriate levels. To determine teachers’ levels of trust for ATP administration, they were
given a brief school district survey about their levels of trust with their administrators. Based on
these surveys, the school district discovered that the teachers felt that their administrators were
not valuing their input and were making too many unilateral decisions that were affecting ATP
(M. Garcia, personal communication, January 15, 2018). Through a thorough review of these
teacher surveys, it was determined that ATP teachers’ felt that administrators needed to increase
their collaboration with teachers in the decision-making processes affecting ATP (M. Garcia,
personal communication, January 15, 2018).
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 49
Cultural model influences and creates teacher “buy in” for program improvement.
Researchers have stated that stakeholders are more likely to help an organization reach its goals
when they practice proactive collaboration and work together for the common good of their
institution (Bryan et al., 2007; Cruz & Patterson, 2005; Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001; Greene,
2014; Johnson & Lichter, 2016; Langley et al., 2009). Langley et al. (2009) stated that
collaboration amongst team members increased the number of ideas available and acted as a
social support system that encourages and motivates stakeholders to improve their performance.
Langley et al. concluded that stakeholders who worked collaboratively and believed in the
mission of their organization were happier in their work and closed performance gaps more
quickly than those who did not.
Collaboration between ATP stakeholders and teacher “buy in” to the program
improvement was an important aspect in solving the gap between present organizational
performance and ATP performance goals. LUSD had identified the current glut in parent/teacher
collaboration as a primary catalyst for student inappropriate placement in ATP (M. Garcia,
personal communication, December 15, 2017). The present level of performance for teachers
was lower than school district specifications and needed to be improved to fall in line with the
mandated standards. To help solve this issue, every internal educational stakeholder (including
teachers) would benefit the ATP program improvement by working together to ensure that all
teachers and administrators were effectively collaborating with parents. This teamwork amongst
educators would help stakeholders reach their goal and support ATP in meeting its appropriate
student placement goal.
Cultural setting influences and provides ATP teachers with ample time to
collaborate with EL parents. School district focus on paperwork and administrative deadlines
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 50
have created time constraints for teachers that can create barriers to communication and
collaboration between teachers and EL parents (Bacon & Causton-Theoharis, 2013; Bryan et al.,
2007; Cruz & Patterson, 2005; Davies & Beamish, 2009; Greene, 2014; Johnson & Lichter,
2016; Marchese, 2000; Morningstar et al., 2008). Bacon and Causton-Theoharis (2013) stated
that the time constraints created from administrative professional accountability have put
pressure on teachers to finish their IEP planning with little time to spare in their work days.
Bryan et al. (2007) also stated that due to teachers’ general perception that communication with
EL families is generally a longer process, they believed they were not able to properly give the
time needed to EL parents in the IEP process. Bryan et al. (2007) stated that EL parents felt that
they were not being treated as equal stakeholders in the IEP process and wanted more time to
express their wants and needs for their children. Furthermore, Bryan et al. concluded that
through a supportive school administration that gives teachers ample time during their workday
to appropriately conduct IEP planning, they can boost teacher morale and support cultural
empathetic IEP meetings where all stakeholders feel valued.
This current research supports administrators that give their teachers more time to
conduct culturally empathetic IEP meetings directly affects the LUSD ATP. One of the primary
concerns for teachers was that they felt their administrators were overly focused on professional
accountability and bureaucratic paperwork. In the past, ATP teachers have not felt they have
enough time to devote to IEP planning, and this has led to frustrations between stakeholders.
The teachers have felt as if they were not being supported by their administrators at appropriate
levels and wanted to be given more time in their work day to devote to teacher/parent
collaboration (Morningstar et al., 2008). This frustration created levels of mistrust between
teachers and administrators in ATP and was identified as a catalyst for the current program
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 51
improvement and the organizational performance goal of 80% student appropriate placement in
ATP. Clark and Estes (2008) stated that KMO influences are integrated and affect stakeholders
in all organizations. Clark and Estes concluded that organizational influencers on stakeholder
behavior are rarely inclusive of their knowledge and motivation counter-points.
In Table 4, the organizational mission, organizational goals, stakeholder goals, and the
organizational model/setting influencers are included to portray a focused diagram on the
organizational factors affecting ATP.

Table 4

Organizational Influences and Assessments for Motivation Gap Analysis

Organizational Mission
The mission of the Adult Transition Program (ATP) is to empower all individuals with
disabilities with the skills necessary to achieve their full potential in adult living, through
support and collaboration with families, education, and communities.
Organizational Global Goal
ATP’s global goal is that the program will attain appropriate classroom placements for its
students at a rate of 80%.
Stakeholder Goal
By June 2018, 100% of ATP teachers will demonstrate that they are effectively
collaborating with parents in the IEP process to address the concerns of the LUSD
Special Education Department.
Cultural Model Influence 1:
There needs to be a culture of collaboration
and trust between school district
administration and ATP teachers to achieve
the organizational goal of 80% appropriate
student placement.

Interview questions about whether ATP
teachers trust the LUSD special education
department.

Cultural Model Influence 2:
There needs to be teacher “buy in” to
ensure that all ATP teachers participate in
the program improvement.

Interview questions about ATP teacher’s
interest in participating in the program
improvement on increasing
cultural/linguistic empathy.

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 52
Table 4 (Cont’d.)
Cultural Setting Influence 1:
Teachers need ample non-instruction time
from administration to communicate and
collaborate effectively with EL parents in
IEP/transition planning.
Interview questions on whether ATP
teachers feel that they were given enough
non-instruction time to devote to
IEP/transition meetings.

Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and
Motivation and the Organizational Context
Researchers have stated that a conceptual framework is a model that describes what a
researcher is studying and outlines important factors and variables that can affect the inquiry
process (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam, 2009). Maxwell (2013) discovered that the role of a well
thought out conceptual framework is to defend and rationalize the validity of a study. The
researcher also concluded that the factors expressed in a conceptual framework integrate with
one another and help to guide a researcher in his or her course of study. For this study, the
researcher used the Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational (KMO) Analytic Conceptual
Framework to design the user-driven inquiry. Clark and Estes (2008) stated that understanding
the KMOs of stakeholder behavior enables researchers to understand the catalysts behind the
stakeholders’ present performance. Understanding the KMOs of ATP teachers would support
the researcher in understanding issues that affect parent/teacher communication and
collaboration and were used to develop the conceptual framework. For purposes of clarity, the
stakeholder KMO influences in this study were presented independent of one another; however,
the inquiry illustrated how all three influences work together, which impact the communication
and collaboration between educational stakeholders.
Teachers were identified as the primary stakeholders for the study and were at the center
of the inquiry relating to parent/teacher communication and collaboration and its effects on
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 53
student placement. KMO’s that influenced teacher and parent collaboration focused on
cultural/linguistic differences, school district accountability, and time prioritization issues.
Teachers currently face a changing demographic that affects the way they interact with people
from cultures different from their own (Chavez et al., 2008; Greene, 2014; Johnson & Lichter,
2016). Knowledge influencers that have impacted ATP teachers include EL parents’ lack of
involvement in the IEP process and their frustration that had surfaced due to parent perceptions
that teachers were lacking cultural empathy. The organizational influencers that impacted the
LUSD special education department served as antecedents for trust and teacher “buy in” for the
program improvement by providing teachers with ample time to devote to parent collaboration in
the IEP planning process. Furthermore, motivational influencers that have affected the ATP
teachers include teachers understanding the importance of cultural empathy training and how
increasing communication and collaboration with parents can lead to increases in appropriate
student academic placements. This is important due to findings that state that school district
accountability systems can create time sensitivities which lead to ineffective time prioritizations
that are not conducive to culturally empathetic best practices (Morningstar et al., 2008).
Research also showed that an educational environment where teacher KMOs are not conducive
to healthy communication with parents are more likely to be confrontational and lead to
inappropriate student placements (Gillan & Coughlan, 2010). The relationship between the
KMO’s affecting the stakeholders and the organization are illustrated in Figure A.
Figure A represents the conceptual framework of the unified KMO influences that have
been portrayed in this chapter. In the conceptual framework model, the researcher outlined
specific integrated influences affecting the ATP teachers’ current performance as it was aligned
with the ATP organizational goal. Knowledge and motivation influences were displayed in the
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 54
stakeholder (teachers) orange diagram and were connected by a bi-directional arrow to the
organizational (ATP) influences that were displayed in the blue diagram. Due to the fact that
organizational influences are a primary catalyst for the knowledge and motivational influences
that teachers display, a one-sided arrow was placed linking the stakeholder knowledge and
motivational influences with the ATP stakeholder goal. Lastly, for transparency of the inquiry,
teachers have been separated from the LUSD adult transition program in the figure, due to the
fact that the researcher wanted to separate and focus on KMO influences that are usually
integrated and more ambiguous to the layperson.

Figure A. Conceptual Framework of Parent/Teacher Communication and Collaboration
Teachers
Knowledge Influences
Cultural/Linguistic
Empathy
Lack of Parent
Involvement = Parent
Frustration

Motivation Influences
Attributions:
Increased
Collaboration =
Increased appropriate
placement
Utility Value:
Finding Value In
ATP Program
Organizational
Influences
Culture of
Collaboration
= Trust
Teacher “Buy In” Is
Necessary
Teachers Need
Ample Time To
Conduct IEP
Meetings
Stakeholder Goal
Teachers Being Compliant With
LUSD Placement Goal
 80% ATP Student Appropriate
Placements

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 55
The conceptual framework figure displayed and demonstrated the knowledge influences
affecting ATP teachers need for expressing cultural and linguistic empathy with parents during
the IEP process. The figure also showed how the lack of parental involvement in IEP planning
could lead to confrontational environments that are not conducive to student learning
(Morningstar et al., 2008). As noted in the framework, the motivational influences focus on
teachers understanding that professional development opportunities focused on cultural empathy
coupled with parent collaboration could aid in the increase of appropriate student placement
(Gillan & Coughlan, 2010). The organizational influences displayed include the importance of
building a culture of teacher trust where teachers are given ample time to conduct IEP meetings.
Based on research, school district sanctioned increases in time for parent/teacher collaboration
and communication in the IEP process could act as a catalyst for teacher “buy in” to the school
district sanctioned program improvement (Morningstar et al., 2008). Lastly, the more teachers
who are striving to increase their collaboration with parents could help the ATP program reach
its organizational goal of 80% appropriate student placements by July 2018.
Conclusion
Stakeholder communication and collaboration in the IEP/transition process has had a
profound effect on parent/teacher relationships (Cruz & Patterson, 2005; Davies & Beamish,
2009). Research also showed that a disproportionate percentage of these combative relationships
in the IEP process have involved EL parents and their perceived lack of involvement in the IEP
process (Neece et al., 2009). This, coupled with teacher time constraints have created IEP
planning practices that could be observed by EL parents as inferior and fraught with a lack of
cultural/linguistic empathy (Cruz & Patterson, 2005). Furthermore, the lack of stakeholder
planning in the IEP process has left EL parents with less time to provide input to the IEP team
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 56
about their child’s wants and needs (Work & Stafford, 2013). Parent lack of input has been
shown to correlate with decreased student information at IEP meetings and can have an effect on
appropriate student placements (Crockett, 2014).
Chapter Two of this study presented the key KMO influences that have affected teachers
in the LUSD ATP. The KMOs that were presented acted as both a chapter focus and as an
integral piece of the conceptual framework used in this study. Moving forward, Chapter Three
of this inquiry will target the study’s qualitative approach to user-driven inquiry, as it pertained
to the ATP teacher participation goal in organizational program improvement. Furthermore,
Chapter Three will address stakeholders and lead to the discovery of antecedents relating to the
gap that exists between teachers’ current performance levels and the ATP organizational goal.

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 57
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY

For this study, research was focused on parent/teacher collaboration in the IEP process
and its effects on appropriate student placement. Specifically, the researcher evaluated the
degree to which teachers were participating in program improvement to support the LUSD ATP
of reaching its goal of achieving appropriate placements for its students at a rate of at least 80%.
Teachers in the LUSD ATP represented both the stakeholders and the population of respondents
for the study. In this chapter the researcher will present the research design and the methodology
for the inquiry. This chapter includes a review of the study’s research questions, a description of
the participating stakeholders in the study, the data collection methods employed, data analysis,
credibility and trustworthiness, validity and reliability, the ethical considerations involved, and
will conclude with a section on limitations and delimitations associated with this course of
inquiry.
Research Questions

The questions that guide this study are the following:
1. To what extent are LUSD ATP teachers meeting their goal of being compliant with the
LUSD goal of achieving appropriate placements for its students at a rate of at least 80%
by October 2018?
2. How are the teacher’s knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences of ATP
teachers related to achieving the LUSD organizational goal of achieving appropriate
placements for its students at a rate of at least 80% by October 2018?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 58
Participating Stakeholders
For this study, all of the LUSD ATP special education teachers were the target
stakeholder population of focus. In this population, there were 18 teachers’ total; 12 of the
teachers are female and six of the teachers were male. All of the teachers in this population were
Caucasian, with one teacher from each sex being bilingual.
Criteria for the sample selection were that they should currently be an ATP teacher, have
school district tenure, and hold a California Clear teaching credential. It was necessary for ATP
teachers currently involved in the ATP program to be selected due to the fact that these teachers
were the internal stakeholders with the closest relationships to parents in the ATP IEP process.
The researcher included holding school district tenure and a clear teaching credential as criteria
in the interest of ensuring that participants have engaged in the necessary IEP/transition
experience as it relates to parent communication and collaboration. Based on the selected
criteria, the entire ACT teacher population of 18 teachers met the standards to become
participants (the sample) in the study.
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Criterion 1. The first sampling criterion was that the participants are ATP teachers at
LUSD. These teachers were the internal stakeholders who had a direct effect on ATP reaching
its organizational goal. Furthermore, the teachers were also the school district’s internal
stakeholders with the highest levels of knowledge and experience in dealing with parents in the
IEP/transition planning process. Due to this fact, they provided a vast degree of knowledge
about the communication and collaboration they exhibit with both EL and non-EL parents.
Criterion 2. The second criterion was that ATP teachers must hold LUSD tenure. In
California it takes two years to earn tenure in any specific public school district. The researcher
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 59
selected this criterion due to the fact that it ensured that the teachers selected for the sample have
at least two years of experience interacting with parents in an IEP setting.
Criterion 3. The third criterion for sample selection was that ATP teachers selected to
participate held a Clear teaching credential. Generally, it takes a teacher in in this state two to
five years of teaching before they can earn a clear credential. Similar to the tenure criterion, this
benchmark would serve to ensure that teachers chosen to participate in the study had been
teaching and holding IEP meetings for at least two to five years.
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
The sampling strategy the researcher employed was a non-random selection of
participants for the study. The participant selection was very concrete giving the researcher a
focused teacher population in which to conduct user-driven inquiry. Based on the three criteria
for the inquiry, the researcher concluded that the participants involved would be the teachers in
the LUSD ATP. The researcher recruited this population for the inquiry by asking each of the 18
ATP teachers if they would become a participant in the interview process. When teachers agreed
to be participants in the study, they were asked to sign an informed consent form (Appendix A),
which disclosed the purpose of the study to the participants, inquiry procedures, potential risks
and discomforts, and potential benefits to the participant and (or) society. This informed consent
form also notified participants that their answers would remain confidential and that they could
quit participation in the study at any time.
The non-random sampling of this study was conducted in a purpose-convenience style,
which is a very common model for qualitative research (Fink, 2013; Johnson & Christensen,
2015). Researchers stated that purposeful-convenience sampling is non-probabilistic in that it
looks for what occurs in a specific cultural location through interactions with participants who
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 60
have specific characteristics and are natural to that setting (Johnson & Christensen, 2015;
Maxwell, 2013; Merriam, 2009). The purpose-convenience model was appropriate for this
inquiry due to the fact that the researcher would aspire to discover the issues of central
importance from the 18 ATP teachers (the sample) and their effects on both the stakeholder and
organizational goals (Merriam, 2009).
The population for this study was census driven, in that all 18 members of the ATP
teaching staff were sought out as participants. The 18 ATP teachers who made up the proposed
population of the sample were appropriate for the qualitative inquiry due to the fact that the
sample size would allow for potential non-participation from some participants. The census
driven sample also protected the study by ensuring that there are enough participants to ensure
that appropriate amounts of data were gathered to align with the conceptual framework and the
research questions guiding this inquiry. Through non-probable sampling, the researcher was able
to gain insight from a relatively small group of teachers, through a longer and more detailed
qualitative inquiry process. As a result of this relatively small sample, the researcher was able to
conduct a detailed inquiry and gain a focused view of the KMO influences affecting ATP
teachers in meeting their goal of 100% participation in the organization’s program improvement.
Understanding these KMOs would enable the researcher to discover stakeholder behavior
antecedents and their conceivable effects on ATP’s organizational goal of achieving appropriate
placements for its students at a rate of at least 80% by October 2018.
Data Collection and Instrumentation
For this qualitative study, the researcher chose to use interviews as the primary source of
data collection. The researcher attempted to conduct one-time interviews with the 18 teachers in
the LUSD ATP, which also served as the site where the interviews were conducted. The
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 61
interviews were conducted at the LUSD ATP and were formal in nature and semi-structured.
Through this formal and semi-structured approach, each respondent was asked the same series of
12 open-ended questions (Appendix B). However, all questions were used flexibly and employed
probing questions to gain richer descriptions to respondents’ individual interview responses.
A secondary source of data collection was a review of documents pertaining to the
inquiry. The researcher reviewed public documents that were relevant to the study and could be
used to help support the data collected from the ATP stakeholder interviews. Public documents
included any item released by the school district that had a bearing on the ATP program
improvement process. The public documents would consist of school district emails and
memorandums that express the school district’s perceptions, opinions, and feelings leading up to
and during the ATP program improvement.
Interviews
The researcher sought out the participation of all 18 ATP teachers (the researcher’s co-
workers) to participate in interviews focusing on their relationships with parents. First, the
researcher gained permission from the school site administrator to conduct interviews on the
school property. Second, the researcher recruited each member of the population by asking them
in a face-to-face manner, understanding that some teachers would refuse to participate in the
study for various reasons. Lastly, after the sample size was determined, the researcher conducted
interviews with all of the ATP teachers who gave their consent. Questions sought to understand
teacher KMOs that affected their communication and collaboration with parents. Data
accumulated from the interviews gave the researcher a better picture of the attitudes, practices,
and concerns ATP teachers possessed that influenced their interactions with parents and other
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 62
stakeholders in the IEP process. Furthermore, the interview questions also sought to confirm if
teachers were fully participating in their stakeholder goal as it relates to the goal of ATP.
Interviews were conducted in-person at the ATP school site. The researcher asked each
respondent a list of 12 questions; however, the transitions and types of probing questions were
individualized per the respondent and or responses. Preceding the interview, the researcher
informed each respondent that his or her responses would be voice recorded with their consent,
kept confidential, and that they could skip questions or opt-out entirely at any time. Once the
interview began, the 12 open-ended questions took no longer than 45 minutes to one hour to
complete, and according to Maxwell (2013) should yield informative data relating to the subject
of inquiry.
Questions involved with this inquiry related to ATP teachers’ knowledge, motivation,
and organizational factors with regards to their stakeholder goal of 100% participation in the
current ATP program improvement. Questions enabled the researcher to gain a better
understanding of the factors involved with parent/teacher communication and collaboration and
its effect on student placement. Through this understanding, the goal of the researcher was to
discover antecedents, techniques, and other actions that would ultimately benefit ATP and
support the organization to attain its goal of 80% student appropriate placement by October
2018.
Documents and Artifacts
The second approach for data collection was the review of documents relating to the
LUSD ATP program improvement. This method of data collection enabled the researcher to
increase qualitative support by adding to the knowledge base about the history and background
affecting this organization. For the inquiry, the researcher collected public documents relating to
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 63
the special education department’s study on ATP student placement. Public documents included
memos relating to the inquiry the special education department sent out to teachers relating to the
school district’s internal study. The documents were convenient for the researcher to collect, as
they were available online or on file at the ATP district office. School district public documents
collected for this methodology according to Bogdan and Biklin (2007) would continue to
enhance the validity and reliability of this inquiry by displaying genuine first and second-hand
accounts of the school district’s perceptions of the inquiry.
Explanation for Choices
Due to the small population of the participation sample, the researcher concluded that
interviews and the review of documents would be the most effective tools for gaining an in-depth
understanding of ATP teachers’ thought processes. The researcher discovered that of the
methods of data collection, that interviews would serve as the most flexible, allowing for
alterations and further probing, should the need arise. The researcher also concluded that
interviews would provide the inquiry with the most honest and personal answers from the
participants. Document collection was chosen as a secondary means of gathering data due to the
fact that public communications provide a clear synopsis of the issues facing ATP and genuine
first-person reflections of school district policies and protocols. The documents gave the
researcher background information about the problem of practice and were used to gauge the
authenticity of interview responses.
Data Analysis
For the eight qualitative interviews, the data analysis began during data collection. The
researcher wrote analytic memos during and after each interview. The researcher documented
thoughts, concerns, and initial conclusions about the data in relation to the conceptual framework
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 64
and research questions. The analytic memos enabled the researcher to reflect on important
themes and served as an important information source to draw from during the coding process.
Once the researcher left the field, interviews were transcribed using Rev software. In the first
phase of analysis, the researcher used open coding, looking for empirical codes and applying
priori codes from the conceptual framework. During the second phase of analysis, empirical and
a priori codes were assembled into axial codes to gain a deeper understanding of the
respondents’ responses. During the open and axial coding phases of analysis, the researcher
employed a codebook that contained all of the codes and their frequencies. In the third phase of
data analysis, the researcher identified themes that emerged in relation to the conceptual
framework and study questions. Lastly, the researcher analyzed documents and artifacts for
evidence consistent with the concepts in the conceptual framework. Through the analysis of
both the qualitative interviews and document analysis, the researcher was able to conceptualize
results from the data. These results were further scrutinized by the researcher resulting in
inferences that would develop into the findings for the inquiry.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
For this study, the researcher conducted a non-probable selection process for the teacher
participants involved in the inquiry. This proposed respondent population consisted of the 18
teachers in the LUSD ATP, however only eight teachers participated in the interview process.
These teachers that comprised the stakeholder group in the current ATP program improvement
program were responsible for the implementation and success of the LUSD organizational goal
relating to appropriate student placement. Since the population of the study consisted only of
ATP teachers, it helped to ensure that the participants possessed the appropriate knowledge to
adequately answer the interview protocol. The purposeful-convenience model for conducting the
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 65
interviews enabled the researcher to not only gather reasonable amounts of information, but also
increased the quality of the data gathered from responses.
Merriam (2009) stated that through thorough development of a study’s interview
protocol, a set of interview questions can be developed that elicit genuine responses and
construct more reliable data. Prior to the study, the researcher, several writing advisors, and
professors had reviewed the interview protocol. This scrutiny of the interview questions ensured
that the questions were focused, clear, and were in alignment with the inquiry’s conceptual
framework. The protocol review process also ensured that all participant responses answer the
KMO assumed influences involved with this study.
In the beginning of this inquiry, the researcher held a bias against parents during tenuous
situations with fellow teachers. To counter this bias, the researcher understood that he had an
ethical duty to the respondents in his study to abide as a non-biased interviewer. The researcher
ensured this non-biased approach by developing questions that were neutral in nature so they
would elicit natural feedback and probing would seek to clarify responses, rather than guide
them. Through respect for the interview protocol and an unbiased approach to the interview
process, the researcher held credible interviews that instilled trust in his findings amongst his
respondents, professors, and the academic community.
Validity and Reliability
The proposed population for this study was the entire teaching staff at the LUSD ATP.
This population consisted of 18 teachers who were requested by the researcher to participate in
the 12-question interview pertaining to the study. The goal of this study was to obtain 100%
participation from this group, however the researcher understood that for many reasons such as,
scheduling conflicts, uneasiness, or lack of time, several of the potential respondents presumably
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 66
would not participate. Merriam (2009) stated that the goal of the researcher is to attain the
highest possible response rate by being respectful, ethical, open, honest and willing to cater to
the time and scheduling needs of his participants. Potential respondents were notified that their
participation was voluntary and they could skip questions or choose to not participate. The
researcher stated that a level of trust created more comfortable and open discussion during the
interviews, creating what Creswell (2003) concluded to be more genuine and honest responses
from the respondents. The proactive steps ensured that there was a high level of trust amongst
the potential respondents which enabled the researcher to conduct as many qualitative interviews
as possible. Higher numbers of interviews would enable the researcher to increase the amount of
collected data, which correlated into higher numbers of ideas and (or) solutions to help the ATP
organization reach its student placement goal. Maxwell (2013) concluded that this inquiry could
also serve the academic community by furthering the research base on this particular subject and
potentially be used as data to advance even further studies on this subject.
Ethics
For this study, the researcher conducted a census interview of eight teachers in the LUSD
Adult Transition Program (ATP). Merriam (2009) stated that due to the fact that human subjects
were the stakeholders in this study and were the focus of the methodology, there were many
steps taken to ensure that the study was conducted in a respectful and ethical manner. In this
section, the researcher will discuss the actions taken that ensured ethical treatment of his study
participants.
The researcher understood that he was obligated to treat each one of the participants in
the study with beneficence, confidentiality, social justice, and privacy (Glesne, 2011; Rubin &
Rubin, 2012). The researcher would accomplish this through a series of steps to ensure these
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 67
four domains were adhered to. First, the supervisor of the ATP organization signed a written
consent document, allowing the researcher to conduct the interviews of the respondents on the
grounds of the ATP organization. Second, the researcher asked each of the 18 teachers
(colleagues) to sign informed consent forms. The participants were ensured that their
participation in the study was completely voluntary and that they could completely opt-out or
skip questions at any time (Glesne, 2011; Krueger & Casey, 2009; Merriam, 2002). Informed
consent ensured the participants that their voice recordings during interviews, their identity, and
any written notes pertaining to their interviews would be kept confidential and stored in a locked
cabinet in the researcher’s office (Merriam, 2002; Rubin & Rubin, 2012). Lastly, the
respondents were informed that at the conclusion of the data analysis/synthesis process, the voice
recordings and any notes pertaining to their interviews would be destroyed.
Due to the fact that the researcher worked in a non-supervisory teaching role in the ATP
organization, he held a valued stake in the results of the inquiry. The researcher’s role within the
organization showed that the researcher was responsible for maintaining the most professional
standards for inquiry, due to his working relationship with the respondents (co-workers). In
understanding the ethical duties to the study’s respondents, the researcher felt that the close
relationship with the participants would bolster their confidence in both the researcher and the
inquiry. Open and honest interviews served as a catalyst for quality data collection that could be
used to support teachers and other internal stakeholders in their future communication and
collaboration with parents in the IEP process. This information could also assist the ATP
organization during its program improvement process so they may meet the organizational goal
of 80% appropriate student placement by October 2018.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 68
Based on past work history the researcher understood that according to Merriam (2002),
the researcher holds teacher biases which could have affected the outcome of the study. The
primary bias he recognized was the tendency to side with teachers over parents during
altercations involving IEP communication and collaboration. To keep this favoritism from
interfering with the inquiry process, the researcher recognized the importance of assuming what
Merriam termed a non-biased interviewer and researcher role during the entire course of inquiry.
Through frequent formative reflections on biases that might exist during the inquiry process, the
researcher continually increased his mindfulness and reduced teacher bias during the course of
the study. The un-biased approach ensured that the participant responses to the interview
questions were uninfluenced by the researcher (Rubin & Rubin, 2012). Merriam concluded that
the researcher’s genuine knowledge gained through the interview, analysis, and synthesis
processes would produce findings that are valid and reliable.
Limitations and Delimitations
The researcher identified limitations and delimitations that could affect the inquiry.
Limitations involved with this study revolve around the respondent’s honesty to the interview
protocol. The population for the study was comprised of the eight special education teachers in
the LUSD ATP. The teachers were the researcher’s colleagues and it was understood that their
relationship with the researcher could have had an impact on their responses to the interview
questions. Even though all of the respondents were assured that their responses would remain
anonymous, they may have been reluctant to answer certain questions truthfully, out of fear of
possible retaliation from school district administration. It was also possible that respondents
could have altered their responses if they felt that a genuine response might lead to negative
judgment from the interviewer.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 69
Delimitations that may be associated with this study were that the interviews were not
being triangulated by surveys and (or) observations. Although these two methodologies were
evaluated for the inquiry, the researcher chose to not include them as part of the data collection
process. Observations were not chosen because they would interrupt and deter honest
conversation between teachers and parents at IEP meetings. Surveys were not chosen due to the
fact that although they might elicit easily attainable information, they would lack the personal
characteristics and flexibility associated with interviews.
The other primary delimitation of the study was that of all the stakeholder groups
involved in the IEP process, only teachers were interviewed. The researcher understood that
other stakeholders may have added certain perspectives to the study; however, the context of this
inquiry was based on teacher attitudes and viewpoints regarding their communication and
collaboration with parents in the IEP process. ATP teacher knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences were the primary focus of this study and aligned the interview
methodology with the study’s conceptual framework. Understanding teacher attitudes also
added to the knowledge base on this subject and should promote other researchers to examine the
IEP communication dynamic from other stakeholder points of view.

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 70
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
The purpose of the study was to evaluate the degree to which teachers have participated
in program improvement to support the LUSD ATP in reaching its goal of achieving appropriate
placements for its students at a rate of at least 80%. Many stakeholder groups were identified
that play a part in the ATP program, however teachers were identified as the primary
stakeholders who have the most significant impact in ATP reaching its organizational goal. The
stakeholder goal directed at ATP teaching staff was the primary vehicle in the attainment of the
organizational goal. The ATP stakeholder goal consisted of 100% participation by the ATP
teaching staff to effectively collaborate with parents in the IEP process by June 2018. The
stakeholder goal would serve as the primary school district vehicle to address the concerns of the
LUSD special education department. Meeting this goal is important due to the fact that
increased levels of parent/teacher communication have been shown to correlate with higher
levels of appropriate student academic placements.
During the data collection process, the researcher focused on two qualitative methods of
research to determine the KMO aspects that impact ATP teacher participation toward meeting
their stakeholder goal. The researcher employed ATP teacher interviews as the primary source
of data collection in order to gain a first-hand understanding of the factors affecting teachers’
abilities in reaching their stakeholder goal. Document analysis was also undertaken by the
researcher to help support the qualitative data gained through the interview protocol.
The questions that guided this study were the following:
1. To what extent are LUSD ATP teachers meeting their goal of being compliant with the
LUSD goal of achieving appropriate placements for its students at a rate of at least 80%
by October 2018?
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 71
2. How are the teacher’s knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences of ATP
teachers related to achieving the LUSD organizational goal of achieving appropriate
placements for its students at a rate of at least 80% by October 2018?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?
Participating Stakeholders
The participating stakeholder group for this study were the special education teachers in
the LUSD ATP. All of the teachers who participated met the interview criterion discussed in
Chapter Three. The criterion consisted of the following: (a) each participant had to be a teacher
in the LUSD ATP, (b) possess a state clear teaching credential, and (c) hold state tenure. These
three criteria would help to ensure that each participant had served enough time in their
profession as special educators. The aforementioned criteria served to ensure that the
stakeholders had been exposed to parent/teacher communication and collaboration experiences in
a significant number of IEP meetings. The participation selection process would ensure that
each stakeholder participant possessed the appropriate amount of IEP experience to give open,
honest, and credible responses.
The targeted population for the qualitative interviews consisted of the 18 teachers in the
LUSD ATP. All teachers were approached and asked for their participation by the researcher;
however, only eight of the teachers were able to participate in the interview process. Seven of
the potential respondents declined to participate for personal reasons. Three of the other teachers
could not participate due to the fact that both they and the researcher could not find a mutually
agreeable time to take part in the interviews.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 72
Interviews employed a semi-structured approach and consisted of 12 open-ended
questions that were voice recorded. The interview protocol included prompts that were utilized
by the researcher on an individualized basis and were employed to expand on participant
responses. After completing the interviews, the researcher began the transcription and data
organization process. For transcription services, the researcher uploaded the voice recordings to
Rev.com, which was followed by organization, analysis, and synthesis of the data. The
researcher organized the knowledge, motivation, and organizational themes stemming from
collected data, using hand-made computer files.
Table 5 provides demographic information of the eight interview respondents. To protect
the confidentiality of the interview respondents, pseudonyms have been used and specific
identifying characteristics have been omitted.

Table 5
Qualitative Participants
Participants Gender
Years of
Experience
LUSD
Tenure
State Clear
Credential Bilingual
Dan

Male 25 Yes Yes No
Libby

Female 15 Yes Yes No
Marty

Male 10 Yes Yes No
James

Male 4 Yes Yes Yes
Lucy

Female 20 Yes Yes No
Michael

Male 11 Yes Yes No
Jamie

Female 23 Yes Yes No
Matthew

Male 18 Yes Yes No
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 73
Findings
The findings of the study were based on the Clark and Estes’ (2008) knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences that have been fully integrated into the conceptual
framework of this inquiry. Through qualitative data analysis, in the form of interviews coupled
with document analysis, the researcher connected the findings to the primary research questions
guiding this inquiry. Guided by the research questions, the raw data collected was analyzed and
connections to the inquiry’s conceptual framework were identified. The qualitative analysis
discussed how the KMO influences affect ATP teachers’ abilities to communicate and
collaborate with parents during the IEP process. The analyzed data also determined KMO gaps
that can be addressed to ensure that both the stakeholders and the organization can meet the
program improvement goals.
Research Question 1 (Stakeholder Knowledge and Motivation)
To what extent are LUSD ATP teachers meeting their goal of being compliant with the
LUSD goal of achieving appropriate placements for its students at a rate of at least 80% by
October 2018?
Knowledge results and findings. Clark and Estes (2008) stated that the recognition of
the wisdom one has acquired is recognized as knowledge. During this qualitative inquiry, the
researcher sought to identify the knowledge elements that had an impact on the interview
respondents. The eight ATP teachers who were interviewed, responded to several questions that
furnished the inquiry with data relating to their awareness of issues impacting their profession.
Their responses to the interview questions also supplied the researcher with evidence pertaining
to the ATP stakeholder goal. The stakeholder knowledge identified from the interviews became
an important aspect of the data collected during the qualitative process.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 74
Stakeholder knowledge is important to identify because it gives researchers insight into
what stakeholders know and what the organization wants them to understand (Clark & Estes,
2008). After reviewing the data, two themes came to light that impacted the gaps in knowledge
affecting ATP teachers during the IEP process. The first knowledge gap that impacted the
teachers is their understanding of cultural and linguistic empathy as it relates to the IEP
proceedings. The second gap identified was ATP teacher understanding of the relationships
between parent IEP participation and their levels of satisfaction or frustration with the process.
Cultural/linguistic empathy. During the interview process, only two out of the eight
respondents showed empathy for people from cultural/linguistic groups that were different from
their own. These two respondents specifically gave positive answers when asked about their
perceptions of communicating and collaborating with EL parents during the IEP process. Of
these two respondents, one was bilingual and the other was an English only speaker. The
bilingual teacher named James did not perceive EL meetings in a negative light due to the fact
that he did not require a translator, thus decreasing the time relay associated with verbal
reconstruction. The other respondent named Lucy, who viewed EL IEP meetings in a positive
light, saw working with these parents as a part of the job as a special educator.
The two respondents however, did hold unfavorable perceptions about a Hispanic special
education advocacy group of parents in LUSD. The two respondents also displayed their
negative feelings about past interactions they have had with parents from this organization.
Matthew stated that, “This group was not helping students, but acting as a hindrance to
productive IEP meetings.” Jamie disclosed that, “These parents came into the meetings with a
chip on their shoulder.” In both of these interviews, the two respondents discussed how
combative parents from this organization were during IEP meetings. When prompted to expand
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 75
on their answer by the researcher, both teachers displayed empathy for EL parents’ situations and
discussed how hard it must be for them to communicate with English only speakers during IEP
meetings. The two teachers also felt that these parents must have had negative feelings about the
IEP process due to negative experiences in prior IEP meetings.
Six of the eight participants in the study displayed negative perceptions about working
with EL parents during the IEP process. The general theme from these respondents was that they
believed parent/teacher communication was important to the IEP process; however, each of the
eight respondents applied communication with varying levels of rigor within their own IEP
meetings. Matthew disclosed that, “I do not enjoy conducting IEP meetings with EL parents
because I believe that those meetings would take longer than those meetings with English
speaking parents.” One hundred percent of these respondents told the researcher that IEP
meetings with EL parents took twice the time of similar meetings conducted with English
speaking parents. Lucy stated that, “these meetings with EL parents were a time drain that took
away from other important facets of the students’ instructional day.” Marty concluded that, “It is
not my job to speak a foreign language and that these EL parent should learn English.” The
participants disclosed to the researcher that EL IEP meetings generally took somewhere between
two and a half hours, whereas IEP meetings with English speakers took between 60 to 90
minutes. The six teachers all stated that there is not enough time to be empathetic to cultural and
linguistic differences because there was simply not enough time in the work day to both
accommodate the needs of these parents and deliver appropriate levels of instruction to their
students.
The six teachers all held negative perceptions of the Hispanic advocacy group whose
initial complaint sparked the LUSD ATP program improvement. All six of these respondents
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 76
felt that conducting IEP meetings with members of this organization were unpleasant. They said
that these EL parent meetings were long and that they generally came to the meetings in a
combative mood. They all held perceptions that working with this group of parents in the IEP
process would be overly time consuming and get in the way of other aspects of their teaching
positions. Jamie concluded that, “The advocacy group gets in the way of our IEP meetings and
hinders student academic progress.”
Parent/teacher perceptions. During the interviews, the researcher identified another
knowledge theme based on both parent and teacher perceptions of IEP involvement. All of the
eight ATP teachers stated in their responses that they were aware of IEP related frustrations on
the part of some of their parents. Based on the participant responses, the researcher determined
that ATP teachers were aware of parent frustrations and their responses pointed towards their EL
parents. Libby stated that, “I understand how frustrating it must be for these parents to
understand the technical jargon associated with these meetings.” James said, “I can only imagine
putting myself in their shoes.” These responses demonstrated that linguistic differences were the
culprit of most, if not all of the cases where parents have been frustrated with the IEP process.
Several teachers went on to say that linguistic differences caused this frustration because it both
slowed and (or) skewed the perceptions of those EL parents with regards to the IEP process.
These participant responses showed that all of the teachers who were interviewed
understood that linguistic differences between themselves and the parents had become a barrier
to clear communication. This barrier forced many of the respondents to cut these parents out of
the process or limit their participation in the hopes of saving time. In addition, four of the
participants believed that the time savings they had hoped to establish seemed to have created
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 77
negative EL parent feelings. The parents perceived that their input was not being valued and that
they were not being viewed as equal stakeholders in the IEP planning process.
Another barrier associated with these linguistic differences were teacher perceptions that
IEP meetings with EL parents increased their levels of stress. Six of the eight respondents stated
that their negative views of EL IEP meetings were based on the prior knowledge they possessed
about combative parents. James mentioned that, “I hold negative perceptions of these meetings
because so many of them have gone bad in the past.” This prior knowledge led these teachers to
anticipate similar negative feelings and led to anxiety about working with EL parents. The six
respondents that had these negative feelings about working with EL parents all stated that their
levels of increased stress further hindered their levels of communication and collaboration with
EL parents in the IEP process. Lucy concluded that, “I know that I should be involving EL
parents more in the IEP process, but I feel that their combative stance would get in the way of
true and relevant discourse amongst the IEP team.”
Motivation results and findings. Clark and Estes (2008) stated that stakeholder
motivation are the intrinsic values, attitudes, and beliefs one holds that inspire them to reach their
goals. The stakeholder respondents who participated in this qualitative inquiry gave the
researcher data about motivational influences affecting their job performance. The data also
showed their self-concepts as they pertain to the motives behind them reaching their stakeholder
goal. The two primary themes affecting motivational influence gaps were attributions and utility
value.
Attributions affecting stakeholder motivation involve ATP teachers’ current beliefs based
on what they have learned from past events and activities. The researcher identified motivational
gaps related to what they have learned in the past relating to parent collaboration and its effects
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 78
on student placement. Expanding on this motivational concept, are the motivational influences
relating to stakeholder accountability and utility value. Participants answered interview
questions and exposed how their past interactions at IEP meetings have created their current
perceptions and motivations about understanding cultural and linguistic differences. A major
element of the stakeholder utility value that was identified was the expectancy value theory
behind participant perceptions of cultural empathy. Through the inquiry process, the researcher
was able to attain data on participant experiences that had affected their attitudes towards
building rapport with EL parents in the IEP process.
Attributions. During the course of the interviews, the researcher collected data on the
attributions affecting stakeholder motivation. Through analysis of the data, the researcher
identified a common theme among all of the respondents pertaining to their prior knowledge of
student placement. One hundred percent of the respondents stated that they understood there
was a correlation between teacher/parent collaboration and appropriate student academic
placement. All of these respondents understood the theory behind this, however most did not
seem to be motivated by this academic construct. Each one of the respondents mentioned that
they wanted their students to be appropriately placed in their least restrictive environment,
however, they felt as if proactively acting upon this theory would increase their workload and
would require more of their time in any given workday. Dan said, “I simply don’t have the time
to handle this work.” All eight of the interview respondents concluded that the sole reason they
were currently focused on parent collaboration and student placement was due to the LUSD
scrutiny of student placements that had created the ongoing program improvement for ATP.
Matthew said that, “This school scrutiny of student academic placement had become a hindrance
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 79
to providing appropriate amounts of functional academics, which could have a negative effect on
student placement.”
Utility value. The other primary theme of the qualitative interviews was the motivational
gaps affecting ATP teacher understanding of professional development and cultural empathy.
Every one of the ATP teachers who were interviewed stated they had not participated in a
professional development opportunity that was focused on cultural/linguistic empathy. Several
of the teachers who were interviewed stated that by not being exposed to this type of training,
teachers district-wide were missing out on the opportunity to build their communicative and
collaborative skill-sets. All eight of the inquiry respondents believed that they would benefit
from a cultural training and that it may help them to better understand the differences that
currently exist between themselves and the EL parents they interact with. Libby expanded on
this when she declared that, “Teachers would definitely attend cultural empathy training if it
were to be offered by the school district.” James said that, “Teachers who were not exposed to a
proactive training program were subject to cultural perceptions that they had developed based on
past events.” Jamie disclosed that, “These past events more than likely involved negative
occurrences that could have been integrated into ATP teacher EL perceptions.” The teachers all
concluded that this was a missed opportunity to reteach educators about best practices pertaining
to communication and collaboration with EL parents in the IEP process. Through these
responses, it was apparent that teachers who were interviewed believed that LUSD had missed
an organizational opportunity to expand on the cultural skill-sets that help to motivate educators.

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 80
Research Question 2 (Interaction between Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational
Influences)
How are the teacher’s knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences of ATP
teachers related to achieving the LUSD organizational goal of achieving appropriate placements
for its students at a rate of at least 80% by October 2018?
Organizational results and findings. Clark and Estes (2008) identified organizational
influences as the programs, policies, and protocols that guide cultural models and settings and
influence stakeholder’s activities and interactions. In this study, the researcher imbedded
questions dedicated to gaining responses about organizational influences that affect the ATP
teachers. The eight teachers who participated in the interview process provided clear answers to
the organizational influenced questions. The inquiry also provided the study with data related to
how LUSD treats, supports, and collaborates with them as educators.
Through focused questions and personal prompting, the researcher was able to gain data
about the organizational influences that relate to how LUSD and the ATP teachers interact with
one another. From these interviews, the researcher identified organizational influences affecting
the views of the respondents of this study. These influences focused on teacher mistrust,
building teacher trust, increasing teacher participation in decision-making processes, the
importance of collaboration, teacher time constraints, increasing time devoted to parent/teacher
communication, and student academic placement. The results supported the researcher in
determining what levels of guidance and cooperation the LUSD administration implements to aid
ATP teachers in reaching their stakeholder goals of 100% teacher participation in the ATP
program improvement. This stakeholder participation is crucial for the ATP in reaching its
school district imposed goal of 80% student appropriate placements by October 2018.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 81
Teacher mistrust. Interview respondents gave responses that led the researcher to focus
on the subject of teacher “buy in” for the current ATP program improvement. Every one of the
eight interview respondents displayed mistrust for LUSD and how it went about creating the
program improvement model. The respondents understood that the EL parent advocacy group
had complained about EL parent interaction during the IEP process. What they did not
understand was how the school district came up with their current student appropriate placement
baseline of 50%.
All eight of the respondents were suspicious of the antecedents behind the program
improvement model and the methodologies the school district employed to come up with their
findings. The respondents knew that the EL parent advocacy group had complained and
threatened the school district with a lawsuit if LUSD did not proactively try to remediate their
grievance. Libby said, “I saw this threat and the ensuing school district inquiry as merely a
monetary matter.” The respondents all believed the only reason the school district acted was due
to the possible threat of litigious action by the advocacy group which might have led to the
school district losing money. None of the respondents felt that the school district genuinely
cared about this matter but they were scared of losing money and possible bad press associated
with getting sued.
All eight of the respondents also had negative feelings about how the school district
carried out their expedited inquiry. They believed that the time spent by the school district
looking into the matter had been expedited and that they were never included in any of the
protocols used to collect data. James disclosed that, “He believed that this non-participatory bias
skewed the findings and created credibility issues with the results.” These results showed that
approximately 50% of the students in ATP were currently inappropriately placed and were not in
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 82
their least restrictive environments. Every one of the teachers concluded that there was no way
the district could have identified this number and viewed it as arbitrary.
Lastly, all eight of the respondents disclosed that they were only participating in the
program improvement due to the fact that if they did not, they would be subject to increased
school district audits. This threat drove them to increase their parent/teacher communication
because none of them wanted school district administration to further encroach on their jobs as
educators. They all felt that less school district involvement in their daily work lives was a good
thing. James said, “The real catalyst for increasing parent/teacher communication was the school
district threat.” Conversely, these respondents believed that too much school district interaction
would take away from their roles as teachers and would disturb student learning. Michael
concluded that, “I don’t want them interfering with my classroom as it will negatively affect my
students’ routine.” The overwhelmingly negative views of the respondents toward the reliability
and validity of the internal inquiry lead the researcher to conclude that teacher “buy in” to the
ATP program improvement existed, however, their participation was not genuine and hinged on
suspicion of the school districts motives.
Building trust. During the interviews, several of the questions yielded responses
pertaining to the trust the respondents possessed for their LUSD administrators. One hundred
percent of the respondents stated that LUSD administrators have never involved them in the
decision-making process. More specifically, all eight of the respondents divulged that there is a
clear lack of collaboration between school district administration and teachers in ATP. Marty
stated, “The school district should enact measures that involve all internal stakeholders in the
decision-making process.” Lucy expanded on this by declaring that, “The school district should
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 83
develop a culture of collaboration pertaining to decisions that have a direct affect on their roles
as special educators in LUSD.”
All eight of the interview respondents informed the researcher that this lack of
collaboration with school district administration had affected the levels of confidence that ATP
teachers held for school administration. In response to a direct question prompt from the
researcher, 100% of the respondents stated that their levels of trust with school district
administration were very low. Several of the interview respondents expanded on this by stating
that they held resentment towards school administration. Michael said, “I just don’t deal with
administration anymore as I don’t feel they care a thing about me.” Michael went on to say that,
“This was due to their perception that those administrators who were the policy makers were
creating binding directives without understanding the true consequences of their decisions.” Six
of the respondents went on to conclude that they were incensed about taking orders from
administrators who had never been educators in a special education class. They believed that
this lack of experience created a gap in their knowledge about the realities affecting special
education and the IEP process.
Stakeholder participation. Several interview questions dealt with respondent perceptions
of the LUSD authorized ATP program improvement. This program was in effect during the time
of the interviews and served as a catalyst for respondent responses with regards to their levels of
participation. All of the eight respondents understood that they were being held professionally
accountable to the LUSD special education department for increasing their levels of
communication and collaboration with parents during the IEP process. Half of the respondents
were unclear how increasing communication levels with parents would correlate with an increase
in appropriate student academic placements. The other half of the respondents concluded that
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 84
they believed that increasing levels of communication and collaboration with parents in the IEP
process would yield a higher percentage of appropriate student placements.
All eight of the ATP teachers who were interviewed said that they were aware of the
subtle threat of a school district led audit of the ATP program if the organization did not reach its
goal of 80% student appropriate placements by October 2018. Of these eight participants, six of
them stated that the school district was just undertaking this program improvement model to
placate the Hispanic advocacy group whose complaints had sparked the initial student placement
investigation. All of the interview participants declared that the major antecedent to their
program improvement participation was due to the fact that these new directives included a
subtle threat if the organizational goal was not met. Lucy said, “I believe the negative
reinforcement the school district is exhibiting is not constructive.” She went on to say, “If
administration just worked with us, and explained their actions, the level of teacher trust would
increase.”
Culture of collaboration. During the interviews, all eight of the respondents viewed
their interactions with school district administration with a negative light. When asked about
their collaboration with administration, all of the respondents stated that there was virtually none
to speak of. Through further probing, the researcher identified that all of the respondents felt
angst towards their school district administration because they felt that they had no say in the
policies and protocols that affected them as educators.
Each respondent agreed that they had never played a role in providing input into the
decisions that affect the way ATP is run. Each respondent felt as if the school district
undervalued their ideas or concerns, leading toward negative perceptions of the school district’s
organizational culture. When asked if they would like to have a say in policy creation, every one
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 85
of the respondents said that they would, however, none of the respondents felt as if school
district administration would ever treat them as equal stakeholders. Libby articulated that, “I
believe that this was due to the fact that currently administrators have all of the power, and if
teachers were to begin to have a say, administrators’ power would decrease.”
With regards to the current ATP program improvement, all of the respondents disclosed
that LUSD had unilaterally conducted inquiry and developed organizational and stakeholder
goals without ever consulting them or including them in the process, leading to further negative
feelings on behalf of ATP teachers toward the school district. Respondents concluded they felt
that the school district had been negligent in the way they conducted their inquiry of ATP student
placement. Jamie expanded on this by stating that, “District methodology seemed to have been
sloppy and the results were probably a foregone conclusion.”
Through analysis of their organizational perceptions the researcher concluded that LUSD
did not value teachers as equal stakeholders in the decision-making processes. The current level
of teacher exclusion in the decision-making process has created teacher feelings of anger and
mistrust towards the school district. The respondents’ feedback showed that all of those who
were interviewed wanted more of a say in how ATP was run. Teachers believed that if given the
chance to provide input, the school district would be able to gain valuable insight from educators
who are at the forefront of the educational process. Michael concluded that, “Giving policy
makers the ability to make more informed decisions based on current school climates would lead
to a more proactive decision-making process for ATP.”
Stakeholder time constraints. One of the biggest themes that was derived from the
qualitative interviews was the issue of teachers perceiving that they were not provided with
enough time to communicate and collaborate with parents in the IEP process. All eight of the
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 86
teachers interviewed concluded that because of their teaching responsibilities they could only
devote a limited amount of time to meeting with parents to listen to their concerns and create
individualized learning plans. One hundred percent of these respondents expanded on this by
discussing how working with EL parents further complicated this time issue due to the
translation process. All of these respondents also identified a correlation between EL IEP
meetings and increased meeting times.
During the interviews, all of the teachers discussed the ATP program improvement and
how it has affected the communication process with parents. All but one of the respondents
generally held negative views of the program improvement due to the fact that they believed that
increasing parent communication would impede their other roles as classroom teachers. These
teachers discussed how they were held accountable for conducting direct instruction as well as
outside activities that took up a vast percentage of their workdays. Matthew disclosed, “The
combination of their job expectations and working within a limited time frame made it very
difficult for them to devote increased amounts of time in the collaborative IEP planning
process.” All eight of the respondents concluded that the school district imposed ATP program
improvement did in fact increase the amount of time they spent collaborating with parents,
however, they felt that it took away from the other aspects of their job duties (direct instruction,
vocational training, community based instruction, and life skills). Libby said, “My increase in
parent collaboration has negatively affected the amount of time I’m able to devote to vocational
training, which I see as the most important functional program my class is a part of.”
Lastly, all of the respondents reported they believed the LUSD ATP program
improvement was based on good intentions, however, they did not understand how only a few
months of increased parent communication would increase student appropriate placements from
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 87
50% - 80%. The teachers restated their mistrust for school district administration and their
interview responses demonstrated that they felt that school district administration was out of
touch with the needs of the ATP teaching staff. Six out of the eight respondents disclosed that
they believed that because school district administration had imposed this increase in parent
collaboration on ATP teachers that they should create and adopt a plan that would give teachers
more time to communicate and collaborate with parents in the IEP process. Lucy concluded,
“This type of plan would provide teachers with the time and tools to meet their stakeholder goals
and ultimately help ATP reach the organizational goal.”
Increased time for parent involvement. During the interviews, the researcher observed
that the respondents perceived time as a guiding force within their workdays. Every one of the
eight respondents stated that they understood the importance of increased communication and
collaboration with parents; however, all of them did not understand how this was to be done.
The primary argument was that they recognized that they only have a set amount of time in a
given workday (6 hours) to plan IEP’s, implement IEP’s, and conduct direct classroom
instruction. Due to the ATP program improvement, the teachers were now spending more time
focusing on parent interaction during the IEP process; however, all of the respondents felt this
increase of time stole time from other aspects of their jobs as special educators.
All eight of the respondents stated that they did not like the idea of using their personal
time to cover the perceived time gap associated with parent collaboration. Of the eight
respondents, only two of them stated that they filled this perceived time gap before or after work
hours. The other six respondents stated that they were unwilling to conduct work business
during their personal time. Lucy concluded that, “This was as an invasion of personal time and
was unacceptable.” Libby said, “I once asked if the school district was willing to pay her extra if
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 88
I worked overtime and administration quickly denied her request without giving further
comment.” She went on to conclude that, “The school district wanted ever increasing amounts
of work from teachers but was not willing to compensate them if their work spilled over their
work day hours.”
Five of the respondents went on to say that they knew of a system employed by other
school districts that helps solve this time gap issue. These respondents discussed how other
school districts have a set minimum day each week that gives teachers two to three hours of time
devoted to planning. The five respondents believed that if LUSD employed this type of model
ATP teachers could more easily increase their parent communication and collaboration without
interfering with their other teaching duties. Michael concluded that, “This type of time model
would enable them to proactively complete all of their daily duties, including their ATP
stakeholder communication goals, without encroaching on their personal time.”
Student academic placement. Through further analysis of the eight interviews, the
researcher identified one further theme affecting ATP teachers and their abilities to meet the
goals of the ATP program improvement. Every one of the respondents believed that student
academic placement had an impact on student outcomes. Even further, all of the respondents
concluded that students who were appropriately placed in their least restrictive environments had
more opportunities to increase their levels of independence. The respondents also unanimously
stated that these students who were appropriately placed were more likely to lead successful
post-school lives than those who were not.
Respondents correlated appropriate student academic placement with student success due
to their beliefs that when students are placed in their least restrictive environments they are both
exposed to higher levels of academic rigor and find more commonalities in the socialization of
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 89
the academic setting. Academic rigor was identified as a primary antecedent for academic
growth, which the respondents viewed as a primary catalyst for increased cognitive ability. The
higher levels of cognitive thought were believed to promote increased student understanding of
the world around them, which respondents concluded would benefit students’ abilities to attain
employment and live more productive lives.
The other factor that respondents identified was the increased student socialization and its
correlation with appropriate student placements. All eight of the respondents disclosed that
when students were placed in their least restrictive environments they were forced to
communicate with other classmates and teaching staff about the learning process. Through this
communication, classroom support systems were created that further increased student
interaction and increased student levels of self-confidence in their abilities. Based on respondent
views, the researcher concluded that these increases in self-confidence related to higher levels of
student self-efficacy that would foster student confidence in themselves and would enable
students to better transition to post-school life.
Although every one of the respondents understood the importance of appropriate student
academic placements, their opinions of student placements in ATP were varied. One hundred
percent of the respondents stated that parent involvement in the IEP process did not play a
significant role in student academic placement. Lucy expanded on this by stating that,
Parent collaboration in the IEP process should have an impact on student placement, but
under current practice those placement decisions were made unilaterally at the beginning
of the school year by a small group of lead teachers and special education administrators.
All of the respondents expressed negative feelings toward the current ATP organizational
placement model that they felt took student placement decisions from them and gave it to other
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 90
educators and administrators who did not know the students as well. The respondents all
concluded that the current placement process lacked collaboration and served as a primary
catalyst for the LUSD recognized gap in appropriate student placement. Libby said, “I have
never really played a role in student placements during my tenure at ATP.” Michael added to
this by mentioning,
The current program improvement goal of 100% participation in increased parent
communication was a step in the right direction toward reaching the organizational goal;
however, until a new collaborative placement process was created, a gap in appropriate
student placement would remain.
The respondents unanimously agreed that they wanted to play a larger role in student placement
and desired the flexibility to adapt student placements based on parent input and formative
student outcomes.
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Synthesis
The researcher identified knowledge themes that have influenced performance gaps
affecting ATP teachers and their ability to communicate and collaborate with parents during the
IEP process. These knowledge influences focused on the conceptual framework themes of
cultural empathy and correlation between parent IEP involvement and parent feelings. The
research exposed that teachers generally understood the importance of practicing cultural
empathy with their EL parents. The research also showed that the majority of ATP teachers held
negative views of the time associated with IEP meetings that involved EL parents. These views
stemmed from past EL IEP meetings and how they generally took longer due to the translation
process. Teachers held negative views of longer meetings and, therefore, had developed a gap in
motivational self-efficacy. The gap in motivation affected the way they currently perceive the
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 91
increased time associated with these meetings. ATP teachers also generally held negative views
of an EL advocacy group that believed they were not being treated as equal stakeholders in the
IEP process.
This perceived lack of parent/teacher communication had created feelings of resentment
and anger on the part of these parents which many times had manifested into contentious IEP
environments between internal and external stakeholders. Due to these occurrences, it was
shown that ATP teachers held negative views of working with EL parents due to prior
contentious environments. These knowledge influence gaps affecting teacher performance led
the researcher to conclude that both internal and external stakeholders in the IEP process should
both let go of negative feelings associated with past IEP events and be understanding of one
another’s differences in the communication and collaboration process.
Motivational themes were exposed displaying that there is currently a gap in teacher
inspiration to meet the needs of the EL parent population. These motivational influences
centered around the correlation between collaboration and student placement, cultural empathy
professional development, and the organizational influence crossover of accountability threats.
The correlation between parent/teacher collaboration and appropriate student placement was the
first motivational theme yielded from the inquiry. The eight respondents overwhelmingly agreed
that parent input did indeed provide the IEP team with increased information that could be used
by the team to create learning goals and decide which services are appropriate. These teachers
concluded that by providing more input they would be better informed of student academic
levels and better able to place students in their appropriate academic settings. Currently
however, the ATP program does not pay too much attention to parent input with regards to
student placement. Placement decisions are placed in the hands of administrators at the
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 92
beginning of the school year and unless a parent is adamant at an IEP meeting about a change of
placement, these are rarely ever granted mid-year. Teachers had very negative views of this
protocol and believed that they should have more of a say in the process. Based on this
motivational performance gap, the researcher concluded that teachers should have an increased
role in the student placement process at the beginning of the school year and that the protocol
should be more flexible, allowing for increased student placements based on both parent inputs
and student need.
Another theme affecting ATP teacher motivation is the ability of teachers to recognize
that professional development opportunities related to cultural empathy could help students and
all stakeholders in the IEP process. During the interview process, the researcher identified
motivational performance gaps that showed the respondents had very little to no school-district
sponsored professional development within the last few years. The researcher also found that
none of the professional development teachers had attended focused on cultural empathy.
Through further probing, the researcher identified that all of the respondents would attend
cultural empathy training and believed that this type of instruction would close this motivational
performance gap and positively impact the relationship between ATP teachers and EL parents.
Teachers unanimously held positive perceptions of the idea of attending a cultural
empathy training because they felt that this type of professional development would enable
teachers to increase their cultural awareness, thus adding to their overall skill-set as educators.
Even though all of the teachers held positive views on this subject, all of the respondents went on
to state that based on past professional development they did not believe that the school district
would create and (or) send them to this type of training any time in the near future. These
respondents also stated that this inability of LUSD to provide them with the training they needed
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 93
created another motivational gap in performance and served as a missed opportunity for
professional growth and made them have feelings of resentment. Through analysis of this theme,
the researcher concluded that teachers understood the importance that cultural empathy training
could play for special educators and that LUSD should implement this type of training as part of
their ATP program improvement.
Organizational influences were the last of the KMO themes affecting performance gaps
amongst ATP teachers. The eight interview respondents overwhelmingly agreed that they did
not play a part in the decision and policy-making processes affecting ATP. Every one of the
respondents had never played a role in creating programs or making school-district sanctioned
decisions. This perceived lack of collaboration with school administration was seen in a
negative light by all of the teachers who were interviewed and has acted as a barrier between
school administration and the ATP teaching staff. The primary organizational performance gaps
relating to these organizational influences, were an absence of collaboration, school district
mistrust, and ATP teacher “buy in” to the ATP program improvement model.
When asked about their roles in creating policies and protocols affecting their roles as
educators, all of the respondents stated that they played little to no role and had almost no
involvement in the way new educational programs were implemented. The respondents also
stated that they had never been a part of the decision-making process. They perceived this as a
negative aspect of their organizational model and all expressed a desire for that to change.
Through further prompting, the researcher identified that all of the respondents wanted to
provide input into decision-making processes, but felt that the current decision-making
administrators would not want to relinquish their current unilateral decision-making prowess.
The respondents all concluded that as long as the organizational culture followed its current
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 94
hierarchal model, they would not be given the opportunity to participate in policy decisions.
Through the interview process, the researcher also identified the current ATP program
improvement as a major theme affecting ATP teachers’ negative perceptions of LUSD
administration. Negative teacher perceptions of the school district hinged on the unilateral
decisions the district made in reaction to the placement concerns of the EL advocacy group. All
of the eight respondents felt that the school district ran a hasty inquiry in order to placate the
concerns of this advocacy group. The respondents also had negative feelings toward the
methodology behind the school district’s expedited study. Further, the respondents felt that the
school district erred when they did not include ATP teachers in the data collection process and
concluded that the results of the study were flawed and could not have been tabulated in a
credible fashion based on the loose-knit, mixed-methodologies employed.
Respondents unanimously agreed that they believed that the school district’s results had
been a forgone conclusion and that the current ATP program improvement model was the result
of their desire to avoid possible litigious action. Respondents all held a great deal of mistrust for
the school district, however, they all stated that they were taking part in their stakeholder goal of
100% ATP teacher participation by increasing their communication and collaboration with all
parents. The mistrust for the school district displayed by the respondents left the researcher to
conclude that ATP teachers currently have negative views of their school district administration.
These negative views have created barriers to collaboration that could increase the levels of
internal stakeholder communication and enable the current program improvement model increase
its effectiveness in meeting the organizational goal. The researcher also concluded that ATP
teacher “buy in” to this school-district imposed program improvement, was not based on
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 95
individual self-efficacy, but on the impedance of a possible school audit that is perceived by all
of the respondents as a threat against their roles in the educational process.
Document Analysis Findings
To support the data the researcher gathered from the eight respondent interviews, public
emails were analyzed to ensure that respondent feedback was genuine and credible. For this
portion of the inquiry methodology, the researcher focused on analyzing three school district
public emails that had been sent out to ATP teaching staff. These emails focused on the current
ATP program improvement model and fixated on the reasons behind the school district student
placement inquiry, the methodology the school district had employed, and ATP stakeholder
accountability towards the organizational goal.
Email 1. The first school-district public email the researcher analyzed focused on the EL
parent advocacy group. The email discussed their complaint relating to their perceived lack of
parent/teacher communication and collaboration and its negative effects on student academic
placement. The email was quite short and focused primarily on the complaint and the steps the
school district was going to take to address the issue. The memo then discussed that the school
district was going to conduct an expedited internal inquiry of ATP through parent survey, parent
interviews, and IEP observation.
Through analysis of the memo, the researcher identified that the LUSD decision to
conduct inquiry of ATP was a unilateral decision in which ATP teachers had no input in the
process. This email supported the ATP teachers’ assertions made during the interviews that they
were not active in the decision-making processes affecting their organization. The email also
backed up the ATP teacher’s perceptions that the inquiry was conducted in a rushed manner
based on the fact that LUSD included the word “expedited” to discuss the pace of their internal
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 96
study. This led the researcher to conclude that the research findings of the LUSD ATP inquiry
were less than credible and that validity and reliability of the inquiry could be questionable.
Email 2. The second public email the researcher analyzed had been sent out to ATP
teaching staff shortly after the school district’s inquiry had commenced. In this email, the school
district further discussed the methodologies they had employed in their inquiry of student
placements in ATP. First, LUSD had interviewed EL parents, who belonged to the advocacy
group, on their views of parent/teacher communication and its effects on student placement.
Second, surveys were given to those EL parents who could not participate in the interview
process. Lastly, school administrators had randomly observed IEP meetings between teachers
and EL parents.
The memo went on to discuss that the goal of the inquiry was to determine if the
complaints of the advocacy group were valid by uncovering if there was a correlation with parent
IEP participation and appropriate student placement. Results of the inquiry were not included in
this memo; however, it did note that the data would be analyzed and appropriate measures would
be implemented based on the findings. This memo further triangulated negative interview
perceptions of ATP teachers not being included in the decision-making processes affecting their
organization.
Email 3. The last public email examined by the researcher focused on the results of
LUSD’s internal inquiry of ATP. The memo served as a summary of the findings and discussed
what course of action the school district would take based on what they had learned. The memo
also disclosed that the study found that there was a probable correlation between parent/teacher
communication and appropriate student academic placement. The email concluded that LUSD
researchers believed that currently, approximately 50% of the students in ATP were not placed in
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 97
their least restrictive environments. Based on their findings, the memo went on to discuss an
ATP program improvement model that would be implemented immediately.
The finding that 50% of the students in ATP were not currently in their appropriate
academic placement left the researcher with doubts about their findings. Teachers mistrust
issues over the way the school district conducted the study were triangulated due to the fact that
this number seemed to be artificial and arbitrary. Like the teachers who had been interviewed,
the researcher had doubts about how this number had been created based on the methodology
that had been conducted.
The other primary finding that the researcher uncovered focused on the ATP program
improvement model that had been created. This program improvement model contained an
organizational goal of 80% appropriate student placement by October 2018. It also stated that
ATP teacher (stakeholders) would be held professionally accountable by the school district to
increase their levels of communication and collaboration with parents during the IEP process.
Lastly, the school district email mentioned the consequences that would be implemented if ATP
did not meet their organizational goal.
Through analysis of the memo, the researcher further supported respondents’ perceptions
about the organizations unwillingness to include ATP teachers in the policy and protocol
creation process. The memo showed that decisions about ATP program improvement were made
unilaterally by school district administration and did not include teacher inputs. Teachers
believed that the school district had missed an opportunity to create a better program
improvement model when they did not invite teachers to provide input pertaining to the program
development.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 98
Based on both qualitative inquiry and document analysis, the researcher has concluded
that teacher perceptions affecting their stakeholder goal were focused on linguistic differences, a
perceived lack of time, and a genuine mistrust for their school district. Research showed that
these three primary themes and their corresponding KMO related sub-themes had created
negative feelings on the part of ATP teachers and represented the gaps between prior
performance and their stakeholder goal of 100% teacher participation in the ATP program
improvement. Based on school-district imposed guidelines, the performance gap must be closed
in order for ATP to reach its organizational goal of 80% student academic placement by October
2018. Table 6 displays primary and sub-themes and the KMO relationships between them.

Table 6
Primary and Sub-Themes Based on KMO Research Results and Findings

Primary Themes Linguistic
Differences
Administration
Mistrust
Time Constraints
Sub-Themes Teachers should
practice cultural/
linguistic Empathy
with EL families

A lack of parent
involvement can lead
to parent frustration
about their role in the
IEP process teacher
skill sets

Culture of
collaboration should
be employed between
teachers and
administration

Flexibility in student
placement should be
employed
Teachers need ample
non-instruction time
for collaborative IEP
planning
Professional
development focused
on cultural empathy
should help develop
teacher skill sets

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 99
Table 6 (Cont’d.)
Primary Themes Linguistic
Differences
Administration
Mistrust
Time Constraints
Relationship Knowledge,
Motivation, &
Organizational
Influences
Organizational
Influence
Organizational
Influence

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 100
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS
In Chapter Four, the assumed KMO influences affecting the problem of practice were
analyzed to validate their significance as antecedents for stakeholder behaviors as they relate to
the specific ATP organizational goal. Based on the analysis of the qualitative interviews through
the use of a priori and empirical coding, the researcher was able to construct results based on the
interviews. These results were analyzed even further to establish inferences, which acted as
inductive hypotheses and constituted the findings for the inquiry. Lastly, these findings were
triangulated through public document analysis to ensure that data derived from the interviews
was genuine and credible.
Chapter Five includes an expansion of the results and findings in Chapter Four by
providing recommendations for future practice in both education and other related fields. The
recommendations were organized based on validated knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences as they relate to the primary research questions guiding the inquiry. This chapter will
employ the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) as a guide for
future application of the recommendations. Through this four-tiered post-inquiry model, the
researcher will show how results, behavior, learning, and reactions should be employed to ensure
that the recommendations would effectively support ATP teachers in reaching both their
stakeholder and organizational goals. The four-tiered model should also help to ensure the
validity and reliability of the researcher’s current findings, so that future research relating to this
study may be conducted in the most credible manner possible.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project was to evaluate the degree to which teachers were
participating in program improvement to support the LUSD ATP in reaching its goal of
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 101
achieving appropriate placements for its students at a rate of at least 80%. The analysis focused
on knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences related to achieving this organizational
goal. While a complete evaluation project would focus on all ATP stakeholders, for practical
purposes the stakeholders that were focused on in this analysis were the LUSD ATP teachers.
As such, the questions that guided this study are the following:
1. To what extent are LUSD ATP teachers meeting their goal of being compliant with the
LUSD goal of achieving appropriate placements for its students at a rate of at least 80%
by October 2018?
2. How are the teacher’s knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences of ATP
teachers related to achieving the LUSD organizational goal of achieving appropriate
placements for its students at a rate of at least 80% by October 2018?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
The researcher employed the Clark and Estes (2008) knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences to identify ATP teachers’ gaps in performance. Clark and Estes stated
that these influences represent what stakeholders understand and their intrinsic ability to employ
that insight and react to feedback to reach both their stakeholder and organizational goals (Clark
& Estes, 2008). The researchers also stated that knowledge should be proactively employed to
enable stakeholders to understand organizational problems so they may implement specific
actions to close gaps in performance. To identify and understand stakeholder knowledge,
inquiry should be employed so that a baseline of current understanding can be established (Clark
& Estes, 2008). The baseline could then be gauged against stakeholder goals, thus creating a gap
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 102
that displays where current knowledge lies against the goals set by the organization. This gap
analysis was undertaken through the process of inquiry and was used to increase specific
stakeholder understanding of the knowledge influences affecting their behavior.
The Clark and Estes (2008) KMO model was used to identify the influences behind
stakeholder behavior and were integral in the development of both results and findings for the
inquiry. The researcher built off of the Clark and Estes KMO model and employed the New
World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) as a means for evaluating
recommendations based on the findings. The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016) provided the basis for integrating this change into the inquiry so that the
stakeholders and organization could utilize the recommendations involved in this study to close
performance gaps and reach their goals.
Table 7 displays KMO influences, whether or not these influences validated previous
literature related to each influence.

Table 7
Summary of KMO Influences and their Validation of Previous literature

KMO Influences Validated Literature (Yes, No)

Cultural/linguistic empathy

Parent/teacher perceptions
Yes

Yes
Attributions

Utility value
Yes

Yes
Teacher mistrust

Building trust

Stakeholder participation
Yes

Yes

Yes

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 103
Table 7 (Cont’d.)

KMO Influences Validated Literature (Yes, No)

Culture of collaboration

Stakeholder time constraints

Increased time for parent involvement

Student academic placement
Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Knowledge Recommendations
Introduction. Knowledge influences specific to this study were identified and validated
through the researcher’s inquiry. The inquiry investigated ATP teachers understanding of
parent/teacher communication and collaboration, and its role in the IEP process. Through a
review of literature, the researcher identified relevant data that displayed the need to perform
further academic inquiry into the subject of knowledge antecedents within the context of this
study. Specific knowledge themes were identified and used to guide a semi-formal set of
qualitative interview questions.
The data was then analyzed to create findings that were used to validate the assumed
knowledge influences. The researcher identified two primary knowledge influences that played
an important role in the current communication and collaboration between parents and teachers
in the IEP process: (a) teachers need to understand that cultural and linguistic empathy are
required for successful communication and collaboration with EL families in the IEP/transition
process (Crockett, 2014) and (b) teachers need to be aware that not employing cultural/linguistic
empathy with EL families has led to increases in parent frustration and anger with school district
IEP stakeholders over inappropriate placements of students (Carpenter, 2012).
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 104
Table 8 displays the two assumed knowledge influences, whether or not these influences
were validated, literature related to the need of each influence, and context-specific
recommendations for each influence.

Table 8
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations

Assumed Knowledge
Influence
Validated
(Y, N) Principle and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Declarative
(Conceptual):
Teachers need to
understand that
cultural and linguistic
empathy are required
for successful
communication and
collaboration with EL
families in the
IEP/transition
process.

Y
Declarative knowledge
is comprised of two sub-
sets: the first is
conceptual which
focuses on bridging
identified pattern
connections, the second
is factual which focuses
on awareness of what is
known (Clark & Estes,
2008)

Provide ATP teachers an
information pamphlet with
clear expectations relating to
bridging connections to
practicing cultural empathy in
their communications with EL
families.

Provide each ATP teacher with
information on full-time
translation services that have
been certified by LUSD.

Declarative
(Conceptual):
Teachers need to be
aware that not
employing
cultural/linguistic
empathy with EL
families has led to
increases in parent
frustration and anger
with school district
IEP stakeholders over
inappropriate
placements of
students.

Y
Prior learning is
necessary for continued
knowledge increases due
to the fact that most
learning is a scaffold of
what was previously
understood (Crockett,
2014).

Conceptual knowledge
is the ability to take
what is known and apply
it to other situations
(Clark & Estes, 2008)

Create and utilize an internal
process for keeping ATP
teachers accountable for
practicing cultural empathy
with parents during the IEP
process.

Provide teachers with
information focusing on parent
concerns focusing on the
communicative needs of EL
parents in the IEP process.

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 105
Declarative knowledge solutions. Teachers need to understand that cultural and
linguistic empathy are required for successful communication and collaboration with EL families
in the IEP/transition process. Conceptual knowledge is the ability to take what is known and
apply it to other situations (Clark & Estes, 2008). It is comprised of two subsets: the first is
conceptual which focuses on bridging identified pattern connections and the second is factual
which focuses on awareness of what is known (Clark & Estes, 2008). The recommendation is to
provide ATP teachers an information pamphlet with clear expectations relating to bridging
connections to practicing cultural empathy in their communications with EL families, as well as
to provide each ATP teacher with information on full-time translation services that have been
certified by LUSD.
The recommendation created by the researcher was based on prior research on the subject
that stated: displaying genuine cultural empathy for EL parents was in direct correlation with
increased communication and increased student outcomes (Bryan et al., 2007; Cruz & Patterson,
2005; Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) stated that a lack of
communication and collaboration between teachers and parents can lead to anger and frustration,
causing breakdowns in trust amongst internal and external educational stakeholders. Cruz and
Patterson (2005) built on this by stating that EL parent/teacher communication in the education
process can benefit from teacher understanding of cultural elements that differ between them.
Bryan et al. (2007) identified that due to the increase of EL families in the educational system, a
higher percentage of internal and external educational meetings are conducted through a
translation-based process. The researchers concluded that through accessible and appropriate
translation services, linguistic differences among people could be decreased prompting further
collaboration (Bryan et al., 2007).
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 106
Teachers need to be aware that not employing cultural/linguistic empathy with EL
families has led to increases in parent frustration and anger with school district IEP stakeholders
over inappropriate placements of students. Crockett (2014) stated that prior learning is necessary
for continued knowledge increases due to the fact that most learning is a scaffold of what was
previously understood. For this assumed knowledge influence, the researcher created two
recommendations that should support stakeholder performance. The first recommendation is to
create and utilize an internal job aid that ATP teachers may utilize to keep them accountable for
practicing cultural empathy with parents during the IEP process. The second recommendation is
to provide teachers with information focusing on parent concerns focusing on the communicative
needs of EL parents in the IEP process.
Crockett (2014) stated that the individual learning process is not an isolated endeavor, but
works as an integrated learning process between the collaboration of individuals. The researcher
concluded that through the transfer of information between organizational stakeholders, new
ideas could be internalized and acted upon. Bacon and Causton-Theoharis (2013) identified that
levels of stakeholder knowledge about the families they are working with in an educational
context, would help to mitigate differences in the IEP process. The researchers concluded that
teachers carry the burden of catering to the cultural needs of EL families and hold themselves
accountable for their current cultural/linguistic knowledge set (Bacon & Causton-Theoharis,
2013).
Motivation Recommendations
Introduction. Clark and Estes (2008) stated that motivational influences consist of the
forces that drive stakeholders to accomplish their goals. These influences stem from prior
positive and negative experiences that have shaped their actions for future success (Pajares,
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 107
2006). The success then becomes a learned function of an individual’s skill-set. An individual’s
increased skill-set should lead to confidence in knowing that when similar actions are taken in
future situations, they too will be rewarding. The result is an association between specific
actions and successful outcomes, which in turn, creates self-efficacy. Motivational influences
play off of self-efficacy and when measured through inquiry and integrated with knowledge and
organizational influences they can play an active role in creating stakeholder performance
baselines. Performance baselines can then be gauged against stakeholder goals creating a
performance gap. Through a focused gap analysis, stakeholders can then understand specific
actions they should employ to reach their goals.
During the inquiry, the researcher identified two primary motivational influences that had
an impact on the performance of ATP teachers in LUSD. Both of these motivational influences
were based on the foundation that self-efficacy should improve stakeholder performance within
an organization. The first assumed motivational influence stated that teachers should feel that
increased communication and collaboration with EL parents during the IEP/transition process is
beneficial for student classroom placement and academic success. The second assumed
motivational influence stated that teachers need to understand the value in professional
development opportunities focused on cultural and linguistic empathy. Through a review of
these motivational influences, the researcher intends to validate the influences based on
qualitative inquiry and provide specific recommendations for implementation amongst ATP
teachers.
Table 9 displays the two assumed motivational influences and context-specific
recommendations for each influence, whether or not these influences were validated, literature
related to the need of each influence.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 108
Table 9

Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations

Assumed
Motivation
Influence
Validated
(Y, N) Principle and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Attributions:

Teachers should
feel that increased
communication and
collaboration with
EL parents during
the IEP/transition
process is beneficial
for student
classroom
placement and
academic success.

Y Motivational influences
consist of the influences
that drive stakeholders to
accomplish their goals
(Clark & Estes, 2008).

Past successes create
intrinsic motivation,
which in turn, creates
self-efficacy, this self-
efficacy should increase
with collaborative
support and feedback
(Pajares, 2006).

Provide teachers and families
with the opportunity to have a
greater say on student
placement, allowing for
flexible mid-year placement
options.

Utility Value
(Expectancy Value
Theory):

Build teacher value
in the usefulness of
professional
development
focused on cultural
and linguistic
empathy.

Y Utility value states that if
an individual believes a
task to be valuable, then
they are more likely to
engage in that activity to
reach their desired
outcomes (Pajares,
2006).

Expectancy value theory
stated that individuals
ask themselves if they
can do it, then they ask
themselves if they want
to do it (Pajares, 2006).

When individuals
confidently answer “yes”
to these two questions,
they should employ
increased motivation to
reach their goals (Eccles,
2006).
Provide internal professional
development aides that
endorse the importance of
ATP teacher understanding of
employing cultural and
linguistic empathy with EL
families.

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 109
Attribution influence. Teachers should feel that increased communication and
collaboration with EL parents during the IEP/transition process is beneficial for student
classroom placement and academic success. Motivational influences consist of the influences
that drive stakeholders to accomplish their goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). Pajares (2006) stated
that past successes create intrinsic motivation, which in turn, creates self-efficacy. The
researcher concluded that levels of self-efficacy should increase with collaborative support and
feedback (Pajares, 2006). The recommendation is to provide teachers and families with the
opportunity to have increased influence on student placement, allowing for flexible mid-year
placement options.
Weiner (2006) stated that individuals possess characteristics that are based on prior
experiences. The researcher concluded that these characteristics can become attributions and
serve as a predictor of how people will react in similar situations both in the present and in the
future (Weiner, 2006). Weiner identified how individual attributions can be both personal and
environmental. The researcher concluded that personal attributions consisted of raw talent, the
desire to learn, and environmental attributions focused on outside influences such as family,
work setting, and organizational culture (Weiner, 2006).
Utility value theory (expectancy value theory). Teachers need to build on their values
regarding the usefulness of cultural and linguistic empathy centered professional development.
Pajares (2006) stated that utility value is a primary antecedent of stakeholder motivation. The
researcher identified that if an individual believes a task to be valuable, then they are more likely
to engage in that activity to reach their desired outcomes (Pajares, 2006). Pajares concluded that
expectancy value theory is a primary component of utility value and that individuals ask
themselves if they can do it, then they ask themselves if they want to do it. Eccles (2006)
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 110
expanded on this by stating that when individuals confidently answer “yes” to these two
questions, they should employ increased motivation to reach their goals. The recommendation is
to provide internal professional development aides that endorse the importance of ATP teachers’
understanding of employing cultural and linguistic empathy with EL families.
Eccles (2006) stated that past experiences create self-efficacy, which can drive
individuals to ask two questions before they take on a task; “Can I do it?” and “Do I want to do
it?” If an individual can answer yes to both of these questions based on prior learning and past
success, that individual should hold intrinsic motivation to accomplish the tasks they’ve been
assigned. According to Pajares (2006), this intrinsic motivation serves as the locus for assessing
whether or not organizational stakeholders will overcome obstacles to reach their goals. Intrinsic
motivation also shows how organizational influences can integrate with motivational influences
to develop individual self-efficacy through feedback and professional learning opportunities.
Organization Recommendations
Introduction. Clark and Estes (2008) stated that organizational influences directly affect
the cultural model and cultural setting of an organization and influence stakeholders’ perceptions
about their roles within the organization. For this study, the researcher analyzed prior research
and identified three assumed organizational influences affecting ATP teachers from reaching
their stakeholder goal. The first assumed organizational influence stated that there needs to be a
culture of collaboration and trust between school district administration and ATP teachers to
achieve the organizational goal of 80% appropriate student placement. The second assumed
organizational influence stated that there needs to be teacher “buy in” to ensure that all ATP
teachers participate in the program improvement. The last influence concluded that teachers
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 111
need ample non-instruction time from administration to communicate and collaborate effectively
with EL parents in IEP/transition planning.
Table 10 displays the three assumed organizational influences, whether or not these
influences were validated, literature related to the need of each influence, and context-specific
recommendations.

Table 10

Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations

Assumed
Organization
Influence
Validated
(Y, N) Principle and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Process:

There needs to be a
culture of
collaboration and
trust between
school district
administration and
ATP teachers to
achieve the
organizational goal
of 80% appropriate
student placement.

Y Organizational
influences directly affect
the cultural model and
cultural setting of an
organization, which
influence stakeholders’
perceptions about their
roles within the
organization (Clark &
Estes, 2008).

Include teachers in the Policy
and protocol creation
processes affecting the ATP
program.

Process:

There needs to be
teacher “buy in” to
ensure that all ATP
teachers participate
in the program
improvement.

Y When organizational
internal stakeholders feel
that their ideas and
inputs are valued, they
are more likely to
display positive
workplace attitudes
(Cruz & Patterson,
2005).

Incorporate teacher ideas into
the decision-making processes
through collaborative
discussion between teachers
and school district
administration.
When stakeholders
possess positive
perceptions of their
place within an

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 112
Table 10 (Cont’d.)
Assumed
Organization
Influence
Validated
(Y, N) Principle and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
organizational structure,
their self-efficacy should
increase resulting in
higher levels of
enthusiasm and job
satisfaction (Bryan et al.,
2007).

Resource:

Teachers need
ample non-
instruction time
from
administration to
communicate and
collaborate
effectively with EL
parents in
IEP/transition
planning.

Y If teachers are given
time that is set aside to
communicate with
internal and external
stakeholders, they will
gain more information
about their students,
which should have a
positive impact on
academic
implementation and
student progress.
(Morningstar et al.
2008).
Allocate time during the
instructional day on a weekly
basis specifically focused on
parent/teacher collaboration
and communication about
students IEP programs.

Process solutions. There needs to be a culture of collaboration and trust between school
district administration and ATP teachers to achieve the organizational goal of 80% appropriate
student placement. Clark and Estes (2008) stated that organizational influences directly affects
the cultural model and cultural setting of an organization. The researchers concluded that these
organizational influences prompt stakeholder perceptions about their roles within an organization
(Clark & Estes, 2008). The recommendation is to include teachers in the Policy and protocol
creation processes affecting the ATP program.
Researchers have stated that stakeholders are more likely to help an organization reach its
goals when they practice proactive collaboration and work together for the common good of their
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 113
institution (Bryan et al., 2007; Cruz & Patterson, 2005). Cruz and Patterson (2005) stated that
organizational models should involve all internal stakeholders in policy creation. Bryan et al.
(2007) identified that an organizational setting that promotes stakeholder involvement in
decision-making processes correlates to increases in stakeholder productivity. Bryan et al.
concluded that increases in stakeholder productivity promotes the likelihood of both stakeholders
and organizational goal attainment.
There needs to be teacher “buy in” to ensure that all ATP teachers participate in the
program improvement. Cruz and Patterson (2005) stated that when organizational internal
stakeholders feel that their ideas and inputs are valued they are more likely to display positive
workplace attitudes. Bryan et al. (2007) concluded that when stakeholders possess positive
perceptions of their place within an organizational structure, their self-efficacy should increase,
resulting in higher levels of enthusiasm and job satisfaction. The researcher’s recommendation
is to incorporate teacher ideas into the decision-making processes through collaborative
discussion between teachers and school district administration.
Stakeholders are more likely to help an organization reach its goals when they feel that
their ideas are valued (Bryan et al., 2007). The researchers also stated that positive stakeholder
perceptions of their roles correlate to increased job satisfaction and increased job performance.
Eccles (2006) identified that increased teacher involvement could change teacher perceptions
about the organizational model and lead to newly defined organizational settings. The researcher
concluded that these organizational settings could proactively support internal stakeholder
attitudes which should have a positive effect on collaborative policy creation and overall
workplace performance (Eccles, 2006).
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 114
Resource solutions. Teachers need ample non-instruction time from administration to
communicate and collaborate effectively with EL parents in IEP/transition planning.
Morningstar et al. (2008) stated that if teachers are given time that is set aside to communicate
with internal and external stakeholders they will gain more information about their students. The
researchers concluded that this should have a positive impact on academic implementation and
student progress (Morningstar et al., 2008). The researcher’s recommendation is to allocate time
during the instructional day on a weekly basis specifically focused on parent/teacher
collaboration and communication about students IEP programs.
Morningstar et al. (2008) stated that special education teachers should have time that is
set aside to communicate effectively with internal and external stakeholders about student
progress and academic implementation. Through this process, teachers would be able to increase
their IEP planning with parents so that every stakeholder in the IEP process would feel as if they
are playing a valuable educational role (Morningstar et al., 2008). Park (2008) stated that
increases in parent/teacher IEP planning should correlate with increases in student information
pertinent to their IEP. Park also identified that an increase in parent/teacher communication
should correlate to increases in appropriate student academic placements. Lastly, the researcher
concluded that time set aside for parent/teacher communication during the IEP planning process
could decrease EL parent frustration (Park, 2008).
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) was employed by
the researcher to conduct the integrated implementation and evaluation plan for the inquiry.
According to Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) the value of their model is its effects on post
KMO training, based on focused recommendations for decreasing gaps in stakeholder
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 115
performance. Through the researcher’s model, stakeholder training should be assessed and
organizational feedback on performance outcomes could be used as a source of both formative
and summative evaluations. The New World Kirkpatrick Model consists of (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016) four levels, (4) results, (3) behaviors, (2) learning, (1) reactions. Results
focus on the outcomes that were inferred from the process of inquiry. Behaviors concentrated on
stakeholder activities under the guise of specific organizational courses of action. Learning
focused on what stakeholders understood and its correlation with intrinsic stakeholder
performance capabilities. Lastly, reactions show how stakeholder performance feedback affects
how stakeholders respond to specific learning models.
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) stated that the New World Kirkpatrick Model acts as
a proactive response to prior intervention. For this study, the researcher incorporated the four
levels of evaluation into the Clark and Estes (2008) KMO model to determine results, create
findings, and create recommendations based on those findings. Through a focused approach
utilizing the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016), the researcher
employed the four levels of evaluation and supplied feedback on the methods, metrics, outcomes,
and behaviors that made up each of these four levels of evaluation. The detailed approach
focused on each of the four levels: results, transfer, learning, and reactions, enabling the
researcher to make conclusions on the effectiveness of the implementation of the KMO
influenced recommendations. The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick,
2016) also enabled the researcher to evaluate the effectiveness of the instruments employed to
gauge implementation.

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 116
Organizational Purpose, Needs, and Expectations
The LUSD ATP is an adult transition program for students with disabilities who are
between the ages of 18-22. In ATP, non-diploma students are taught independence skills
through a functional curriculum consisting of community based instruction, vocational training,
life skills, and functional academics. A focal point of the program is communication and
collaboration between parents and internal stakeholders in the Individual Education process. It is
in these annual IEP meetings that parents and teachers discuss student progress, goals, and
special needs services for each student.
Communication and collaboration plays a vital role in the process; however, the school
district conducted an internal inquiry of ATP due to parent complaints about a perceived lack of
input in the IEP process and its possible correlation with student academic placement. LUSD
identified that there is an identifiable lack of communication between internal and external
stakeholders in the IEP planning process. Inquiry findings showed that there was a perceived
lack of communication between parents and teachers that directly correlated with an appropriate
student placement rate of 50%. Due to the findings of the school district inquiry, LUSD imposed
an internal program improvement model for ATP that was guided by both an organizational and
a stakeholder goal. The organizational goal stated that by October 2018 ATP student appropriate
placements would reach 80%. The means of reaching that objective were contingent on a
stakeholder goal that stated that 100% of ATP teachers would increase their communication and
collaboration with parents in the IEP process. It was imperative that this organizational student
placement goal of 80% was attained due to the fact that if it was not met, it could increase parent
mistrust of the school district that could lead to future lawsuits against the school district. To
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 117
hold stakeholders accountable for meeting the organizational goal, the school district threatened
to institute a rigorous semi-annual audit over the next five years.
Through the Clark and Estes (2008) KMO influence model, the researcher conducted
inquiry and developed findings. Based on these findings, recommendations were developed that
could be employed by the school district and ATP to meet their student placement goal. These
recommendations were focused on issues that constituted the basis of teacher KMO
performance. These issues revolved around, (a) cultural empathy, (b) professional development,
(c) teacher/administrator relationships, and (d) time. Through implementation of the
recommendations, teacher performance should increase and lead to enhanced parent/teacher
communication and collaboration. Lastly, the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016) was employed to act as a framework for evaluation, which could be used to
gauge recommendation effectiveness and guide future studies.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Level four results and leading indicators employ both external and internal outcomes.
Each of the indicative aspects include outcomes, metrics, and methods that serve to gauge
whether stakeholders have met their appurtenant outcomes. The current LUSD imposed ATP
program improvement model has a goal of 80% appropriate student placement by October 2018.
The stakeholders responsible for meeting this goal are 18 ATP teachers who have a stated goal of
100% participation in meeting the organizational goal. The participation consisted of everyone
of the teachers in ATP increasing their levels of communication and collaboration with parents
during the IEP process. The program improvement model would serve as an appropriate
environment for measuring the success of applied interventions and their outcomes.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 118
To measure the success of applied interventions, external outcomes, and metrics was
employed to measure the summative performance of stakeholder outcomes. The primary method
of tracking external outcomes came in the form of school district audits of student academic
placement. Through administrative review of appropriate student placement, LUSD could apply
a metric to gain a deeper understanding of the applied interventions and their effects on student
ATP student appropriate student placements in their LREs. The researcher also measured the
success of applied interventions using internal outcomes, which were used to measure the
formative performance stakeholder results. Through the process of school district observation
and teacher interviews, the school district could apply metrics that would give them a deeper
understanding of the applied interventions and the direct effects they play in stakeholder goal
attainment. Table 11 displays potential internal and external outcomes that were employed to
gauge the performance of applied interventions.

Table 11

Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes

EXTERNAL OUTCOMES
Outcome

Metrics Methods
Parent satisfaction with
student academic placements
increase.

Percentage of satisfaction
responses from parent surveys
and interviews.

Monitor parent survey and
interview data from April
2018 through October 2018.
Decrease in EL parent
advocacy groups’ complaints
about a perceived lack of
communication with teachers.

Number of requests for due
process hearings filed with the
LUSD special education
department.
Track ATP due process
requests between April 2018
and October 2018.
ATP teachers given two hours
of devoted IEP planning time
on a weekly basis.

Number of teachers who
utilize devoted IEP planning
time.

Track time and frequency
utilization of devoted
parent/teacher IEP planning
time.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 119
Table 11 (Cont’d.)
INTERNAL OUTCOMES
Outcome Metrics Methods
Teacher knowledge of cultural
empathy increases.

Number of teachers who
attend school district
professional development
courses.

Track teacher attendance at
school district professional
development course.
ATP teacher given flexibility
to request mid-year student
placement changes.

Number of teacher requests
for changes in student
placement between April 2018
and October 2018.

Monitor teacher request
submissions for changes in
student placement between
April 2018 and October 2018.

Level 3: Behavior
The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) level three,
focused on the ways in which ATP teachers integrate the recommended interventions into their
organizational performance. Level three targeted ATP teachers and consisted of three primary
aspects. First, critical behaviors was analyzed to address stakeholder actions as they correlate
with outcomes. Second, required drivers were investigated due to their role as behavior
antecedents. Third, organizational support was evaluated to identify organizational models and
settings that affected stakeholder behaviors.
Critical behaviors. Critical behaviors focus on an individual’s integration of the Clark
and Estes (2008) KMO influences into a particular skill-set. In particular, knowledge and
motivation influences act as the intrinsic backbone of performance as it relates to both
stakeholder and organizational goals. Through these intrinsic influences, organizational
stakeholders decide if they want to incorporate particular traits into their performance skill-set.
Skill-set incorporation is then followed by stakeholder performance execution of desired activity.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 120
In the LUSD ATP, the stakeholders (teachers) should understand that there is a
correlation between their attitudes and the attitudes of outside stakeholders in the IEP process.
Specifically, when teachers perceive IEP meetings as a time drain, their perceptions of the IEP
process are generally negative. Based on the qualitative interviews, the researcher identified that
these negative views of the time associated with IEP planning were compounded when
stakeholders spoke about working with EL families. Negative views could affect teacher IEP
planning performance and be perceived as lacking cultural empathy due to EL parent perceptions
that they are not being given enough time to provide input and are not seen as equal stakeholders
in the IEP process.
Due to the fact the IEP planning process is the focal point of an education program for
students with disabilities, teachers should understand that educational planning time spent with
families should take precedence over any other educational activity. Based on the importance of
the IEP meeting process, ATP teachers should self-regulate their behaviors through proactive
reflection on their performance levels. Through self-reflection, ATP teachers will continuously
learn from past successes and failures and formatively assess how and to what extent certain
behaviors should be acted upon. External behavior will also be an effective formative and
summative tool for building a performance skill-set as it will enable other organizational
stakeholders to analyze and plan performance, while reducing the individualized bias that can
take shape in the internal reflective process. Internal and external feedback should both integrate
into a stakeholder’s skill-set through self-efficacy and the application of intrinsic ability so that
organizational stakeholders could maximize increased performance and knowledge prowess.
Table 12 looks at critical behaviors as they relate to ATP stakeholders and provides metrics,
methods, and timing as they relate to organizational performance evaluation.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 121
Table 12

Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metrics Methods Timing
1. Teachers display
proactive
communication and
collaboration with
all parents during
the IEP planning
process
Number of parents
contacted by teachers
during the IEP
planning process

LUSD statistics of
certified translation
services

ATP program
improvement parent
surveys

Certified translation
services statistics
performed monthly

ATP program
improvement surveys
performed weekly
2. Teachers display
proactive use of
cultural empathy
through interactions
with internal and
external educational
stakeholders.
Number of teachers
showing cultural
empathy towards
stakeholders

ATP program
improvement parent
surveys

ATP program
improvement parent
interviews
ATP program
improvement surveys
performed weekly

ATP program
improvement
interviews performed
monthly

Required drivers. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) stated that drivers are the
motivational and organizational influences that integrate with an individual’s knowledge to help
organizational stakeholders reach their goals. Clark and Estes (2008) concluded that through
motivational and organizational influences, organizational stakeholders could use information
from their knowledge base and apply it in their cultural setting. Clark and Estes also concluded
that through a specific methodological approach, applied interventions should have an increased
chance of being successful within a stakeholder’s organization.
During this study, the researcher observed that the themes of cultural/linguistic empathy,
professional development opportunities, employee relationships, and issues concerning time
prioritization were the pivotal issues concerning ATP teachers. These themes drove the ability
of ATP to meet its organizational student placement goal. They also had an impact on the ability
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 122
of ATP teachers to meet their goal of 100% participation in the stakeholder goal of 100% teacher
participation in the ATP program improvement model. The ATP program improvement model
included drivers to recommended interventions to enable the stakeholders to successfully
implement, accomplish tasks, and establish successful outcomes.
Through the methods of reinforcement, encouragement, rewards, and monitoring, the
ATP organization were able to influence stakeholders with the integration of recommended
interventions into their productivity. Reinforcing methods included weekly collaborative
department meetings, where teachers and administrators supported coworkers about EL best
practices so that each stakeholder could integrate that new knowledge into their professional skill
set. The ATP organization also reinforced teacher growth by developing customizable job aides
aimed at providing teachers information on empathetic best practices. These fact sheets provided
ATP teachers with the most frequently asked questions and enabled them to save valuable time
associated with the answer-seeking process. Lastly, LUSD will provide ATP teachers with
school-district sanctioned cultural empathy professional development so that teachers can learn
the most up-to-date information about specific cultural and linguistic differences that affect the
school district. Through these reinforcement activities, the school district helped ATP teachers
reflect on their own behaviors and self-monitor their behaviors.
Stakeholder reinforcement was then followed by LUSD’s encouragement, rewards, and
monitoring activities. School district encouragement focused on administrative and department
chair support for ATP teachers who had questions or needed further guidance in implementing
the adopted interventions. When teachers effectively met their goals and displayed positive
performance outcomes, they were given praise by both school district administration and ATP
department chairs offering even further intrinsic motivation to continue their performance.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 123
Lastly, ATP teachers’ performance was monitored by both school district and administrative
oversight that served as a professional accountability model. The oversight consisted of LUSD’s
assessments and administrative observations of ATP teacher participation in the ATP program
improvement model. ATP teacher monitoring was completed through a teacher survey that
offered first-hand information about teacher opinions of their current performance levels. Table
13 shows the required drivers that are necessary for LUSD to support the individual internal
stakeholders (teachers) in their application of the recommended interventions.

Table 13
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Methods Timing
Critical
Behaviors
Supported
(1, 2)
REINFORCING

Collaborative department meetings for teachers and
administrators to discuss their progress in implementing cultural
empathy best practices in the IEP planning process.

Weekly 1, 2
Administration-teacher job aids designed to act as a frequently
asked question guide for cultural empathy best practices.
Monthly 1, 2
ENCOURAGING

Administrator support for ATP teachers who need further
guidance in implementing proactive cultural empathy in the IEP
process.
On-going 1, 2

Department chair support for ATP teachers who need further
guidance in implementing proactive cultural empathy in the IEP
process.

On-going 1, 2

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 124
Table 13 (Cont’d.)
Methods Timing
Critical
Behaviors
Supported
(1, 2)
REWARDING

Administrative and course lead formative and summative praise
for meeting ATP stakeholder participation goals.
On-going 1, 2
School district private praise for teachers meeting ATP
stakeholder goals through email and (or) face-to-face meetings.

On-going 1, 2
MONITORING

Teacher completion of an ATP teacher satisfaction survey
focused on IEP planning concerns.

Monthly 1, 2
School district-administrative teacher assessments of stakeholder
participation in ATP program improvement.

Bi-annually 1, 2
ATP Department chair observation of teacher/parent IEP
planning.

On-going 1, 2

Organizational support. Clark and Estes (2008) stated that organizational influences
are a cornerstone of organizational models and their settings. The researchers concluded that
organizational collaboration with their stakeholders could have a direct impact on the way
stakeholders employ their knowledge and motivation to reach both stakeholder and
organizational goals. The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016)
expanded on this by stating that organizational models and settings must proactively support
stakeholders in their performance activities. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) concluded that
without organizational support of stakeholders, organizations could miss a critical opportunity to
assist stakeholders in implementing organizational programs. In the ATP program improvement
model, ATP teachers were being held professionally accountable by LUSD to accomplish their
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 125
goals and were encouraged by the school district to proactively act on recommendation
interventions.
The LUSD professional accountability over ATP should be viewed by stakeholders as an
integration of both motivational influence and a subtle threat. ATP teachers were issued
stakeholder goals that served as a motivational influence for teachers to apply their knowledge,
as it applied to this researcher’s recommendations. On the converse, teachers should understand
that if they did not employ these interventions, they would be held accountable and face
consequences in the form of future rigorous audits conducted by LUSD. Due to the fact that
organizational influences are a critical aspect of stakeholder performance, LUSD would be held
accountable for ensuring that ATP teachers are proactively implementing drivers on a continuous
basis.
Based on this inquiry, the LUSD department of special education could decide to
integrate most of this researcher’s recommendations into the ATP program improvement for a
limited duration through October of 2018. LUSD administration understood that not meeting the
organizational student placement goal was unacceptable and should be willing to adopt well-
thought ideas that focused on stakeholder performance. Through acknowledgement of this ideal,
the school district put several special education administrators and the department chairs of ATP
in charge of intervention implementation. The group was in charge of gauging stakeholder
participation and perceptions through IEP observation, teacher survey, and assessment of ATP
stakeholders.
Through this mixed formative/summative assessment framework, school administration
was able to hold ATP teaching staff professionally accountable for making use of the newly
enacted time specifically for parent/teacher IEP planning. The accountability standards also
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 126
enabled the school district to gauge how teachers felt about their roles in the decision-making
processes that affected ATP. The formative assessments enabled the school district to
understand how newly enacted teacher implemented mid-year student placement changes
affected appropriate student academic placement. Lastly, LUSD should made use of the school
district statistical systems to ensure that all ATP teachers were participating in cultural empathy
training and employed certified translation services on a continual basis. Through analysis of the
statistical data, LUSD would gain a better understanding of the attendance and utilization of two
important interventions that would increase teacher cultural empathy for EL parents and be
perceived by EL families as a proactive response to their initial grievance.
Level 2: Learning
Baker (2006) stated that learning is the act of integrating new understanding into an
individual’s current skill-set. Pajares (2006) concluded that through successful application of
new knowledge concepts into performance skill-sets, individuals develop increased self-efficacy,
which can become the focal antecedent for motivation. In level 2, this researcher examined the
learning process that ATP stakeholders completed to proactively implement the recommended
interventions. These interventions were implemented by LUSD to assist ATP teachers in
reaching their communication and collaboration goals with parents in the IEP process.
Learning goals. ATP stakeholders’ learning goals are analyzed and displayed in the
following section to present what stakeholders should understand to exhibit the critical behaviors
and their drivers were stated in Table 12 and Table 13. The researcher employed the Clark and
Estes (2008) KMO influences to create objectives that influence stakeholder achievement and
performance objectives.
1. Teachers summarize the importance of communication and collaborations.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 127
2. Teachers recognize that displaying cultural empathy breaks down language barriers.
3. Teachers determine the importance of cultural empathy professional development.
4. Teachers identify positive attitudes towards working with families from different
cultures.
5. Teachers recall the sources of support available to them.
6. Teachers integrate time efficiency in the IEP planning process.
7. Teachers use increased self-efficacy based on positive feedback. (self-efficacy)
8. Teachers use motivation to accomplish their goals. (self-efficacy)
9. All internal stakeholders recognize that collaboration benefits the decision-making
process.
10. Teachers recognize that there is a correlation between parent/teacher communication and
appropriate student placement.
Program. The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) stated
that a methodological approach should be adopted by organizations to maximize stakeholder
learning objectives. The researchers concluded that organizations could benefit from these
programs due to the fact that they increase stakeholder knowledge and act as a cultural
accountability model for stakeholder performance. LUSD developed an ATP professional
accountability program based on formative evaluation of stakeholder performance, as they
related to ATP’s organizational student placement goal. The professional accountability was
integrated with an internal ATP stakeholder support program that was instituted by the ATP
administrator to support ATP teachers in achieving their stakeholder learning goals.
The ATP administrator and the ATP Department chairs should hld a collaborative
meeting to discuss and create an ATP stakeholder learning support plan that would be supported
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 128
by the 10 stakeholder learning goals previously listed. Based on the critical stakeholder
behaviors and their performance-based drivers, stakeholder learning goals were created to aid the
internal ATP stakeholder support program in its teacher support role. The goals were developed
based on the stakeholder learning needs that would support ATP teachers understanding of their
supported learning goals. The learning goal support program was enacted to ensure that teachers
understood the knowledge building blocks that affect their ability to reach their guiding ATP
program improvement stakeholder goal.
The ATP teacher learning support program consisted of an initial meeting of all ATP
internal stakeholders and was a collaborative sharing environment where the 10 newly adopted
teacher-learning goals were presented and discussed. At the meeting, teachers were given the
opportunity to ask questions, provide input, and voice their concerns regarding the learning
goals. Based on teacher input, goals were revised to better align with the intervention
implementation process. After the initial meeting, brief weekly meetings were held during the
workday to provide continuous support to teachers through peer tutoring, mentoring, and
reflection of practices. Through the weekly support meetings, teachers became well informed as
to what knowledge and motivational factors supported their goal compliance. The meetings also
served as another subtle reminder to ATP teachers that LUSD and the ATP organization was
monitoring their stakeholder performance to comply with professional accountability standards.
Evaluation of the components of learning. The New World Kirkpatrick Model
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) stated that the five fundamental components of learning are
knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence, and commitment. Clark and Estes (2008) built on this by
stating that through assessment of stakeholder learning, organizations could create baselines and
gauge them against stakeholder learning goals to identify gaps in learning performance. Through
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 129
the formative and summative assessment process, organizations could hold stakeholders
accountable for meeting their learning goals. The assessments would also help to identify
stakeholders who are meeting those goals and stakeholders who need increased learning support.
Table 14 displays the evaluation components that affect the ATP stakeholder learning
goals. In this table, learning methods and their timing are detailed through organizational
assessment of stakeholder learning. The five methodological aspects of organizational
accountability include declarative knowledge, procedural skills, attitude, confidence, and
commitment. Through this evaluative-learning framework, the ATP organization could ensure
that stakeholders received the appropriate knowledge that could be integrated into their
performance skill-sets.

Table 14

Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program
Methods or Activities Timing
DECLARATIVE KNOWLEDGE “I KNOW IT.”
Knowledge checks using collaborative peer
tutoring

Ongoing during training
Knowledge checks through teacher feedback

Ongoing during training
Knowledge checks using formative
assessment

Appropriate transitions
Knowledge checks using summative
assessment
End of training session
PROCEDURAL SKILLS “I CAN DO IT RIGHT NOW.”
Demonstration of effective communication
and collaboration

Ongoing during training
Demonstration of effective teacher utilization
of cultural empathy

Ongoing during training

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 130
Table 14 (Cont’d.)
Methods or Activities Timing
Demonstration of positive participation

Ongoing during training

Teacher reflection assessment End of training session
ATTITUDE “I BELIEVE THIS IS WORTHWHILE.”
Department chair formative assessment of
teacher attitudes towards their learning

Ongoing during training
ATP administrator summative assessment of
the value teachers place on their learning

End of training session
CONFIDENCE “I THINK I CAN DO IT ON THE JOB.”
Teacher presentation reflecting on their
learning

Ongoing during training
Department Chair/teacher discussions on
practice and feedback

Appropriate transitions
ATP administration assessment on teacher
learning

End of training session
COMMITMENT “I WILL DO IT ON THE JOB.”
Summative reflection assessment on teacher
integration of their learning

End of training session
Department chair/teacher collaborative
teacher action plan

Appropriate transitions
Retrospective ATP administrator pre and
post test assessment

End of training session

Level 1: Reaction
The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) stated that level
one focuses on participant perceptions and feedback based on organizational learning
frameworks designed to increase individual performance and reach organizational goals. Clark
and Estes (2008) concluded that by incorporating proactive stakeholder ideas into their cultural
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 131
models and settings, organizations could increase stakeholder performance outcomes. During
the Level 1 reaction phase of the evaluative framework, both formative and summative
evaluations provide an organization with stakeholder perceptions about both the relevance and
effectiveness of organizational learning programs (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) concluded that the reaction phase of an organizational model
provides organizations with the tools necessary to critically assess their learning models so that if
needed, improvements can be made to increase stakeholder and organizational productivity.
Table 15 displays the methods, tools, and the timing associated with the components
required to measure ATP stakeholder reactions to the ATP learning support program. The three
primary aspects that comprise the measurement of stakeholder reactions are engagement,
relevance, and customer satisfaction. Based on these aspects, stakeholder reactions to the ATP
learning support program were measured through observation and stakeholder feedback.
Observations were conducted by the ATP department chairs and the ATP administrator and
served as both formative and summative assessment tools. ATP teacher feedback showed the
first-person perceptions of stakeholder learning and acted as a summative performance
assessment.

Table 15
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Methods or Tools Timing
ENGAGEMENT

Department head observation Ongoing
ATP Administrator observation Ongoing
Teacher feedback End of training session

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 132
Table 15 (Cont’d.)
Methods or Tools Timing
RELEVANCE

Department head observation Ongoing
ATP Administrator observation Ongoing
Teacher feedback End of training session
CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

Department head observation During training and end of training
ATP Administrator observation During training and topic transitions
Teacher feedback End of training session

Evaluation Tools
Evaluation tools should be used by organizations to gauge the effectiveness of
stakeholders and their effectiveness in implementing intervention programs (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). Included in this study were two training evaluations that represented both
formative and summative stakeholder assessment. First, a formative training evaluation was
conducted that represented the Level 1 and Level 2 stakeholder performance levels. Second, a
summative training evaluation was administered that focused on levels one through four of the
New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Immediately following the program implementation. The New World Kirkpatrick
Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) stated that Level 1 and Level 2 training serve as an
important arena for organizations to conduct assessments that reflect stakeholder perceptions and
attitudes about learning. In the ATP learning support program, all 18 of the ATP teachers took
part in a weekly 1-hour training focused on stakeholder reactions to their intervention-based
training program. The assessment was employed by ATP to assess Level 1 (Appendix C) and
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 133
consisted of a brief survey that was evaluated by the ATP department chair and (or) the ATP
administrator to gain a better understanding of stakeholder perceptions of the training.
Level 2 of the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) stated
that Level 2 of the evaluation framework focused on knowledge that stakeholders gain from
organizational training programs. For the evaluation of this training program, the LUSD ATP
also conducted a brief survey (Appendix D) focused on stakeholder perceptions of their learning
goals. The Level 2 assessment tool enabled the ATP program administrator to quickly assess
and synthesize stakeholder responses to ensure that ATP teachers adequately comprehended the
learning goals of the intervention based training program.
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick
(2016) stated that organizational learning programs are evaluated through a four-level process
consisting of results, behaviors, learning, and reactions. The researchers concluded that this
process would be an effective framework for assessing the effectiveness of intervention training
for stakeholders within an organization (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Based on the
recommendations stemming from the inquiry, ATP conducted weekly meetings focusing on each
of the four levels of learning evaluation. At the end of the last training session, the ATP training
team conducted the last in a series of three assessments related to stakeholder performance in the
learning support program.
The final assessment was a summative survey designed to gain a holistic understanding
of stakeholder proficiency in the ATP learning support program. The summative assessment
included questions based on each of the four levels of evaluation and reflected the effectiveness
of both the design of the learning framework and stakeholder learning (Appendix E). Based on
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 134
the stakeholders’ responses, the ATP organization made changes to the learning program to
ensure that it maximizes effectiveness for future trainings (if needed).
Data Analysis and Reporting
Carpenter (2012) stated that assessment findings should be reported in the most clear and
concise manner to ensure that organizational stakeholders understand the results and their
implications. The researcher also stated that assessment findings could increase stakeholder
productivity through the integration of the knowledge into their performance skill-sets. Clark
and Estes (2008) concluded that increases in stakeholder knowledge should help close
performance gaps which would increase the probability of stakeholder and organizational goal
attainment. For this inquiry, the ATP learning support program stakeholder learning evaluations
were presented through a process of data collection and synthesis, followed by direct face-to-face
reporting of the results and findings.
During the ATP learning support process, three assessments will be given to the ATP
teachers who represent the stakeholder group for the program. Formative survey assessments
will be given to the stakeholders after their Level 1 and Level 2 trainings. These formative
evaluations will be followed by a summative survey assessment that will be given to
stakeholders after they have completed their Level 1-4 weekly meetings to gain a holistic view of
stakeholder perceptions. After stakeholders complete the summative assessment for Levels 1-4,
the ATP administrative staff will analyze and synthesize the quantitative findings from the brief
Likert survey. The survey includes themes from each level of the New World Kirkpatrick Model
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) and will provide the ATP staff with stakeholder views on their
learning and perceptions about the design of the learning support framework.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 135
After data is analyzed, it will be inputted into a Microsoft Excel document (Appendix F)
that will examine response frequency, mean, median, and mode. Stakeholders will then attend a
final learning support meeting to review their anonymous responses and reflect on the findings
associated with them. The summative stakeholder reflection will serve as a way to gauge how
effective the learning support program had been at providing learning support for ATP teachers
who were given the task of incorporating recommended interventions as part of the ATP
program improvement program.
Summary
The Clark and Estes (2008) KMO framework was used by the researcher to identify
performance gaps, conduct inquiry, synthesize data, and develop recommendations based on
study findings. The New World Kirkpatrick model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) was built
off of the KMO framework by establishing an evaluation construct that could be used to identify
stakeholder perceptions of recommended interventions, as they applied to the ATP program
improvement model. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) also concluded that the evaluation
model could serve as a tool that enabled ATP administration to identify areas within the learning
model that could use improvement.
The researcher understands that evaluation is an important aspect of the learning process
and would prompt LUSD to adopt the recommended interventions. Through the proactive
learning support program, ATP could promote a culture of learning that should reduce the gaps
in learning and support stakeholders in their goals. To-date, the school district has not adopted
the researcher’s recommended interventions, however the researcher is optimistic that all, or if,
not part of the recommendations will be adopted in the near future. The researcher believes that
the inquiry recommendations coupled with the four-level evaluative learning support plan,
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 136
should enable both the stakeholders and the ATP organization reach future student placement
goals.
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach
Through KMO analysis of the data, the researcher was able to identify current
performance baselines from the three perspectives. Separating the three influences enabled the
researcher to employ a focused approach of each influence on an individualized basis. These
approaches enabled the researcher to gain a deeper understanding and were valuable in that it
enabled the researcher to pin point the antecedents that guided stakeholder behavior. The
focused individual attention paid to each influence also enabled the researcher to dig deeper and
gain a more in-depth understanding of the catalysts that influenced behaviors. Lastly, the KMO
model provided the researcher with the ability to integrate data that had been attained and created
a focused framework from which findings could be identified and inferences could be verified.
The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) provided the study
with a four level, focused approach for evaluating stakeholder learning, should the school district
and ATP adopt the recommendations. Like the KMO model, the four-aspect Kirkpatrick models
were also analyzed on an individualized basis. Focusing on each aspect of evaluation separately
provided the researcher with increased understanding of the evaluation process focused on
potential stakeholder learning. Through this model, the researcher also gained a better
understanding of employing organizational, formative, and summative assessments to gauge
stakeholder performance and evaluation design components.
Although the positive aspects of both the KMO framework and the New World
Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) greatly outweighed the negative aspects,
the researcher identified one primary flaw that presented itself during the course of the inquiry.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 137
The KMO influence was effective in identifying behavioral antecedents followed by the
Kirkpatrick model which focused on stakeholder evaluation. The researcher felt that treating
both KMO and evaluative influences as separate entities provided findings that could be skewed,
due to the fact that in real-world situations both sets of influences are integrated and rarely
exclusive of one another. The researcher concluded that independently looking at each influence
separately could negatively sway research findings in favor of one influence over another.
Limitations and Delimitations
For this inquiry, the researcher employed a qualitative interview methodology that was
supported through the analysis of pertinent documents. The researcher had originally hoped to
interview the entire target population of 18 ATP teachers for the study, however due to time
issues and refusals to participate, the researcher was only able to conduct eight interviews. The
small number of respondents did yield valuable insight into the problem of practice; however, it
left out feedback from those who could or would not participate. The lack of participation on the
part of 10 potential respondents created selection and non-selection bias that could have
influenced the data collected and ultimately the findings and recommendations made by the
researcher.
One other area that the researcher could have improved upon during this inquiry would
have been to interview other internal stakeholders involved with the ATP program improvement
model. During the study, the researcher identified that there was a communicative tension
between teachers and school district decision makers. The feedback on this rift all came from a
teacher point of view and lacked any input from administrators. The researcher understands that
omitting administrators in the interview process could have been a missed opportunity and could
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 138
have provided the inquiry with valuable insight into the problem of practice from a different
perspective.
During the course of the study, the researcher focused on an educational organization and
centered on a target population of 18 teachers in the LUSD ATP. The recommendations created
by the researcher, based on the assumed KMO influences, could be utilized by any school district
regardless of size. These recommendations could also be employed by school districts not just in
a special education context, but in the general education setting as well. This is because the
focus of these recommendations revolved around the practice of cultural empathy, professional
development, and time/relationship issues. These three areas are not inclusive to special
education and could be practiced in any segment of an educational organization. Lastly, the
researcher concluded that the practice of these recommendations could enhance the
communication and collaboration between both internal and external stakeholders leading to
more proactive cultural models and settings.
Future Research
The researcher identified areas of this study that could be applied to future research
studies. Future researchers could inquire about the recommendations that were established in
this study and how they would affect academic stakeholders in a general education setting. The
context of this researcher’s study fell within the scope of special education; however, special
education is only comprised of a small percentage of the makeup of our educational system.
Through application of a similar qualitative methodology and a larger target population, future
researchers could advance this inquiry and widen the scope of its relevance.
The other primary area identified by the researcher as a possible area for future research
is the implementation of this study into different fields. In the literature review section of the
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 139
study, the researcher discussed how communication issues had impacted the physician/patient
relationship. For this reason, the researcher concluded that future research should expand this
study into the medical field. Researchers could focus studies on communication and
collaboration between patients and their physicians and analyze their perceptions of these
relationships. Due to the increase in the EL population in this country, the researcher
understands that a study similar in context but focused on medical stakeholder relationships
could expand on the researcher’s recommendations and yield even further recommendations,
some of which could be applied to an academic context, thus furthering this study even further.
Conclusion
For over a decade, the researcher has been a teacher in special education and has
witnessed every imaginable scenario affecting the IEP process. The vast majority of IEP
planning has taken place with very few major incidents; however, the times when these incidents
occurred were stressful for all stakeholder groups involved. Contentious IEP planning meetings
have affected the communication and collaboration between parents and IEP teams, which have
created challenges in the IEP/transition planning process. These challenges prompted the
researcher to inquire about stakeholder performance focusing on ATP parent/teacher
communication and collaboration in the IEP process.
The researcher understands the importance of stakeholder rapport amongst stakeholders
involved with the special education planning processes. It has been the goal of this inquiry to
provide a more focused understanding of the influences affecting the parent/teacher dynamic and
how these influences can create gaps in performance. Through this qualitative inquiry, it has
been the goal to not only help other teachers within the researcher’s organization, but also to
create dialogue amongst IEP stakeholder relationships outside of the LUSD organization.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 140
The study was pertinent to expanding the knowledge base behind the idea of
communication between teachers and parents and its role in student academic placement.
Through focused inquiry, the researcher identified that proactive communication between
parents and teachers increases data, and it is the synthesis of data that adds to the IEP knowledge
base, thereby enabling educational stakeholders to make better-informed decisions about student
academic placements.

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 141
References
Accardo, P. J., & Whitman, B. Y. (2008). Dictionary of developmental disabilities terminology.
Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Company.
Anderman, E. M., Anderman, L. H., Yough, M. S., & Gimbert, B. G. (2010). Value-added
models of assessment: Implications for motivation and accountability. Educational
Psychologist, 45(2), 123-137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00461521003703045
Ankeny, E. M., & Lehmann, J. P. (2010). The transition lynchpin: The voices of individuals with
disabilities who attended a community college transition program. Community College
Journal of Research and Practice, 34(6), 477-496. doi:10.1080/10668920701382773
Bacon, J. J., & Causton-Theoharis, J. (2013). ‘It should be teamwork:’ A critical investigation of
school practices and parent advocacy in special education. International Journal of
Inclusive Education, 17(7), 682-699.
Baker, L. (2006). Metacognition. Retrieved from http://www.education.com/reference/article/
metacognition/
Bandura, A. (2005). The evolution of social cognitive theory. In K. G. Smith & M. A. Hitt
(Eds.), Great Minds in Management (pp. 9-35). Oxford: Oxford University.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to
theories and methods (5th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Bryan, T., Stiles, N., Burstein, K., Ergul, C., & Chao, P. C. (2007). “Am I supposed to
understand this stuff?” Youth with special health care needs readiness for transition.
Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 42(3), 330-338. Retrieved from
http://www.dddcec.org/etmrddv/TOC/tblecontents.htm
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 142
Buckingham, M., & Coffman, C. (1999). First, break all the rules. New York, NY: Simon and
Schuster.
Carpenter, S. K. (2012). Testing enhances the transfer of learning. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 21(5), 279-283.
Chavez, V., Duran, B., Baker, Q. E., Avila, M. M., & Wallerstein, N. (2008). The dance of race
and privilege in CBPR. In M. Minkler & N. Wallerstein (Eds.), Community-Based
Participatory Research for Health: From Process to Outcomes (pp. 91-105). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/John Wiley & Sons.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Coates, K. (1985). The education for all handicapped children act since 1975. Marquette Law
Review. 69(1), 51-81.
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Crockett, J. B. (2014). Reflections on the concept of the least restrictive environment in special
education. Advances in Learning & Behavioral Disabilities, 2739-61. doi:10.1108/S0735
-004X20140000027004
Cruz, B. C., & Patterson, J. (2005). Cross-cultural simulations in teacher education: Developing
empathy and understanding. Multicultural Perspectives, 7(2), 40-47.
Davies, M., & Beamish, W. (2009).Transitions from school for young adults with intellectual
disability: Parental perspectives on “life as an adjustment.” Journal of Intellectual and
Developmental Disability, 34(3), 248-257. doi:10.1080/13668250903103676
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 143
Dweck, C. S.; Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality.
Psychological Review, 95(2), 256-273. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.256
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory. Retrieved from http://www.
education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/
Fink, A. (2013). How to conduct surveys: A step-by-step guide. (5th

ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
Fossum, B., & Arborelius. (2004). Patient-centered communication: Videotaped consultations.
Patient Education & Counseling, 54(2), 163-169
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45-56.
Gillan, D., & Coughlan, B. (2010). Transition from Special Education into Post-school Services
for Young Adults with Intellectual Disability: Irish Parents' Experience. Journal of Policy
and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 7(3), 196-203.
Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.). Boston, MA:
Pearson.
Greene, G. (2014). Transition of culturally and linguistically diverse youth with disabilities:
Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 40(3), 239-245.
doi:10.3233/JVR-140689
Grossman, R., & Salas, E. (2011). The transfer of training: What really matters. International
Journal of Training and Development, 15(2), 103-120.
Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2015). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative,
and mixed approaches (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 144
Johnson, K. K., & Lichter, D. D. (2016). Diverging demography: Hispanic and non-Hispanic
contributions to U.S. population redistribution and diversity. Population Research &
Policy Review, 35(5), 705-725. doi:10.1007/s11113-016-9403-3
Jones, J. L., & Hensley, L. R. (2012). Taking a closer look at the placement students share their
perspective from inside special education classrooms. Educational Research Quarterly,
35(3), 33-49.
Kirkpatrick, D. L. (2006). Seven keys to unlock the four levels of evaluation. Performance
Improvement, 45(7), 5-8.
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation.
Alexandria, VA: ATD Press.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice,
41I(4), 212-218. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2009). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research
(4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Kurth, J. A., Morningstar, M. E., & Kozleski, E. B. (2014). The persistence of highly restrictive
special education placements for students with low-incidence disabilities. Research and
Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 39(3), 227-239.
Langley, G., Moen, R., Nolan, K., Nolan, T., Norman, C., & Provost, L. (2009). The
improvement guide: A practical approach to enhancing organizational performance (2nd
ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and
task motivation: A 35-year old odyssey. American Psychology, 57(9), 705-717.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 145
Lytle, R. K., & Bordin, J. A. (2001). Enhancing the IEP team. Teaching Exceptional Children,
33(5), 40-44.
Mahmood, S. (2013). First-year preschool and kindergarten teachers: challenges of working with
parents. School Community Journal, 23(2), 55-85.
Malloy, C. (2011). Moving beyond data: Practitioner-led inquiry fosters change. Phi Delta
Kappa International, 6(4), 1-20.
Marchese, S. (2000). Putting square pegs into round holes: Mediation and the rights of children
with disabilities under the IDEA. Rutgers Law Review, 53, 333.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
McGee, H. M., & Johnson, D. A. (2015). Performance motivation as the behaviorist views
it. Performance Improvement, 54(4), 15-21.
McKernan, J. F. (2012). Accountability as aporia, testimony, and gift. Critical Perspectives on
Accounting, 23(3), 258-278.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. (4th ed.).
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Morningstar, M. E., Kim, K-H., & Clark. G. M. (2008). Evaluating a transition personnel
preparation program: Identifying transition competencies of practitioners. Teacher
Education and Special Education, 31(1), 47-58. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.
1177/088840640803100105
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 146
Neece, C. L., Kraemer, B. R., & Blacher, J. (2009). Transition satisfaction and family well being
among parents of young adults with severe intellectual disability. Intellectual and
Developmental Disabilities, 47(1), 31-43.doi:10.1352/2009.47:31-43.
Ogden, J., Bavalia, K., Bull, M., Frankum, S., Goldie. C., Gosslau. M., Jones. A., Kumar, S., &
Vasant. K. (2004). I want more time with my doctor: A quantitative study of time and the
consultation. Family Practice, 21(5), 479-483.
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. Retrieved from http://www.education.com/reference/
article/self-efficacy-theory/
Park, Y. Y. (2008). Transition services for high school students with disabilities. Exceptionality
Education International, 18(3), 95-111. Retrieved from http://ejournals.library.
ualberta.ca/index.php/eei/article/view/4498.
Patterson, K. (2005). What classroom teachers need to know about. Kappa Delta Pi Record,
41(2), 62-67.
Pekrun, R. (2011). Emotions as drivers of learning and cognitive development. In R. A. Calvo &
S. K. D’Mello (Eds.), New Perspectives on Affect and Learning Technologies (pp. 23-
39). New York, NY: Springer. doi 10.1007/978-1-4419-9625-1_3
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.
Povenmire-Kirk, T. C., Lindstrom, L., & Bullis, M. (2010). De escuela a la vida adulta/from
school to adult life: Transition needs for Latino youth with disabilities and their families.
Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 33(1), 41-51. doi:10.1177/08857288
09359004.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 147
Powell-Sears, K. (2012). Improving cultural competence education: The utility of an
intersectional framework. Medical Education, 46(6), 545-551.
Ramanathan, A. K. (2008). Paved with good intentions: The federal role in oversight and
enforcement of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and the No Child
Left Behind Act (NCLB). Teachers College Record, 110(2), 278-321.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.)
(pp. 85-92). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. New York, NY:
Teachers College Press.
Ruppar, A. L., & Gaffney, J. S. (2011). Individualized education program team decisions: A
preliminary study of conversations, negotiations, and power. Research & Practice for
Persons with Severe Disabilities, 36(1/2), 11-22.
Schein, E. H. (2004). The concept of organizational culture: Why bother? In E. H. Schein,
(Ed.), Organizational culture and leadership (3rd ed., pp. 3-24). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey Bass.
Schneider, B., Brief, A., & Guzzo, R. (1996). Creating a culture and climate for sustainable
organizational change. Organizational Dynamics, 24(4), 7-19.
Schultz, T., Sreckovic, M.A., Able, H., & White, T. (2016). Parent-teacher collaboration:
Teacher perceptions of what is needed to support students with ASD in the inclusive
classroom. Education & Training in Autism & Developmental Disabilities, 51(4). 344-
354.
Shraw, G., & Lehman, S. (2009). Interest. Retrieved from http://www.education.com/refer
ence/article/interest/
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 148
Summer, M., & Summer, G. (2014). Creating family learning communities. Young Children,
69(4), 8-14.
Weiner, B. (1985). An attribution theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological
Review, 92, 548-73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.92.4.548
Weiner, B. (2006). Social motivation, justice, and the moral emotions: An attributional
approach. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
West, C. P. (2012). Empathy, distress and a new understanding of doctor professionalism.
Medical Education, 46(3), 243-244.
Work, W., & Stafford, L. (2013). Parent teacher-communication. Communication Education,
36(2), 186-187.
Yee, D. K., & Eccles, J. S. (1988). Parent perceptions and attributions for children’s Math
Achievement. Sex roles, 19, 317-333

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 149
Appendix A
Informed Consent Form

University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Los Angeles, CA 90089

INFORMED CONSENT FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH

IEP Stakeholder Communication and Collaboration and its Effects On Student Placement

You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Micah Stork, principal
investigator, Dr. Monique Datta, Faculty Advisor at the University of Southern California,
because you are a special education teacher in the Long Beach Unified School District (LBUSD)
Adult Community Transition Program (ACT). Your participation is voluntary. You should read
the information below, and ask questions about anything you do not understand, before deciding
whether to participate. Please take as much time as you need to read the consent form. You may
also decide to discuss participation with your family or friends. If you decide to participate, you
will be asked to sign this form. You will be given a copy of this form.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study is to examine the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences
associated with ACT teacher’s communication and collaboration with parents in the IEP process.

STUDY PROCEDURES
If you volunteer to participate in this study, you will be asked to participate in one scheduled
interview. The interview will be recorded. You will be afforded the opportunity to review the
transcription of the interview and retract or amend any statement or the interview in its entirety.
The interviews will occur at the Tucker Administrative Site. Each interview will last no longer
than one hour.

POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS
No risks are foreseen resulting from your participation in this study.

POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO PARTICIPANTS AND/OR TO SOCIETY
Your participation will help address gaps in teacher/parent communication and collaboration in
the IEP process. Honest and insightful responses, regardless of content, should allow the ACT
Program to increase student appropriate placement.

CONFIDENTIALITY
We will keep your records for this study confidential as far as permitted by law. However, if we
are required to do so by law, we will disclose confidential information about you. The members
of the research team, and the University of Southern California’s Human Subjects Protection
Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors research studies to
protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 150
The data will be stored in a locked cabinet in the researcher’s office. As stated previously, you
will be able to access the transcription of your interview for edits or retractions. A pseudonym
will be assigned to you (i.e., if you are a teacher from New York named Stanley, your
pseudonym may be Janice, a teacher in a large urban school district) for purposes of inclusion in
the dissertation. You will have the right to review the pseudonym prior to its use. All data will
be coded for similarities in responses and stored on a password-encrypted computer. After all
data has been analyzed, synthesized and integrated into the researcher’s dissertation all interview
data will be destroyed.

PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL
Your participation is voluntary. Your refusal to participate will involve no penalty or loss of
benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. You may withdraw your consent at any time and
discontinue participation without penalty. You are not waiving any legal claims, rights or
remedies because of your participation in this research study. If the interview were to uncover
any harmful or illegal activities on your part, the interview may be terminated without prior
notice.

ALTERNATIVES TO PARTICIPATION
If you desire to participate, but feel uncomfortable in the interview process, a written list of
questions can be provided to you for completion at your convenience.

INVESTIGATOR’S CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact Micah Stork:
Principal Investigator, micahsto@usc.edu, 2388 N. Heliotrope Dr. Santa Ana, CA 92706.

RIGHTS OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANT – IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have questions, concerns, or complaints about your rights as a research participant or the
research in general and are unable to contact the research team, or if you want to talk to someone
independent of the research team, please contact the University Park Institutional Review Board
(UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or
upirb@usc.edu

SIGNATURE OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANT

I have read the information provided above. I have been given a chance to ask questions. My
questions have been answered to my satisfaction, and I agree to participate in this study. I have
been given a copy of this form.

AUDIO/VIDEO/PHOTOGRAPHS (If this is not applicable to your study and/or if
participants do not have a choice of being audio/video-recorded or photographed, delete
this section.)

□ I agree to be audio recorded

□ I do not want to be audio recorded

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 151

Name of Participant

Signature of Participant Date

SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR

I have explained the research to the participant and answered all questions. I believe that he/she
understands the information described in this document and freely consents to participate.

Micah Stork
Name of Person Obtaining Consent

Signature of Person Obtaining Consent Date

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 152
Appendix B
Interview Protocol
1. How would you describe your role in IEP meetings?
Probe: Do you see yourself as more of a facilitator or a director at these meetings?
2. If I observed your communication with parents at an IEP meeting, what would I
see?
Probe: Would you consider yourself more of an active listener or an active speaker?
3. Describe how demographic changes affect the IEP process.
Probe: What percentage of your student’s parents are English language learners (EL)?
Has this number increased or decreased since you started teaching in ATP?
4. Describe a recent meeting with EL parents to me.
Probe: How long did that meeting take? How long does a typical IEP meeting take with
parents whose first language is English?
5. What influences do EL parents have on the IEP process?
Probe: What time perceptions do you hold about IEP meetings with EL parents?
6. Describe how you integrate parent input into the IEP process.
Probe: Do you feel that parent input is as important as input from school district members
of an IEP team?
7. Describe how you employ cultural empathy when communicating with EL parents.
Probe: Does this come easy for you? Do you perceive this as a time constraint?
8. Describe the role that parent collaboration during IEP meetings plays for
administering student academic placements.
Probe: Do parent inputs directly affect IEP team decisions on student academic
placement?
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 153
9. Describe your typical daily workload relating to the IEP process.
Probe: Do you feel you’re given enough time for IEP planning? Are IEP paperwork and
deadlines or IEP planning valued equally by school district administration?
10. How would you describe the relationships between administration and teachers in
ATP?
Probe: Are your interactions with them collaborative?
11. What school district influences affect teacher participation in ATP program
improvement?
Probe: Are you more motivated by directives or being a part of the process?
12. How does your professional development training impact the IEP process?
Probe: What specific types of professional development training have you been a part of?
Have you ever taken training in cultural and (or) linguistic empathy?

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 154
Appendix C
Level 1 Survey
1. I found that I was able to understand how this training affected my focus on
communication and collaboration?
Yes No

2. The training will help me to conduct more proactive IEP planning with parents
Yes No

3. I am satisfied with the way instruction was presented
Yes No

4. I am satisfied with the instruction that I received
Satisfied Unsatisfied
0 1 2 3 4
Always Usually Sometimes Usually Always

5. I am confident that I can apply instructional themes in my IEP planning
Confident Doubtful
0 1 2 3 4
Always Usually Sometimes Usually Always

6. I found the training that I received was applicable to my role as an educator?
Applicable Inappropriate
0 1 2 3 4
Always Usually Sometimes Usually Always

7. What adjustments could be administered to make the instruction more applicable?

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 155
Appendix D
Level 2 Survey
1. I understand the importance of communication and collaboration
Yes No

2. I understand that language proficiency affects perceptions
Yes No

2. I understand that displaying cultural empathy breaks down language barriers.
Yes No

3. I understand that knowledgeable language translation decreases misunderstandings
Yes No

4. I understand the importance of cultural empathy professional development
Yes No

5. I understand possess positive attitudes towards working with families from different
cultures
Yes No

6. I am knowledgeable about the sources of support available
Knowledgeable Unaware
0 1 2 3 4
Always Usually Sometimes Usually Always

7. I am able to utilize time efficiency in the IEP planning process
Frequently Infrequently
0 1 2 3 4
Always Usually Sometimes Usually Always

8. I can develop increased self-efficacy based on positive feedback
Frequently Infrequently
0 1 2 3 4
Always Usually Sometimes Usually Always
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 156

9. I can employ motivation to accomplish my goals
Frequently Infrequently
0 1 2 3 4
Always Usually Sometimes Usually Always

10. I understand that professional accountability should be used as a motivational influence
Understand Disregard
0 1 2 3 4
Always Usually Sometimes Usually Always

11. I understand that collaboration benefits the decision making process
Understand Disregard
0 1 2 3 4
Always Usually Sometimes Usually Always

12. I understand that there is a correlation between parent/teacher communication and
appropriate student placement
Understand Disregard
0 1 2 3 4
Always Usually Sometimes Usually Always

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 157
Appendix E
Level 1-4 Survey
1. The delivery of information was clear and understandable:
Understandable Ambiguous
0 1 2 3 4
Always Usually Sometimes Usually Always

2. The training I received was useful:
Useful Harmful
0 1 2 3 4
Always Usually Sometimes Usually Always

3. I can apply communication and collaboration effectively in IEP planning:
Effective Ineffective
0 1 2 3 4
Always Usually Sometimes Usually Always

4. I know how to apply cultural empathy with EL parents:
Effectively Ineffectively
0 1 2 3 4
Always Usually Sometimes Usually Always

5. I ask questions during the learning process:
Frequently Infrequently
0 1 2 3 4
Always Usually Sometimes Usually Always

6. I reflect on my learning on an ongoing basis:
Frequently Infrequently
0 1 2 3 4
Always Usually Sometimes Usually Always

7. I am applying what I’m learning to accomplish my stakeholder goals:
Frequently Infrequently
0 1 2 3 4
Always Usually Sometimes Usually Always

8. My learning has directly affected my ability to appropriately place students:
Helpful Unhelpful
0 1 2 3 4
Always Usually Sometimes Usually Always

Appendix F
ATP Learning Support Program Assessment Review

Assessment Codebook

Q1
The delivery of information was clear and
understandable
Q2 The training I received was useful
Q3
I can apply communication and collaboration
effectively in IEP planning
Q4
I know how to apply cultural empathy with
EL parents
Q5 I ask questions during the learning process
Q6 I reflect on my learning on an ongoing basis
Q7
I am applying what I’m learning to accomplish my
stakeholder goals
Q8
My learning has directly affected my ability
to appropriately place students

LIKERT SCALE RESPONSE

Always (P) A positive response to the question
Usually (P) A positive response to the question
Sometimes (N) A neutral response to the question
Usually (N) A negative response to the question
Always (N) A negative response to the question

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8
P1 3 4 3 4 3 3 2 3
P2 4 3 2 4 2 4 3 3
P3 3 3 0 2 2 4 3 3
P4 2 3 3 2 2 4 3 2
P5 3 3 4 3 3 4 2 3
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 158

Appendix F (Cont’d.)
P6 3 3 2 3 3 4 3 3
P7 3 3 0 4 1 4 3 2
P8 1 2 4 4 1 4 3 3
P9 3 1 3 4 2 4 3 3
P10 0 3 3 2 3 4 4 3
P11 2 3 3 3 3 4 3 1
P12 3 0 2 3 2 4 4 2
P13 1 3 3 4 1 4 2 3
P14 3 2 4 3 2 4 3 3
P15 4 2 3 3 3 4 3 4
P16 3 2 2 2 3 4 3 4
P17 1 3 3 3 3 4 4 4
P18 3 1 3 2 3 4 2 3

FREQUENCY

Always (P) 4 2 1 3 5 0 17 3 3
Usually (P) 3 9 9 9 7 9 1 11 11
Sometimes 2 2 4 4 4 6 0 4 3
Usually (N) 1 3 2 0 0 3 0 0 1
Always (N) 0 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0
Most
Frequent
Usually
(P) Usually (P) Usually (P) Usually (P) Usually (P) Always (P) Usually (P) Usually (P)
MEAN 2.5 2.444444444 2.611111111 3.055555556 2.333333333 3.944444444 2.944444444 2.888888889
MEDIAN 3 3 3 3 2.5 4 3 3
MODE 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION 159

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Equitable schooling for African American students: an evaluation study

PDF

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

PDF

Using restorative practice community-building activities to meet the social-emotional needs of students

PDF

School integration as a reform strategy: the principal’s role, an evaluation study

PDF

The knowledge, motivation, and organization influences affecting the frequency of empathetic teaching practice used in the classroom: an evaluation study

PDF

Creating changemakers: integrating social innovation and service-learning to empower student voice and bolster college, career, and civic readiness

PDF

The racially responsive facilitator: an evaluation study

PDF

Factors related to transfer and graduation in Latinx community college students

PDF

Leadership and the impact on organizational citizenship behaviors: an evaluation study

PDF

Partnerships and nonprofit leadership: the influence of nonprofit managers on community partnerships

PDF

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

PDF

The inconsistency of teachers reporting and intervening in bullying situations: an evaluation study

PDF

The impact of teacher perceptions about underrepresented students

PDF

Information technology architects’ shift to remote work: an exploration of collaboration challenges

PDF

Access to standards-based curriculum for students with severe and multiple disabilities: an evaluation study

PDF

Effective services provided to community college student-athletes: a gap analysis

PDF

Inclusion of adjunct faculty in the community college culture

PDF

How can I help you? A study of onboarding and ongoing supports for new teachers

PDF

Development of intraorganizational post-merger collaboration plan: an evaluation study

PDF

Building employers’ capacity to support competitive employment for adults with autism: a promising practice study

Asset Metadata

Creator Stork, Micah (author)

Core Title IEP stakeholder communication and collaboration and its effects on student placement

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 02/21/2019

Defense Date 12/20/2018

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

Tag collaboration,Communication,IEP,OAI-PMH Harvest,placement,student

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Datta, Monique (committee chair), Campbell, Deanna (committee member), Maddox, Anthony (committee member)

Creator Email micahsto@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-127152

Unique identifier UC11675805

Identifier etd-StorkMicah-7106.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-127152 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-StorkMicah-7106.pdf

Dmrecord 127152

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Stork, Micah

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