University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Implementation of the Social Justice Anchor Standards in the West Coast Unified School District: a gap analysis

(USC Thesis Other)

Implementation of the Social Justice Anchor Standards in the West Coast Unified School District: a gap analysis

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS

1

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS IN THE
WEST COAST UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT: A GAP ANALYSIS
by

Paul Karaiakoubian

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 Paul Karaiakoubian

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 2
Acknowledgements
The past three years have been incredible and I have been lucky enough to have an
amazing group of colleagues, friends, professors, and family that have supported and kept me
sane throughout this process.
To my parents, you have supported me through everything since the beginning.
Regardless of the decisions I have made, you always gave me the confidence and advice I
needed to succeed. You are my inspiration and my motivation. I see all the sacrifices you have
made for me and I strive to be my best self each day because of it.
To my amazing classmates and cohort, your ideas and our discussions really opened my
mind to new perspectives about how to be a leader. School never felt overwhelming because
you guys were always there to make the process so easy and fun.
To Eric, I could not have asked for a better classmate, coworker, and friend. We only
worked together before this program and I did not really know you, but I am so glad we grew as
colleagues and even more so as friends. You definitely kept me sane throughout this process.
Bouncing ideas off each other and always hearing your perspectives gave me a lot of insight. I
could not imagine this journey without you. We made it!
To my committee Dr. Kenneth Yates, Dr. Sandra Kaplan, and Dr. David Cash, thank you
for your guidance, wisdom and support throughout this dissertation process. I was lucky enough
to take classes with three of you and have learned so much about curriculum, leadership,
accountability, learning, and gap analysis. You made the dissertation process valuable and
enjoyable and I could not have asked for a better committee.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 3
Table of Contents
List of Tables .............................................................................................................................6
List of Figures ..........................................................................................................................13
Abstract ....................................................................................................................................14
Chapter One: Introduction .......................................................................................................15
Introduction of the Problem of Practice .......................................................................15
Organizational Context and Mission ...........................................................................15
Organizational Performance Status ..............................................................................16
Related Literature .........................................................................................................17
Teacher Bias and the Achievement Gap ..........................................................17
Teacher Expectations and the Achievement Gap ............................................17
Combating Bias ................................................................................................19
Importance of the Problem to the Organization ...........................................................20
Organizational Performance Goal ................................................................................20
Description of the Stakeholders ...................................................................................20
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals ................................................................................21
Stakeholder Group for the Study .................................................................................22
Stakeholder of Focus Critical Behaviors .....................................................................22
Purpose of the Project and Questions ..........................................................................23
Conceptual and Methodological Framework ...............................................................23
Organization of the Study ............................................................................................24
Definitions ....................................................................................................................25
Social Justice Pedagogy ...................................................................................25
Culturally Responsive Teaching ......................................................................25
Teacher Agency ...............................................................................................25
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ...................................................................................26
Social Justice Pedagogy ...............................................................................................27
Need for Social Justice Pedagogy ....................................................................27
History of Social Justice .................................................................................28
Conceptual Framework ....................................................................................28
Implementation of Social Justice Pedagogy ................................................................32
Teacher Preparation .........................................................................................33
Challenges of Implementation .........................................................................37
Challenges for Teachers ...................................................................................39
Challenges for Site Leaders .............................................................................40
Methodological Framework .........................................................................................41
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Factors ...............................42
Knowledge and Skills ......................................................................................42
Motivation .......................................................................................................56
Organization .....................................................................................................67
Chapter Three: Methodology ...................................................................................................80
Purpose of the Project and Questions ..........................................................................80
Conceptual and Methodological Framework ..............................................................80
Assessment of Performance Influences .......................................................................82
Knowledge Assessment ...................................................................................83
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 4
Motivation Assessment ....................................................................................94
Organization/Culture/Context Assessment ...................................................102
Participating Stakeholders and Sample Selection ......................................................110
Sampling ........................................................................................................110
Recruitment ...................................................................................................111
Instrumentation ..........................................................................................................111
Survey Design ...............................................................................................111
Interview Protocol Design ............................................................................113
Document Analysis .......................................................................................113
Data Collection ..........................................................................................................113
Surveys ..........................................................................................................113
Interviews ......................................................................................................114
Data Analysis .............................................................................................................115
Trustworthiness of Data .............................................................................................116
Role of Investigator ....................................................................................................116
Limitations ................................................................................................................117
Chapter Four: Results and Findings .......................................................................................118
Participating Stakeholders .........................................................................................118
Criteria for Determining Assets and Needs ...............................................................119
Results and Findings for Knowledge Causes .............................................................120
Factual Knowledge ........................................................................................120
Conceptual Knowledge ..................................................................................132
Procedural Knowledge ..................................................................................144
Metacognitive Knowledge .............................................................................153
Results and Findings for Motivation Causes .............................................................155
Value .............................................................................................................155
Self-efficacy ...................................................................................................163
Emotion ..........................................................................................................169
Goal Orientation ............................................................................................175
Results and Findings for Organization Causes ..........................................................183
Resources .......................................................................................................183
Policies, Processes, and Procedures ...............................................................196
Culture Setting ...............................................................................................205
Culture Model ................................................................................................213
Summary of Determined Influences and Assets ........................................................218
Knowledge .....................................................................................................218
Motivation ......................................................................................................220
Organization ...................................................................................................222
Chapter Five: Recommendations and Evaluation ..................................................................224
Purpose of the Project and Questions ........................................................................224
Recommendations to Address Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization
Influences ..................................................................................................................225
Knowledge Recommendations ......................................................................226
Motivation Recommendations .......................................................................232
Organization Recommendations ....................................................................238
Summary of Knowledge, Motivation and Organization Recommendations .............244
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 5
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan ........................................................245
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations ...........................................245
Implementation and Evaluation Framework ..................................................246
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators ........................................................247
Level 3: Behavior ...........................................................................................249
Level 2: Learning ...........................................................................................254
Level 1: Reaction ...........................................................................................258
Evaluation Tools ............................................................................................259
Data Analysis and Reporting .........................................................................260
Summary of the Implementation and Evaluation ..........................................260
Limitations and Delimitations ....................................................................................263
Recommendations for Future Research .....................................................................264
Conclusion .................................................................................................................265
References ..............................................................................................................................266
Appendix A ............................................................................................................................282
Appendix B ............................................................................................................................283
Appendix C ............................................................................................................................287
Appendix D ............................................................................................................................288

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 6
List of Tables
Table 1: Organizational Goal and Mission ..............................................................................21
Table 2: Summary of Assumed Knowledge Influences on Teachers’ Ability to
Achieve the Performance Goal ................................................................................................53
Table 3: Summary of Assumed Motivation Influences on Teachers’ Ability to
Achieve the Performance Goal ................................................................................................65
Table 4: Summary of Assumed Organization Influences on Teachers’ Ability to
Achieve the Performance Goal ................................................................................................75
Table 5: Summary of Knowledge Influences and Method of Assessment ..............................85
Table 6: Summary of Motivation Influences and Method of Assessment ...............................96
Table 7: Summary of Organizational Influences and Method of Assessment .......................104
Table 8: Survey Results for Factual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards,
Factual Knowledge Item 1 .....................................................................................................121
Table 9: Survey Results for Factual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards,
Factual Knowledge Item 2 .....................................................................................................122
Table 10: Survey Results for Factual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards,
Factual Knowledge Item 3 .....................................................................................................123
Table 11: Survey Results for Factual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards,
Factual Knowledge Item 4 .....................................................................................................125
Table 12: Survey Results for Factual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards,
Factual Knowledge Item 5 .....................................................................................................126
Table 13: Survey Results for Factual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards,
Factual Knowledge Item 6 .....................................................................................................127
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 7
Table 14: Survey Results for Factual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards,
Factual Knowledge Item 7 .....................................................................................................128
Table 15: Survey Results for Factual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards,
Factual Knowledge Item 8 .....................................................................................................129
Table 16: Survey Results for Factual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards,
Factual Knowledge Item 9 .....................................................................................................130
Table 17: Survey Results for Factual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards,
Factual Knowledge Item 10 ..................................................................................................131
Table 18: Survey Results for Conceptual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Conceptual Knowledge Item 1 .............................................................................133
Table 19: Survey Results for Conceptual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Conceptual Knowledge Item 2 .............................................................................136
Table 20: Survey Results for Conceptual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Conceptual Knowledge Item 3 .............................................................................137
Table 21: Survey Results for Conceptual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Conceptual Knowledge Item 4 .............................................................................138
Table 22: Survey Results for Conceptual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Conceptual Knowledge Item 5 .............................................................................140
Table 23: Survey Results for Conceptual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Conceptual Knowledge Item 6 .............................................................................141
Table 24: Survey Results for Conceptual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Conceptual Knowledge Item 7 .............................................................................142

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 8
Table 25: Survey Results for Procedural Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Procedural Knowledge Item 1 ..............................................................................145
Table 26: Survey Results for Procedural Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Procedural Knowledge Item 2 ..............................................................................147
Table 27: Survey Results for Procedural Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Procedural Knowledge Item 3 ..............................................................................149
Table 28: Survey Results for Procedural Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Procedural Knowledge Item 4 ..............................................................................150
Table 29: Survey Results for Procedural Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Procedural Knowledge Item 5 ..............................................................................151
Table 30: Survey Results for Metacognitive Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Metacognitive Knowledge Item ...........................................................................154
Table 31: Survey Results for Value Motivation of Social Justice Anchor Standards,
Value Motivation Item 1 ........................................................................................................156
Table 32: Survey Results for Value Motivation of Social Justice Anchor Standards,
Value Motivation Item 2 ........................................................................................................157
Table 33: Survey Results for Value Motivation of Social Justice Anchor Standards,
Value Motivation Item 3 ........................................................................................................158
Table 34: Survey Results for Value Motivation of Social Justice Anchor Standards,
Value Motivation Item 4 ........................................................................................................160
Table 35: Survey Results for Value Motivation of Social Justice Anchor Standards,
Value Motivation Item 5 ........................................................................................................161

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 9
Table 36: Survey Results for Value Motivation of Social Justice Anchor Standards,
Value Motivation Item 6 ........................................................................................................163
Table 37: Survey Results for Self-efficacy Motivation of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Self-efficacy Motivation Item 1 ...........................................................................164
Table 38: Survey Results for Self-efficacy Motivation of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Self-efficacy Motivation Item 2 ...........................................................................165
Table 39: Survey Results for Self-efficacy Motivation of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Self-efficacy Motivation Item 3 ...........................................................................166
Table 40: Survey Results for Self-efficacy Motivation of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Self-efficacy Motivation Item 4 ...........................................................................167
Table 41: Survey Results for Self-efficacy Motivation of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Self-efficacy Motivation Item 5 ...........................................................................168
Table 42: Survey Results for Goal Orientation Motivation of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Goal Orientation Motivation Item 1 .....................................................................175
Table 43: Survey Results for Goal Orientation Motivation of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Goal Orientation Motivation Item 2 .....................................................................176
Table 44: Survey Results for Goal Orientation Motivation of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Goal Orientation Motivation Item 3 .....................................................................178
Table 45: Survey Results for Goal Orientation Motivation of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Goal Orientation Motivation Item 4 .....................................................................179
Table 46: Survey Results for Goal Orientation Motivation of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Goal Orientation Motivation Item 5 .....................................................................182

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 10
Table 47: Survey Results for Organization Resources of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Organization Resources Item 1 ............................................................................184
Table 48: Survey Results for Organization Resources of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Organization Resources Item 2 ............................................................................186
Table 49: Survey Results for Organization Resources of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Organization Resources Item 3 ............................................................................188
Table 50: Survey Results for Organization Resources of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Organization Resources Item 4 ............................................................................189
Table 51: Survey Results for Organization Resources of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Organization Resources Item 5 ............................................................................191
Table 52: Survey Results for Organization Resources of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Organization Resources Item 6 ............................................................................194
Table 53: Survey Results for Organization Resources of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Organization Resources Item 7 ............................................................................195
Table 54: Survey Results for Organization Policies, Processes, and Procedures of
SJAS, Organization Policies, Processes, and Procedures Item 1 ...........................................197
Table 55: Survey Results for Organization Policies, Processes, and Procedures of
SJAS, Organization Policies, Processes, and Procedures Item 2 ...........................................198
Table 56: Survey Results for Organization Policies, Processes, and Procedures of
SJAS, Organization Policies, Processes, and Procedures Item 3 ...........................................200
Table 57: Survey Results for Organization Policies, Processes, and Procedures of
SJAS, Organization Policies, Processes, and Procedures Item 4 ...........................................201

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 11
Table 58: Survey Results for Organization Policies, Processes, and Procedures of
SJAS, Organization Policies, Processes, and Procedures Item 5 ...........................................203
Table 59: Survey Results for Organization Policies, Processes, and Procedures of
SJAS, Organization Policies, Processes, and Procedures Item 6 ...........................................204
Table 60: Survey Results for Organization Culture Setting of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Organization Culture Setting Item 1 ....................................................................206
Table 61: Survey Results for Organization Culture Setting of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Organization Culture Setting Item 2 ....................................................................207
Table 62: Survey Results for Organization Culture Setting of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Organization Culture Setting Item 3 ....................................................................208
Table 63: Survey Results for Organization Culture Setting of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Organization Culture Setting Item 4 ....................................................................211
Table 64: Survey Results for Organization Culture Setting of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Organization Culture Setting Item 5 ....................................................................212
Table 65: Survey Results for Organization Culture Model of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Organization Culture Model Item 1 .....................................................................214
Table 66: Survey Results for Organization Culture Model of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Organization Culture Model Item 2 .....................................................................215
Table 67: Survey Results for Organization Culture Model of Social Justice Anchor
Standards, Organization Culture Model Item 3 .....................................................................217
Table 68: Summary of Assumed Knowledge Causes Demonstrated ....................................218
Table 69: Summary of Assumed Motivation Causes Demonstrated .....................................220
Table 70: Summary of Assumed Organization Causes Demonstrated ..................................222
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 12
Table 71: Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations .................................226
Table 72: Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations .................................233
Table 73: Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations ..............................238
Table 74: Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes ................248
Table 75: Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation .......................250
Table 76: Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors ....................................................252
Table 77: Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program ................................257
Table 78: Components to Measure Reactions to the Program ...............................................258

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 13
List of Figures
Figure 1: The sequence of steps in the GAP analysis Process .................................................82

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 14
Abstract
This study utilized the gap analysis problem-solving framework (Clark & Estes, 2008) to
understand the teachers’ needs in creating and implementing a social justice curriculum across
all grade levels and content areas. The purpose of this study was to conduct an analysis to
identify and understand the assets and needs for West Coast Unified School District (WCUSD)
to motivate, support, and prepare teachers to implement the Social Justice Anchor Standards in
all curricula. The knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational resources of teachers
participating in Social Justice Cohort 1 in WCUSD were assessed using survey and interview
data. Twelve teachers participating in Social Justice Cohort 1 participated in the survey and four
of these teachers were interviewed. Survey data was analyzed using descriptive statistics
through Qualtrics and interviews were analyzed in an effort to establish whether or not gaps
existed. The validated assumed causes for declarative factual knowledge, conceptual knowledge,
procedural knowledge, metacognitive knowledge, value, self-efficacy, emotion, goal orientation,
resources, policies and procedures, cultural setting, and cultural models were identified.
Solutions to the validated causes were developed and recommended to improve the knowledge
and skills, motivation, and organizational components of teachers. Moreover, this study
contribute to this nation-wide effort and can be used to inform future efforts by similar districts
or organizations trying to achieve a similar goal.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 15
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Introduction of the Problem of Practice
Student achievement in our elementary and secondary schools depends on the school
system’s ability to provide a safe, equitable, and just learning environment. When the system
fails to provide these, the consequences are often student achievement gaps caused by the
intersection of racism, sexism, and deculturation. On the other hand, when our schools “reduce
prejudice, improve intergroup relations, and support equitable school experiences [we] educate
all students for full participation in a diverse democracy.”
The Social Justice Standards are a set of anchor standards and age-appropriate learning
outcomes divided into four domains—identity, diversity, justice and action (IDJA). The
standards provide a common language and organizational structure: Teachers can use
them to guide curriculum development, and administrators can use them to make schools
more just, equitable and safe. The standards are leveled for every stage of K–12
education and include school-based scenarios to show what anti-bias attitudes and
behavior may look like in the classroom.
The goal of the Social Justice Anchor Standards (SJAS) is to teach students the attitudes and
behaviors that both reduce prejudice and advocate collective action.
Organizational Context and Mission
The West Coast Unified School District (WCUSD) is headquartered in the West Coast
and serves the coastal communities of West Coast and Beach City. It is located in Los Angeles
County and serves 11,000 students in preschool through 12th grade in 10 elementary schools,
two middle schools, one middle / high school, one comprehensive high school, a continuation
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 16
high school and a K - 8th grade alternative school. The district is also home to 11 early
childhood education centers and an adult school.
The WCUSD Mission Statement: extraordinary achievement for all students while
simultaneously closing the achievement gap, guides the work of the Excellence through Equity
plan that includes the following three priorities: All graduates are ready for college and careers;
English learners will become proficient in English while engaging in a rigorous, standards-
aligned curriculum and all students engage in schools that are safe, well-maintained and family-
friendly.
Organizational Performance Status
WCUSD desires to examine the assets and needs for the school district to motivate,
support, and prepare teachers to implement the Social Justice Anchor Standards into all
curricula.
As a District-wide innovation, identifying these assets and needs provides the District
with the information it needs to implement the Social Justice Anchor Standards and gain the
necessary support of the teachers, administration, school board, and community.
Implementation of the Standards will positively impact the District’s mission that
students of diverse backgrounds and cultures be engaged and connected with the curriculum,
narrow the achievement gap, and enhance the mission statement that “As a community of
learners, the West Coast Unified School District [community] works together in a nurturing
environment to help students be visionary, versatile thinkers; resourceful, life-long learners;
effective, multilingual communicators and global citizens. We are a rich, culturally diverse
community that values the contributions of all its members and strives to promote social justice.”

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 17
Related Literature
Teacher Bias and the Achievement Gap
Bias refers to prejudices that favor or discriminate against a thing, a person, or a group
compared with another, usually in an unfair way (McKean, 2005). Teachers demonstrate bias
through “unfair treatment, being biased and personal, and showing favoritism” (Swee-Choo,
2008, p. 68). Bias causes social inequalities within school as mainstream beliefs and ideas are
upheld over those of students with dissimilar cultural backgrounds and differences, which are not
openly recognized and acknowledged in the general curriculum or teacher’s practices and beliefs
(Aguado, Ballesteros, & Malik, 2003). Students also come to school with their own biases and
stereotypes stemming from family, cultural background, and past experiences (Caughy,
O’Campo, Randolph, & Nickerson, 2002). As a result, structures must be placed to help
navigate through these cultural differences and beliefs of the teachers, students, and school
curriculum within the school setting in order to narrow the achievement gap contributed by bias
(Caughy, O’Campo, Randolph, & Nickerson, 2002). Bias by both teachers and students creates
many issues and contributes to the inequities within the school setting. Teaches, through biased
and stereotypical expectations and assumptions, can cause educational inequities that attribute to
the achievement gap.
Teacher Expectations and the Achievement Gap
According to Guo and Zhou (2008), students’ achievement and development is
negatively impacted by teacher bias. Teacher expectations can display bias in cases where
expectations of student achievement are based on ethnicity, such as teachers expecting higher
achievement from Caucasian and Asian students versus their African American and Latino peers
(McKown & Weinstein, 2008). Gayle-Evans and Michael (2006) point out that students are
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 18
aware of who their teacher likes and dislikes and ultimately, these negative relationships can
affect both parties. Students notice favoritism, which can create negative relationships that affect
both parties (Gayle-Evans & Michael, 2006). Often, teachers provide higher quality instruction
to students which they expect will be higher achievers, which supports inequitable education
(McKown & Weinstein, 2008). Further, students may internalize teachers’ beliefs and
expectations, which leads to higher motivation and achievement from those of higher teacher
expectation and negative self-efficacy and diminished motivation for those of lower teacher
expectations (McKown & Weinstein, 2008). Jussim, Eccles, and Madon (1996) found that
African American students’ achievement was more strongly affected by teacher expectations
than their Caucasian peers. McKown and Weinstein (2002) add that African American
elementary school students were negatively affected by teachers’ negative expectancy, which
suggests that the impact of teacher expectancy is more strongly correlated to minority students.
Negative effects to students are caused by racist expectations. Racism and stereotypes contribute
to teacher bias and contribute to educational inequities.
Racism and stereotypes. Teachers’ perception of race can make a great impact on
students, especially those of color (McKown & Weinstein, 2002). Ladson-Billings (1994) states,
“Sometimes, unrecognized or outright racism causes teachers to hold negative beliefs about
students of color” (p.23). Student demographics are moving towards more diverse student
populations within schools (Ladson-Billings, 1994). In order to be effective, teachers must be
educated and prepared to teach students of all backgrounds and races, not just White (Ladson-
Billings, 1994). “Teachers can unintentionally convey messages of stereotypical behavior in
their interactions with children” (Derman-Sparks & Edwards, 2010, p. 93). Singleton and Linton
(2006) describe that “the most devastating factor contributing to the lowered achievement of
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 19
students of color is institutionalized racism, which we recognize as the unexamined and
unchallenged system of racial biases and residual White advantage that persist in our institutions
of learning” (p. 33).
Teacher’s misplacement of students into gifted and special education classes, which
many teachers base on race or social class (Elhoweris, Mutua, & Holloway, 2005; Powell &
Siegle, 2000). According to Brown (2006), misplacing students places them in tracks throughout
their academic careers and minority students “are ‘left behind’ without hope, without vision, and
without equal access to the excellent education that all children are entitled” (p. 701). Teacher
expectations come with racist and stereotypical lenses, which may or may not be intentional, and
result in diminished self-efficacy and inequitable education for many students, especially
minorities. Because teacher bias has such a negative impact on students’ education and self-
efficacy, structures must be placed to combat these biases and promote equitable education for
all students.
Combating Bias
Teacher biases must be disrupted in order to promote equitable educational opportunities
for all students regardless of race, gender, social, or economic background. One way to combat
bias is through anti-racism, which Singleton and Linton (2006) define as “conscious and
deliberate efforts to challenge the impact and perpetuation of institutional White racial power”
(p. 45). Anti-racism relies on one’s analysis of his or her own racial beliefs towards those of the
non-dominant race (Singleton & Linton, 2006). According to Copenhaver (2000), classrooms
should be utilized to discuss race to help students understand and potentially break their own
biases and gain an understanding and respect for their classmates. Dutro (2002) explains that
teachers can support students in challenging stereotypes by facilitating discussions and creating a
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 20
safe classroom environment where all students can express their feelings about stereotypes they
have encountered. Through anti-racism, teacher bias must be disrupted so that teachers can also
be able to support students in disrupting their own biases to gain respect for and acknowledge the
diversity of their peers.
Importance of the Problem to the Organization
It is important to address this problem to pursue the District’s mission and realize its
vision to “assist all students in their pursuit of academic achievement, strength of character, and
personal growth, and to support them in their exploration of the intellectual, artistic,
technological, physical and social expression” (WCUSD, 2016). “Teachers must face the reality
that they will continue to come into contact with students whose cultural, ethnic, linguistic,
racial, and social class backgrounds differ from their own” (Howard, 2003, p. 196).
Organizational Performance Goal
The goal of WCUSD, then, is to design and implement a social justice education
pedagogy program, which will develop teachers as change agents through a curriculum
embedded with Social Justice Anchor Standards throughout the district and across all subjects
and grade-levels. The intention is that the program will provide teachers with the knowledge,
skills, and dispositions to employ the finest teaching practices in all its schools. “The priority of
social justice educators is to affirm, model, and sustain socially just learning environments for all
participants, and by so modeling, to offer hope that equitable relations and social structures can
be achieved in the broader society” (Adams et al., 2016, p. 27).
Description of the Stakeholders
Although, as in all educational settings, students are the primary stakeholders that benefit
from instructional practices, the organization’s stakeholders for this study are the teachers and
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 21
the site administrators and district administrators who are collectively responsible for
implementing the SJAS throughout the District. Members of the Board of Education and the
community are also stakeholders.
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals
The goals for the organization and the three primary stakeholders to implement the Social
Justice Anchor Standards across all curriculum and grade-levels are shown in Table 1.
Table 1
Organizational Goal and Mission
Organizational Mission
The mission of West Coast Unified School District is “Extraordinary achievement for all
students while simultaneously closing the achievement gap, guides the work of the
Excellence through Equity plan that includes the following three priorities: All graduates are
ready for college and careers; English learners will become proficient in English while
engaging in a rigorous, standards-aligned curriculum and all students engage in schools that
are safe, well-maintained and family-friendly.”
Organizational Global Goal
In August 2020, WCUSD will implement a curriculum embedded with Social Justice
Anchor Standards throughout the district and across all subjects and grade-levels.
Stakeholder Goal
Teachers
By August 2020, all
teachers will
demonstrate the skills
and knowledge to
develop pedagogical
connections through
the Social Justice
Anchor Standards
within the context in
which they are
teaching.
Stakeholder Goal
District Administrators
By January 2020, the District
Administrators will provide
professional development and
training opportunities to the
teachers in the District so that
they can gain the skills and
knowledge of how to
implement the Social Justice
Anchor Standards and be
culturally responsive
educators.
Stakeholder Goal
Site Administrators
Commencing with the fall
2020 school year, Site
Administrators will monitor
the implementation of the
Social Justice Anchor
Standards across all
curriculum and grade-levels
through observation and by
providing constructive
feedback.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 22
Stakeholder Group for the Study
WCUSD teachers are primarily responsible for making pedagogical connections through
the Social Justice Anchor Standards within the context in which they are teaching. As such, it is
necessary to identify teachers’ knowledge, motivation, and organization assets and needs
required to implement the program. Thus, the stakeholders of focus for this study are elementary
and secondary District teachers.
Stakeholder of Focus Critical Behaviors
Critical behaviors are the few, key behaviors that have to be consistently performed on
the job to bring about desired outcomes and achieve organizational success (Kirkpatrick and
Kirkpatrick, 2016). Critical behaviors are used to guide the literature review and the application
of the Clark & Estes (2008) Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization framework.
Three preliminary critical behaviors have been identified for teachers to achieve their
goal. The review of the literature may reveal other critical behaviors.
1. Create a curriculum at respective grade-level and content area that develops pedagogical
connections through the Social Justice Anchor Standards.
2. Implement SJAS-influenced curriculum
3. Evaluate effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement
Three preliminary critical behaviors have been identified for site administrators to
achieve their goal. The review of the literature may reveal other critical behaviors.
1. Create a culture supportive of the SJAS by incorporating systems, policies, procedures
and resources to promote shared values and beliefs
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 23
2. Develop a support system for teachers through informal walkthroughs, teacher meetings
in the beginning of the year, and allowing common collaboration time for each content
and grade level
3. Construct and implement an evaluation system to measure teacher effectiveness utilizing
SJAS
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this study is to use the Clark and Estes (2008) knowledge, motivation and
organization performance framework to conduct an analysis to identify and understand the assets
and needs for WCUSD to motivate, support, and prepare teachers to implement the Social Justice
Anchor Standards in all curricula.
The questions that we answer are
1. What are teachers’ knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational assets and needs
to implement the Social Justice Anchor Standards throughout WCUSD?
2. What are the knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational recommendations for
providing these assets and needs for implementing the Social Justice Anchor Standards
across all subject areas and grade-levels?
Conceptual and Methodological Framework
The conceptual and methodological framework for the study is the Clark and Estes
(2008) performance framework. The framework serves as collaborative action research, which is
a systematic, analytical method that helps to clarify organizational goals and identify the current
and preferred performance level within an organization. This framework suggests that the three
major assets of high performing individuals and organizations are (a) knowledge (Individuals
and groups know why, when and how); (b) motivation (Individuals and groups choose, persist
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 24
and apply mental effort); and (c) the organization’s policies, procedures, resources, and culture
are aligned with the organizational goal.
To answer the first study question, assumed knowledge, motivation and organizational
assets and needs were generated based on district information and related literature. These needs
were validated and triangulated by data, including knowledge assessments, motivation and
organization scales, observational data, and document analysis.
The methods used to collect these data are surveys, focus groups, individual interviews,
observations, and content analysis.
The analysis of the data from the first question informs the content of the professional
development program to enhance teachers’ knowledge, skills and dispositions, as well as the
necessary WCUSD motivational and organizational support for teachers to effectively embed the
SJAS in their curriculum.
Organization of the Study
This study is organized by five chapters. Chapter One was used to provide the key
concepts and terminology used when discussing social justice. Further, the organization's
mission, goals and stakeholders as well as an overview of the conceptual and methodological
framework of the gap analysis were introduced in this chapter.
Chapter Two provides a review of the current literature examine scholarly research that
analyzes social justice pedagogy and identifies both the challenges and benefits of implementing
social justice pedagogy. Topics of the need for social justice, the history of social justice,
conceptual framework of social justice, and the implementation of social justice pedagogy are
addressed in Chapter Two. Moreover, Chapter Two provides an overview of learning theories
addressing knowledge, motivation, and organization.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 25
Chapter Three discusses the methodological considerations of the study as well as the
assumed gaps related to the organization's performance. Subsequently, Chapter Four presents
the results of the inquiry methods presented in Chapter Three. Finally, Chapter Five includes
recommendations based on findings, as well as a detailed evaluation plan that focuses on the
effectiveness of the implementation plan. Finally, the limitations, potential for future research,
and conclusion are presented in Chapter Five.
Definitions
Some terms used in the study have specific meaning and are operationalized as follows:
Social Justice Pedagogy
“Teaching for social justice is a philosophy, where educators must approach their pedagogical
practice with actions anchored in respect, dignity, equity, and the ability to be open-minded”
(Papa, Eadens, & Eadens, 2016, p. 3).
Culturally Responsive Teaching
“Culturally responsive teaching involves using the cultures, experiences, and perspectives of
African, Native, Latino, and Asian American students as filters through which to teach them
academic knowledge and skills” (Gay & Kirkland, 2003, p. 181).
Teacher Agency
“Teacher agency is the capacity of teachers to act purposefully and constructively to direct their
professional growth and contribute to the growth of their colleagues” (Calvert, 2016).
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 26
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
School demographics are becoming more and more diverse throughout the 21st century
(Banks & Banks, 2010). As a result, teachers need a theoretically sound pedagogy to meet the
challenges of teaching students of diverse cultures, languages, and beliefs (Carlisle, Jackson, &
George, 2006; Gollnick & Chinn, 2002; Richards, Brown & Forde, 2007). Further, teachers
must create a classroom culture where all students receive equal educational opportunities
regardless of race, culture, class, and beliefs (Richards et al., 2007). Many scholars have turned
to social justice pedagogy (Hart, 2016) as the answer to teachers’ challenges of equitable
education (Adams & Bell, 2016; Carlisle et al., 2006; Wade, 2004).
The purpose of this literature review is to examine scholarly research that analyzes social
justice pedagogy and identifies both the challenges and benefits of implementing social justice
pedagogy. Specifically, it looks at why social justice pedagogy is important and examines the
conceptual framework that shapes it. Moreover, the implementation of social justice pedagogy is
discussed to determine the underlying theories in preparing teachers to implement it. Finally, the
challenges that teachers and administrators face is also be discussed in order to understand the
complexity of implementing social justice pedagogy.
The literature review also provides insight on the conceptual framework of the
study. The study uses the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis model and addresses different
factors and needs that could affect the implementation of the SJAS across all content areas and
all grade levels.
Finally, the literature review discusses the influences and critical behaviors that are
required to achieve the stakeholders’ goals. This examination is organized by influence with the
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization (KMO) framework.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 27
Social Justice Pedagogy
Need for Social Justice Pedagogy
Because the world is full of differences and diversity, there exists the potential for unfair
discrimination as people see others’ differences as less favorable and undesirable (Thompson,
2016). To combat this within the world of education, social justice education is being
incorporated within schools (Carlisle et al., 2006; Kelly, Brandes, & Orlowski, 2004). Social
justice refers to revolutionizing society through the key principles of equity, recognition, and
inclusion (Adams & Bell, 2016). According to Adams and Bell (2016), social justice is both a
goal and a process, where the goal is the full acceptance and inclusion of people from all identity
groups into society and where the process for attaining this goal is “democratic and participatory,
respectful of human diversity and group differences, and inclusive and affirming of human
agency and capacity for working collaboratively with others to create change” (p. 4). Wade
(2001) adds that “at the core of social justice lies both the belief in the equal worth of each
person as well as the willingness to act from a place of both morality and care in upholding that
belief” (p. 25). According to VeneKlasen and Miller (2002), “power with” versus a “power
over” paradigm is necessary to accomplish these social justice goals. “Power with” refers to
“finding common ground among different interests and building collective strength” while
“power over” refers to the power of institutions, which “has many negative associations for
people, such as repression, wealth, force, coercion, discrimination, corruption, and abuse”
(VeneKlasen & Miller, 2002, p. 39). Social justice pedagogy is being incorporated within
schools in order to empower both teachers and students to create a more equitable school setting
where everyone respects and accepts each other’s diversity. The idea of social justice and
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 28
equality has been studied throughout history and is gaining more attention in the school setting
through a pedagogical frame.
History of Social Justice
Social justice is a concept that has been around for centuries and referenced in different
capacities. The concept of social justice pedagogy was used by John Stuart Mill in 1893, which
is considered the first modern usage of the term (Clark & Elliott, 2010). Mill (2009) states,
“Society should treat all equally well who have deserved equally well of it, that is, who have
deserved equally well absolutely” (p. 111). However, even before Mill discussed social justice,
philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle discussed the relationship between justice and society
(Johnston, 2011). According to Johnston (2011), the Hebrew texts, such as Babylonian law, also
conceive the ideals of social justice where the weak and poor received protection “from being
unfairly deprived of the legal status, property rights, and economic condition” (p. 24). Paulo
Freire also was a catalyst of the social justice movement in the twentieth century as he advocated
for pedagogical methods that acknowledge students’ experiences and culture and for techniques
that disrupted social norms to help spark a movement that promoted literacy, social insight,
revolution, and national economic development through social justice (Gibson, 1999). Scholars
such as Plato and Freire advocated for social justice throughout history in order to create a
society that was socially just and promoted equality for all. To understand social justice
pedagogy, the conceptual framework it is based upon must be explored.
Conceptual Framework
A social justice framework revolves around working towards resisting oppression and
inequity while promoting fairness and a safe social environment for all. Teaching for social
justice is influenced by five conceptual and pedagogical frameworks—democratic education,
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 29
critical pedagogy, multicultural education, culturally relevant pedagogy, and social justice
education (Dover, 2013). Although all of these frameworks share the same commitment to
social and educational equity, they vary in their “curricular, pedagogical, and sociopolitical
priorities” (Dover, 2013, p. 4). The conceptual framework of social justice pedagogy is based on
fundamental components of various pedagogies geared towards equality and emancipation. Each
of the five conceptual and pedagogical frameworks is a foundational pillar of social justice.
Democratic education (progressive education). Democratic education, which is also
known as progressive education, is one of the five pedagogical frameworks that influences
teaching for social justice. Progressive theorist John Dewey believed that the main objective of
schools was to educate the whole child, which means attending to the physical, emotional, and
intellectual growth of the child (“Progressive education,” 2018). A major component of
democratic education is participatory democracy, which refers to education that fosters students’
ability “to work collectively towards a better society” (Westheimer & Kahne, 1998, p. 2).
Democratic education pedagogy involves educators utilizing participatory pedagogy to draw
connections from students’ lives and experiences and teach students the skills necessary to foster
civic participation (Dover, 2013).
Critical pedagogy. Another component of the pedagogical framework that influences
teaching for social justice is critical pedagogy, which considers the historical context of schools
“as dominant social, cultural, and political institutions rather than as sites of social mobility,
recognizing how schooling reflects an asymmetrical distribution of power and access to
resources based on race, class, and gender” (Mclaren & Crawford, 2010, p. 147). Critical
pedagogy differs from democratic education because it has a more explicit social justice agenda
as “critical pedagogues challenge the political neutrality of curriculum, pedagogy, and education
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 30
systems and seek to develop students’ sociopolitical consciousness through co-investigation,
problem-posing, and dialogue” (Dover, 2013, p. 5). According to Dover (2013), a fundamental
component of critical pedagogy is an analysis of correlation among “sociopolitical power, social
processes, and the construction of knowledge” (p. 5).
Multicultural education. Multicultural education also influences teaching for social
justice as it focuses on the creation of the means and conditions necessary to enhance the ideals
of “freedom, social justice, and equality in a culturally diverse society” (Lunneblad & Johansson,
2012, p. 709). According to Sleeter and Grant (1999), multicultural education began in the
1960s during the Black civil rights movement and became one of the most prominent approaches
towards equitable education in the United States. There are five dimensions of multicultural
education—integration of multicultural curricular content; an analysis of the knowledge
construction process; prejudice reduction; equity pedagogy to promote educational equality and
multicultural group dynamics; and empowering school culture and social structure for social
change (Agirdag, Merry, & Van Houtte, 2014; Hackman, 2005). Multicultural education relates
to teaching for social justice as it strives to reform schools and other educational institutions to
promote educational equality for all students from all racial, ethnic, and social-class groups
(Banks, 1993).
Culturally responsive (relevant) pedagogy. Culturally responsive pedagogy is also a
component of the conceptual framework of teaching for social justice as it emphasizes the
disruption of social and educational inequity (Dover, 2013; Irvine & Armento, 2001). According
to Dover (2013), “culturally responsive education integrates critical pedagogy’s emphasis on
sociopolitical consciousness with multicultural education’s commitment to culturally diverse
content” (Dover, 2013, p. 5). Gay (2010) defines culturally responsive teaching “as using the
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 31
cultural knowledge, prior experiences, frames of reference, and performance styles of ethnically
diverse students to make learning encounters more relevant to and effective for them” (p. 31).
Teachers’ instructional strategies and disposition of teaching are essential in culturally
responsive pedagogy (Aronson & Laughter, 2016). Esposito and Swain (2009) describe a strong
relationship between culturally responsive pedagogy and social justice pedagogy. They posit
that the ethic of caring, which refers to teachers caring about their students and whether or not
they face discrimination, is one of the main links between the two pedagogies (Esposito &
Swain, 2009).
Social justice education. Social justice education (SJE) combines various facets of
democratic education, critical pedagogy, critical multicultural education, and culturally
responsive education (Dover, 2013). According to Dover (2013), many theorists disagree on the
exact conceptualization of SJE, but certain aspects such as critical multicultural education’s
bridging of social justice theory and critical pedagogy are prominent in SJE. Bell (2007)
believes the goal of SJE is to empower individuals to develop the critical analytical tools to
understand the nature of oppression and their own socialization within an oppressive system.
SJE aims to provide participants with the tools to develop awareness, knowledge, and processes
to examine issues of justice and injustice in their personal lives, communities, institutions and
society (Bell, 2007). SJE serves the fundamental purpose of eradicating oppression in society
(Gustein, 2006). Carlisle et al. (2006) define SJE as “the conscious and reflexive blend of
content and process intended to enhance equity across multiple social identity groups (e.g., race,
class, gender, sexual orientation, ability), foster critical perspectives, and promote social action”
(p. 57). Carlisle et al. (2006) add that there are five principles of SJE: 1. Inclusion and equity,
which occurs within schools and the community where all forms of social oppression are
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 32
addressed; 2. High expectations and accountability through diverse and rigorous learning
environments that empower and support the development of students of all social identities; 3.
Reciprocal community relationships where the school is both a resource to and beneficiary of the
community; 4. System-wide approach where all aspects of the educational institution (mission,
resource allocation, policies and procedures) embody the institution’s commitment to a socially
just environment for all groups within the system; and 5. Direct SJE and intervention by the
faculty, staff and administration to actively advocate for social justice and confront any
indications of social oppression. Wade (2004) states that SJE begins with students’ lived
experiences and “then move[s] toward multiple perspectives and action directed toward social
change” (p. 65).
The need for social justice has been echoed throughout history. People have been
oppressed throughout time and the idea of social justice and equity has been the framework to
resolve the existing oppressions of society. The most recent movement has been towards social
justice in schools. Social justice pedagogy relies on a conceptual framework consisting of five
pedagogical approaches—democratic education, critical pedagogy, multicultural education,
culturally responsive pedagogy, and social justice education. These five pedagogies are the
foundational pillars of social justice. Once an educational institution adopts social justice as its
pedagogical framework, the site leaders must understand how to approach implementation and
teacher preparation.
Implementation of Social Justice Pedagogy
Many teachers incorporate teaching tolerance in their pedagogy and go further and
promote instruction in social justice within their curriculum (Zakin, 2012). Wade (2004)
describes social justice curriculum as being student-centered, collaborative, experiential,
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 33
intellectual, analytical, multicultural, and value-based. In the implementation of social justice
pedagogy, Wade (2001) views critique as essential and contends that in a social justice
curriculum, “students are invited to question the status quo, examine underlying values and
assumptions, and explore their own role in relation to social problems” (p. 25). Further, when
implementing social justice pedagogy within their curriculum, educators should facilitate student
development and growth through opportunities to examine issues, discuss their positions with
peers, analyze and reflect on them, and plan a course of action (Wade, 2001). Dover (2013) adds
that implementing social justice pedagogy “is inherently situated within the contemporary
educational context and requires teachers to simultaneously meet social justice goals, local
curricular mandates, and accountability demands” (p. 9). Teaching for social justice requires
teachers to incorporate social justice within their curriculum and create opportunities for students
to grow and develop positive beliefs and attitudes towards diversity and equality. In order for
teachers to become social justice educators, they must be prepared through professional
development and training opportunities, which must be taught by well-trained teacher educators.
Teacher Preparation
Many teachers have reported that their preservice preparation did not prepare them well
for the diversity and challenges they face in today’s classroom (Howard, 2007; Oyler,
2011). According to Cobb-Roberts and Agosto (2011), “Schools and colleges of education are
responsible for preparing preservice and in-service professionals (i.e., teachers, counselors,
administrators) to meet the needs of an increasingly diverse society” (p. 7). As a result, social
justice must be at the core of the andragological framework used to prepare these preservice
teachers to teach and promote diversity, help students develop socially and through their own
identities, and enhance equity through their instruction (Cobb-Roberts & Agosto,
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 34
2011). Discussing concepts such as racism is never an easy task, which means teachers need to
be prepared to be able to facilitate conversations regarding events, both historical and present-
day, that involve racism or other sensitive topics of identity, especially in classrooms consisting
of a diverse student demographic or where the teacher and student have different identities or
interpretive frameworks (Epstein, 2009).
Adult learning. According to Papa and Eadens (2016), creating an adult learning
classroom that teaches social justice and explores social justice issues requires various tools and
resources to facilitate the learning process for adult learners. Papa, Eadens and Eadens (2016)
explain that “the adult learner poses a unique challenge since an adult learner already has
acquired a worldview, particularly a worldview that may or may not align with the topics and
sensitive awareness that the subject matter requires” (p. 24). Papa, Eadens and Eadens (2016)
add that adult learning through a social justice lens should teach adult learners that students
cannot and should not be defined by any one aspect of their identity. To help prevent this,
instructors of adult learners must utilize theory, such as transformative learning, and examples of
good practice to “gradually but steadily move instructors toward successful teaching of all
students [regardless of their race, class, gender, or sexuality]” (p. 161). Brown (2006) adds that
“the learner, the learning process, and the context of learning form the cornerstone of the field of
adult education” (p. 706). Adult education can take place in various settings, such as teacher
education programs or professional development opportunities, and involves adult learners
engaging in activities and experiences that lead to changes in thinking, values, and behavior
(Brown, 2006). Grant and Engdahl (2014) emphasize the importance of socially justice teaching
and “how inappropriate teaching practices influence students’ opportunities to learn” (p. 147).
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 35
Transformative learning. Transformative learning generates a change in the way that
people see themselves and their world. Action is a fundamental component of transformative
learning (Mezirow, 1991). Transformative learning relies on the disruption and change of a
person’s distorted cultural expectations and presuppositions to develop less constrained and more
advanced perspectives and learning to take social action and create social progression (Mezirow,
1991). Through education, learners can develop a personal meaning and derive political goals
that promote social action (Mezirow, 1991). Shields, Larocque, and Oberg (2002) describe that
the way to promote transformation, empowerment, and growth is through understanding how
issues of race and ethnicity affect the educational experiences for all students. Shields et al.
(2002) also emphasizes that people must work to overcome their prejudices through awareness
of the different backgrounds, perspectives, and understandings of others versus their own.
“Engaging in socially just leadership requires us to maintain an open conversation, to examine
and reexamine our perceptions and those of others, constantly looking beneath the surface and
seeking alternative explanations and ways of understanding” (Shields et al., 2002, p. 134)
Mezirow describes three themes of transformative theory: centrality of experience, critical
reflection, and rational discourse (Brown, 2006). People’s life experiences help shape and mold
their perspectives and the meanings they give to social structures, which, in turn, become a frame
of reference that are based on the individuals’ cultural and contextual experiences (Brown,
2006). In order to undergo perspective transformation, critical reflection is essential (Brown,
2006). Through critical reflection, one strives “to externalize and investigate power relationships
and uncover hegemonic assumptions” (Brown, 2006, p. 709). Critical reflection makes people
aware of uncritically accepted social norms and perspectives, acknowledge and understand
alternative perspectives of others, and “recognize the hegemonic aspects of dominant culture”
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 36
(Brookfield, 1995, p. 2). Rational discourse, which is an essential vessel through which
transformation is fostered and developed after critical reflection takes place, requires
understanding and testing the validity of one’s construction of meaning through deep, rich, and
repeated conversations with peers where the participants are able to develop new perspectives
that involve deeper understandings of their own biases and acknowledge their peers’ perspectives
on social issues to recognize how each person differently perceives those issues (Brown, 2006).
Critical social theory. The implicit goal of critical social theory is to rethink and reform
oppressive mainstream knowledge and to promote the emancipatory function of knowledge
(“Critical Social Theory,” nd). According to Leonardo (2004), critical social theory develops
students' ability to question and critique institutional and conceptual issues, particularly those
that lead to oppression. Further, a critical social theory-based approach of education emphasizes
and reveals the relationship between people and social systems, how they affect one another, and
“how critical social theory can contribute to the emancipation of both” (Leonardo, 2004, p.
11). Activism is crucial to critical social theory as it requires critical reflection towards action
(Brown, 2006). Social justice educators advocate “a theory of social critique, embrace a greater
sense of civic duty, and willingly become active agents for political and social change” (Brown,
2006, p. 711). Social justice leaders “examine power relations within schools and society,
scrutinize differential schooling, and critique social class stratifications” (Brown, 2006, p. 711).
Teachers must be well-prepared to be able to implement social justice pedagogy within their
curriculum. In order to do so, teacher educators must be well-equipped to teach adult learners
how to understand and implement social justice through adult learning based on transformative
learning and critical social theory. However, teachers, like many adult learners, come with biases
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 37
and stereotypical or racist beliefs that they may not be aware of, which pose as challenges for
them to become agents of change within their classrooms for their students.
Challenges of Implementation
Social justice calls for teachers to become agents of change to address educational
inequalities and to raise educational attainment and improvement of all students (Ballard, 2012;
Florian, 2009; Villegas & Lucas, 2002; Zeichner, 2009). Teaching for social justice involves all
teachers acting as change agents and working together for the betterment of their students
(Edwards, 2010). The focus on teachers as change agents comes from the idea that student
achievement mainly depends on the influence of teachers within a school setting (Hattie, 2009).
In order to implement social justice standards, teachers must have high expectations of their
students and themselves (Carlisle et al., 2006; Cochran-Smith, 2004; Poplin and Rivera, 2007);
focus on the growth of students’ understanding of themselves, others, and the academic content
(Carlisle et al., 2006; Darling-Hammond, French and Garcia-Lopez, 2002; Epstein, 2009); and
engage students in learning communities in class (Cochran-Smith, 2004). In order to prepare
teachers as agents of change to promote social justice, the teachers’ competencies need to be
challenged, developed, and expanded so they can better understand how to exercise their agency
while implementing a social justice approach (Pantić & Florian, 2015). Teacher competencies
refer to teachers’ skills, knowledge, motivation including values and moral awareness, and
professional identity (Korthagen, 2004; Tigelaar et al., 2005; Van Huizen et al., 2005). In order
to develop teacher competency to promote social justice, Slee (2010) argues that the
development of teachers’ understanding of how social forces influence oppression and inequity
is crucial.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 38
Teacher agency is critical for teachers to become agents of change (Pantic,
2015). “Teacher agency is the capacity of teachers to act purposefully and constructively to
direct their professional growth and contribute to the growth of their colleagues” (Calvert, 2016,
p. 52). Teachers who have agency take a stake in their own professional growth and make
thoughtful choices in order to achieve their goals rather than taking a passive approach towards
learning and professional growth (Calvert, 2016). Pantic (2015) developed four units of analysis
for teacher agency for social justice: 1. Sense of purpose, which refers to teachers’ perceptions
about their role as agents of and understanding of social justice; 2. Competence, which denotes
teachers’ practices towards the promotion of social justice and understanding and awareness of
broader social forces that impact student achievement; 3. Autonomy, which focuses on teachers’
efficacy and perceptions of school environments and socio-cultural contexts; 4. Reflexivity,
which is the teachers’ capacity to self-regulate, analyze, and evaluate their own actions and
professional knowledge in the context of the structures and cultures in their schools. Becoming
agents of change to promote social justice involves preparation, training, open-mindedness, and
an understanding and appreciation of one’s own identity (Archer, 2000). Teachers must be able
to achieve a sense of wholeness that allows them to accept and engage in the role of agents of
change within the school environment (Lysaker & Furuness, 2011).
In order to successfully implement social justice within the curriculum, teachers must be
agents of change by understanding and accepting their own positionality in order to accepts those
of their peers and students and by facilitating and creating opportunities of awareness, reflection
and growth for their students. Positionality refers to the idea that gender, race, class, personal
values, beliefs, and other aspects of identities influence how one understands the world (Acevedo
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 39
et al., 2015). However, becoming an agent of change is not an easy task as teachers face various
issues that can challenge their beliefs and understandings and make them uncomfortable.
Challenges for Teachers
Teaching for social justice is a complex and multidimensional practice (Lee, 2011). In
social justice teaching, teachers are challenged with contested values, views, and behaviors of
their students that they may not accept but must learn to recognize and accept these differences
(Lee, 2011). Teachers must have a strong sense of self so that they can comfortably interact with
students and peers with different values, views, and behaviors in a variety of contexts and
settings (Lee, 2011). Lee (2011) expands that norms and values that are different from the
mainstream are seen to cause conflict rather than serve as learning tool. According to Cornbleth
(2008), many teachers are uncomfortable validating norms and values that differ from
mainstream values because they see them as problematic. Hooks (1995) adds that a teacher must
be open-minded and understand that multiple ways of thinking must be acknowledged and
encouraged within the classroom, which can create tension and chaos, so teachers must learn to
be patient and facilitate such conversations. Another challenge is that many teachers teach with
a colorblind lens because they are afraid to acknowledge issues such as racism and diversity or
are ignorant to these issues overall (Sleeter, 2001). Sleeter (1988) argues that teachers are not
given enough time and resources to help them understand their own knowledge, beliefs and
attitudes towards diversity, which makes it difficult for them to change so they can better
understand the diverse beliefs, attitudes and knowledge of others. In order to be able to teach for
social justice, teachers’ knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes, which are socially and historically
constructed, must be need to be built upon through teacher education for preservice teachers or
professional development for current teachers (Brown, 2006; Cochran-Smith, 2004). Teachers
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 40
will face a variety of beliefs and values that conflict with their own, which will cause discomfort
and reluctance to acknowledge; but must be prepared to do so by understanding themselves
better and being open-minded towards others’ beliefs and values. Further, in order for teachers
to be prepared for these challenges, they must receive support from their site leaders, who also
face their own challenges.
Challenges for Site Leaders
Social justice site leaders, especially those in underperforming districts with scarce
resources and underqualified and inexperienced teachers, face many challenges and bureaucratic
demands (Adamson & Darling-Hammond, 2012; Anyon, 2005; Bossert, Dwyer, Rowan, & Lee,
1982; Greenfield, 1995). Dantley and Tillman (2006) state that a social justice leader
“interrogates the policies and procedures that shape schools and at the same time perpetuate
social inequalities and marginalization due to race, class, gender, and other markers of otherness”
(p. 19). Social justice leaders (e.g., principals) should be able to bring diverse groups of people
(e.g., teachers and staff) together to collaborate and engage in democratic dialogue to create
goals geared towards social justice (Brooks, Jean-Marie, Normore, & Hodgins, 2007; Riester,
Pursch, & Skrla, 2002). Social justice site leaders should be able to exhibit “ongoing actions,
skills, habits of mind, and competencies that are continually being created, questioned, and
refined” (DeMatthews & Mawhinney, 2014, p. 847). Theoharis (2007) describes that many
principals trying to implement social justice throughout the school environment face “demands
of the principalship, the momentum of the status quo, obstructive staff attitudes and beliefs, and
insular and privileged parental expectations” (p. 240). He goes on to describe that many
principals for social justice also receive resistance from their district due to “unsupportive central
office administrators, a formidable bureaucracy, prosaic colleagues, a lack of resources, harmful
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 41
state and federal regulations, and uninspired administrator preparation” (Theoharis, 2007, p.
241). When facing such bureaucratic challenges, many social justice principals face feelings of
discouragement, hopelessness, emotional and physical distress, and even apathy towards
progress due to resistance (Theoharis, 2007). Site leaders face many bureaucratic obstacles
when implementing social justice, but must surround themselves with a staff and faculty that will
collaborate effectively towards social justice goals.
As biases create inequities in education, the need for social justice becomes
prominent. Training and preparation is necessary to implement social justice pedagogy within
schools. Proper training and preparation cannot occur unless teacher educators masterfully
understand the framework of social justice and how to teach adult learners through a critical
social and transformative lens. As teachers understand their own beliefs and actions, they will
better understand themselves and become better-equipped to serve their students educational
needs and help their students grow and develop their beliefs and acknowledge and appreciate
diversity. Although training teachers to undertake such a sensitive and immense role is difficult,
the results of implementing social justice standards within curriculum is vital to providing a more
equitable education for all students and narrowing the achievement gap. In order for a district to
be able to implement social justice pedagogy across all sites, the administration must understand
what needs the teachers have and what assets are necessary to provide them with these needs.
Methodological Framework
This study examined the assets and needs for the school district to motivate, support, and
prepare teachers to implement the SJAS into all curricula using the Clark and Estes (2008) Gap
Analysis framework. This framework consists of three critical areas: knowledge, motivation,
and organizational culture (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011).
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 42
In the gap analysis framework, a crucial component is determining whether people know
how to achieve their performance goals (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Factors
Knowledge and Skills
This section analyzes the four different types of knowledge required for teachers to
perform their critical behaviors using the Anderson and Krathwohl’s (2001) taxonomy of
learning. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) suggest there are four types of knowledge: factual,
conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive.
In order to support and prepare teachers to implement the SJAS across all curriculum and
grade levels, the district must find out the extent of teachers’ knowledge about themselves,
curriculum and the SJAS. Teachers’ knowledge has to be investigated in order to see what
knowledge needs teachers have so they can better understand how to exercise their agency while
implementing the SJAS (Pantić & Florian, 2015).
Declarative factual knowledge influences. Declarative factual knowledge refers to basic
elements or knowledge of a discipline that one must know in order to understand and function
effectively or solve a problem (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda, 2011). Anderson and
Krathwohl (2002) describe declarative knowledge as knowledge of vocabulary and knowledge of
specific details and elements.
In this case, teachers need to know the proper terminology, details and elements that align
with the current process of implementing the SJAS into their curriculum at all grade levels and
content areas in West Coast Unified School District. Teachers’ inability to recognize and
identify elements, such as what a curriculum, pedagogical connections, or social justice anchor
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 43
standards are, can be defined as factual knowledge needs that must be resolved (Clark & Estes,
2008).
Teachers know what pedagogical connections, curriculum, positionality, bias, and
change agents are. Teachers must know their positionality and biases. Teachers know the
State Standards (SS) and Social Justice Anchor Standards (SJAS). Teachers know what
domains of SJAS go into each lesson. Teachers know what assessments are best for
evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement. In order to be able to
create a curriculum at respective grade-level and content areas that develops pedagogical
connections through the SJAS, several elements must be defined and identified. Pedagogical
connection is the relationship between, and unity of, theory and practice (Korthagen, Loughran,
& Russell, 2006). “A curriculum is a collection of exercises and tasks that culminates in learning
of one type or another” (Scott, 2016, p. 2). Positionality is the idea that gender, race, class,
personal values, beliefs, and other aspects of identities influence how one understands the world
(Acevedo et al., 2015). Acevedo et al. (2015) also describe positionality as “where we make
meaning of—as well as engage with—the world are informed by our identities and lived
experiences” (p. 32). Bias refers to prejudices that favor or discriminate against a thing, a
person, or a group compared with another, usually in an unfair way (McKean, 2005). Being an
agent of change means gaining control over one’s behavior, being able to act purposively and
reflectively, and achieving the role to bring about social change (Moore, 2008). In order to
become a social justice agent of change, one must know his or her positionality in order to
realize his or her biases to be able to better understand the world and others’ perspectives and
identities (Moore, 2008). A standard is a statement intended to identify a target. The State
Standards are standards for teachers, specified by content and subject areas, that identify target
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 44
goals for teachers to understand the concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures to create a
meaningful learning experience for students (Gorlewski, 2013). The Social Justice Anchor
Standards (SJAS) are a set of standards and learning out-comes geared toward anti-bias
education that provide a common language and organizational structure teachers can use to guide
curriculum development and make their classrooms more just and equitable (Teaching
Tolerance, 2016a). The SJAS are broken into four domains: Identity, Diversity, Justice and
Action (IDJA) (Teaching Tolerance, 2016a). Each of the IDJA domains has specific learning
outcomes organized by grade level (Teaching Tolerance, 2016a). An assessment is considered
effective if it encourages and rewards successful teaching practices on the basis of student
learning outcomes (National Research Council, 2003). Knowing what the elements necessary
for creating a curriculum that develops pedagogical connections through the SJAS is the
foundation of being able to execute this goal. Without the knowledge of what these elements are
and their definitions, a teacher cannot effectively create a social justice curriculum. Once this
knowledge is gained, teachers must understand the purpose of these elements and the
relationship between these elements and their goal of creating a social justice curriculum.
Conceptual knowledge influences. Conceptual knowledge refers to the
interrelationships of the factual knowledge within a larger structure that allows them to function
together (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). Rueda (2011) adds that “conceptual knowledge is
knowledge of categories, classifications, principles, generalizations, theories, models, or
structures pertinent to a particular area” (p. 28). In this study, the conceptual knowledge
describes the purpose of the elements necessary for creating a curriculum to develop pedagogical
connections through the SJAS. Teachers’ inability to understand the purpose of these elements,
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 45
such as the role of positionality, can be defined as conceptual knowledge needs that must be
resolved (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Teachers understand the relationship between the domains of the SJAS and the SS.
Teachers know the relationship or categories between pedagogy and the SJSS and SS.
Teachers understand the relationship between SJAS principles and categories and which
SJAS components go with each lesson section. Teachers know how to use their positionality to
create an open-minded and anti-bias curriculum which recognizes and respects students of all
races, beliefs, classes, and social groups. Teachers understand the relationship between
effective curriculum and student achievement. Understanding the purpose of the elements
necessary for creating a curriculum to develop pedagogical connections through SJAS is vital in
teachers’ understanding of how to use these elements to create a more equitable and just
classroom. The SJAS recognize that classrooms are much more diverse and these diverse
students need to learn the knowledge and skills related to prejudice reduction and collective
action (Teaching Tolerance, 2016a). The IDJA domains are a “continuum of engagement in
anti-bias, multicultural and social justice education” (Teaching Tolerance, 2016a). Being able to
incorporate the IDJA domains into the SS creates the structure necessary to create a more
equitable and just classroom (Teaching Tolerance, 2016a). Teachers must understand their
positionality and reflect on how the institutionalization of their social identities influence the way
they view the classroom and how they interact and react within the classroom (Acevedo et al.,
2015). Being an agent of change empowers teachers to be catalysts of social change within their
classrooms (Acevedo, et al., 2015). Teachers’ positionality is comprised of their gender, age,
race, ethnicity, sexual identity, physical ability, and social class, which are all reflected in their
practices (Martin & Van Gunten, 2002). To be able to teach for social justice, teachers need to
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 46
understand their positionality and their views on the sources of inequities, privileges, and bias
(Lee, 2011). By understanding their positionality and views, teachers can recognize and accept
differences of their students (Lee, 2011). “Multiple ways of knowing and thinking should be
recognized and encouraged” (p. 2). Positionality allows people to construct meaning from
different aspects of their identity, including gender, social class, sexuality, and professional
identity (Kezar, 2002). An effective assessment of curriculum provides instructors with rich data
for improving their teaching methods and for guiding and motivating students to be active
participants in their own learning (National Research Council, 2003). An effective assessment
provides the instructor with important feedback (National Research Council, 2003).
Understanding the purpose of the elements necessary for creating a curriculum that develops
pedagogical connections through the SJAS is necessary for being able to execute this goal.
Without the understanding of these elements and the relationships between them, a teacher
cannot effectively create a social justice curriculum. Once this conceptual knowledge is gained,
teachers must know how to perform and accomplish the underlying procedures of the elements
necessary for accomplishing the goal of creating a social justice curriculum.
Procedural knowledge influences. Procedural knowledge is the knowledge of how to
perform and accomplish an activity (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2002, p. 214; Rueda, 2011). It is
the knowledge of how to do something (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2002, p. 214; Rueda, 2011) and
the “methods of inquiry, and criteria for using skills, algorithms, techniques, and methods” for
accomplishing specific activities (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2002, p. 214). In order to accomplish
their goal, teachers must know the steps needed. Teachers’ inability to understand the steps in
accomplishing the goal of creating a curriculum at respective grade-level and content areas that
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 47
develops pedagogical connections through the SJAS will denote a procedural knowledge need
that must be resolved (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Teachers know how to use their positionality to create an open-minded and anti-bias
curriculum which recognizes and respects students of all races, beliefs, classes, and social
groups. Teachers’ positionality dictates the implications and intentions of instruction. Teachers
need to be prepared to face the challenges of teaching in diverse schools in order to ensure
educational equity and teach through social justice (Florian, 2009). Teachers must understand
their own positionality and understand how to use it to help them move from theory to practice
and become effective teachers for social justice (Kugelmass, 2000). Understanding one’s
positionality, allows a teacher to work through his or her biases and create a classroom
environment that advocates for the diversity of all of the students (Cooper, 2003). A teacher who
is not aware of his or her positionality may indirectly make students, who have different
positionalities than the norm, feel hopeless and helpless (Cooper, 2003). On the other hand,
understanding one’s positionality can give a teacher the tools to develop a hopeful and self-
affirming praxis (Cooper, 2003). When teachers understand their positionality, they can act as
change agents to empower students to understand their own identities and appreciate the
positionality of others.
Teachers know how to act as change agents and work together for the betterment of
their students. In order to implement the SJAS within curriculum, teachers must understand
their role as change agents for their students. Teachers need to understand their power as agents
so that they do not abuse it or fail to maximize it for their students’ benefit (Cooper, 2003). In
order to become an agent of change, a teacher must know the different socio-structural, cultural,
and social-psychological contexts that are more conducive to developing the different modalities
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 48
of agency (Biesta & Tedder, 2007). When teachers know how to act as change agents, they
possess the capacity to critically shape their own responsiveness to challenging and problematic
situations (Biesta & Tedder, 2007). When teachers act as agents of change, they are able to help
students gain more control over and give more direction to their lives (Biesta & Tedder,
2007). Once teachers have understood their role as agents of change, they must be able to embed
the SJAS within curriculum and understand the pedagogy necessary to best benefit their students.
Teachers know how to embed the SJAS within their curriculum. Teachers know how
to utilize instructional strategies in order to effectively implement the SJAS curriculum in
their teaching. Studies note the importance of effectively embedding the SJAS within
curriculum and utilizing proper instructional strategies to implement them. In order to make
informed pedagogical decisions and guide their instruction, teachers must be able to analyze and
evaluate the context of specific learning situations and be able to connect this data to their
knowledge of the teaching-learning process (Shulman, 1987). “Effective instructional and
learning strategies can be used across grade levels and subject areas, and can accommodate a
range of student differences” (Learning, 2015, p. 67). When implementing social justice
pedagogy within their curriculum, teachers facilitate student development and growth through
different instructional strategies that create equitable opportunities for students to examine their
own identities and beliefs, discuss their positions with peers, analyze and reflect on them, and
plan a course of action (Wade, 2001). The incorporation of the SJAS within curriculum must be
also be assessed after implementation to measure effectiveness.
Teachers know how to assess the collected student data and monitor student
achievement. Studies show that collecting student data and monitoring student achievement
allows teachers to further inform their practice. “To gain a deeper understanding of students’
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 49
learning needs, teachers need to collect data from multiple sources, such as annual state
assessments, interim district and school assessments, classroom performance data, and other
relevant data” (National Association, 2011). Instructional design consists of several planning
variables; however, the effectiveness of the instruction is best measured through student progress
(Kelly, Hosp, & Howell, 2008). Knowing how to assess collected student data and monitor
student achievement allows teachers to structure better teaching procedures and provide strong
feedback to help students recognize effective learning strategies (Kelly et al., 2008). Further,
effective assessment data can show what the student need is so that the teacher can use this
information to inform his or her practice and create a new instructional plan (Kelly et al., 2008).
Understanding how to perform the tasks and activities necessary for creating a curriculum that
implements the SJAS standards is necessary for being able to execute this goal. Without the
understanding of how to execute and perform these procedures and tasks, a teacher cannot
effectively create a social justice curriculum. Once this procedural knowledge is gained,
teachers must be aware of their own cognition and cognitive processes necessary for
accomplishing the goal of creating a social justice curriculum.
Metacognitive knowledge. Metacognitive knowledge refers to awareness and
knowledge of one’s own cognition and cognitive processes (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2002;
Rueda, 2011). Rueda (2011) also describes metacognitive knowledge as the knowledge that
allows a person to know why and when to do something. It is necessary for solving problems
and allows one to consider the context and conditions of a problem (Rueda, 2011). If a need
exists where a teacher is unaware of or lacks knowledge of his or her own cognitive process, the
accomplishment of the goal of creating a curriculum that develops pedagogical connections
through SJAS could be in jeopardy.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 50
Teachers reflect on their own positionality. Studies found that reflection is a critical
component of teaching for social justice and incorporating the SJAS across all curriculum. In
order to affect social justice in the classroom, it is critical that teachers understand and reflect
upon how their identities are shaped by their positionalities (Mthethwa-Sommers,
2014). Vicarious positionality is an important component in developing one’s critical
consciousness, which serves as the foundation of social justice, and is achieved through
reflection of one’s own positionality (Mthethwa-Sommers, 2014). When a teacher is critically
conscious, he or she is aware of how economic, social, cultural, and political attributes shape
their students and their students’ relationships with their peers and adults (Mthethwa-Sommers,
2014). Reflection helps teachers develop their ability to examine their own concepts, theories
and beliefs about teaching and the content taught (Posner, 2005). Reflecting on their positionality
allows teachers to understand themselves and begin thinking about the development process,
their goal, status and planning.
Teachers reflect on their lesson goal and planning. Research indicates that teachers are
more effective when reflecting on the development process, their goal, status and planning. In
order to become effective educators, teachers need to become aware of what they are doing at the
metacognitive level (Hutton, 2003). When teachers reach this metacognitive level, “what they
plan or evaluate in relation to their teaching leads them to decide what is relevant in the language
learning environment they are in the process of creating” (Hutton, 2003, p. 122). When teachers
reflect on their development process, their goal and planning, they gain new insights and
perspectives on things and connect them to their own experiences to create actions to move
forward (Hutton, 2003). Teachers need to reflect deeply on their own approaches to basic issues
in language learning and teaching, which has to do with the quality of the teachers’ professional
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 51
engagement (Hutton, 2003). Teachers need to reflect to set their own goals within broader
frameworks such as the requirements of the curriculum and associated assessments (Hutton,
2003). “Ongoing use of the process of reflection is essential for building knowledge, and
increasing knowledge increases one's ability to use reflection effectively and to develop as a
teacher” (McAlpine & Weston, 2000, p. 364). Reflecting on the development process, goal,
status and planning is vital to creating the necessary steps for working towards the
implementation of the SJAS.
Teachers reflect on implementation and monitoring. Research indicates the importance
of teacher reflection on implementation and monitoring of the SJAS. Reflection helps
professionals learn about and improve their practices (McAlpine & Weston, 2000). Reflection
can occur before, during, or after implementation (McAlpine & Weston, 2000). Reflecting on
implementation and monitoring serves as a mechanism for teachers to turn experience into
knowledge about teaching (McAlpine & Weston, 2000). Reflecting on implementation and
monitoring is linked to improving teaching, which involves evaluating the relation between
intentions and the impact of the actual teaching process (McAlpine & Weston, 2000). Reflection
helps teachers actively consider and reconsider beliefs and practices that allow them to move
towards metacognition in teaching and improve their ability to monitor their teaching and the
decisions they make (Rodman, 2010). Reflection on implementation and monitoring allows
teachers to improve their teaching practice and become more effective social justice educators
through the measure of students’ reactions and engagement to SJAS lessons.
Teachers reflect on teaching practice and students’ reactions to the lessons utilizing
the SJAS curriculum. Studies show that reflecting on teaching practice and students’ reactions
the SJAS lessons is important to the process of training teachers to become social justice
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 52
educators. Reflecting on teaching practice and students’ reactions to lessons helps improve
teachers’ pedagogical ability (Rodman, 2010). Reflecting on teaching practice allows teachers to
focus on “actions they take while in the classroom and how the application of the teaching-
learning process in the classroom enabled them construct meaning from that application”
(Rodman, 2010, p. 20). As teachers reflect on their own teaching practices, they empower
themselves to become more skilled and capable practitioners who are able to better understand
their role in the context of educational goals (Rodman, 2010). Reflection allows deeper thinking
about an occurrence and allows teachers to exam a teaching event from more than one
perspective, which informs teachers about their practice and allows them to think about what
happened, why it happened and what else could have been done (Cruickshank & Applegate,
1981). According to Larrivee (2006), when teachers engage in reflection about their instruction,
they become empowered decision makers who can act as change agents. Reflecting on teaching
practice and students’ reactions to lessons empowers teachers to improve their practice,
especially when followed by reflection on assessing collected student data.
Teachers reflect on assessing the collected data and how to modify their lessons
according to the data. Empirical evidence supports that teacher reflection on assessing collected
student data and how to modify lessons according to the data as a factor in successful
implementation of the SJAS across all curriculum. Teachers need to be able to connect the data
they collect to the results they wish to produce through the modification of lessons (Love, 2004).
Reflection on the assessment of collected student data leads to critical analysis of data and leads
to improvement of teaching craft (Marsh, Pane, & Hamilton, 2006). An improvement of
teaching craft occurs through lesson modification and adaptation driven by assessment data
(Marsh et al., 2006). Teachers must be able to understand their own cognition and cognitive
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 53
processes through reflection upon the elements necessary for creating a curriculum that
implements the SJAS standards. Without the understanding of their own cognition and cognitive
processes, a teacher cannot effectively create a social justice curriculum.
The summary of assumed knowledge influences from expected teacher critical behavior
when implementing the SJAS within curriculum is displayed in Table 2. Table 2 shows the
assumed declarative factual knowledge, conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge, and
metacognitive knowledge.
Table 2
Summary of Assumed Knowledge Influences on Teachers’ Ability to Achieve the Performance
Goal
Assumed Knowledge Influences Research Literature
Author, Year; Author,
Year.
Declarative Factual (terms, facts, concepts)
Teachers know…

CB 1: Teachers know what positionality is. Acevedo et al. (2015).
Kezar (2002).
CB 1: Teachers know what bias is. Brown, K. M. (2006).
CB 1: Teachers know their own positionality and biases. Acevedo, et al. (2015).

CB 1: Teachers know what an agent of change is. Moore (2008)
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 54
CB 1: Teachers need to know what a curriculum is. Scott (2016)
CB 1: Teachers know what pedagogical connections are. Korthagen, Loughran,
& Russell (2006)
CB 1: Teachers know what the Social Justice Anchor Standards
(SJAS) are.
Teaching Tolerance
(2016)
CB 1: Teachers know the State Standards (SS) for their subject
areas and grade-level.
Gorlewski (2013)

CB 2: Teachers know what domains of SJAS go into each lesson. Teaching Tolerance
(2016a)
CB 3: Teachers know what Assessments are best for evaluating the
effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement.
National Research
Council (2003)

Declarative Conceptual (categories, process models, principles,
relationships)
Teachers know...

CB 1: Teachers know the relationship between their own
positionality and biases in creating and implementing a curriculum
that incorporates SJAS.
Acevedo et al. (2015)
Martin, R.J., & Van
Gunten, D.M. (2002).
Lee, Y. A. (2011).
Kezar, A. (2002).
CB 1: Teachers understand how change agents can affect student
achievement.
Acevedo et al. (2015).

CB 1: Teachers understand the relationship between the domains of
the SJAS and the SS.
Teaching Tolerance
(2016a).
CB 1: Teachers know the relationship or categories between
pedagogy and the SJSS and SS.
Teaching Tolerance
(2016a).

CB 2: Teachers understand the relationship between SJAS
principles and categories and which SJAS components go with each
lesson section.
Teaching Tolerance
(2016a).
CB 3: Teachers understand the relationship between effective
curriculum and student achievement.
National Research
Council. (2003).

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 55
Procedural
Teachers know how to…

CB 1: Teachers know how to use their positionality to create an
open-minded and anti-bias curriculum which recognizes and
respects students of all races, beliefs, classes, and social groups.
Florian, L. (2009).
Kugelmass, J. W. (2000).
Cooper, C. W. (2003).
CB 1: Teachers know how to act as change agents and work
together for the betterment of their students.
Cooper, C. W. (2003).
Biesta, G., & Tedder, M.
(2007).
CB 1: Teachers know how to embed the SJAS within their
curriculum.
Shulman, L. (1987).
Alberta Learning. (2015).
Wade, R.C. (2001)
CB 2: Teachers know how to utilize instructional strategies in
order to effectively implement the SJAS curriculum in their
teaching.
Shulman, L. (1987).
Alberta Learning. (2015).
Wade, R.C. (2001)
CB 3: Teachers know how to assess the collected student data
and monitor student achievement.
National Association of
Elementary School
Principals. (2011).
Kelley, B., Hosp, J.L., &
Howell, K.W. (2008).
Metacognitive
Teachers need to know how to reflect on...

CB 1: Teachers reflect on their own positionality. Mthethwa-Sommers, S.
(2014).
Posner, G. J. (2005).
CB 1: Teachers reflect on their lesson goal and planning. Huttunen, I. (2003).
McAlpine, L., & Weston,
C. (2000).
CB 1: Teachers reflect on implementation and monitoring. McAlpine, L., & Weston,
C. (2000).
Rodman, G. J. (2010).
CB 2: Teachers reflect on teaching practice and students’
reactions to the lessons utilizing the SJAS curriculum.
Cruickshank, D. &
Applegate, J. (1981).
Larrivee, B. (2006).
Rodman, G. J. (2010).
CB 3: Teachers reflect on assessing the collected data and how
to modify their lessons according to the data.
Love, N. (2004).
Marsh, J. A., Pane, J. F., &
Hamilton, L. S. (2006).
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 56
Motivation
General theory. Motivation is the internal, psychological process that drives someone to
engage in an activity and accomplish a goal (Pintrich, 2003). Rueda (2011) describes motivation
as inherently cultural. Social interactions and various social contexts play a role in the
development of a person’s motivational beliefs (Rueda, 2011). According to Clark and Estes
(2008), active choice, mental effort, and persistence are the three motivational indices that must
be examined to establish that motivation is a need that must be addressed.
Active choice refers to a person choosing whether or not to pursue a work goal (Clark &
Estes, 2008). Whether a person chooses or is assigned a goal, high motivation is displayed
through active choice if the person is actively working towards accomplishing the goal (Clark &
Estes, 2008). Active choice can indicate a motivation need that must be addressed in this study
if the teachers procrastinate, avoid working towards the goal, delay accomplishing it, argue
against it, or avoid it (Clark & Estes, 2008). Persistence refers to a person starting a task but
never finishing it due to distractions or a lack of time spent (Clark & Estes, 2008). Persistence
can show evidence of high motivation if they do not allow themselves to be distracted and
continue to drive themselves and work towards the accomplishment of the goal (Clark & Estes,
2008). Mental effort is the amount of cognitive resources one invests in achieving a work goal
(Clark & Estes, 2008). Mental effort can show evidence of high motivation if the teachers work
smarter and develop novel solutions towards accomplishing their goal (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Problems with mental effort refer to using inaccurate, familiar knowledge to solve a new task
that requires a new approach, and making mistakes and projecting responsibilities externally
(Clark & Estes, 2008). People who lack confidence tend not to invest much mental effort in a
task (Clark & Estes, 2008).
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 57
If teachers work towards the goal of creating a curriculum that implements SJAS, then
there is evidence of high motivation. If a teacher refuses to participate in the creation of a
curriculum that implements the SJAS or avoids working on it, then there is an active choice issue
that is an indicator of a motivation need. If teachers are able to prioritize and do not allow
distraction to get in the way of accomplishing the goal of creating a social justice curriculum
implementing the SJAS, then their persistence is evidence of high motivation. If teachers start
working towards the goal but allow themselves to be distracted or not spend enough time on it,
then the lack of persistence indicates a motivation need. Teachers who lack confidence in their
ability to create a curriculum implementing the SJAS will not invest much mental effort towards
accomplishing the goal, which indicates a cause of low motivation. Further, if teachers continue
to use the same familiar strategies to create a curriculum and are not succeeding, they are not
using mental effort, which also indicates a cause of low motivation.
Stakeholder/topic specific factors. The three motivational indices of active choice
persistence, and mental effort are supported by three underlying constructs: value, self-efficacy,
emotions. Additional underlying constructs may include goal orientation. According to Clark &
Estes (2008), value, self-efficacy, mood and goal-orientation are some of the assumed causes that
affect motivation.
WCUSD’s teachers’ expected behaviors were analyzed using these four types of
motivation to understand what is known through research as well as in categorizing the teachers’
behaviors into motivational types as shown in Table 2.
Value. According to Pintrich (2003), value refers to how important one identifies a task
to be. Rueda (2011) also describes that value answers the question, “Why should I do this
task?” Clark and Estes (2008) state that value is one of the three powerful ways people express
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 58
their perceptions about what they believe will make them effective. They go one to describe that
people value what they think will help them and reject what they perceive as an obstacle (Clark
& Estes, 2008). Pintrich (2003) also identifies four dimensions of value: attainment value (the
importance one attaches to doing well on a task), intrinsic value (the enjoyment one experiences
in a particular activity), utility value (how useful one believes a task is for achieving a future
goal), and cost value (perceived cost of the activity in terms of time or effort).
Teachers’ may or may not have a variety of reasons to value the implementation of SJAS
within their curriculum, such as being interested in the SJAS, liking the SJAS, thinking the SJAS
are essential, not wanting to teach through them.
Teachers value their own positionality. Teachers value the idea of a change
agent. Teachers value creating a curriculum at respective grade-level and content area that
develops pedagogical connections through the Social Justice Anchor Standards. Teachers
value the implementation of the SJAS curriculum. Teachers value evaluating the
effectiveness of curriculum based on student achievement data. Studies show that teachers
who value the SJAS will successfully implement it within their curriculum. People value
different things (Pudelko & Boon, 2014). Internalized values guide behavior and goal
achievement (Pudelko & Boon, 2014). Teachers who value their positionality better understand
themselves in order to understand the beliefs, actions, and positionality of their students
(Acevdeo et al., 2015). Teachers who value change agency are found to engage in “school
development and professional networks, initiate collaborations with colleagues and other
professionals or engage in inquiries seeking to address exclusion and educational disadvantage”
(Pantic, 2015). According to Pantic (2015), teachers who value being agents of change believe
that all students can learn and progress. A teacher who is empowered values the creation of
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 59
curriculum (Carl, 2009). Teachers who value creating a curriculum that develops pedagogical
connections through the SJAS optimize the teacher-learning events in the classroom (Carl,
2009). According to Carl (2009), empowered teachers experiment and make curriculum relevant
and meaningful as they create it. Carl (2009) also indicates that teachers who value the
evaluation of curriculum are able to determine the success of instruction and quality of
learning. Teachers are also able to make replanning adjustment, identify defects and correct
them, and determine whether advancement is possible (Carl, 2009). The more that teachers
value the elements involved in implementing SJAS, the more motivated they will become to
achieve their goal. Once teachers have developed a value for the elements of implementing the
SJAS, teachers must be confident in their abilities to accomplish the goal of creating a social
justice curriculum.
Self-efficacy. According to Usher and Pajares (2006), self-efficacy refers to a person’s
beliefs about his or her capabilities to perform tasks or to succeed in activities. According to
Bandura (1986), self-efficacy is people’s judgments of their own capabilities and the level at
which they can perform or engage in a task or accomplish a goal. Research has shown that when
people expect to do well and believe in their abilities, they try harder, persist, show resilience
and perform better (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002). Thus, people with higher self-efficacy are more
motivated to engage in, persist at, and work hard at a task or activity (Pintrich, 2003). According
to Pintrich (2003), self-efficacy is related to all three motivational indicators of active choice,
persistence, and mental effort, and is especially important when a difficult task is
encountered. According to Pintrich (2003), self-efficacy is the most important factor in a
person’s commitment and motivation to work tasks and in the quality and quantity of mental
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 60
effort to invest. Clark and Estes (2008) expand on this idea and explain that people with lower
self-efficacy will not choose to engage in, persist at, and work hard at a task or activity.
Teachers’ may or may not have confidence in their abilities to implement the SJAS
within their curriculum.
Teachers are confident about their positionality. Teachers are confident they can be
an agent of change. Teachers are confident about creating a curriculum at respective grade-
level and content area that develops pedagogical connections through the Social Justice
Anchor Standards. Teachers are confident about implementing the SJAS curriculum.
Teachers are confident about the evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on student
achievement. Studies show that teachers who are confident about the implementation of the
SJAS will successfully implement it within their curriculum. Self-efficacy of teachers is defined
as “individual beliefs in their capabilities to perform specific teaching tasks at a specified level of
quality in a specified situation” (Dellinger, Bobbett, Olivier, & Ellett, 2008, p. 4). Teacher self-
efficacy is shaped by previous experiences, beliefs, and behavior (Vieluf, Kunter, & van de
Vijver, 2013). Teacher self-efficacy is a powerful predictor of behavior, especially classroom
teaching practices (Vieluf et al., 2013). Understanding their positionality and gaining knowledge
about their teaching affects teachers’ confidence (Jenlink, 2014). According to Ross and Bruce
(2007), high teacher self-efficacy creates confidence that they can create and teach new
curriculum. Perceiving themselves as professionally masterful also increases teacher self-
efficacy (Ross & Bruce, 2007). When teachers are confident about their understanding of the
content area they teach and the standards and curriculum goals, they are able to create
assessments that reflect their learning intentions for their students (Alkharusi et al., 2014). As
teachers become more confident in their assessment strategies and tools, they are able to give
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 61
more meaningful feedback to students, to develop scoring schemes to quantify student
performance, and to apply educational decisions that are formed based on classroom assessments
(Alkharusi et al., 2014). The more confident that teachers are about the elements involved in
implementing SJAS and utilizing them, the more motivated they will become to achieve their
goal. Once teachers have developed strong self-efficacy towards the elements of implementing
the SJAS, teachers must feel positively about their abilities to accomplish the goal of creating a
social justice.
Emotion. According to Dolan (2002), “emotions represent complex psychological and
physiological states that, to a greater or lesser degree, index occurrences of value” (p. 1191).
Clark and Estes (2008) describe emotion as a psychological or physiological state of a person,
positive or negative, that can affect a person’s motivation. Dolan (2002) also describes that
emotion exerts a strong influence on reason and motivation. According to Bandura (1994),
mood affects people’s judgments and their self-efficacy. Clark and Estes (2008) add that
positive emotions support a person’s work commitment while negative emotions impede it. As a
result, it is important to create a positive work environment that promotes a positive mood, such
as happiness or joy, in order to support maximum work commitment (Clark & Estes, 2011).
Teachers may or may not feel positive about implementing the SJAS within their
curriculum.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 62
Teachers feel positive about understanding their positionality. Teachers feel positive
about being agents of change. Teachers feel positive about creating a curriculum at respective
grade-level and content area that develops pedagogical connections through the Social Justice
Anchor Standards. Teachers feel positive about implementing the SJAS curriculum.
Teachers feel positive about evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on student
achievement. Research indicates that teachers who feel positively about the SJAS will
successfully implement it within their curriculum. When teachers are able to contextualize the
teaching to the students’ learning experience and promote social change through individual self-
understanding, teachers feel positively about their positionality and their role as agents of change
(Taylor, Tisdell, & Stone Hanley, 2000). Teachers feel positively about their positionality when
they are able to build connections between the themselves as individuals and the social structure
or the systems of power and privilege (their race, class, gender) that shape how they view the
world (Taylor et al., 2000). Teachers who feel positively about an action or even are more likely
to be motivated to work harder towards achieving their goal (Villegas, 2007). Teachers feel
positively about their developed curriculum and when they are able to connect it to students’ past
experiences and promote a transformative change in students’ perspectives (Lingard & Mills,
2007). When teachers see their curriculum creating an impact on students, they feel more
positively about it (Lingard & Mills, 2007). When teachers create meaningful assessments and
evaluative tools that show that their curriculum impacts their students, they feel positively about
their curriculum (Alkharusi et al., 2014). The more positive that teachers feel about the elements
involved in implementing SJAS and utilizing them, the more motivated they will become to
achieve their goal. Once teachers have developed strong positive feelings towards the elements
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 63
of implementing the SJAS, teachers must have a mastery approach towards accomplishing the
goal of creating a social justice.
Goal Orientation. Goal orientation is a perspective that focuses different ways of
approaching, engaging in, and responding to achievement behaviors (Rueda, 2011). According
to Pintrich (2000), two types of goal orientation exist: mastery goal orientation and performance
goal orientation. Mastery goal orientation refers to approaching a task in order to learn, gain new
knowledge, or accomplish a difficult task (Pintrich, 2000). Performance goal orientation refers
to a person focusing more on demonstrating ability in front of others, on seeking recognition, on
outperforming others, and avoiding judgments by others (Pintrich, 2000). Although it may seem
as though mastery goal performance is ideal, research shows that performance goal orientation
can be adaptive in some situations and create positive outcomes (Rueda, 2011).
Teachers may or may not have a mastery approach towards implementing the SJAS
within their curriculum.
Teachers view understanding their positionality as a learning opportunity. Teachers
view being agents as change as a learning opportunity. Teachers view creating a curriculum
at respective grade-level and content area that develops pedagogical connections through the
SJAS as a learning opportunity. Teachers want to master the implementation of the SJAS
curriculum. Teachers want to gain knowledge about their students and practice through the
evaluation of the effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement. Research indicates that
teachers who develop a mastery goal orientation of implementing the SJAS will successfully
implement it within their curriculum. Teachers that are serious about reforming teaching and
improving student learning see the importance in understanding their positionality (Cochran-
Smith, 2004). Teachers that are serious about reforming teaching and improving student
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 64
learning see the importance of being change agents in their classrooms (Cochran-Smith,
2004). Teachers that view understanding their positionality and ability to be change agents as
learning opportunities are able to develop alternative ways of interpreting classroom events, to
resolve conflicts with parents or administrators, and to identify and to interpret students’
strengths and vulnerabilities (Cochran-Smith, 2004). According to Hackman (2005), teachers
are successful social justice educators when they have mastered the implementation of five
components of social justice education: content mastery, tools for critical analysis, tools for
social change, tools for personal reflection, and an awareness of multicultural group dynamics.
The more positive that teachers develop a mastery approach towards the elements involved in
implementing SJAS and utilizing them, the more motivated they will become to achieve their
goal.
The summary of assumed motivational influences from expected teacher critical behavior
when implementing the SJAS within curriculum is displayed in Table 3. Table 3 shows that
teachers must value, feel confident about, feel positive about and take on a mastery approach in
order to succeed at accomplishing the goal of creating a curriculum that implements the SJAS.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 65
Table 3
Summary of Assumed Motivation Influences on Teachers’ Ability to Achieve the Performance
Goal
Assumed Motivation Influences Research Literature
Author, Year; Author,
Year.
Value
Teachers needs to value…

CB 1: Teachers value their own positionality. Pudelko, C. E., & Boon, H.
J. (2014).
Acevedo et al. (2015).
CB 1: Teachers value the idea of a change agent. Pudelko, C. E., & Boon, H.
J. (2014).
Pantić, N. (2015).
CB 1: Teachers value creating a curriculum at respective grade-
level and content area that develops pedagogical connections
through the Social Justice Anchor Standards.
Pudelko, C. E., & Boon, H.
J. (2014).
Carl, A. E. (2009).
CB 2: Teachers value the implementation of the SJAS
curriculum.
Pudelko, C. E., & Boon, H.
J. (2014).
Carl, A. E. (2009).
CB 3: Teachers value evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum
based on student achievement data.
Pudelko, C. E., & Boon, H.
J. (2014).
Carl, A. E. (2009).
Self-Efficacy
Teachers needs to have confidence that ...

CB 1: Teachers are confident about their positionality. Carlisle, L.R., Jackson,
B.W., & George, A.
(2006).
Cochran-Smith, M. (2004).
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 66
Darling-Hammond, L.,
French, J., & Garcia-Lopez,
S. (Eds.). (2002).
Edwards, A. (2010).
Poplin, M., & Rivera, J.
(2005).
CB 1: Teachers are confident they can be an agent of change. Carlisle, L.R., Jackson,
B.W., & George, A.
(2006).
Cochran-Smith, M. (2004).
Darling-Hammond, L.,
French, J., & Garcia-Lopez,
S. (Eds.). (2002).
Edwards, A. (2010).
Poplin, M., & Rivera, J.
(2005).
CB 1: Teachers are confident about creating a curriculum at
respective grade-level and content area that develops
pedagogical connections through the Social Justice Anchor
Standards.
Aronson, B., & Laughter, J.
(2016).
CB 2: Teachers are confident about implementing the SJAS
curriculum.
Teaching Tolerance.
(2016a).
Teaching Tolerance.
(2016b).
CB 3: Teachers are confident about evaluating the effectiveness
of curriculum on student achievement.
Moeller, A.K. (2005).
LaCursia, N. (2013).
Mood
Teachers need to feel positive about…

CB 1: Teachers feel positive about understanding their
positionality.

Dellinger, A. B., Bobbett,
J. J., Olivier, D. F., &
Ellett, C. D. (2008).
Vieluf, S., Kunter, M., &
van de Vijver, F. J. (2013).
Jenlink, P. M. (Ed.).
(2014).
CB 1: Teachers feel positive about being agents of change. Dellinger, A. B., Bobbett,
J. J., Olivier, D. F., &
Ellett, C. D. (2008).
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 67
CB 1: Teachers feel positive about creating a curriculum at
respective grade-level and content area that develops
pedagogical connections through the Social Justice Anchor
Standards.
Vieluf, S., Kunter, M., &
van de Vijver, F. J. (2013).
Ross, J., & Bruce, C.
(2007).
CB 2: Teachers feel positive about implementing the SJAS
curriculum.
Alkharusi et al. (2014).
CB 3: Teachers feel positive about evaluating the effectiveness
of curriculum on student achievement.
Alkharusi et al. (2014).
Goal Orientation
Teachers need to believe that ....

CB 1: Teachers view understanding their positionality as a
learning opportunity.
Cochran-Smith, M. (2004).
Hackman, H. W. (2005).
CB 1: Teachers view being agents as change as a learning
opportunity.
Cochran-Smith, M. (2004).
Hackman, H. W. (2005).
CB 1: Teachers view creating a curriculum at respective grade-
level and content area that develops pedagogical connections
through the SJAS as a learning opportunity.
Cochran-Smith, M. (2004).
Hackman, H. W. (2005).
CB 2: Teachers want to master the implementation of the SJAS
curriculum.
Cochran-Smith, M. (2004).
Hackman, H. W. (2005).
CB 3: Teachers want to gain knowledge about their students
and practice through the evaluation of the effectiveness of
curriculum on student achievement.
Cochran-Smith, M. (2004).
Hackman, H. W. (2005).

Organization
Although motivation and knowledge and skill are essential to achieving organizational
goals, inadequate processes and materials can prevent the achievement of the performance goal
(Clark & Estes, 2008). Moreover, according to Clark and Estes (2008), organizational culture
affects all attempts to improve performance. Further, Rueda (2011) adds that an organization
itself can impede the performance of its staff. Clark and Estes (2008) identify organizational
barriers to include a lack of resources, inadequate policies and procedures, etc.
Resources. Tangible supplies and equipment are necessary to achieve organizational
goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). Time, supplies, and support are organizational resources that
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 68
teachers need in order to successful achieve their performance goal (Geser, 2007; Kraft et al.,
2015; Merrit, 2016). According to Clark and Estes (2008), the organization’s tools and material
supplies need to be available and designed in a way that supports the organizational goals.
There may be specific resources that are not properly provided by WCUSD to its faculty
in order to accomplish their goal. If there is a resource need, the faculty would not be able to
properly implement the SJAS across all curriculum at all grade levels.
Teacher have the training to understanding your own positionality within the
district. Teachers have resources to be effective change agent within the district. Teachers
have prep time to master and implement the SJAS curriculum. Teachers have the training to
implement SJAS. Teachers have prep time to analyze and evaluate the effectiveness of
curriculum on student achievement. Studies show that resources are needed for teachers to be
successful in the implementation of the SJAS across all curriculum. Several resources are
necessary to implement social justice education (Apple, 2011). Critical theoretical, historical,
political, and empirical resources are needed to create a curriculum with a rich and detailed
understanding of society in which students live (Apple, 2011). Principals should support
teachers trying to implement social justice within their curriculum (Brooks et al., 2007).
Principals should help develop a culture where diverse groups of teachers and staff can come
together to collaborate and engage productively to create goals geared towards social justice
(Brooks, Jean-Marie, Normore, & Hodgins, 2007; Riester, Pursch, & Skrla, 2002). Constraints
such as school reform models, risks to career, time involvement, and lack of administrative
support can affect the implementation of the SJAS by teachers (Esposito & Swain, 2009). The
implementation of social justice education requires ongoing professional development for
teachers guided by need (Corrigan, Beebe, & Sell, 2013). The implementation of social justice
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 69
education requires a structure that provides teachers to reflect and collaborate (Corrigan, Beebe,
& Sell, 2013). Money is a necessary resource in education and can be a major barrier for
accomplishing educational goals (Theoharis, 2007). Money is a barrier to social justice
education because equitable education is expensive (Theoharis, 2007). Money is necessary to
teach students who do not have the resources at home that they need to be successful in school
(Theoharis, 2007). Teachers need proper resources to be successful in creating and utilizing a
curriculum that implements the SJAS. Resources such as time and money are required to
support teachers in their process of creating and implementing a social justice curriculum while
having set policies and procedures will guide them in this process and will ease the process of
accomplishing their goal.
Policies and procedures. Policies and procedures refer to the framework and structure of
an organization (Kokemuller, n.d.). Policies and procedures, when enforced consistently,
contribute to the culture of an institution (Kokemuller, n.d.). According to Kokemuller (n.d.),
good policies and procedures reinforce good practices that benefit the workplace and its
stakeholders. Further, good policies and procedures do not unnecessarily restrict employee
freedom and decision-making (Kokemuller, n.d.).
If WCUSD’s organizational policies and procedures are not aligned with the
organizational goal, then there is an organizational need based on policy and procedure.
The policies and procedures in the school and district are aligned with the goal of
creating social justice curriculum. The policies and procedures in the school and district are
aligned with the goal of implementing the SJAS curriculum. The policies and procedures in
the school and district are aligned with the goal of evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum
on student achievement. Research indicates that an organization’s policies and procedures
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 70
guide teachers in their implementation of the SJAS within their curriculum. Policies and
procedures that promote social justice education allow teachers to create and environment and
implement a curriculum that engages learners, treats all students as agents of their own learning,
and positions students as collaborators in their own learning which increases motivation and
efficacy (Burns & Miller, 2017). Such policies and procedures have been strongly linked to
increased learning and academic achievement (Burns & Miller, 2017). However, oppression is
built into our policies, procedures and institutions (Hytten & Bettez, 2011). School discipline
policies are resembling those created by the criminal justice system for adults (Daniel & Bondy,
2008). Policies such as the “zero tolerance” policy can be detrimental to students (Daniel &
Bondy, 2008). Policies such as the zero tolerance policy hinder the implementation of social
justice education as it has an adverse effect on equitable student learning (Daniel & Bondy,
2008). Disciplinary policies and procedures that promote a transformative or social justice
learning component, such as sending a student to an alternate setting and having him or her
review why he or she is in trouble and what her or she can do to prevent such events in the
future, are much more beneficial to social justice education if facilitated properly than simply
suspending a student (Daniel & Bondy, 2008). According to Casella (2003), zero tolerance
policies strengthen the link between schools and prisons. Policies such as the zero tolerance
policy have negative effects on the emotional health of students, their graduation rates, their
fundamental right to an education, and their futures. Set policies and procedures that promote
social justice and equitable education are necessary to guide teachers in the process of creating
and implementing a social justice curriculum. Teachers will find it easier to adhere to the district
or school’s policies and procedures if they belong to a cultural setting that to the same policies
and procedures.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 71
Cultural setting. Gallimore and Goldenberg (2004) define cultural setting as a social
construct of an organization “where people come together to carry out joint activity that
accomplishes something they value” (p. 48). Schein (2004) describes cultural setting as the core
values, goals, beliefs, emotions and processes learned as people develop over time in their work
environments. Schein (2004) describes cultural setting as the who, what, when where, why, and
how of the routines that constitutes everyday life in the workplace. Culture is an important force
in performance (Schein, 2004). Rueda (2011) adds that cultural setting must be analyzed in
order to understand performance. A work environment is composed of the assumed influences
and characteristics of the cultural setting (Rueda, 2011).
WCUSD will have to address its cultural setting for assumed causes that may indicate an
organizational need.
There is a setting conducive to understanding your own positionality. There is a
setting conducive to being a change agent. There is a culture in the school and district that
supports the creation of a social justice curriculum. There is a culture in the school and
district that supports the implementation of the SJAS curriculum. There is a culture in the
school and district that supports the evaluation of the effectiveness of the curriculum on
student achievement. Studies describe cultural setting in SJAS implementation as an important
factor to be considered to accomplish the goal of implementing the SJAS throughout all
curriculum and across all grade levels. Carlisle et al. (2006) suggest that a just school should
have a culture that promotes inclusion and equity of all students, hold high expectations for all
students, develop reciprocal community relationships, involve a system wide approach, and
entail direct social justice education and intervention. According to Bettez (2008), schools must
have a culture in place that promotes a mind and body connection; the facilitation of critical
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 72
thinking; student engagement in explicit discussions of power, privilege, and oppression; an
environment that fosters and maintains compassion for students; the opportunity for students to
exercise self-care; and the development of critical communities. “Schools should invest in
improving their quality of thinking through developing their capacity for shared-vision building,
continual inquiry, organizational development, and collaborative work culture” (Mestry, Pillay &
Plessis, 2006, p. 2). Bryk, Lee, & Holland (1993) suggest that schools that promote a culture of
community promote a sense of excellence in schools and that teachers are less likely to be absent
and more satisfied with their work. McLaughlin and Talbert (2001) add that a culture focused on
learning that motivates staff and students, creates a cohesive working environment, and instills
passion and commitment among teachers leads to teacher satisfaction and student
success. Social support in the work environment is an important factor for teachers to cope with
the professional challenges they may face (Aelterman, Engels, Van Petegem, & Verhaeghe,
2007). In a study by Aelterman et al. (2007), the strongest cultural factor that affected teacher
well-being was lower pressure put on teachers by the district and school. Further, cultural
factors such as support from colleagues and administration also promoted higher self-efficacy
(Aelterman et al., 2007). A positive and supportive cultural setting that is important for teachers
in the process of creating and implementing a social justice curriculum. A positive and
supportive cultural setting will positively influence teachers’ creation and implementation of a
social justice curriculum and will produce expert role models throughout the district.
Cultural models. Cultural models are the normative understandings of how the world
works or should work (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Further, cultural models can dictate
environmental and social interpretations, what is valued, what settings should be constructed and
avoided, who should participate and how, and the purpose of interactions (Gallimore &
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 73
Goldenberg, 2001). According to Rueda (2011), cultural models can be used to characterize
organizations, classrooms, and individuals and can be expressed through cultural practices such
as behavior. Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) describe that such processes “represent, in a
given community or ecological niche, historically evolved and shared ways of perceiving,
thinking, and storing possible responses to adaptive challenges and changing conditions” (p.
47). Cultural models shape the structure of an organization, including the values, practices,
policies, and reward structure (Rueda, 2011). Because cultural models are so familiar, “they are
often invisible and unnoticed by those who hold them” (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001, p. 47).
Faculty role models who have implemented the SJAS within their curriculum are an
important resource to WCUSD and the rest of the teachers because they have shared ways of
perceiving and thinking and the expertise to store possible responses to adaptive challenges and
changing conditions. WCUSD will have to assess its cultural models for assumed causes that
may indicate an organizational need.
There are role models within the district who have integrated social justice topics into
curriculum. There are role models available within the district who have implemented the
SJAS curriculum. There are role models available within the district who have evaluated the
effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement. Studies show that having an expert role
model promotes teachers’ implementation of the SJAS within curriculum. A teacher can develop
a new vision of teaching based on his or her encounters with role models (Shulman & Shulman,
2004). Teacher role models have the ability to shape the culture of the workplace (Roby, 2011).
Katzenmeyer and Moller (2009) explain that teacher role models are teacher leaders who identify
with and contribute to a community of teacher learners and leaders, and influence others towards
improved educational practice. Day and Harris (2003) suggest that teacher role models lead by
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 74
example in their own classrooms through the translation of school improvement into their
practices. Teacher role models act as agents of change and create an environment conducive to
change and development for other teachers (Muijs & Harris, 2003). Teacher role models are the
participatory link between change and development for other teachers and help promote
ownership (Muijs & Harris, 2003). Further, teacher role models assist other teachers to work
together towards a particular development and to foster a more collaborative way of working
(Muijs & Harris, 2003). Teacher role models impact the classroom practices of other teachers
through the adoption of new practices or improvements in the currently established practices
(Frost & Durrant, 2002). Effective and empowering role models are an important organizational
factor that impact teachers in the process of creating and implementing a social justice
curriculum. A lack of such role models would reveal an organizational need that must be
addressed.
The summary of assumed organizational influences from expected teachers’ critical
behaviors when attempting to implement SJAS within all curriculum across all grade-levels are
demonstrated in Table 4. Table 4, the summary of assumed organizational influences, details the
assumed organizational influences of WCUSD, which are not limited to resources, policies and
procedures, cultural setting, and cultural model.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 75
Table 4
Summary of Assumed Organization Influences on Teachers’ Ability to Achieve the Performance
Goal
Assumed Organization Influences Research Literature
Author, Year; Author, Year.
Resources (time; finances; people)
Teachers needs resources to …

CB 1: Teacher have the training to understanding your
own positionality within the district.
Apple, M. W. (2017).
Brooks, J. S., Jean-Marie, G.,
Normore, A. H., & Hodgins, D.
W. (2007).
Riester, A. F., Pursch, V., &
Skrla, L. (2002).
Esposito, J., & Swain, A. N.
(2009).
Corrigan, D., Beebe, R. S., &
Sell, C. R. (Eds.). (2013).
Theoharis, G. (2007).
CB 1: Teachers have resources to be effective change
agent within the district.
Apple, M. W. (2017).
Brooks, J. S., Jean-Marie, G.,
Normore, A. H., & Hodgins, D.
W. (2007).
Riester, A. F., Pursch, V., &
Skrla, L. (2002).
Esposito, J., & Swain, A. N.
(2009).
Corrigan, D., Beebe, R. S., &
Sell, C. R. (Eds.). (2013).
Theoharis, G. (2007).
CB 1: Teachers have prep time to master and implement
the SJAS curriculum.
Apple, M. W. (2017).
Brooks, J. S., Jean-Marie, G.,
Normore, A. H., & Hodgins, D.
W. (2007).
Riester, A. F., Pursch, V., &
Skrla, L. (2002).
Esposito, J., & Swain, A. N.
(2009).
Corrigan, D., Beebe, R. S., &
Sell, C. R. (Eds.). (2013).
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 76
Theoharis, G. (2007).
CB 2: Teachers have the training to implement SJAS. Apple, M. W. (2017).
Brooks, J. S., Jean-Marie, G.,
Normore, A. H., & Hodgins, D.
W. (2007).
Riester, A. F., Pursch, V., &
Skrla, L. (2002).
Esposito, J., & Swain, A. N.
(2009).
Corrigan, D., Beebe, R. S., &
Sell, C. R. (Eds.). (2013).
Theoharis, G. (2007).
CB 3: Teachers have prep time to analyze and evaluate the
effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement.
Apple, M. W. (2017).
Brooks, J. S., Jean-Marie, G.,
Normore, A. H., & Hodgins, D.
W. (2007).
Riester, A. F., Pursch, V., &
Skrla, L. (2002).
Esposito, J., & Swain, A. N.
(2009).
Corrigan, D., Beebe, R. S., &
Sell, C. R. (Eds.). (2013).
Theoharis, G. (2007).
Policies, Processes, & Procedures
Teachers has policies that align with ...

CB 1: The policies and procedures in the school and
district are aligned with the goal of creating social justice
curriculum.
Burns, L. D., & Miller, S.
(2017).
Hytten, K., & Bettez, S. C.
(2011).
Daniel, Y., & Bondy, K.
(2008).
Casella, R. (2003).
Henault, C. (2001).
CB 2: The policies and procedures in the school and
district are aligned with the goal of implementing the
SJAS curriculum.
Burns, L. D., & Miller, S.
(2017).
Hytten, K., & Bettez, S. C.
(2011).
Daniel, Y., & Bondy, K.
(2008).
Casella, R. (2003).
Henault, C. (2001).
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 77
CB 3: The policies and procedures in the school and
district are aligned with the goal of evaluating the
effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement.
Burns, L. D., & Miller, S.
(2017).
Hytten, K., & Bettez, S. C.
(2011).
Daniel, Y., & Bondy, K.
(2008).
Casella, R. (2003).
Henault, C. (2001).
Culture Setting
Teachers are part of a culture that aligns with ...

CB 1: There is a setting conducive to understanding your
own positionality.
Shulman, L. S., & Shulman, J. H.
(2004).
Roby, D. E. (2011).
Katzenmeyer, M., & Moller, G.
(2009).
Day, C., Harris, A., & Hadfield,
M. (2001).
Muijs, D., & Harris, A.
(2003).
Frost, D., & Durrant, J. (2002).
CB 1: There is a setting conducive to being a change
agent.
Shulman, L. S., & Shulman, J. H.
(2004).
Roby, D. E. (2011).
Katzenmeyer, M., & Moller, G.
(2009).
Day, C., Harris, A., & Hadfield,
M. (2001).
Muijs, D., & Harris, A.
(2003).
Frost, D., & Durrant, J. (2002).

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 78
CB 1: There is a setting in the school and district that supports
the creation of a social justice curriculum.
Shulman, L. S., &
Shulman, J. H. (2004).
Roby, D. E. (2011).
Katzenmeyer, M., &
Moller, G. (2009).
Day, C., Harris, A., &
Hadfield, M. (2001).
Muijs, D., & Harris, A.
(2003).
Frost, D., & Durrant, J.
(2002).
CB 2: The school and district provide a setting that supports the
implementation of the SJAS curriculum.
Shulman, L. S., &
Shulman, J. H. (2004).
Roby, D. E. (2011).
Katzenmeyer, M., &
Moller, G. (2009).
Day, C., Harris, A., &
Hadfield, M. (2001).
Muijs, D., & Harris, A.
(2003).
Frost, D., & Durrant, J.
(2002).
CB 3: The school and district provide a setting that supports the
evaluation of the effectiveness of the curriculum on student
achievement.
Shulman, L. S., &
Shulman, J. H. (2004).
Roby, D. E. (2011).
Katzenmeyer, M., &
Moller, G. (2009).
Day, C., Harris, A., &
Hadfield, M. (2001).
Muijs, D., & Harris, A.
(2003).
Frost, D., & Durrant, J.
(2002).
Culture Model
Teachers have role models who...

CB 1: There is a shared supportive culture in the district and
school site for integrating social justice topics into curriculum.
Carlisle et al. (2006).
Bettez, S. C. (2008).
Mestry et al. (2006).
Bryk et al. (1993).
McLaughlin, M. W., &
Talbert, J. E. (2001).
Aelterman et al. (2007).
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 79
CB 2: There is a shared supportive culture in the district and
school site for implementing the SJAS in curriculum.
Carlisle et al. (2006).
Bettez, S. C. (2008).
Mestry et al. (2006).
Bryk et al. (1993).
McLaughlin, M. W., &
Talbert, J. E. (2001).
Aelterman et al. (2007).
CB 3: There is a shared supportive culture in the district and
school site for evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on
student achievement.
Carlisle et al. (2006).
Bettez, S. C. (2008).
Mestry et al. (2006).
Bryk et al. (1993).
McLaughlin, M. W., &
Talbert, J. E. (2001).
Aelterman et al. (2007).

Therefore, the KMO influences revealed by the literature were used as the basis of
inquiry in Chapter Three to determine the extent to which the teachers’ influences are assets or
needs that must be addressed in order to successfully meet the district’s goal of creating a social
justice curriculum that implements the SJAS.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 80
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this study is to use the Clark and Estes (2008) knowledge, motivation and
organization performance framework to conduct an analysis to identify and understand the assets
and needs for WCUSD to motivate, support, and prepare teachers to implement the Social Justice
Anchor Standards in all curricula.
The questions that are answered are
1. What are teachers’ knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational assets and needs
to implement the Social Justice Anchor Standards throughout WCUSD?
2. What are the knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational recommendations for
providing these assets and needs for implementing the Social Justice Anchor Standards
across all subject areas and grade-levels?
Conceptual and Methodological Framework
The framework of this study is Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework. The gap
analysis diagnoses the human causes behind gaps between desired and actual performance
through an analysis of organizational goals and an analysis of the causes of the gaps along three
critical dimensions: knowledge, motivation, and organizational policies, resources, and culture
(Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). In the gap analysis framework, a crucial component is
determining whether people know how to achieve their performance goals (Clark & Estes,
2008). Further, understanding how others think and feel about performance goals and gaps is an
important component of the gap analysis (Clark & Estes, 2008). Important documentation and
data about the organizational goal and the relevant work systems that attribute to the
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 81
performance gap must be identified and analyzed. Clark and Estes (2008) describe the use of the
gap analysis process model, which consists of seven steps (See Figure 1):
• Step 1: Goals: Identify the organizational goal.
• Step 2: Current Achievement: Identify the current achievement of performance
goals.
• Step 3: Gaps: Determine performance gaps.
• Step 4: Causes: Analyze gaps to determine causes (KMO).
The following three steps are not to be discussed in Chapter 3, but, rather, are discussed
in Chapters Four and Five of this study:
• Step 5: Solutions: Recommend knowledge solutions, motivation solutions, and
organizational process and material solutions to close gap.
• Step 6: Implement: Plan for the implementation of the KMO solutions.
• Step 7: Evaluate: Evaluate the results, fine-tune the system, and revise goals.
For the purpose of this study, the gap analysis framework is adapted to identify the assets
and needs of WCUSD to innovate the new curriculum that implements the SJAS throughout the
district. Because this is an innovation study, assets and needs, rather than gaps, are identified
and analyzed. In this Chapter, the critical behaviors identified in Chapter Two are analyzed to
determine any needs that the teachers have that could be a barrier in the creation of a curriculum
that implements the SJAS.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 82

Figure 1. The sequence of steps in the GAP analysis Process.
Assessment of Performance Influences
In order to better understand the assets and needs required to achieve the goal of creating
a curriculum that implements the SJAS throughout all grade levels and content areas, teachers’
knowledge and skills, motivation to achieve the goal, and organizational barriers (KMO) must be
examined and analyzed (Clark & Estes, 2008). The examination and analysis of the KMO assets
and needs help identify to extent to which teachers have the necessary knowledge and skills,
motivation, and organizational support to achieve the organizational goal. The KMO tables in
the subsequent sections show the assumed assets and needs and the methods of assessment such
as surveys, interviews, and observations.
In order to meet the goal of creating a curriculum that implements the SJAS throughout
all grade levels and content areas, teachers need specific knowledge and skills. Specifically,
declarative factual knowledge, declarative conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge, and
metacognitive knowledge must be addressed to understand the needs of achieving the
organizational goal.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 83
Moreover, teachers must also be highly motivated to be able to create a social justice
curriculum. Thus, the motivation influences, such as value, self-efficacy, emotion, and goal
orientation must be assessed.
Finally, teachers need organizational support in order to successfully achieve the
organization goal. Organizational support includes resources, policies and procedures aligned
with the goal, a culture that supports the goal, and role models to support the teachers in the
execution of the goal.
Knowledge Assessment
According to Clark and Estes (2008), it is important for teachers to know how, where,
when, why, what and who in order to achieve their performance goals. Table 5, which is derived
from the literature review in Chapter Two (pp. 49-53), lists the knowledge influences that affect
teachers’ ability to successfully create a curriculum that implements the SJAS. In this section,
the assumed knowledge influences were assessed using Anderson and Krathwohl’s (2001)
taxonomy. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) describe four types of knowledge: declarative
factual, declarative conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive. The declarative factual,
declarative conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge types were assessed using
survey items influenced by Anderson and Krathwohl’s (2001) knowledge assessment table.
Further, teachers were interviewed as shown in the interview item as well as observed for further
insight.
Declarative factual knowledge. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) define declarative
factual knowledge as the basic elements or knowledge of a discipline that one must know in
order to understand and function effectively or solve a problem. Teachers were asked close-
ended items for recall and recognition of their declarative factual knowledge required to
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 84
successfully implement the SJAS. According to Fink (2017), close-ended questions make
scoring and analysis of data simpler. Items included multiple choice questions with single or
multiple answers.
Declarative conceptual knowledge. Conceptual knowledge is defined by Anderson and
Krathwohl (2001) as the interrelationships of the factual knowledge within a larger structure that
allows them to function together. Declarative conceptual knowledge were assessed through
items that require teachers to apply cognitive processes such as analyzing their own positionality
or their role as change agents. Close-ended multiple choice answers with single answers were
used to assess declarative conceptual knowledge. Further, open-ended questions were used so
that teachers can elaborate on the concepts. According to Anderson and Krathwohl (2001),
understanding refers to comprehension of a concept. Teachers must understand their
positionality, how the social justice standards and their pedagogy is connected, and relationship
between effective curriculum and student achievement. According to Anderson and Krathwohl
(2001), analysis, through the process of breaking down and understanding the components of
material, provides evidence of the extent that complex knowledge and cognitive processes are
involved. Teachers were asked to analyze the critical behaviors involved in creating a
curriculum that implements the SJAS.
Procedural knowledge. Application refers to the ability to carry out the procedures for a
given task (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). In this study, application refers to teachers’ ability to
create a curriculum that implements the SJAS, act as change agents, and assess the effectiveness
of their curriculum. To assess procedural knowledge, close-ended multiple-response questions
were used. Further, open-ended questions were used to identify the steps necessary to create a
curriculum that successfully implements the SJAS.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 85
Metacognitive knowledge. According to Anderson and Krathwohl (2001),
metacognitive knowledge is “knowledge about cognition in general as well as awareness of and
knowledge about one’s own cognition” (p. 214). In order to assess metacognitive knowledge,
both close-ended and open-ended questions were used.
In this case, for metacognitive knowledge assessment, items that ask teachers to think
about their positionality, teaching practice, and assessment strategies were used. Questions
address teachers’ ability to reflect upon their awareness and knowledge of their own cognition.
Table 5 shows the types of survey items that were used to assess teachers’ assumed
knowledge influence. The table lists both survey and interview items that are created to assess
declarative factual knowledge, declarative conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge, and
metacognitive knowledge influences. The responses marked with an asterisk denotes the correct
response.
Table 5
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Method of Assessment
Assumed Knowledge
Influences
Survey Items Interview Items
Declarative Factual
(terms, facts, concepts)
Teachers know…

CB 1: Teachers know what
positionality is.
What is positionality?
a. The idea that gender, race,
class, personal values, beliefs, and
other aspects of identities influence
how one understands the world. *
b. The idea that one’s beliefs
and values must always be
critiqued and scrutinized.
What is positionality?
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 86
c. The idea that self-reflection
leads to the elimination of bias and
self-realization.
d. All of the above.
CB 1: Teachers know what
bias is.
What is an example of bias?
a. Favoring one student over
another.
b. Discriminating against a
student based on gender, race,
sexual orientation, beliefs, etc.
c. Both A and B*
d. None of the above

Main Q: What instances
of bias have you
encountered at your
school site?

CB 1: Teachers know their
own positionality and
biases.
In terms of my own positionality
and biases,
a. I know and can identify
both my positionality and most of
my biases very well.
b. I know and can identify my
positionality very well, but do not
understand or cannot identify my
biases well.
c. I know and can identify my
biases, but do not understand or
cannot identify my positionality
well.
d. I do not know and cannot
identify either my positionality or
biases.
Main Q: What is your
positionality in terms of
social justice education?

Probing Q: What
instances of bias have you
encountered in your own
classroom?

Probing Q: Have there
been instances where you
have shown bias in your
class? If so, can you
provide me with an
example?
CB 1: Teachers know what
an agent of change is.
Teachers who are agents of change
a. possess the capacity to
critically shape their own
responsiveness to challenging and
problematic situations.
b. are empowered to be
catalysts of social change within
their classrooms
c. Both A and B*
d. None of the above
What is an agent of
change in a social justice
classroom?
CB 1: Teachers know what
a curriculum is.
A curriculum
a. is the lessons and academic
content taught in a school or in a
specific course or program.
What is a curriculum?
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 87
b. must be guided by learning
objectives and questions.
c. operates on multiple levels.
d. A and C only
e. All of the above*
f. None of the above
CB 1: Teachers know what
pedagogical connections
are.
Pedagogical connections are
a. how different theories relate
to one another.
b. The relationship of theory
to practice. *
c. how different instructional
strategies relate to one another.
d. A and C only.
e. None of the above.
What pedagogical
connections do you see
between social justice
pedagogy and your own
instruction?
CB 1: Teachers know what
the Social Justice Anchor
Standards (SJAS) are.
Which of the following is a grade
level outcome of the Social Justice
Anchor Standards?
a. I can feel good about
myself without being mean or
making other people feel bad.
b. I care about those who are
treated unfairly.
c. I express empathy when
people are excluded or mistreated
because of their identities and
concern when I personally
experience bias.
d. All of the above*
Main Q: What are the four
domains of the Social
Justice Anchor Standards?

Probe: Please give me a
standard that relates to
each.
CB 1: Teachers know the
State Standards (SS) for
their subject areas and
grade-level.
Please indicate your level of
familiarity with the State Standards
for your subject area and grade
level:
a. Very familiar (I can name
each standard)
b. Moderately familiar (I can
name most of the standards)
c. Somewhat familiar (I can
name less than half of the
standards)
d. Not familiar at all (I cannot
name any of the standards)
What State Standards can
you name for your
specific subject area and
grade level that you
teach? If you teach more
than one, just choose one
specific subject and grade
level.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 88
CB 2: Teachers know what
domains of SJAS go into
each lesson.
Which of the following is a domain
of the Social Justice Anchor
Standards (Select all that apply)?
a. Identity*
b. Morality
c. Diversity*
d. Justice*
e. Action*
Please describe a lesson
that you have taught that
you believe relates to the
Social Justice Anchor
Standards and please
identify which of the four
domains are reflected in
this lesson.
CB 3: Teachers know what
Assessments are best for
evaluating the
effectiveness of
curriculum on student
achievement.
When evaluating if my curriculum
is effective, I use:
a. Formative assessments
b. Summative Assessments
c. Both a and b.*
d. None of the above.
What types of assessments
do you use to evaluate the
effectiveness of your
curriculum on student
achievement?
Declarative Conceptual
(categories, process
models, principles,
relationships)
Teachers know...

CB 1: Teachers know the
relationship between their
own positionality and
biases in creating and
implementing a curriculum
that incorporates SJAS.
To what extent would you say that
understanding and being able to
identify your positionality and bias
affects your ability to create and
implement a curriculum that
incorporates the Social Justice
Anchor Standards (SJAS)?
a. Understanding and being
able to identify my positionality
and bias plays no role in my ability
to create and implement a
curriculum that incorporate the
SJAS.
b. Understanding and being
able to identify my positionality
and bias plays a slight role in my
ability to create and implement a
curriculum that incorporate the
SJAS.
c. Understanding and being
able to identify my positionality
and bias plays a moderate role in
my ability to create and implement
Main Q: What does your
positionality mean in
terms of being a
successful social justice
educator?

Probe Q: What does
understanding your bias
mean in terms of being a
successful social justice
educator?
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 89
a curriculum that incorporate the
SJAS.
d. Understanding and being
able to identify my positionality
and bias plays a significant role in
my ability to create and implement
a curriculum that incorporate the
SJAS.*
CB 1: Teachers understand
how change agents can
affect student
achievement.
How much influence does a teacher
change agent have on affecting
student achievement?
a. No influence.
b. Some influence.
c. Moderate influence.
d. Strong influence.*
How much influence does
a teacher change agent
have on affecting student
achievement?
CB 1: Teachers understand
the relationship between
the domains of the SJAS
and the SS.
The relationship between the
domains of the SJAS and the State
Standards is
a. No relationship.
b. The SJAS are guidelines (a
new lens to look through) for
approaches for teaching the State
Standards. *
c. The SJAS are mandated
methods for teaching social justice
in State Standards.
Main Q: What is your
understanding of the
relationship between the
domains of the SJAS and
the State Standards?
CB 1: Teachers know the
relationship or categories
between pedagogy and the
SJAS and SS.
The relationship between pedagogy
and the SJAS and State Standards
(SS) is
a. Not important for creating
and implementing a social justice
curriculum.
b. Slightly important for
creating and implementing a social
justice curriculum.
c. Moderately important for
creating and implementing a social
justice curriculum.
d. Very important for creating
and implementing a social justice
curriculum.*
How would you describe
the relationship between
pedagogy and the SJAS
and SS?
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 90
CB 2: Teachers understand
the relationship between
SJAS principles and
categories and which
SJAS components go with
each lesson section.
To what extent do you understand
the relationship between the SJAS
and how they would be
implemented into your lessons?
a. I do not understand the
relationship between the SJAS and
my pedagogy enough to
incorporate the SJAS into my
lessons.
b. I somewhat understand the
relationship between the SJAS and
my pedagogy enough to
incorporate the SJAS into my
lessons.
c. I moderately understand the
relationship between the SJAS and
my pedagogy enough to
incorporate the SJAS into my
lessons.
d. I completely understand the
relationship between the SJAS and
my pedagogy enough to
incorporate the SJAS into my
lessons.
Describe a lesson that
would incorporate the
SJAS.
CB 3: Teachers understand
the relationship between
effective curriculum and
student achievement.
How important is curriculum on
student achievement?
a. Not at all important.
b. Somewhat important.
c. Moderately important.
d. Very Important. *

How effective do you think a social
justice curriculum will be in
comparison to your current
curriculum?
a. Much less effective than my
current curriculum.
b. Somewhat less effective
than my current curriculum.
c. Just as effective as my
current curriculum.
d. Somewhat more effective
than my current curriculum.
e. Much more effective than
my current curriculum.*
Main Q: How do you see
a social justice curriculum
affecting student
achievement?

Probe: What are the
components of an
effective social justice
curriculum?
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 91
Procedural
Teachers know how to…

CB 1: Teachers know how
to use their positionality to
create an open-minded and
anti-bias curriculum which
recognizes and respects
students of all races,
beliefs, classes, and social
groups.
In order to be able to create an
open-minded and anti-bias
curriculum that recognizes and
respects students of all races,
beliefs, classes, and social groups,
a teacher must (select all that
apply):
a. Write up their positionality
profile.
b. Create a lesson plan.
c. Review the lesson plan for
your pedagogical strategies for
teaching the content.
d. Review the pedagogical
strategies against SJAS.
e. Review pedagogical
strategies through the lens of your
own positionality (requires that you
complete the positionality profile
first).
f. Adjust the instructional
activities of the lesson to reflect
your revisions based upon the
adjustments to your positionality.
Please tell me what steps
are involved in creating an
open-minded and anti-bias
curriculum that recognizes
and respects students of
all races, beliefs, classes,
and social groups.
CB 1: Teachers know how
to act as change agents and
work together for the
betterment of their
students.
A teacher can act as a change agent
within the school setting when he
or she does what first?
a. Discusses sensitive issues,
such as race, gender, class, and
sexuality, with students.
b. Creates a safe and accepting
classroom environment. *
c. Discusses conflicting
opinions with students.
d. Keeps an open-mind when
hearing students’ perspectives on
sensitive topics.
e. Creates lessons geared
toward social change and social
awareness.
What steps are necessary
in order to become a
change agent?

How can you work with
other teachers in order to
become change agents
geared towards the
betterment of your
students and to spark
social change among
them?
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 92
CB 1: Teachers know how
to embed the SJAS within
their curriculum.
When embedding the SJAS within
their curriculum, teachers should
a. Plan the lesson and all
activities and then incorporate the
SJAS within that lesson.
b. First consider the learning
objectives of the lesson and ask
how it can be approached from a
social justice perspective before
creating the lesson. *
c. Plan a lesson around the
SJAS and then incorporate the
State Standards that match it.

What steps would you
take to embed the SJAS
within your curriculum?
CB 2: Teachers know how
to utilize instructional
strategies in order to
effectively implement the
SJAS curriculum in their
teaching.
How should a teacher utilize
instructional strategies that will
help effectively implement the
SJAS within their curriculum
(Select all that apply)?
a. Build a lesson around an
instructional strategy and match the
appropriate SJAS and SS to the
instructional strategy.
b. Identify which instructional
strategies are appropriate to
connect the SJAS to the SS being
taught. *
c. Both A and B
Please describe how you
would utilize different
instructional strategies in
order to effectively
implement the SJAS
within your curriculum.
CB 3: Teachers know how
to assess the collected
student data and monitor
student achievement.
What steps do you take when
assessing student data (Select all
that apply)?
a. Look at overall scores and
move on.
b. Check and see what specific
questions students missed. *
c. Take notes on areas of
improvement for reteaching or
intervention for next year.
d. Create an intervention plan
or a new lesson to reteach material.
*
e. Create a spreadsheet of data
to compare different periods of the
same course. *
Main Q: What steps
would you take to assess
the effect of a social
justice curriculum on
student achievement?

Probe: What measures or
evidence would you use to
assess the quality of your
curriculum?
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 93
f. Compare data with a
teacher who gave the same
assessment. *
g. Reflect upon, rethink, and
restructure the lesson(s) taught
prior to assessment.*
Metacognitive
Teachers know how to
reflect on...

CB 1: Teachers reflect on
their own positionality.
When thinking about my own
positionality, I tend to think about
(Select all that apply)
a. my race.
b. my gender.
c. my political beliefs.
d. my sexuality.
e. my religion.
f. my life experiences.
g. my age.
h. My socioeconomic class.
i. Other: __________
What do you think about
the effect of your own
positionality on your
teaching?

How do you think
students perceive your
positionality? Is it positive
or negative?

How do you think your
positionality can facilitate
the implementation of the
SJAS?
CB 1: Teachers reflect on
their lesson goal and
planning.

Tell me how you think
about your approach to
the lesson planning
process.
CB 1: Teachers reflect on
implementation and
monitoring.
Tell me what you think
about when you
implement a lesson.

CB 2: Teachers reflect on
teaching practice and
students’ reactions to the
lessons utilizing the SJAS
curriculum.
Tell me what you think
about when you reflect
upon your instructional
practice after completing a
lesson.
Tell me what you think
about when you monitor
student reactions after
completing a lesson.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 94
CB 3: Teachers reflect on
assessing the collected
data and how to modify
their lessons according to
the data.
Tell me what you think
about when assess student
data after completing a
lesson.

Motivation Assessment
According to Pintrich (2003), motivation is the internal, psychological process that
drives someone to engage in an activity and accomplish a goal. Clark and Estes (2008) describe
that motivation influences three critical aspects of a person’s work and private life: choosing to
work towards a goal, persisting until the goal is achieved, and the amount of mental effort one
invests to do the task. Table 6, which is derived from the literature review in Chapter Two
(Chapter 2, pp. 64-68), lists the assumed motivational influences that affect teachers’ ability to
create a curriculum that implements the SJAS. The motivational influences that were assessed in
this chapter are value, self-efficacy, emotion, and goal orientation.
Value. According to Pintrich (2003), value refers to how important one identifies a task
to be. In this study, teachers’ value of the components and steps needed to implement the SJAS
are assessed. The assessment for value is intended to assess how teachers rate and rank their
work processes, as itemized in Table 6. The survey for value relied on a Likert scale and ranking
scale, the survey items for value were created for the assumed motivation influences. Open-
ended interview questions were used to gain insight about what components and steps to
implement the SJAS the teachers value.
Self-efficacy. According to Usher and Pajares (2006), self-efficacy refers to a person’s
beliefs about his or her capabilities to perform tasks or to succeed in activities. Bandura’s (2006)
efficacy rating scale were used in the survey to assess teachers’ self-efficacy in accomplishing
their performance goal. Open-ended interview questions were used to gain insight about
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 95
teachers’ confidence in their abilities and knowledge to create a curriculum that implements the
SJAS.
Emotions. According to Dolan (2002), “emotions represent complex psychological and
physiological states that, to a greater or lesser degree, index occurrences of value” (p. 1191). In
this study, survey for emotion relied on a Likert scale and ranking scale. Open-ended interview
questions were used to gain insight about whether or not teachers feel positive about the process
of creating a curriculum that implements the SJAS.
Goal orientation. Goal orientation is a perspective that focuses different ways of
approaching, engaging in, and responding to achievement behaviors (Rueda, 2011). The survey
items for goal orientation relied on a Likert scale and ranking scale. The interview items relied
on open-ended questions that were used to assess if the teachers have a mastery approach
towards the creation of a social justice curriculum.
Table 6 shows the type of survey items and interview items that were used to assess the
teachers’ assumed motivation influences. The table lists both survey and interview items that are
created to assess what teachers value, teacher self-efficacy, teachers’ emotional motivation, and
teachers’ goal orientation.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 96
Table 6
Summary of Motivation Influences and Method of Assessment
Assumed Motivation
Influences
Survey Items Interview Items
Value
Teachers value…

CB 1: Teachers value their
own positionality.
How important is knowing
your positionality as you write
daily lesson plans?
1. Not at all important
2. Slightly important
3. Moderately important
4. Very important
5. Extremely important
How do you value your own
positionality as you write
daily lesson plans?

CB 1: Teachers value the
idea of a change agent.
How important do you find the
idea of teachers being change
agents as you write daily
lesson plans?
1. Not at all important
2. Slightly important
3. Moderately important
4. Very important
5. Extremely important

How do you value the idea of
being a change agent as you
write daily lesson plans?

How much importance does
the district place on teachers
to be change agents?

CB 1: Teachers value
creating a curriculum at
respective grade-level and
content area that develops
pedagogical connections
through the Social Justice
Anchor Standards.
How important do you think it
is to create a curriculum that
develops pedagogical
connections through the SJAS
at respective grade-levels?
1. Not at all important
2. Slightly important
3. Moderately important
4. Very important
5. Extremely important
How important do you think
creating a curriculum that
develops pedagogical
connections through the
SJAS at respective grade-
levels and content areas?

How much important do you
think it has been for the
district to have teachers
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 97

How important do you think it
is to create a curriculum at
your respective content area
that develops pedagogical
connections through the
SJAS?
1. Not at all important
2. Slightly important
3. Moderately important
4. Very important
5. Extremely important
create a curriculum that
develops pedagogical
connections through the
SJAS at respective grade-
levels and content areas?

CB 2: Teachers value the
implementation of the SJAS
curriculum.
How important is the
implementation of the SJAS
curriculum to you?
1. Not at all important
2. Slightly important
3. Moderately important
4. Very important
5. Extremely important
Main Q: How important do
you feel the implementation
of the SJAS curriculum is for
student achievement?

How important do you think
your school site feels
(administration and teachers)
the implementation of the
SJAS is for student
achievement?
CB 3: Teachers value
evaluating the effectiveness
of curriculum based on
student achievement data.
How important is evaluating
the effectiveness of curriculum
based on student achievement
data to you?
1. Not at all important
2. Slightly important
3. Moderately important
4. Very important
5. Extremely important
Main Q: How important is
using data in evaluating the
effectiveness of curriculum?

Probe Q: How much
importance does your school
site put on using data to
evaluate the effectiveness of
curriculum?

How much importance does
the district put on using data
to evaluate the effectiveness
of curriculum?
Self-Efficacy
Teachers have confidence
that ...

CB 1: Teachers are
confident about their
positionality.
Indicate how confident you are
right now about considering
Main Q: Describe a time your
positionality affected a lesson
you taught.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 98
your positionality as you write
daily lesson plans:
1. Not at all confident
2. Slightly confident
3. Moderately confident
4. Very confident
5. Extremely confident

Probe: How did it affect your
lesson?
CB 1: Teachers are
confident they can be an
agent of change.
Indicate how confident you are
right now that you can be an
agent of change in your
classroom:
1. Not at all confident
2. Slightly confident
3. Moderately confident
4. Very confident
5. Extremely confident
Describe how you are or can
be an agent of change in your
classroom.
CB 1: Teachers are
confident about creating a
curriculum at respective
grade-level and content area
that develops pedagogical
connections through the
Social Justice Anchor
Standards.
Indicate how confident you are
right now about creating a
curriculum at your respective
grade-level and content area
that develops pedagogical
connections through the SJAS:
1. Not at all confident
2. Slightly confident
3. Moderately confident
4. Very confident
5. Extremely confident
Describe how you would
create a curriculum at your
respective grade-level and
content area that develops
pedagogical connections
through the SJAS.
CB 2: Teachers are
confident about
implementing the SJAS
curriculum.
Indicate how confident you are
right now about implementing
social justice curriculum:
1. Not at all confident
2. Slightly confident
3. Moderately confident
4. Very confident
5. Extremely confident
Describe how you would
implement a social justice
curriculum.
CB 3: Teachers are
confident about evaluating
the effectiveness of
curriculum on student
achievement.
Indicate how confident you are
right now about evaluating the
effectiveness of curriculum on
student achievement:
1. Not at all confident
2. Slightly confident
3. Moderately confident
4. Very confident
Describe how you evaluate
the effectiveness of your
curriculum on student
achievement.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 99
5. Extremely confident
Emotion
Teachers feel positive
about…

CB 1: Teachers feel positive
about understanding their
positionality.

Please rate how positive you
feel about your understanding
of your positionality as you
write daily lesson plans:
0 Not positive at all
1
2
3
4
5 Moderately positive
6
7
8
9
10 Extremely positive
Main Q: Please tell me how
you feel about your
understanding of your
positionality as you develop
curriculum.

CB 1: Teachers feel positive
about being agents of
change.
Please rate how positive you
feel about being an agent of
change:
0 Not positive at all
1
2
3
4
5 Moderately positive
6
7
8
9
10 Extremely positive
Please tell me how you feel
about being an agent of
change in your classroom and
school site.
CB 1: Teachers feel positive
about creating a curriculum
at respective grade-level and
content area that develops
pedagogical connections
through the Social Justice
Anchor Standards.
Please rate how positive you
feel about creating a
curriculum that develops
pedagogical connections
through the SJAS at your
respective grade-level and
content area:
0 Not positive at all
1
2
Please tell me how you feel
about creating a curriculum
that develops pedagogical
connections through the
SJAS at your respective
grade-level and content area.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 100
3
4
5 Moderately positive
6
7
8
9
10 Extremely positive
CB 2: Teachers feel positive
about implementing the
SJAS curriculum.
Please rate how positive you
feel about implementing a
social justice curriculum:
0 Not positive at all
1
2
3
4
5 Moderately positive
6
7
8
9
10 Extremely positive
Please tell me how you feel
about implementing a social
justice curriculum.
CB 3: Teachers feel positive
about evaluating the
effectiveness of curriculum
on student achievement.
Please rate how positive you
feel about evaluating the
effectiveness of curriculum on
student achievement:
0 Not positive at all
1
2
3
4
5 Moderately positive
6
7
8
9
10 Extremely positive
Please tell me how you feel
about evaluating the
effectiveness of curriculum
on student achievement.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 101
Goal Orientation
Teachers believe that ....

CB 1: Teachers view
understanding their
positionality as a learning
opportunity.
Please indicate how you would
rate the following: I like learning
about my own positionality even
though it can sometimes be a
struggle.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree
What is your approach
for understanding your
own positionality?

CB 1: Teachers view being
agents of change as a
learning opportunity.
Please indicate how you would
rate the following: I like learning
about how to be an agent of
change in my classroom and at my
school site even though I know
there will be challenges.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree
Main Q: What is your
approach for being a
change agent in your
classroom or school site?

Probe: Tell me about
your goals for being a
change agent in your
classroom or school site.
CB 1: Teachers view
creating a curriculum at
respective grade-level and
content area that develops
pedagogical connections
through the SJAS as a
learning opportunity.
Please indicate how you would
rate the following: I like the idea
of creating new curriculum that
develops pedagogical connections
through the SJAS even though I
may make mistakes along the way.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree
Tell me about your goals
for creating a curriculum
that develops pedagogical
connections through the
SJAS at your respective
grade-level and content
area.
CB 2: Teachers want to
master the implementation
of the SJAS curriculum.
Please indicate how you would
rate the following: I like the idea
of implementing a social justice
curriculum even though it may be
challenging and may receive
pushback from students or the
community.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
Main Q: What is your
approach to
implementing a social
justice curriculum?

Probe: Tell me about
your goals for
implementing a social
justice curriculum.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 102
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree
CB 3: Teachers want to
gain knowledge about their
students and practice
through the evaluation of
the effectiveness of
curriculum on student
achievement.
Please indicate how you would
rate the following: I like the idea
of evaluating the effectiveness of
my curriculum on student
achievement even if the results
may indicate that I need to further
develop my instructional practice.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree
What is your approach to
gaining knowledge about
your students’
achievement through the
evaluation of the
effectiveness of your
curriculum?

What is your approach to
gaining knowledge about
your own practice
through the evaluation of
the effectiveness of your
curriculum?

Organization/Culture/Context Assessment
According to Rueda (2011), organizational support is necessary in order to successfully
achieve the organization goal. Further, Clark and Estes (2008) emphasize that organizational
culture affects all attempts to improve performance. Moreover, Rueda (2011) adds that an
organization itself directly affects the performance of its staff. Table 7, derived from the
literature review in Chapter Two (pp. 79-87), lists the assumed organizational influences that
affect teachers’ ability to create curriculum that implements the SJAS. The assumed
organizational influences that were assessed in this section are organizational resources, policies
and procedures, cultural setting, and cultural models.
Resources. According to Clark and Estes (2008), resources are tangible supplies and
equipment are necessary to achieve organizational goals. Clark and Estes (2008) also suggest
that an organization’s tools and material supplies need to be available and designed in a way that
supports the organizational goals. In this study, the survey questions on resources relied on a
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 103
Likert scale and ranking scale. Open-ended interview questions were used to gain insight about
whether or not teachers feel the organization provides the resources they need to creating a
curriculum that implements the SJAS.
Policies and procedures. According to Kokemuller (n.d.), policies and procedures refer
to the framework and structure of an organization, which, when enforced consistently, contribute
to the culture of an institution (Kokemuller, n.d.). In this study, the survey questions relied on a
Likert and ranking scale. Open-ended interview questions were used to gain insight about
whether or not teachers feel the organization’s policies and procedures reinforce good practices
that attribute to the creation of a curriculum that implements the SJAS.
Cultural setting. According to Gallimore and Goldenberg (2004), cultural setting is a
social construct of an organization where “where people come together to carry out joint activity
that accomplishes something they value” (p. 48). In this study, the survey questions relied on a
Likert and ranking scale. Open-ended interview questions were used to assess whether or not
teachers feel the organization’s cultural setting creates a structure that facilitates the creation of a
curriculum that implements the SJAS.
Cultural models. According to Gallimore & Goldenberg (2001), cultural models are the
normative understandings of how the world works or should work and can dictate environmental
and social interpretations, what is valued, what settings should be constructed and avoided, who
should participate and how, and the purpose of interactions. Further, Rueda (2011) suggests that
cultural models can be used to characterize organizations, classrooms, and individuals and can be
expressed through cultural practices such as behavior. For the purposes of this study, Likert and
rating scale items were used in the survey. Open-ended interview questions were used to assess
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 104
whether or not teachers feel the organization has the cultural models necessary to help facilitate
and help promote the creation of a curriculum that implements the SJAS.
Table 7 shows the type of survey items and interview items that were used to assess the
teachers’ assumed organizational influences. The table lists both survey and interview items that
are created to assess the organizational resources, organizational policies and procedures,
organizational cultural setting, and organizational models that affect the teachers’ ability to
create curriculum that implements the SJAS.
Table 7
Summary of Organizational Influences and Method of Assessment
Assumed Organization
Influences
Survey Items Interview Items
Resources (time; finances;
people)
Teachers needs resources
to …

CB 1: Teachers have the
training to understanding
their own positionality
within the district.
Rate the level of your agreement
for the following statement:

I have the training to understand
my own positionality.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree
What kind of training does
the district provide to help
teachers understand their
own positionality?

CB 1: Teachers have
resources to be effective
change agent within the
district.
Rate the level of your agreement
for the following statement:

The district provides me with the
resources to be an effective
change agent within the district.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
What kind of resources
does the district provide
you with to be an effective
change agent within the
district?
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 105
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree
CB 1: Teachers have prep
time to master and
implement the SJAS.
Rate the level of your agreement
for the following statements:

The district provides me with
enough prep time to master the
SJAS.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree

The district provides me with
enough prep time to implement a
social justice curriculum.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree

How much prep time does
the district provide you
with to master the SJAS
curriculum?

How much prep time does
the district provide you
with to implement a social
justice curriculum?
CB 2: Teachers have the
training to implement
SJAS.
Rate the level of your agreement
for the following statement:

The district provides me with the
training I need to successfully
implement the SJAS.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree
What kind of training does
the district provide you
with to successfully
implement the SJAS?
CB 3: Teachers have prep
time to analyze and
evaluate the effectiveness
of curriculum on student
achievement.
Rate the level of your agreement
for the following statement:

The district provides me with the
prep time I need to analyze the
effectiveness of curriculum on
student achievement.
1. Strongly disagree
How much prep time does
the district provide you
with to analyze the
effectiveness of your
curriculum on student
achievement?

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 106
2. Somewhat disagree
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree

The district provides me with the
prep time I need to evaluate the
effectiveness of curriculum on
student achievement.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree
How much prep time does
the district provide you
with to evaluate the
effectiveness of your
curriculum on student
achievement?
Policies, Processes, &
Procedures
Teachers have policies that
align with ...

CB 1: The policies and
procedures in the school
and district are aligned
with the goal of creating
social justice curriculum.
Please indicate to what extent you
agree with the following
statement: The district’s policies
and procedures align with the
district’s goal of creating a social
justice curriculum.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree

Please indicate to what extent you
agree with the following
statement: My school’s policies
align with the district’s goal of
creating a social justice
curriculum.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree
To what extent do the
districts policies and
procedures align with the
district’s goal of creating a
social justice curriculum?

To what extent does your
school site align with the
district’s goal of creating a
social justice curriculum?

CB 2: The policies and
procedures in the school
Please indicate to what extent you
agree with the following
To what extent do the
district’s policies and
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 107
and district are aligned
with the goal of
implementing the SJAS.
statement: The district’s policies
and procedures are aligned with
the goal of implementing the
SJAS.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree

Please indicate to what extent you
agree with the following
statement: The school’s policies
and procedures are aligned with
the goal of implementing the
SJAS.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree
procedures align with the
goal of implementing the
SJAS?

To what extent do your
school site’s policies and
procedures align with the
goal of implementing the
SJAS?

CB 3: The policies and
procedures in the school
and district are aligned
with the goal of evaluating
the effectiveness of
curriculum on student
achievement.
Please indicate to what extent you
agree with the following
statement: The district’s policies
and procedures are aligned with
the goal of evaluating the
effectiveness of curriculum on
student achievement.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree

Please indicate to what extent you
agree with the following
statement: My school’s policies
and procedures are aligned with
the goal of evaluating the
effectiveness of curriculum on
student achievement.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
To what extent do the
policies and procedures of
the district align with the
goal of evaluating the
effectiveness of curriculum
on student achievement?

To what extent do the
policies and procedures of
your school site align with
the goal of evaluating the
effectiveness of curriculum
on student achievement?
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 108
5. Strongly agree
Culture Setting
Teachers are part of a
culture that aligns with ...

CB 1: There is a setting
conducive to
understanding your own
positionality.
Please indicate to what extent you
agree with the following
statement: The district and my
school site provide an
environment conducive to
understanding your own
positionality.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree
What are some ways that
the district provides you
with an environment
conducive to
understanding your own
positionality?

What are some ways that
your school site provides
you with an environment
conducive to
understanding your own
positionality?
CB 1: There is a setting
conducive to being a
change agent.
Please indicate to what extent you
agree with the following
statement: The district and my
school site provide an
environment conducive to being a
change agent.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree
What are some ways that
the district provides you
with an environment
conducive to being a
change agent?

What are some ways that
your school site provides
you with an environment
conducive to being a
change agent?
CB 1: There is a setting in
the school and district that
supports the creation of a
social justice curriculum.
Please indicate to what extent you
agree with the following
statement: The district and my
school site provide an
environment that supports the
creation of a social justice
curriculum.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree
What are some ways that
the district provides you
with the environment that
helps support your creation
of a social justice
curriculum?

What are some ways that
your school site provides
you with an environment
that helps support your
creation of a social justice
curriculum?
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 109
CB 2: The school and
district provide a setting
that supports the
implementation of the
SJAS.
Please indicate to what extent you
agree with the following
statement: The district and my
school site support the
implementation of a social justice
curriculum.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree
What are some ways that
the district creates a culture
that supports the
implementation of a social
justice curriculum?

What are some ways that
your school site creates a
culture that supports the
implementation of a social
justice curriculum?
CB 3: The school and
district provide a setting
that supports the
evaluation of the
effectiveness of the
curriculum on student
achievement.
Please indicate to what extent you
agree with the following
statement: The district and my
school site provide an
environment that supports the
evaluation of the effectiveness of
the curriculum on student
achievement.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree
What are some ways that
the district provides a
culture that supports the
evaluation of the
effectiveness of your
curriculum on student
achievement?

What are some ways that
your school site provides a
culture that supports the
evaluation of the
effectiveness of your
curriculum on student
achievement?
Culture Model
CB 1: There is a shared
supportive culture in the
district and school site for
integrating social justice
topics into curriculum.
Please indicate to what extent you
agree with the following
statement: There is a shared
supportive culture in the district
and school site for integrating
social justice topics into
curriculum.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree
Main Q: How would you
describe the culture in the
district and your school
site in terms of integrating
social justice topics into
curriculum.

CB 2: There is a shared
supportive culture in the
district and school site for
Please indicate to what extent you
agree with the following
statement: There is a shared
supportive culture in the district
Main Q: How would you
describe the culture in the
district and your school
site in terms of being able
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 110
implementing the SJAS in
curriculum.
and school site for implementing
the SJAS in curriculum.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree
to implement the SJAS in
curriculum?

CB 3: There is a shared
supportive culture in the
district and school site for
evaluating the
effectiveness of curriculum
on student achievement.
Please indicate to what extent you
agree with the following
statement: There is a shared
supportive culture in the district
and school site for evaluating the
effectiveness of curriculum on
student achievement.
1. Strongly disagree
2. Somewhat disagree
3. Neither agree or disagree
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree
Main Q: How would you
describe the culture in the
district and school site for
evaluating the
effectiveness of curriculum
on student achievement?

Participating Stakeholders and Sample Selection
The stakeholder group of focus for this this paper is secondary teachers at WCUSD that
are participating in the Social Justice pilot group. According to the WCUSD website, WCUSD
serves the coastal communities of West Coast and Beach City and serves 11,000 students in
preschool through 12th grade in 10 elementary schools, two middle schools, one secondary
school (both middle and high school), one comprehensive high school, a continuation high
school and a K - 8th grade alternative school.
Sampling
The study focuses on 16 secondary teachers, including the PD leader, from two middle
schools, one high school, and an alternative school. The 16 teachers all volunteered to be part of
the pilot group for the implementation of the SJAS within all curriculum throughout WCUSD.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 111
Recruitment
For the purpose of this study, all 16 members of the pilot group were asked to participate
in the survey and interview process.
Instrumentation
The instrumentation used for this study consisted of an anonymous online survey that
was sent to all 16 members of the pilot group and an interview protocol.
Survey items were built from Tables 5, 6 and 7 listed above. Survey items designed
around knowledge influences are multiple choice and require respondents to recognize and
understand concepts and principles relating to social justice education. These knowledge items
assess respondents’ awareness of declarative factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive
factors involved with social justice education. Survey items designed to assess motivation and
organizational needs are assessed through Likert and rating scales.
Moreover, this study used an interview protocol to gain further insight through open-
ended questions that clarify and elaborate on the survey data. The interview protocol was
derived from Tables 5, 6 and 7 listed above. Interview items consisted of a main open-ended
question, which may be followed by a probing question, in order to assess a respondent’s
assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs.
Survey Design
In this study, survey items were used to measure the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational needs and assets of teachers in order to implement the Social Justice Anchor
Standards throughout WCUSD. The survey contained 65 survey items: 23 items relating to
teacher knowledge, 21 items relating to motivation, and 21 items relating to organizational
factors. The survey is shown in Tables 5, 6 and 7 and was derived from the Chapter Two
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 112
literature review. The survey was distributed to all members of the social justice pilot group
using the Qualtrics online platform.
Knowledge and Skills. In order to assess the teachers’ needs and assets with regards to
knowledge, survey items for the assumed knowledge influences were created using Anderson
and Krathwohl’s (2001) taxonomy. The survey items were categorized using the four types of
knowledge described by Anderson and Krathwohl (2001): declarative factual, declarative
conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive. The knowledge and skills survey items consisted of
multiple choice questions that assess teachers’ knowledge including basic information necessary
to create a social justice curriculum, the purpose of the skills and knowledge for creating a social
justice curriculum, the steps to create a social justice curriculum, and the metacognitive
strategies.
Motivation. In order to assess the teachers’ needs and assets with regards to motivation,
survey items for the assumed motivational influences were constructed. According to Usher and
Pajares (2006), self-efficacy plays a large role in motivation as a person’s beliefs about his or her
capabilities drives him or her to perform tasks or to succeed in activities. Bandura’s (2006)
efficacy rating scale were used in the survey to assess teachers’ self-efficacy in accomplishing
their performance goal. As a result, if teachers are confident that they can accomplish a task,
they will be more motivated to perform and succeed, whereas teachers that believe they cannot
accomplish a task, will not be successful at accomplishing a task. The value, emotion, and goal
orientation survey items relied on a Likert scale and ranking scale.
Organization. This study also focused on the organizational needs and assets for creating
and implementing a social justice curriculum. The assumed organizational influences that were
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 113
assessed in this section are organizational resources, policies and procedures, cultural setting,
and cultural models. In this study, the survey relies on Likert and rating scale items.
Interview Protocol Design
An interview protocol was also designed for this study in order to triangulate the data
collected in the surveys. The members of the pilot group that opt to be interviewed were asked
open-ended questions, which are shown in Table 5 for knowledge, Table 6 for motivation, and
Table 7 for organizational factors. The interview consisted of 20 interview questions with 17
primary interview questions and 3 follow up questions. The interview should last no more than
60 minutes per participant.
Document Analysis
The Social Justice Anchor Standards and any other documents related to the
implementation of the standards that the district has available and is willing to supply.
Data Collection
Following University of Southern California Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval,
participants were solicited by the researcher via e-mail to participate in the survey. The
researcher asked the professional development leader for the e-mail addresses of all of the pilot
group members, so that they can be provided with an e-mail containing a survey link that
allowed the teachers in the pilot group and the professional development leader, who is also a
teacher, to access and complete a Qualtrics survey and opt into the interview. The procedure for
data collection is described in the following sections.
Surveys
Data was collected through a Qualtrics survey. The text for the survey invitation and link
were sent to the participants by the researcher via e-mail. Surveys were sent to all 16
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 114
participants, consisting of 16 secondary teachers and the professional development leader who is
also a teacher. In the survey instructions, participants were notified that respondents’ identities
will remain anonymous for the purpose of reporting findings. The target for participation in the
survey is 100%, which is all 16 teachers. Surveys were in the field for three weeks. The
researcher sent the first e-mail reminder for the survey on the tenth day after distribution and the
second e-mail reminder on the seventeenth day. However, because surveys were sent over the
summer, feedback was not given as most teachers did not check their email. As a result, a
professional development session in the Fall semester to distribute the surveys and allow
teachers time to respond.
Interviews
At the end of the Qualtrics survey, participants were given an opportunity on the “thank
you” page to opt in or out of the interview. An external link was sent to participants who opted
into the interview to a different webpage where they inputted their name, school site, grade level
taught, subject taught, e-mail, and phone number. This information was used to compile the
interview list. The target for participation in the interview was 25%, which is three teachers.
Interviews were conducted in person. In-person interviews were conducted at a school
site within the district of the participants’ choice, in order to create a sense of comfort for the
participant, or in a neutral location. A protocol for recording the interview was created and used
during the interview process. The recorded interviews lasted no longer than 45 minutes.
Participants were briefed about the purpose of the study, their role in the interview, and that their
identities will remain anonymous. The researcher also conveyed to the participants that they will
be asked a series of questions about their own experiences with social justice and curriculum as
well as scenario questions to gain further insight into their feelings and thoughts about a social
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 115
justice and building a curriculum that implements it. During the interview, main questions as
well as probing questions were asked. At the completion of the interview, participants were
thanked for their participation. After the conclusion of all of the interviews, the interviews were
transcribed verbatim.
Data Analysis
The survey data was analyzed using descriptive statistics, which include mean, mode and
standard deviation. Frequencies among knowledge, motivation, and organization were analyzed.
The knowledge and skills analysis were categorized by the four knowledge types: declarative
factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge types. Motivation was examined
according to value, self-efficacy, emotion, and goal orientation. Finally, organization was
examined through the categories of resources, policies and procedures, cultural setting, and
cultural models.
The recorded interviews were transcribed, reviewed, and coded a priori using Tables 5, 6
and 7 and based on Clark and Estes (2008) knowledge, motivation, and organization (KMO)
framework. The recorded interviews were coded using frequencies and common themes. The
frequencies and common themes of knowledge were categorized into declarative factual,
conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge types. The variables associated with
motivation were categorized into value, self-efficacy, emotion, and goal orientation. Finally, the
variables associated with organization were categorized into resources, policies and procedures,
cultural setting, and cultural models. In order to be sensitive towards data that falls outside the
KMO framework, new codes and themes were created. According to Corbin & Strauss (2008),
any findings not included in the a priori categories were analyzed using grounded theory in order
to identify emerging themes.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 116
Trustworthiness of Data
In order to maintain the credibility and trustworthiness of this study, the researcher
triangulated the survey and interview data to see how they inform each other. According to
Hatch (2002), triangulation is the “verification or extension of information from other sources”
(p. 92). Triangulation requires using multiple investigators, multiple sources of data, multiple
theories, or multiple data collection methods (Merriam & Tisdale, 2016). Merriam and Tisdale
(2016) describe triangulation as “a powerful strategy for increasing the credibility or internal
validity of your research” (p. 245). Patton (2015) argues that “triangulation, in whatever form,
increases credibility and quality by countering the concern (or accusation) that a study’s findings
are simply an artifact of a single method, a single source, or a single investigator’s blinders” (p.
673). Thus, the researcher triangulated the survey data and interview data in order to enhance
the trustworthiness of the data.
Role of Investigator
According to Fink (2000), the role of the investigator in a qualitative study is split into
seven categories: thematisor, study designer, interviewer, transcriber, analyzer, verifier, and
reporter. Merriam and Tisdale (2016) further describe the investigator as the person that
explains the purpose of the study to the participants. The investigator in this study is a teacher in
WCUSD and has a stake in the successful implementation of the SJAS within curriculum. The
investigator is also an observer participant, which means that his observer activities are known to
the group while he actively participates in the group (Merriam & Tisdale, 2016). According to
Patton (2002), an investigator should maintain a stance of empathic neutrality, which refers to
the researcher’s stance in working with study participants while seeking an empathetic
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 117
understanding without judgment by showing openness, sensitivity, respect, awareness, and
responsiveness.
Limitations
This study investigates one school district and one small group within the school district
as an innovation. Thus, a limitation of this study is the sample size. Because the pilot group
began training in the Spring semester, the instruments that were used for data collection are
limited to a survey and interview. Further, surveys and interviews were used for data collection,
which is self-reported data and can contain several sources of bias such as selective memory,
telescoping, attribution, and exaggeration (McGregor, 2017). Therefore, another limitation of
this study is the instrumentation used for data collection. Finally, the author of the study is a
teacher in WCUSD, which could result in biased interpretation of the data to validate his own
beliefs about the needs and assets necessary for implementing the SJAS across all grade level
and across all curricula.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 118
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
Assumed knowledge, motivation, and organization gaps related to understanding the
assets and needs for WCUSD to motivate, support, and prepare teachers to implement the Social
Justice Anchor Standards in all curricula identified in Chapter 2 and Chapter 3 were
assessed. Surveys and interviews were conducted to collect qualitative data. Multiple sources of
qualitative data were collected in order to demonstrate that the assumed influences meet their
respective thresholds. Specifically, survey, interview, and observation data were collected to
understand the knowledge, motivation, and organization needs and assets of secondary teachers
in Social Justice Cohort 1 in WCUSD who are responsible for creating and implementing a
social justice curriculum at each of their respective grade levels and content areas. As a result,
the results of the surveys and interviews have been organized into corresponding assumed
knowledge, motivation, and organization domains.
The participants were first asked to participate in the anonymous survey. At the end of
the survey, a new window appears that allows participants to opt into an interview. This is how
participants were able to agree to be interviewed. The option to be interviewed was made
available at the end of the survey so that participate could get an understanding of what the
research topic is through the survey and have a safe and unobtrusive means of being asked to
participate without any social pressures that occur through a face-to-face
encounter. Observations were conducted on two separate days of professional development.
Participating Stakeholders
Faculty members that were part of Social Justice Cohort 1 in WCUSD were the
stakeholders of interest in this study and were the stakeholders who provided survey data and
some of whom provided interview data. Social Justice Cohort 1 is comprised of one Spanish
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 119
Immersion teacher, one Special Education teacher, six English/ELA teachers, four Math
teachers, one Visual Arts teacher, one Social Studies teacher, one Off Campus Learning Center
teacher, and one member of Education Services. The population surveyed included 14
secondary teachers. Although 16 secondary teachers participated in Social Justice Cohort 1, two
of these participants were researchers and were not surveyed. Of the 14 eligible secondary
teachers surveyed, 12 completed the survey (response rate of approximately 86%). Additionally,
three faculty members participated in interviews.
Criteria for Determining Assets and Needs
This study utilized two data sources: surveys and interviews. These two data sources
were used as the criteria for determining the assets and needs of the district according to the
assumed causes. The assumed causes and the description of the survey and its items are
discussed in depth in Chapter Three. The survey results provided the criteria for determining
assets and needs of the assumed knowledge, motivation, and organization influences. The
criteria used for determining any gaps from the survey data on assumed knowledge, motivation,
and organizational influences for the creation and implementation of a social justice curriculum
by the secondary teachers participating in Social Justice Cohort 1 were as follows: results with
less than 100% agreement indicated a gap in all knowledge and organization domains and in the
motivation domains of value and goal orientation; results with less than 80% of responses in the
“extremely confident” or “very confident” range indicated a gap in the motivation domain of
self-efficacy; and results with less than a mean of 9 indicated a gap in the motivation domain of
emotion. The thresholds were on the higher end due because the sample population is small.
Interview data was used to confirm or challenge survey results. Interviews were used to confirm
or challenge survey results through agreements among participants and detail of responses.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 120
Interviews were used to elaborate on survey results and also see if there are any discrepancies
between the survey results and recorded interview data.
Results and Findings for Knowledge Causes
Teachers' knowledge was assessed through surveys and interviews. Results of surveys
and interviews are presented for each assumed cause within the categories of declarative factual
knowledge, conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge, and metacognitive knowledge.
Results of knowledge surveys in Tables 8-30 and interviews are used to determine whether or
not assumed gaps are present.
Factual Knowledge
Surveys and interviews were used to assess teachers' declarative knowledge. Teachers in
Social Justice Cohort 1 were surveyed on the knowledge needed to successfully and effectively
create and implement a social justice curriculum. Results have been organized and evaluated in
order to assess whether or not there is a gap regarding the assumed causes.
Factual knowledge influence 1: Teachers know what positionality is.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to choose the correct definition of positionality
from a list of four possible answers. The accuracy in identifying the correct definition was
66.7%. The threshold for this item is 100% due to the emphasis the research places on the
understanding of what positionality is in order to create and implement a social justice
curriculum effectively. Therefore, there is a need for teachers’ factual knowledge of
positionality.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 121
Table 8
Survey Results for Factual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Factual Knowledge Item 1 % Count
What is positionality?
1
The idea that gender, race, class, personal values, beliefs, and other
aspects of identities influence how one understands the world.*
66.7% 8
2
The idea that one’s beliefs and values must always be critiqued and
scrutinized.
0% 0
3
The idea that self-reflection leads to the elimination of bias and self-
realization.
0% 0
4 All of the above. 33.3% 4
Total 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. In the observation of 15 members of Social Justice Cohort 1, the majority
of teachers demonstrated knowledge of what positionality is as they discussed their gender, race,
class, beliefs and sexuality during professional development. For example, on numerous
occasions, one teacher emphasized that she identifies as White and uses this and other aspects of
her identity to help her students understand how these aspects influence her life. Further, another
teacher who identifies as Hispanic discussed how she also discusses how being Hispanic
influences her life and influences her students, especially her students of color.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers know what positionality is. Since only
66.7% were able to accurately identify what positionality is and the threshold is 100%, the
teachers did not demonstrate that they know what positionality is and there is room for
improvement.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 122
Factual knowledge influence 1. Teachers know what bias is.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to choose an example of bias from a list of four
possible answers. The accuracy in identifying the examples of bias was 91.7%. The threshold
for this item is 100% due to the emphasis the research places on knowing what bias is and being
able to identify it in order to create and implement a social justice curriculum
effectively. Therefore, there is a need for teachers’ factual knowledge of bias.
Table 9
Survey Results for Factual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Factual Knowledge Item 2 % Count
What is an example of bias?
1 Favoring one student over another. 0% 0
2
Discriminating against a student based on gender, race, sexual
orientation, beliefs, etc.
0% 0
3 Both A and B* 91.7% 11
4 None of the above 8.3% 1
Total 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers can identify examples of bias. Since
only 91.7% were able to accurately identify what positionality is and the threshold is 100%, the
teachers did not demonstrate that they know what positionality is and there is room for
improvement. Although all teacher but one were able to identify the correct examples, every
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 123
teacher must be able to identify bias in order to effectively create and implement a social justice
curriculum.
Factual knowledge influence 1. Teachers know their own positionality and biases.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to choose a response that reflects their
understanding and ability to identify their own biases and positionality from a list of four
possible answers. Only 75% of the teachers feel they know and can identify their positionality
and most of their biases very well, while 25% of the teachers know they and can identify their
biases but do not know or understand their positionality well. The research states that a teacher
must understand and be able to identify his or her biases and positionality in order to effectively
create and implement a social justice curriculum. Therefore, there is a need for teachers’ factual
knowledge of positionality and biases.
Table 10
Survey Results for Factual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Factual Knowledge Item 3 % Count
In terms of my own positionality and biases,
1
I know and can identify both my positionality and most of my biases very
well.*
75% 9
2
I know and can identify my positionality very well, but do not understand
or cannot identify my biases well.
0% 0
3
I know and can identify my biases, but do not understand or cannot
identify my positionality well.
25% 3
4 I do not know and cannot identify either my positionality or biases. 0% 0
Total 100% 12

Interview findings. Interview respondents were asked to describe a time their
positionality affected a lesson they taught and to describe how it affected their lesson. One
teacher discussed his experience teaching freshman seminar:
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 124
The use of word Latino/Hispanic, comments I have gotten from students are “aren’t they
all the same?” I am Salvadorian and calling me “Mexican” strips and ignores my
Salvadorian history and identity. Also, being a male teacher and discussing Sexual
assault in Freshman Seminar Curriculum may not always have the same impact if a
female teacher delivered it.
The teachers all discussed their political views as being big difference makers in their
lessons. However, gender and socio-economic status was also discussed in sometimes taking
away from the effectiveness of a lesson.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers know their own positionality and
biases. Since only 75% of teachers know their own positionality and biases well and the
threshold is 100%, there is room for improvement, especially in terms of teachers understanding
and knowing what positionality is. Conversely, the interview data shows that teachers are able to
identify how their positionality affects their lessons. Although teachers may not know their own
positionality and biases well, they are able to discuss aspects of their positionality and how they
affect their lessons. However, there is not enough data in the interviews to show that teachers
understand their own positionality and biases and the need found in the surveys is confirmed.
Factual knowledge influence 1. Teachers know what an agent of change is.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to choose a response that reflects the qualities of a
teacher that is an agent of change from a list of four possible answers. All of the teachers
(100%) chose the correct answer of both choices A (possess the capacity to critically shape their
own responsiveness to challenging and problematic situations) and choice B (are empowered to
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 125
be catalysts of social change within their classroom). The research states that a teacher must
know what an agent of change is in order to effectively create and implement a social justice
curriculum. Therefore, there is no need for improving teachers’ knowledge of what an agent of
change is.
Table 11
Survey Results for Factual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Factual Knowledge Item 4 % Count
Teachers who are agents of change
1
possess the capacity to critically shape their own responsiveness to
challenging and problematic situations.
0% 0
2 are empowered to be catalysts of social change within their classrooms 0% 0
3 Both A and B* 100% 12
4 None of the above 0% 0
Total 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers know what an agent of change
is. Since 100% were able to accurately identify the qualities of a teacher that is an agent of
change and the threshold is 100%, the teachers did demonstrate that they know what an agent of
change is.
Factual knowledge influence 1. Teachers know what a curriculum is.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to choose the response that best describes the
aspects of a curriculum from a list of five possible answers. The accuracy in identifying the
correct aspects of a curriculum was 91.7%. The threshold for this item is 100% because teachers
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 126
must know what a curriculum is in order to create and implement one. Therefore, there is a need
for teachers’ factual knowledge of knowing what a curriculum is.
Table 12
Survey Results for Factual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Factual Knowledge Item 5 % Count
A curriculum
1
is the lessons and academic content taught in a school or in a specific
course or program.
0% 0
2 must be guided by learning objectives and questions. 0% 0
3 operates on multiple levels. 0% 0
4 A and C only 8.3% 1
5 All of the above* 91.7% 11
Total 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers know what a curriculum is. Since
91.7% were able to accurately identify what a curriculum is and the threshold is 100%, the
teachers did not demonstrate that they know what a curriculum is and there is room for
improvement.
Factual knowledge influence 1. Teachers know what pedagogical connections are.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to choose the response that best describes the what
pedagogical connections are from a list of five possible answers. The accuracy in identifying the
correct response to what pedagogical connections are was 66.7%. The threshold for this item is
100% because teachers must know how to relate social justice theory to their practice is in order
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 127
to successfully create and implement a social justice curriculum. Therefore, there is a need for
teachers’ factual knowledge of knowing what pedagogical connections are.
Table 13
Survey Results for Factual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Factual Knowledge Item 6 % Count
Pedagogical connections are
1 how different theories relate to one another. 0% 0
2 the relationship of theory to practice.* 66.7% 8
3 how different instructional strategies relate to one another. 8.3% 1
4 A and C only. 25% 3
5 None of the above. 0% 0
Total 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers know what pedagogical connections
are. Since only 66.7% were able to accurately identify what pedagogical connections are and the
threshold is 100%, the teachers did not demonstrate that they know what pedagogical
connections are and there is room for improvement.
Factual knowledge influence 1. Teachers know what the Social Justice Anchor
Standards (SJAS) are.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to choose the response that best identifies a grade
level outcome of the Social Justice Anchor Standards from a list of four possible answers. The
accuracy in identifying the correct grade level outcome of the Social Justice Standards 83.3%.
The threshold for this item is 100% because teachers must know the Social Justice Anchor
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 128
Standard and their grade level outcomes in order to successfully create and implement a social
justice curriculum. Therefore, there is a need for teachers’ factual knowledge of knowing what
the Social Justice Anchor Standards are.
Table 14
Survey Results for Factual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Factual Knowledge Item 7 % Count

Which of the following is a grade level outcome of the Social Justice
Anchor Standards?

1
I can feel good about myself without being mean or making other people
feel bad.
0% 0
2 I care about those who are treated unfairly. 0% 0
3
I express empathy when people are excluded or mistreated because of
their identities and concern when I personally experience bias.
16.7% 2
4 All of the above* 83.3% 10
Total 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is teachers know what the Social Justice Anchor
Standards (SJAS) are. Since only 83.3% were able to accurately identify what the grade level
outcomes of the Social Justice Anchor Standards are and the threshold is 100%, the teachers did
not demonstrate that they know what the Social Justice Anchor Standards are.
Factual knowledge influence 1. Teachers know the State Standards (SS) for their
subject areas and grade-level.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to choose the response that indicates the teachers’
level of familiarity with the State Standards for their subject area and grade level from a list of
four possible answers. The level of familiarity with the Social Justice Standards varied. Only
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 129
25% of teachers indicated that they were very familiar while 50% indicated they were
moderately familiar and 25% indicated they were somewhat familiar. In order to create a
curriculum for their subject area and grade level, teachers must be familiar with their respective
State Standards. Therefore, there is a need for teachers’ factual knowledge of knowing the State
Standards for their subject areas and grade-level.
Table 15
Survey Results for Factual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Factual Knowledge Item 8 % Count

Please indicate your level of familiarity with the State Standards for your
subject area and grade level:

1 Very familiar (I can name each standard)* 25% 3
2 Moderately familiar (I can name most of the standards) 50% 6
3 Somewhat familiar (I can name less than half of the standards) 25% 3
4 Not familiar at all (I cannot name any of the standards) 0% 0
Total 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers know the State Standards for their
subject areas and grade-level. Since only 25% of teachers are very familiar with the State
Standards and the threshold is 100%, there is room for improvement.
Factual knowledge influence 2. Teachers know what domains of SJAS go into each
lesson.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to identify the domains of the Social Justice Anchor
Standards from a list of five possible answer choices. Four of the five responses were correct. Of
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 130
the four possible correct responses, 100% of the teachers accurately identified two correct
responses while 91.7% accurately chose the other two correct responses. None of the teachers
chose the incorrect response. In order to create and implement a social justice curriculum based
on the Social Justice Anchor Standards (SJAS), teachers must know what the SJAS are.
Therefore, there is a need for teachers’ factual knowledge of knowing what domains of SJAS go
into each lesson.
Table 16
Survey Results for Factual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Factual Knowledge Item 9 % Count

Which of the following is a domain of the Social Justice Anchor
Standards (Select all that apply)?

1 Identity* 100% 12
2 Morality 0% 0
3 Diversity* 100% 12
4 Justice* 91.7% 11
5 Action* 91.7% 11
Total Average: 95.85% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers know what domains of SJAS go into
each lesson. The threshold for each domain is 100%. Since two of the domains were correctly
identified by 91.7% of the teachers, there is room for improvement.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 131
Factual knowledge influence 3. Teachers know what assessments are best for
evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to identify the response that best indicates how
teachers evaluate if their curriculum is effective from a list of four possible answers. The
accuracy in identifying the correct methods of evaluating if curriculum is effective was 100%.
The threshold for this item is 100% because teachers must know how to properly evaluate if the
social justice curriculum they will be creating and implementing is effective in order to ensure
the success of students. Therefore, there is no need for improvement in regards to teachers’
factual knowledge of knowing what assessments are best for evaluating the effectiveness of
curriculum on student achievement.
Table 17
Survey Results for Factual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Factual Knowledge Item 10 % Count
When evaluating if my curriculum is effective, I use:
1 Formative assessments 0% 0
2 Summative assessments 0% 0
3 Both a and b.* 100% 12
4 None of the above. 0% 0
Total: 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers know what assessments are best for
evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement. Since 100% of the teachers
were able to accurately identify the response that best indicates how teachers evaluate if their
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 132
curriculum is effective and the threshold is 100%, the teachers did demonstrate that they know
what assessments are best for evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on student
achievement.
Conceptual Knowledge
Teachers' conceptual knowledge was assessed through interviews and surveys. Teachers
in Social Justice Cohort 1 were surveyed on the conceptual knowledge necessary to successfully
and effectively create and implement a social justice curriculum. Results have been organized
and evaluated in order to assess whether or not there is a gap regarding the assumed causes.
Conceptual knowledge influence 1. Teachers know the relationship between their
own positionality and biases in creating and implementing a curriculum that incorporates
SJAS.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to indicate the extent that understanding and being
able to identify their positionality and bias affects their ability to create and implement a
curriculum that incorporates the Social Justice Anchor Standards from a list of four possible
answers. The accuracy in identifying the correct response necessary for being able to effectively
create and implement a social justice curriculum was 91.7%. The threshold for this item is 100%
because teachers must understand and be able to identify how their positionality and bias affects
their ability to create and implement a social justice curriculum. Therefore, there is a need for
teachers’ conceptual knowledge of knowing the relationship between their own positionality and
biases in creating and implementing a curriculum that incorporates SJAS.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 133
Table 18
Survey Results for Conceptual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Conceptual Knowledge Item 1 % Count

To what extent would you say that understanding and being able to
identify your positionality and bias affects your ability to create and
implement a curriculum that incorporates the Social Justice Anchor
Standards (SJAS)?

1
Understanding and being able to identify my positionality and bias plays
no role in my ability to create and implement a curriculum that
incorporate the SJAS.
0% 0
2
Understanding and being able to identify my positionality and bias plays
a slight role in my ability to create and implement a curriculum that
incorporate the SJAS.
0% 0
3
Understanding and being able to identify my positionality and bias plays
a moderate role in my ability to create and implement a curriculum that
incorporate the SJAS.
8.3% 1
4
Understanding and being able to identify my positionality and bias plays
a significant role in my ability to create and implement a curriculum that
incorporate the SJAS.*
91.7% 11
Total: 100% 12

Interview findings. During the interview, teachers were asked “What does your
positionality mean in terms of being a successful social justice educator?” One of the teachers
had to look up the term “positionality” before answering the question, which already shows a gap
in understanding positionality. After looking up the term, he responded that “We need to be
careful to not allow our own Biases to skew the curriculum, our experiences are important,
however, when presenting curriculum, we need to keep a sense of neutrality.” Another teacher
was unable to actually discuss her positionality. Instead, she discusses the way she prepares
students, but fails to mention how her positionality ties into her curriculum and instructional
practices.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 134
The third teacher discusses her positionality and how she thinks about it as she creates
and implements a social justice curriculum.
I kind of come at it as an educated socio-economically advantaged, straight, white
woman. So I could be criticized for that because how can I get up and talk about social
justice with regards to race, ethnicity, or class coming from the white privileged and
socio-economically privileged person? But I think because I can really understand and
recognize that it's an ongoing practice for me to understand my blind spots and my
implicit bias and I keep going to training. And I haven't really been questioned in terms
of, "Well, who are you to be doing this?" Which sometimes I worry about, like, do I have
more clout or power or authenticity or, I don't know if the word is validity. Legitimacy,
maybe? Do I have more legitimacy if I came from a minority group? But I don't. But I'm
committed to this and I'm committed to change and I'm committed to equity, I'm
committed to excess. I believe in all kids. So I think I let my heart speak for who I am and
I hope that they see that I'm authentic and genuine and what my values are. And I've
never been called into question by anybody except for actually another woman with the
same background as me accusing me of not teaching the classics and teaching only
ethnic studies. And so I referred them to Dr. Mora.
This teacher provides a detailed description of how she thinks about her positionality in relation
to the curriculum she teaches and how it affects her students.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers know the relationship between their
own positionality and biases in creating and implementing a curriculum that incorporates SJAS.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 135
Since 91.7% of the teachers were able to accurately identify the response that best indicates the
extent that understanding and being able to identify their positionality and bias affects their
ability to create and implement a curriculum that incorporates the Social Justice Anchor
Standards and the threshold is 100%, the teachers did not demonstrate that they know the
relationship between their own positionality and biases in creating and implementing a
curriculum that incorporates SJAS. Moreover, the interview data shows that some of the
teachers do not know what the term positionality means and that some cannot describe the
relationship between their positionality and creating and implementing a social justice
curriculum. Thus, there is room for improvement.
Conceptual knowledge influence 1. Teachers understand how change agents can
affect student achievement.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to indicate how much influence a teacher change
agent has on affecting student achievement from a list of four possible answers. The accuracy in
identifying the correct definition was 66.7%. The threshold for this item is 100% due to the
importance of teachers being and understanding the impact of agents of change in a classroom in
order to effectively create and implement a social justice curriculum that will impact and benefit
all students. Therefore, there is a need for teachers’ conceptual knowledge of understanding how
an agent of change can affect student achievement.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 136
Table 19
Survey Results for Conceptual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Conceptual Knowledge Item 2 % Count

How much influence does a teacher change agent have on affecting
student achievement?

1 No influence. 0% 0
2 Some influence. 8.3% 1
3 Moderate influence. 25% 3
4 Strong influence.* 66.7% 8
Total: 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers understand how change agents can
affect student achievement. Since 66.7% of the teachers were able to accurately identify the
response that best indicates how much influence a teacher change agent has on affecting student
achievement and the threshold is 100%, the teachers did not demonstrate that they understand
how change agents can affect student achievement.
Conceptual knowledge influence 1. Teachers understand the relationship between
the domains of the SJAS and the SS.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to indicate the response that best describes the
relationship between the domains of the Social Justice Anchor Standards and the State Standards
from a list of three possible answers. The accuracy in identifying the correct relationship was
91.7%. The threshold for this item is 100% due to the importance of understanding the
relationship between the domains of the Social Justice Anchor Standards and the State Standards
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 137
in order to create and implement an effective social justice curriculum. Therefore, there is a need
for teachers’ conceptual knowledge of understanding the relationship between the domains of the
SJAS and the SS.
Table 20
Survey Results for Conceptual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Conceptual Knowledge Item 3 % Count

The relationship between the domains of the SJAS and the State
Standards is

1 No relationship. 0% 0
2
The SJAS are guidelines (a new lens to look through) for approaches for
teaching the State Standards.*
91.7% 11
3
The SJAS are mandated methods for teaching social justice in State
Standards.
8.3% 1
Total: 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers understand the relationship between
the domains of the Social Justice Anchor Standards and the State Standards. Since only 91.7%
were able to accurately identify the correct relationship between the domains of the SJAS and the
State Standards and the threshold is 100%, the teachers did not demonstrate that they understand
the relationship between the domains of the Social Justice Anchor Standards and the State
Standards.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 138
Conceptual knowledge influence 1. Teachers know the relationship or categories
between pedagogy and the SJAS and SS.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to indicate the response that best describes the
relationship between pedagogy and the Social Justice Anchor Standards and the State Standards
from a list of four possible answers. The accuracy in identifying the correct relationship was
83.3%. The threshold for this item is 100% due to the importance of understanding the
relationship between pedagogy and the Social Justice Anchor Standards and the State Standards
in order to create and implement an effective social justice curriculum. Therefore, there is a need
for teachers’ conceptual knowledge of knowing the relationship or categories between pedagogy
and the SJAS and SS.
Table 21
Survey Results for Conceptual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Conceptual Knowledge Item 4 % Count

The relationship between pedagogy and the SJAS and State Standards
(SS) is

1 Not important for creating and implementing a social justice curriculum. 0% 0
2
Slightly important for creating and implementing a social justice
curriculum.
0% 0
3
Moderately important for creating and implementing a social justice
curriculum.
16.7% 2
4
Very important for creating and implementing a social justice
curriculum.*
83.3% 10
Total: 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 139
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers know the relationship or categories
between pedagogy and the Social Justice Anchor Standards and State Standards. Since only
83.3% were able to accurately identify the correct relationship between pedagogy and the Social
Justice Anchor Standards and the State Standards and the threshold is 100%, the teachers did not
demonstrate that they know the relationship or categories between pedagogy and the Social
Justice Anchor Standards and the State Standards.
Conceptual knowledge influence 2. Teachers understand the relationship between
the Social Justice Anchor Standards principles and categories and which Social Justice
Anchor Standards’ components go with each lesson section.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to indicate the extent they understand the
relationship between the Social Justice Anchor Standards and how they would be implemented
into their lessons from a list of four possible answers. The accuracy in identifying relationship
that is most desired in order to best implement a social justice curriculum was 58.4%. The
threshold for this item is 100% due to the importance of understanding the relationship between
the Social Justice Anchor Standards and how they would be implemented in lessons in order to
create and effectively implement a social justice curriculum. Therefore, there is a need for
teachers’ conceptual knowledge of understanding the relationship between the Social Justice
Anchor Standards principles and categories and which Social Justice Anchor Standards’
components go with each lesson section.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 140
Table 22
Survey Results for Conceptual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Conceptual Knowledge Item 5 % Count

To what extent do you understand the relationship between the SJAS and
how they would be implemented into your lessons?

1
I do not understand the relationship between the SJAS and my pedagogy
enough to incorporate the SJAS into my lessons.
0% 0
2
I somewhat understand the relationship between the SJAS and my
pedagogy enough to incorporate the SJAS into my lessons.
8.3% 1
3
I moderately understand the relationship between the SJAS and my
pedagogy enough to incorporate the SJAS into my lessons.
33.3% 4
4
I completely understand the relationship between the SJAS and my
pedagogy enough to incorporate the SJAS into my lessons.*
58.4% 7
Total: 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers understand the relationship between
the Social Justice Anchor Standards principles and categories and which Social Justice Anchor
Standards’ components go with each lesson section. Since only 58.4% were able to accurately
identify that they completely understand the relationship between the Social Justice Anchor
Standards and their pedagogy enough to incorporate the Social Justice Anchor Standards into
their lessons and the threshold is 100%, the teachers did not demonstrate that they understand the
relationship between the Social Justice Anchor Standards principles and categories and which
Social Justice Anchor Standards’ components go with each lesson section.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 141
Conceptual knowledge influence 3. Teachers understand the relationship between
effective curriculum and student achievement.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to indicate how important curriculum is on student
achievement from a list of four possible choices. According to Table 23, the accuracy in
identifying the correct level of importance curriculum has on student achievement was
58.3%. The threshold for this item is 100% due to the importance and emphasis the research
places on curriculum in regards to student achievement. Therefore, there is a need for teachers’
conceptual knowledge of understanding the relationship between effective curriculum and
student achievement.
Table 23
Survey Results for Conceptual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Conceptual Knowledge Item 6 % Count
How important is curriculum on student achievement?
1 Not at all important. 0% 0
2 Somewhat important. 0% 0
3 Moderately important. 41.7% 5
4 Very Important.* 58.3% 7
Total: 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers understand the relationship between
effective curriculum and student achievement. Since only 58.3% were able to accurately identify
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 142
that curriculum is very important on student achievement and the threshold is 100%, the teachers
did not demonstrate that they understand the relationship between effective curriculum and
student achievement.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to indicate how effective do they think a social
justice curriculum will be in comparison to their current curriculum from a list of five possible
choices. The accuracy in identifying the desired level of effectiveness a social justice curriculum
will have in comparison to their current curriculum was 33.3%. The threshold for this item is
100% due to the importance and emphasis the research places on the relationship between social
justice curriculum and student achievement. Therefore, there is a need for teachers’ conceptual
knowledge of understanding the relationship between effective curriculum and student
achievement.
Table 24
Survey Results for Conceptual Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Conceptual Knowledge Item 7 % Count

How effective do you think a social justice curriculum will be in
comparison to your current curriculum?

1 Much less effective than my current curriculum. 0% 0
2 Somewhat less effective than my current curriculum. 0% 0
3 Just as effective as my current curriculum. 33.3% 4
4 Somewhat more effective than my current curriculum. 33.3% 4
5 Much more effective than my current curriculum.* 33.3% 4
Total: 100% 12

Interview findings. Interview findings differed from the survey results, as all interview
responses reflected strong feelings towards social justice curriculum positively affecting student
achievement. Teachers were asked how they see a social justice curriculum affecting student
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 143
achievement. All respondents discussed that a social justice curriculum would engage students
more than a traditional curriculum. One respondent added: “Through a social justice
curriculum, students might be more engaged, feel that the curriculum is relevant to them. They
know their presence is acknowledged and affirmed for whatever their background is.” Further,
another teacher resonated this idea: “A social justice curriculum would allow students’ voices to
be heard and give them more choice and a feeling of freedom, and a stronger sense of self-
identity so that they can better understand themselves in the world.”
Another teacher discussed that students would learn to be more well-rounded and learn to
see and to understand other perspectives. He believes that many students have a skewed view of
the world and are unable to understand social, political, economic struggles that other students
their age face throughout the world. This teacher believes that a social justice curriculum will
help give students a different lens to be more empathetic and understanding.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers understand the relationship between
effective curriculum and student achievement. Since only 33.3% were able to accurately identify
that a social justice curriculum would be more effective than their current curriculum and the
threshold is 100%, the teachers did not demonstrate that they understand the relationship
between effective curriculum and student achievement. However, the interview data indicates
that teachers find that a social justice curriculum would be affect students positively and teach
them about the world in ways that a traditional curriculum cannot. Thus, the interview data
contradicts the survey data as it indicates that the teachers do understand the relationship
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 144
between effective curriculum and student achievement. Since 66% were positive along with
three interviews, there is no gap indicated.
Procedural Knowledge
Teachers' procedural knowledge was assessed through interviews and surveys. Teachers
in Social Justice Cohort 1 were surveyed on the procedural knowledge necessary to successfully
and effectively create and implement a social justice curriculum. Results have been organized
and evaluated in order to assess whether or not there is a gap regarding the assumed causes.
Procedural knowledge influence 1. Teachers know how to use their positionality to
create an open-minded and anti-bias curriculum which recognizes and respects students of
all races, beliefs, classes, and social groups.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to indicate what to do in order to be able to create
an open-minded and anti-bias curriculum that recognizes and respects students of all races,
beliefs, classes, and social groups from a list of six possible choices, which are all important and
accurate responses. Two of the six items were selected by 75% of the teachers. One of the six
items was selected by 66.6% of the teachers. Another two different items were selected by
58.3% of the teachers. One of the six items was selected by 33.3% of the teachers. The
threshold for each item is 100% due to the importance each item has on creating an open-minded
and anti-bias curriculum. Therefore, there is a need for teachers’ procedural knowledge of
knowing how to use their positionality to create an open-minded and anti-bias curriculum which
recognizes and respects students of all races, beliefs, classes, and social groups.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 145
Table 25
Survey Results for Procedural Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Procedural Knowledge Item 1 % Count

In order to be able to create an open-minded and anti-bias curriculum that
recognizes and respects students of all races, beliefs, classes, and social
groups, a teacher must (select all that apply):

1 Write up their positionality profile.* 33.3% 4
2 Create a lesson plan.* 75% 9
3
Review the lesson plan for your pedagogical strategies for teaching the
content.*
58.3% 7
4 Review the pedagogical strategies against SJAS.* 66.6% 8
5
Review pedagogical strategies through the lens of your own positionality
(requires that you complete the positionality profile first).*
58.3% 7
6
Adjust the instructional activities of the lesson to reflect your revisions
based upon the adjustments to your positionality.*
75% 9
Total Average: 61% 12

Interview findings. The interview findings differed from survey results, as all interview
responses described steps toward creating an open-minded and anti-bias curriculum that
recognizes and respects students of all races, beliefs, classes, and social groups. One teacher
noted:
For any curriculum you teach, I think you need to be self-reflective, understand your own
biases, be aware of different cultures and the things that are offensive to different
cultures. I think you always need someone to double-check with so that you don't offend
someone unintentionally to the degree that it harms their learning or their belief in social
justice curriculum.
The teachers all mentioned that the process is “multi-faceted” and that it takes a diverse set of
courses embedding the SJAS to be effective. Another teacher described the following process:
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 146
I feel like the collaborative process of building curriculum is really important. In terms of
steps, the fact that we have our cohort, I would like to plan lessons with them and share
them and get their feedback because I might have blind spots. That way I'm able to
anticipate how other people might experience my lesson or the delivery of the lesson that
I couldn't anticipate on my own because of my own blind spots. So I think it needs to be a
collaborative process with diverse people in that group.
A third teacher resonated this idea:
If I was to create something, I would want to go and share it and get feedback, fine tune
it, try it, come back and say, “This is what I experienced. What kind of feedback can you
give me about how to fine tune it even further?" It needs to be like this cycle of inquiry.
All of the teachers discussed working with each other through a cycle of inquiry to be able to
create an open-minded and anti-bias curriculum that recognizes and respects students of all races,
beliefs, classes, and social groups.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers know how to use their positionality to
create an open-minded and anti-bias curriculum which recognizes and respects students of all
races, beliefs, classes, and social groups. Since none of the six responses were chosen by more
than 75% of the teachers and the threshold for each response is 100%, the teachers did not
demonstrate that they know how to use their positionality to create an open-minded and anti-bias
curriculum which recognizes and respects students of all races, beliefs, classes, and social
groups. The interview data offered a different perspective by teachers and allowed teachers to
elaborate on an actual process involved in using their positionality to create a social justice
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 147
curriculum; and, due to this in-depth data, the teachers did demonstrate that they know how to
use their positionality to create an open-minded and anti-bias curriculum that recognizes and
respects students of all races, beliefs, classes, and groups.
Procedural knowledge influence 1. Teachers know how to act as change agents and
work together for the betterment of their students.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to indicate what a teacher must do first in order to
act as a change agent within the school setting from a list of five possible choices. The accuracy
in identifying the correct response was 83.3%. The threshold for this item is 100% due to the
importance research places on creating a safe and accepting classroom environment in order to
be able to implement a social justice curriculum as an agent of change. Therefore, there is a need
for teachers’ procedural knowledge of knowing how to act as change agents and to work together
for the betterment of their students.
Table 26
Survey Results for Procedural Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Procedural Knowledge Item 2 % Count

A teacher can act as a change agent within the school setting when he or
she does what first?

1
Discusses sensitive issues, such as race, gender, class, and sexuality, with
students.
0% 0
2 Creates a safe and accepting classroom environment.* 83.3% 10
3 Discusses conflicting opinions with students. 0% 0
4
Keeps an open-mind when hearing students’ perspectives on sensitive
topics.
0% 0
5 Creates lessons geared toward social change and social awareness. 16.7% 2
Total: 100% 12

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 148
Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers know how to act as change agents and
work together for the betterment of their students. Since only 83.3% were able to accurately
identify that creating a safe and accepting classroom environment is the first thing a teacher
needs to do in order to be able to act as an agent of change in his or her classroom and the
threshold is 100%, the teachers did not demonstrate that they know how to act as change agents
and work together for the betterment of their students.
Procedural knowledge influence 1. Teachers know how to embed the SJAS within
their curriculum.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to indicate what a teacher must do when embedding
the Social Justice Anchor Standards within their curriculum from a list of three possible
choices. The accuracy in identifying the correct response was 91.7%. The threshold for this
item is 100% due to the importance research places on knowing how to and being able to
effectively embed the Social Justice Anchor Standards within a social justice
curriculum. Therefore, there is a need for teachers’ procedural knowledge of knowing how to
embed the SJAS within their curriculum.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 149
Table 27
Survey Results for Procedural Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Procedural Knowledge Item 3 % Count
When embedding the SJAS within their curriculum, teachers should
1
Plan the lesson and all activities and then incorporate the SJAS within
that lesson.
0% 0
2
First consider the learning objectives of the lesson and ask how it can be
approached from a social justice perspective before creating the lesson.*
91.7% 11
3
Plan a lesson around the SJAS and then incorporate the State Standards
that match it.
8.3% 1
Total: 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers know how to embed the Social Justice
Anchor Standards within their curriculum. Since only 91.7% were able to accurately identify
that they must first consider the learning objectives of the lesson and ask how it can be
approached from a social justice perspective before creating the lesson and the threshold is
100%, the teachers did not demonstrate that they know how to embed the Social Justice Anchor
Standards within their curriculum
Procedural knowledge influence 2. Teachers know how to utilize instructional
strategies in order to effectively implement the SJAS curriculum in their teaching.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to indicate how a teacher should utilize
instructional strategies that will help effectively implement the Social Justice Anchor Standards
within their curriculum from a list of three possible choices. The accuracy in identifying the
correct response was 50%. The threshold for this item is 100% due to the importance research
places on identifying the proper instructional strategies and pedagogies that will best connect the
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 150
Social Justice Anchor Standards (SJAS) and the State Standards (SS) to effectively teach all
students regardless of race, belief, class, and social group. Therefore, there is a need for
teachers’ procedural knowledge of knowing how to utilize instructional strategies in order to
effectively implement the SJAS curriculum in their teaching.
Table 28
Survey Results for Procedural Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Procedural Knowledge Item 4 % Count

How should a teacher utilize instructional strategies that will help
effectively implement the SJAS within their curriculum (Select all that
apply)?

1
Build a lesson around an instructional strategy and match the appropriate
SJAS and SS to the instructional strategy.
0% 0
2
Identify which instructional strategies are appropriate to connect the SJAS
to the SS being taught.*
50% 6
3 Both A and B 50% 6
Total: 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers know how to utilize instructional
strategies in order to effectively implement the SJAS curriculum in their teaching. Since only
50% were able to accurately identify that teachers must identify which instructional strategies are
appropriate to connect the SJAS to the SS being taught in order to utilize instructional strategies
that will help effectively implement the SJAS within their curriculum and the threshold is 100%,
the teachers did not demonstrate that they know how to utilize instructional strategies in order to
effectively implement the SJAS curriculum in their teaching.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 151
Procedural knowledge influence 3. Teachers know how to assess the collected
student data and monitor student achievement.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to indicate what steps they take when assessing
student data from a list of seven possible choices. The teachers were able to choose multiple
responses. Five of the seven responses were accurate. Of the five accurate responses, two were
chosen by 91.7% of the teachers; one by 75% of the teachers; one by 66.7% of the teachers; and
one by 16.7% of the teachers. One of the inaccurate responses was chosen by 66.7% of the
teachers, while the other inaccurate response was chosen by 8.3% of the teachers. The threshold
for this each correct response is 100% due to the importance research places on each step when
assessing student data. Therefore, there is a need for teachers’ procedural knowledge of knowing
how to assess the collected student data and monitor student achievement.
Table 29
Survey Results for Procedural Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Procedural Knowledge Item 5 % Count

What steps do you take when assessing student data (Select all that
apply)?

1 Look at overall scores and move on. 8.3% 1
2 Check and see what specific questions students missed.* 75% 9
3
Take notes on areas of improvement for reteaching or intervention for
next year.
66.7% 8
4 Create an intervention plan or a new lesson to reteach material.* 91.7% 11
5
Create a spreadsheet of data to compare different periods of the same
course.*
16.7% 2
6 Compare data with a teacher who gave the same assessment.* 66.7% 8
7
Reflect upon, rethink, and restructure the lesson(s) taught prior to
assessment.*
91.7% 11
Total Average Percentage Correct: 68.36% 12

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 152
Interview findings. The teachers were asked what steps should be taken to assess the
effectiveness of the curriculum on student achievement. The interview responses confirm the
survey results and do not demonstrate that teachers know how to assess student data and monitor
student achievement. One of the teachers said the following: “I’d have to look at the data prior
and post institution of the social justice system, which includes their behavior patterns, habits,
family, the way they see themselves as students in school.” Although the teacher describes what
kind of data should be looked at, she never describes how she it should be assessed, collected or
monitored. Another teacher describes this as “a difficult task” and that there is not a “test” that
should be used to measure it. A third teacher debates this often:
I have spent a lot of time thinking about this. I haven’t come up with my final solution,
but it needs to be measuring various things, some different data points. Since I have
students who don’t do work and sometimes don’t care, if they see themselves in the
curriculum or feel like their voice can be heard authentically, they might care more and
so they might produce more. So one data point I would want to look at is how much work
has increased and how much they produce. A second piece would be to look at how they
are writing and speaking and expressing their thinking in a sophisticated way, but I’m
not sure how to measure that.
This teacher discusses some data points but no real way to collect or really assess the data.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers know how to assess the collected
student data and monitor student achievement. Since no correct response was chosen by more
than 91.7% of the teachers and the threshold for each response is 100%, the teachers did not
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 153
demonstrate that they know how to assess the collected student data and how to monitor student
achievement. The interview responses confirm the survey data that shows that teachers do not
demonstrate that they know how to assess the collected student data and how to monitor student
achievement.
Metacognitive Knowledge
Teachers' metacognitive knowledge was assessed through interviews and
surveys. Teachers in Social Justice Cohort 1 were surveyed on the metacognitive knowledge
necessary to successfully and effectively create and implement a social justice
curriculum. Results have been organized and evaluated in order to assess whether or not there is
a gap regarding the assumed causes.
Metacognitive knowledge influence 1. Teachers reflect on their own positionality.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to indicate what they think about when they think
about their own positionality from a list of eight possible choices. The teachers were able to
choose multiple responses. All of the responses were accurate responses. Of the eight possible
given responses, the average percentage of responses chosen was 75%. The threshold for these
responses is 100% due to the fact that the eight choices thoroughly reflect aspects of
positionality. Because teachers did not meet this threshold, there is a need for teachers’
metacognitive knowledge of reflecting on their own positionality.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 154
Table 30
Survey Results for Metacognitive Knowledge of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Metacognitive Knowledge Item % Count

When thinking about my own positionality, I tend to think about (Select
all that apply)

1 my race.* 75% 9
2 my gender.* 91.7% 11
3 my political beliefs.* 83.3% 10
4 my sexuality.* 58.3% 7
5 my religion.* 58.3% 7
6 my life experiences.* 75% 9
7 my age.* 66.7% 8
8 My socioeconomic class.* 91.7% 11
Total Average: 75%

Interview findings. The teachers were asked how students perceive their
positionality. One teacher did not specify how students perceive his positionality, but stated that
teachers should remain neutral and understand their biases so they can deliver a neutral and
unbiased curriculum to students. The second teacher said that students’ perceptions of her
positionality varies depending on how she reacts in class and what she teaches and holds them
accountable for. Finally, the third teacher said she does an identity chart for herself in front of
her students.
Students know exactly how I see myself. And I pretty much carry my politics right out
there as an open book. I mean, I don't wear slogans on my t-shirts except for Vote. But,
you know, I have my We the People, Protect Each Other, We Are Greater Than Fear,
Defend Dignity, posters from the women's march up. I have Love and Peace up from
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 155
Hiroshima. We Salute to the Woman in the Hijab up. The American Flag Hijab More
Than to an American Flag. I try and have quotes up and inspiration up from all different
backgrounds. So I think they see me positively as open, accessible, tolerant, respectful.
This teacher was the only one who gave a description of how students perceive her positionality
and why.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers reflect on their own
positionality. Since none of the eight correct responses were chosen by more than 91.7% of the
teachers and the threshold for each response is 100%, the teachers did not demonstrate that they
know how to assess the collected student data and monitor student achievement. Because only
one teacher out of the three that were interviewed was able to describe how students perceive her
positionality, the interview data confirms the survey findings. Thus, there is a gap that needs to
be addressed.
Results and Findings for Motivation Causes
Teachers' motivation was assessed through surveys and interviews. Results of surveys
and interviews are presented for each assumed cause within the categories of value, self-efficacy,
emotion, and goal orientation. Results of surveys in Tables 31-46 and interviews are used to
demonstrate whether or not assumed gaps are present.
Value
Teachers' value of creating and implementing a social justice curriculum was assessed
through surveys and interviews. Through surveys, teachers in cohort 1 were asked how
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 156
important they find motivation influences necessary for creating and implementing a social
justice curriculum.
Motivation value influence 1. Teachers value their own positionality.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to indicate how important knowing their
positionality as they write daily lesson plans is from a scale of five choices ranging from “Not at
all important” to “Extremely important.” As shown in Table 31, 33.3% of the teachers felt that it
was extremely important to know their positionality as they write daily lesson plans; 41.7% felt it
was very important; and 25% felt it was moderately important. Results met the 100% threshold
showing that teachers value knowing their positionality as they write daily lesson plans.
Table 31
Survey Results for Value Motivation of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Value Motivation Item 1 % Count

How important is knowing your positionality as you write daily lesson
plans?

1 Not at all important 0% 0
2 Slightly important 0% 0
3 Moderately important 25% 3
4 Very important 41.7% 5
5 Extremely important 33.3% 4

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. All of the teachers felt that knowing their positionality is important as they
write daily lesson plans, but the degree of which they felt this is important varied. In the
interview, the participants discussed their positionality and how it factors into their lesson
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 157
planning and implementation, which showed that they value knowing their positionality while
writing lessons. Since 100% of respondents agree to an extent that knowing their positionality
while writing lessons is extremely important, the data does not demonstrate a lack of value.
Value motivation influence 1. Teachers value the idea of a change agent.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to indicate how important they find the idea of
teachers being change agents as they write daily lesson plans from a scale of five choices ranging
from “Not at all important” to “Extremely important.” As shown in Table 32, 41.7% of the
teachers felt that it was extremely important; 50% felt it was very important; and 8.3% felt it was
moderately important. The results met the 100% threshold showing that teachers do value the
idea of a change agent.
Table 32
Survey Results for Value Motivation of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Value Motivation Item 2 % Count

How important do you find the idea of teachers being change agents as
you write daily lesson plans?

1 Not at all important 0% 0
2 Slightly important 0% 0
3 Moderately important 8.3% 1
4 Very important 50% 6
5 Extremely important 41.7% 5

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. All of the teachers felt that being a change agent is important as they write
daily lesson plans, but the degree of which they felt this is important varied. Since 100% of
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 158
respondents agree to an extent that they find the idea of being a change agent while writing
lessons is extremely important, the results do not demonstrate that there is a lack of value.
Value motivation influence 1. Teachers value creating a curriculum at respective
grade-level and content area that develops pedagogical connections through the Social
Justice Anchor Standards (SJAS).
Survey results. Teachers were asked to indicate how important they think it is to create a
curriculum that develops pedagogical connections through the SJAS at respective grade-levels
from a scale of five choices ranging from “Not at all important” to “Extremely important.” As
shown in Table 33, 50% of the teachers felt that it was extremely important; 41.7% felt it was
very important; and 8.3% felt it was moderately important. The results met the 100% threshold
showing that teachers value creating a curriculum at respective grade-level and content area that
develops pedagogical connections through the Social Justice Anchor Standards (SJAS).
Table 33
Survey Results for Value Motivation of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Value Motivation Item 3 % Count

How important do you think it is to create a curriculum that develops
pedagogical connections through the SJAS at respective grade-levels?

1 Not at all important 0% 0
2 Slightly important 0% 0
3 Moderately important 8.3% 1
4 Very important 41.7% 5
5 Extremely important 50% 6

Interview findings. The interview findings confirm the survey results as all interview
responses described that creating a curriculum that develops pedagogical connections through
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 159
the social justice standards at respective grade levels and content areas as being very
important. One teacher noted:
We evolve and change, but the concept of ‘Who am I?’ is never old. We can talk about
fixed aspects of identity versus changing, versus chosen, versus assigned. As kids become
more aware of an expanded community from very local to classroom to global, the issue
of diversity and what they care about in terms of justice become more explicit.
Similarly, another teacher shared “Given the achievement gap, it is critical. It definitely will
help, and I do not know why we have been so reluctant to start or try because the kids really
need it.”
All of the interview participants expressed that creating a curriculum that develops
pedagogical connections through the SJAS is critical and will help students be exposed to the
world and be more engaged in both school and the world around them, which many are not
familiar with.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. All of the teachers felt that it is important to create a curriculum that develops
pedagogical connections through the SJAS at respective grade-levels, but the degree of which
they felt this is important varied. Since 100% of respondents agree to an extent that they find the
creation of a curriculum that develops pedagogical connections through the SJAS at respective
grade-levels is extremely important, the results do not demonstrate that there is a lack of value.
These survey results were affirmed through the interview data as all respondents discussed the
importance and value of the creation of a curriculum that develops pedagogical connections
through the SJAS.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 160
Survey results. Teachers were asked to indicate how important they think it is to create a
curriculum at their respective content area that develops pedagogical connections through the
SJAS from a scale of five choices ranging from “Not at all important” to “Extremely
important.” As shown in Table 34, 41.7% of the teachers felt that it was extremely important;
50% felt it was very important; and 8.3% felt it was moderately important. The results met the
100% threshold showing that teachers do not value creating a curriculum at respective grade-
level and content area that develops pedagogical connections through the Social Justice Anchor
Standards (SJAS).
Table 34
Survey Results for Value Motivation of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Value Motivation Item 4 % Count

How important do you think it is to create a curriculum at your respective
content area that develops pedagogical connections through the SJAS?

1 Not at all important 0% 0
2 Slightly important 0% 0
3 Moderately important 8.3% 1
4 Very important 50% 6
5 Extremely important 41.7% 5

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. All of the teachers felt that it is important to create a curriculum at their
respective content area that develops pedagogical connections through the SJAS, but the degree
of which they felt this is important varied. Since 100% of respondents agree to an extent that
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 161
they find the creation of a curriculum that develops pedagogical connections through the SJAS at
respective grade-levels is extremely important, the results do not demonstrate a lack of value.
Value motivation influence 2. Teachers value the implementation of the SJAS
curriculum.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to indicate how important they think the
implementation of the SJAS curriculum is from a scale of five choices ranging from “Not at all
important” to “Extremely important.” As shown in Table 35, 50% of the teachers felt that it was
extremely important; 41.7% felt it was very important; and 8.3% felt it was moderately
important. The results met the 100% threshold showing that teachers value the implementation of
the SJAS curriculum.
Table 35
Survey Results for Value Motivation of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Value Motivation Item 5 % Count
How important is the implementation of the SJAS curriculum to you?
1 Not at all important 0% 0
2 Slightly important 0% 0
3 Moderately important 8.3% 1
4 Very important 41.7% 5
5 Extremely important 50% 6

Interview findings. The interview findings affirm the survey results, as all interview
responses find the implementation of the SJAS curriculum important for student
achievement. One of the interviewees discussed “The anchor standards should be consistently
taught and then depended and made more complex with each grade. I feel like it can tie to the
thematic aspects of curriculum and it can also get more complex.” Another teacher added: “I
think it will assist in student achievement. I do not think it is the end all be all, but it will aid in
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 162
making our students more well-rounded and help them comprehend other perspectives.” These
perspectives show that teachers find value in the implementation the SJAS curriculum to help
benefit student achievement.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. All of the teachers felt that it is important to implement the SJAS curriculum,
but the degree of which they felt this is important varied. Since 100% of respondents agree to an
extent that they find the implementation of the SJAS curriculum to be extremely important, the
results do not demonstrate a lack of value. The interview results affirm this data and reinforce the
idea that teachers find the implementation of the SJAS curriculum to be extremely important.
Value motivation influence 3. Teachers value evaluating the effectiveness of
curriculum based on student achievement data.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to indicate how important they feel evaluating the
effectiveness of curriculum based on student achievement data is from a scale of five choices
ranging from “Not at all important” to “Extremely important.” As shown in Table 36, 41.7% of
the teachers felt that it was extremely important; 50% felt it was very important; and 8.3% felt it
was moderately important. The results met the 100% threshold showing that teachers value
evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum based on student achievement data.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 163
Table 36
Survey Results for Value Motivation of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Value Motivation Item 6 % Count

How important is evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum based on
student achievement data to you?

1 Not at all important 0% 0
2 Slightly important 0% 0
3 Moderately important 8.3% 1
4 Very important 50% 6
5 Extremely important 41.7% 5

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. All of the teachers felt that it is important to evaluate the effectiveness of
curriculum based on student achievement data, but the degree of which they felt this is important
varied. Since 100% of respondents agreed to an extent that they find the evaluation of the
effectiveness of curriculum based on student data to be extremely important, the results do not
demonstrate a lack of value.
Self-efficacy
Self-efficacy was assessed using survey items. Teachers in Social Justice Cohort 1 were
asked about their confidence in their ability to effectively create and implement a social justice
curriculum.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 164
Self-efficacy motivation influence 1. Teachers are confident about their
positionality.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Indicate how confident you are right now about
considering your positionality as you write daily lesson plans” from a scale of five choices
ranging from “Not at all confident” to “Extremely confidant.” As shown in table 37, 41.7% were
extremely confident; 33.3% were very confident; 16.7% were moderately confident; and 8.3%
were slightly confident. These responses were below the 80% threshold established and indicate
that there is a lack of confidence in regard to the teachers’ ability to consider their positionality
as they write daily lesson plans.
Table 37
Survey Results for Self-efficacy Motivation of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Self-efficacy Motivation Item 1 % Count

Indicate how confident you are right now about considering your
positionality as you write daily lesson plans:

1 Not at all confident 0% 0
2 Slightly confident 8.3% 1
3 Moderately confident 16.7% 2
4 Very confident 33.3% 4
5 Extremely confident 41.7% 5

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The teachers participating in this study are in the process of considering their
positionality as they write daily lesson plans; however, with only 75% of respondents identifying
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 165
they are very or extremely confident, there is still a gap in confidence, which can affect
performance and production, as is shown in the survey item in Table 37.
Self-efficacy motivation influence 1. Teachers are confident they can be an agent of
change.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Indicate how confident you are right now that
you can be an agent of change in your classroom” from a scale of five choices ranging from “Not
at all confident” to “Extremely confidant.” As shown in table 38, 33.3% were extremely
confident; 16.7% were very confident; 41.7% were moderately confident; and 8.3% were slightly
confident. These responses were below the 80% threshold established and indicate that there is a
lack of confidence in regard to the teachers’ ability to be an agent of change in their classrooms.
Table 38
Survey Results for Self-efficacy Motivation of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Self-efficacy Motivation Item 2 % Count

Indicate how confident you are right now that you can be an agent of
change in your classroom:

1 Not at all confident 0% 0
2 Slightly confident 8.3% 1
3 Moderately confident 41.7% 5
4 Very confident 16.7% 2
5 Extremely confident 33.3% 4

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The teachers participating in this study are in the process of being change
agents in their classrooms; however, with only 50% of respondents identifying they are very or
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 166
extremely confident, there is still a gap in confidence, which can affect performance and
production, as is shown in the survey item in Table 38.
Self-efficacy motivation influence 1. Teachers are confident about creating a
curriculum at respective grade-level and content area that develops pedagogical
connections through the Social Justice Anchor Standards.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Indicate how confident you are right now about
creating a curriculum at your respective grade-level and content area that develops pedagogical
connections through the SJAS” from a scale of five choices ranging from “Not at all confident”
to “Extremely confidant.” As shown in table 39, 16.7% were extremely confident; 33.3% were
very confident; and 50% were moderately confident. These responses were below the 80%
threshold established and indicate that there is a lack of confidence in regard to the teachers’
ability to create a curriculum at your respective grade-level and content area that develops
pedagogical connections through the SJAS.
Table 39
Survey Results for Self-efficacy Motivation of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Self-efficacy Motivation Item 3 % Count

Indicate how confident you are right now about creating a curriculum at
your respective grade-level and content area that develops pedagogical
connections through the SJAS:

1 Not at all confident 0% 0
2 Slightly confident 0% 0
3 Moderately confident 50% 6
4 Very confident 33.3% 4
5 Extremely confident 16.7% 2

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 167
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The teachers participating in this study are in the process of creating a
curriculum at their respective grade-level and content area that develops pedagogical connections
through the SJAS; however, with only 50% of respondents identifying they are very or extremely
confident, there is still a gap in confidence, which can affect performance and production, as is
shown in the survey item in Table 39.
Self-efficacy motivation influence 2. Teachers are confident about implementing the
SJAS curriculum.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Indicate how confident you are right now about
implementing social justice curriculum” from a scale of five choices ranging from “Not at all
confident” to “Extremely confidant.” As shown in table 40, 16.7% were extremely confident;
50% were very confident; and 33.3% were moderately confident. These responses were below
the 80% threshold established and indicate that there is a lack of confidence in regard to
implementing social justice curriculum.
Table 40
Survey Results for Self-efficacy Motivation of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Self-efficacy Motivation Item 4 % Count

Indicate how confident you are right now about implementing social
justice curriculum:

1 Not at all confident 0% 0
2 Slightly confident 0% 0
3 Moderately confident 33.3% 4
4 Very confident 50% 6
5 Extremely confident 16.7% 2

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 168
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The teachers participating in this study are in the process of implementing a
social justice curriculum; however, with only 66.7% of respondents identifying they are very or
extremely confident, there is still a gap in confidence, which can affect performance and
production, as is shown in the survey item in Table 40.
Self-efficacy motivation influence 3. Teachers are confident about evaluating the
effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Indicate how confident you are right now about
implementing social justice curriculum” from a scale of five choices ranging from “Not at all
confident” to “Extremely confidant.” As shown in table 41, 16.7% were extremely confident;
50% were very confident; 25% were moderately confident; and 8.3% were slightly confident.
These responses were below the 80% threshold established and indicate that there is a lack of
confidence in regard to evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement.
Table 41
Survey Results for Self-efficacy Motivation of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Self-efficacy Motivation Item 5 % Count

Indicate how confident you are right now about evaluating the
effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement:

1 Not at all confident 0% 0
2 Slightly confident 8.3% 1
3 Moderately confident 25% 3
4 Very confident 50% 6
5 Extremely confident 16.7% 2

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 169
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The teachers participating in this study are in the process of learning how to
evaluate the effectiveness of a social justice curriculum on student achievement; however, with
only 66.7% of respondents identifying they are very or extremely confident, there is still a gap in
confidence, which can affect performance and production, as is shown in the survey item in
Table 41.
Emotion
Emotion was assessed using survey items. Teachers in Social Justice Cohort 1 were
asked to indicate how positive they feel about their ability to effectively create and implement a
social justice curriculum.
Emotion motivation influence 1. Teachers feel positive about understanding their
positionality.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Please rate how positive you feel about your
understanding of your positionality as you write daily lesson plans” on a Likert scale numbered
from 0 (Not at all positive) to 10 (Extremely positive). According to survey results, the mean
score is 8.52 indicating teachers felt more positive overall. The minimum response was 5, which
was chosen by two teachers, indicating that these two teachers only feel moderately positive. The
mean value for this item is below the established threshold of 9, which indicates that there is a
lack of emotional motivation in regard to teachers understanding their positionality.
Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 170
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers feel positive about understanding their
positionality. All of the teachers felt positive about understanding their positionality while
writing lesson plans, but the degree of which they felt positive varied. Since the mean response
is only 8.52 to indicate how positive teachers feel about understanding their positionality while
writing lessons, there is a lack of emotional motivation.
Emotion motivation influence 1. Teachers feel positive about being agents of
change.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Please rate how positive you feel about being an
agent of change” on a Likert scale numbered from 0 (Not at all positive) to 10 (Extremely
positive). According to survey results, the mean score is 8.02 indicating teachers felt more
positive overall. The minimum response was 3.09, which was chosen by one teacher, indicating
that this teacher only feels slightly positive. The mean value for this item is below the established
threshold of 9, which indicates that there is a lack of emotional motivation in regard to teachers
feeling positive about being agents of change.
Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers feel positive about being an agent of
change. All of the teachers felt positive about being agents of change, but the degree of which
they felt positive varied. Since the mean response is only 8.02 to indicate how positive teachers
feel about being an agent of change, there is a lack of emotional motivation and room for
improvement.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 171
Emotion motivation influence 1. Teachers feel positive about creating a curriculum
at respective grade-level and content area that develops pedagogical connections through
the Social Justice Anchor Standards.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Please rate how positive you feel about creating
a curriculum that develops pedagogical connections through the SJAS at your respective grade-
level and content area” on a Likert scale numbered from 0 (Not at all positive) to 10 (Extremely
positive). According to survey results, the mean score is 7.23 indicating teachers felt more
positive overall. The minimum response was 4.10, which was chosen by one teacher, indicating
that this teacher only feels somewhat positive. The mean value for this item is below the
established threshold of 9, which indicates that there is a lack of emotional motivation in regard
to teachers feeling positive about creating a curriculum at respective grade-level and content area
that develops pedagogical connections through the Social Justice Anchor Standards.
Interview findings. The teachers were asked how they felt about creating a social justice
curriculum at their respective grade level and content area. The interview findings confirm the
survey data. One teacher responded that she felt “stoked” because it fits very well into the
subjects that she teaches. She is also excited to be able to collaborate with the rest of Social
Justice Cohort 1 and gain knowledge and insight towards her own process and creation of
curriculum. A second teacher interviewed responded that he is “comfortable” creating a social
justice curriculum by finding opportunities to embed Social Justice in the State Standards.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers feel positive about creating a
curriculum at respective grade-level and content area that develops pedagogical connections
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 172
through the Social Justice Anchor Standards. All of the teachers felt positive about creating a
curriculum at respective grade-level and content area that develops pedagogical connections
through the Social Justice Anchor Standards, but the degree of which they felt positive
varied. Since the mean response is only 7.23 to indicate how positive teachers feel about
creating a curriculum at respective grade-level and content area that develops pedagogical
connections through the Social Justice Anchor Standards, there is a lack of emotional motivation
and, as a result, room for improvement. The interview data confirms the lack of emotional
motivation as only one of the three teachers responded that she was excited about creating a
social justice curriculum and elaborated on why, while one felt he was comfortable, which is a
neutral response and does not give any indication of positive emotional motivation.
Emotion motivation influence 2. Teachers feel positive about implementing the
SJAS curriculum.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Please rate how positive you feel about
implementing a social justice curriculum” on a Likert scale numbered from 0 (Not at all positive)
to 10 (Extremely positive). According to survey results, the mean score is 8.11 indicating
teachers felt more positive overall. The minimum response was 4.10, which was chosen by one
teacher, indicating that this teacher only feels somewhat positive. The mean value for this item is
below the established threshold of 9, which indicates that there is a lack of emotional motivation
in regard to teachers feeling positive about implementing a social justice curriculum.
Interview findings. The teachers were asked how they felt about implementing a social
justice curriculum at their respective grade level and content areas. One teacher responded that
he is comfortable implementing the social justice standards within their curriculum because he
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 173
had good experience last year when he taught freshman seminars. He did not elaborate any
further. Another teacher expressed the following:
I am completely excited. I love having the validation and the acknowledgment by my
peers and administrators to go do this work even though some people are going to
complain that I'm not teaching Jane Eyre and Little Women and Robinson Crusoe or
something. I feel totally supported by the administration and excited to be able to
implement this [social justice] into my curriculum. I just wish I had more money to buy
materials.
This teacher is very excited about being able to implement a social justice curriculum and has a
good idea of how she wants to do so. The third teacher had the following response:
I would love to do it. I'm excited about that. I'd love to do it with a small group, and we
work together with a certain group of kids so we can work it out. Not that the kids are
like the guinea pigs of the program, but we work together to make sure everything we're
doing lines up with the expectations and the curriculum for social justice so the kids get
the most of their education, and they're not sacrificed as an experiment. That would scare
me. That's a lot of responsibility.
However, because only two of the three teachers felt excited and described how they would
implement a social justice curriculum, the interview data confirms the survey results that show
that there is room for improvement in this area.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers feel positive about implementing the
SJAS curriculum. All of the teachers felt positive about implementing a social justice
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 174
curriculum, but the degree of which they felt positive varied. Since the mean response is only
7.23 to indicate how positive teachers feel about implementing the SJAS curriculum, there is a
lack of emotional motivation and, thus, room for improvement. The interview data also confirms
that there is room for improvement in teachers’ feelings about implementing the social justice
curriculum at their respective grade level and content area.
Emotion motivation influence 3. Teachers feel positive about evaluating the
effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Please rate how positive you feel about
evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement” on a Likert scale numbered
from 0 (Not at all positive) to 10 (Extremely positive). According to survey results, the mean
score is 8.22 indicating teachers felt more positive overall. The minimum response was 4, which
was chosen by one teacher, indicating that this teacher only feels somewhat positive. The mean
value for this item is below the established threshold of 9, which indicates that there is a lack of
emotional motivation in regard to teachers feeling positive about evaluating the effectiveness of
curriculum on student achievement.
Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers feel positive about evaluating the
effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement, but the degree of which they felt positive
varied. Since the mean response is only 8.22 to indicate how positive teachers feel about
evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement, there is a lack of emotional
motivation and room for improvement.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 175
Goal Orientation
Goal Orientation was assessed using survey items. Teachers in Social Justice Cohort 1
were asked about their how they view their ability to effectively create and implement a social
justice curriculum even though there will be challenges.
Goal orientation motivation influence 1. Teachers view understanding their
positionality as a learning opportunity.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Please indicate how you would rate the
following: I like learning about my own positionality even though it can sometimes be a
struggle” from a scale of five choices ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” As
shown in table 42, 83.3% strongly agree while 16.7% somewhat agree. These responses met the
100% threshold established and indicate that there is no lack of goal orientation in regard to
teachers viewing understanding their positionality as a learning opportunity.
Table 42
Survey Results for Goal Orientation Motivation of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Goal Orientation Motivation Item 1 % Count

Please indicate how you would rate the following: I like learning about
my own positionality even though it can sometimes be a struggle.

1 Strongly disagree 0% 0
2 Somewhat disagree 0% 0
3 Neither agree or disagree 0% 0
4 Somewhat agree 16.7% 2
5 Strongly agree 83.3% 10

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 176
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers view understanding their positionality
as a learning opportunity. Since 100% of the teachers agree to some extent that they like
learning about their positionality even though it can be a struggle and the threshold is 100%, the
teachers did demonstrate that they view understanding their own positionality as a learning
opportunity and there is no room for improvement.
Goal orientation motivation influence 1. Teachers view being agents of change as a
learning opportunity.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Please indicate how you would rate the
following: I like learning about how to be an agent of change in my classroom and at my school
site even though I know there will be challenges” from a scale of five choices ranging from
“strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” As shown in table 43, 100% strongly agree. These
responses met the 100% threshold established and indicate that there is no lack of goal
orientation in regard to teachers viewing being agents of change as a learning opportunity.
Table 43
Survey Results for Goal Orientation Motivation of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Goal Orientation Motivation Item 2 % Count

Please indicate how you would rate the following: I like learning about
how to be an agent of change in my classroom and at my school site even
though I know there will be challenges.

1 Strongly disagree 0% 0
2 Somewhat disagree 0% 0
3 Neither agree or disagree 0% 0
4 Somewhat agree 0% 0
5 Strongly agree 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 177
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers view being agents of change as a
learning opportunity. Since 100% of the teachers strongly agree that they like learning about
how to be an agent of change in their classroom and at their school site even though they know
there will be challenges and the threshold is 100%, the teachers did demonstrate that they view
being agents of change as a learning opportunity and there is no room for improvement.
Goal orientation motivation influence 1. Teachers view creating a curriculum at
respective grade-level and content area that develops pedagogical connections through the
SJAS as a learning opportunity.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Please indicate how you would rate the
following: I like the idea of creating new curriculum that develops pedagogical connections
through the SJAS even though I may make mistakes along the way” from a scale of five choices
ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” As shown in table 44, 91.7% strongly
agree and 8.3% somewhat agree. These responses met the 100% threshold established and
indicate that there is no lack of goal orientation in regard to teachers viewing creating a
curriculum at respective grade-level and content area that develops pedagogical connections
through the SJAS as a learning opportunity.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 178
Table 44
Survey Results for Goal Orientation Motivation of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Goal Orientation Motivation Item 3 % Count

Please indicate how you would rate the following: I like the idea of
creating new curriculum that develops pedagogical connections through
the SJAS even though I may make mistakes along the way.

1 Strongly disagree 0% 0
2 Somewhat disagree 0% 0
3 Neither agree or disagree 0% 0
4 Somewhat agree 8.3% 1
5 Strongly agree 91.7% 11

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers view creating a curriculum at
respective grade-level and content area that develops pedagogical connections through the SJAS
as a learning opportunity. Since 100% of the teachers agree to an extent that they like the idea of
creating new curriculum that develops pedagogical connections through the SJAS even though
they may make mistakes along the way and the threshold is 100%, the teachers did demonstrate
that they view creating a curriculum at respective grade-level and content area that develops
pedagogical connections through the SJAS as a learning opportunity and there is no room for
improvement.
Goal orientation motivation influence 2. Teachers want to master the
implementation of the SJAS curriculum.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Please indicate how you would rate the
following: I like the idea of implementing a social justice curriculum even though it may be
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 179
challenging and may receive pushback from students or the community” from a scale of five
choices ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” As shown in table 45, 100%
strongly agree. These responses met the 100% threshold established and indicate that there is no
lack of goal orientation in regard to wanting to master the implementation of the SJAS
curriculum as a learning opportunity.
Table 45
Survey Results for Goal Orientation Motivation of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Goal Orientation Motivation Item 4 % Count

Please indicate how you would rate the following: I like the idea of
implementing a social justice curriculum even though it may be
challenging and may receive pushback from students or the community.

1 Strongly disagree 0% 0
2 Somewhat disagree 0% 0
3 Neither agree or disagree 0% 0
4 Somewhat agree 0% 0
5 Strongly agree 100% 12

Interview findings. Teachers were asked what their approach is to implementing a social
justice curriculum and to identify their goals for implementing it. One teacher noted:
It needs to begin broadly, it needs to be connected to what they understand and
comprehend. Students should be exposed incrementally, primary grades need some
exposure, Civil Rights leaders for example, and upper graders should be exposed to the
more mature events, those events that are not always in our history books. I feel it can be
across most content areas, but we can’t saturate students with it or they will become
disconnected. I sprinkle it throughout my Language Arts Curriculum, when discussing
Identity, Group Identity, and factors that shape it.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 180
Another teacher took a different approach:
I feel like you need to have a conversation with the core group of kids and need to tell
them what you've seen, what you’re aware they’re experiencing, what you know about
the achievement gap, and what you know about the options for social justice. Then, let
them know that you're instituting this, and you are working your hardest with a group of
people who really want to see you successful and be successful in a way that you can
show that it will also help you later in life.
This teacher feels that it is important to make students aware of what they will be experiencing
and learning about.
Finally, a third teacher had a vivid description of what her approach is to implementing a
social justice curriculum:
I feel like it comes pretty genuinely from who I am as a teacher and how I've always
taught. In terms of prepping the kids, we talk about language hurts. I try and do things in
small ways. I set contracts about no put-downs, no insults, no swear words, no
derogatory words. If you don't know if it hurts and you say something, let's talk about
intent versus impact. If the impact was not what you intended, let's try and understand
how you can shift so that you don't hurt someone in the future unintentionally. I think
kind of creating a classroom culture around that's really important, to prep them.
This teacher also believes in preparing the students for a social justice curriculum and the
expectations prior to implementation.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 181
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers view wanting to master the
implementation of the SJAS curriculum as a learning opportunity. Since 100% of the teachers
strongly agree that they like the idea of implementing a social justice curriculum even though it
may be challenging and they may receive pushback from students or the community and the
threshold is 100%, the teachers did demonstrate that they view mastering the implementation of
the SJAS curriculum as a learning opportunity and there is no room for improvement. According
to the interview data, the survey findings are confirmed.
Goal orientation motivation influence 3. Teachers want to gain knowledge about
their students and practice through the evaluation of the effectiveness of curriculum on
student achievement.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Please indicate how you would rate the
following: I like the idea of evaluating the effectiveness of my curriculum on student
achievement even if the results may indicate that I need to further develop my instructional
practice” from a scale of five choices ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” As
shown in table 46, 91.7% strongly agree while 8.3% neither agree or disagree. The threshold for
this item is 100%. These responses do not meet 100% threshold established and indicate that
there is a lack of goal orientation in regard to teachers viewing and wanting to gain knowledge
about their students and practice through the evaluation of the effectiveness of curriculum on
student achievement as a learning opportunity.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 182
Table 46
Survey Results for Goal Orientation Motivation of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Goal Orientation Motivation Item 5 % Count

Please indicate how you would rate the following: I like the idea of
evaluating the effectiveness of my curriculum on student achievement
even if the results may indicate that I need to further develop my
instructional practice.

1 Strongly disagree 0% 0
2 Somewhat disagree 0% 0
3 Neither agree or disagree 8.3% 0
4 Somewhat agree 0% 0
5 Strongly agree 91.7% 12

Interview findings. During the interview, participants were asked what their approach is
to gain knowledge about their students’ achievement through the evaluation of the effectiveness
of their curriculum. The interview data provides insight to how teachers feel they can evaluate
the effectiveness of their curriculum. One teacher feels that class discussions and journal writing
are good ways to hear and understand how they think through certain processes. Another teacher
describes that she would use more writing assessments to gain a sense of students’ fluency and
vocabulary when they write. She also believes in checking in with students one on one, and
states that she prefers qualitative data over quantitative data.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers view the gaining of knowledge about
their students and practice through the evaluation of the effectiveness of curriculum on student
achievement as a learning opportunity. Since 91.7% of the teachers agree to an extent that they
like the idea of evaluating the effectiveness of their curriculum on student achievement even if
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 183
the results may indicate that they need to further develop their instructional practice and the
threshold is 100%, the teachers did not demonstrate that they view the gaining of knowledge
about their students and practice through the evaluation of the effectiveness of curriculum on
student achievement as a learning opportunity and there is room for improvement. The survey
results show that teachers have ideas of how to evaluate the effectiveness of their curriculum by
analyzing student writing and conversations, but they do not specifically give any insight on how
this data would be used or measured. Thus, the interview data confirms the survey findings.
Results and Findings for Organization Causes
Teachers' perceptions of creating and implementing a social justice curriculum as it
applies to the organization of WCUSD were assessed by surveys and interviews. Results of
surveys and interviews are presented for each assumed cause within the categories of resources,
policies and procedures, cultural setting and cultural models. Results of surveys and interviews
are used to demonstrate whether or not assumed causes are present within WCUSD.
Resources
Teachers in Social Justice Cohort 1 responded to surveys and interviews in order to
assess their perception of the district and their respective school site's resources. Surveys and
interviews were used to assess whether or not teachers in Social Justice Cohort 1 have access to
the resources they feel they need to create and implement a social justice curriculum at their
respective grade-level and content areas.
Organization resources influence 1. Teachers have the training to understanding
their own positionality within the district.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Rate the level of your agreement for the
following statement: I have the training to understand my own positionality” from a scale of five
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 184
choices ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” As shown in table 47, 8.3%
strongly agree; 50% somewhat agree; 8.3% neither agree or disagree; 16.7% somewhat disagree;
and 16.7% strongly disagree. The threshold for this item is 100%. These responses do not meet
100% threshold established and indicate that there is a lack of organization resources in regard to
WCUSD providing teachers with the training to understand their own positionality. As a result,
there is a gap in resources that needs to be addressed.
Table 47
Survey Results for Organization Resources of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Organization Resources Item 1 % Count

Rate the level of your agreement for the following statement: I have the
training to understand my own positionality.

1 Strongly Agree 8.3% 1
2 Somewhat Agree 50% 6
3 Neither Agree or Disagree 8.3% 1
4 Somewhat Disagree 16.7% 2
5 Strongly Disagree 16.7% 2
Total Percentage: 100% 12

Interview findings. The teachers were asked what kind of training the district provides
them to help them understand their own positionality. All three teachers mentioned Matrix of
Bias training through the California Teachers Association and Restorative Justice training. Only
one teacher mentioned the Social Justice Cohort Professional Development. One of the teachers
also discussed how she wished there was a follow-up to the Matrix of Bias training that the
district would provide because she felt it was powerful but she needed more time to process and
felt another session or sessions could be beneficial and make it more powerful. All three of the
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 185
teachers also mentioned that all teachers in the district need to be exposed to Matrix of Bias and
Restorative Justice training and that they need to offer more training opportunities.
Observation. Throughout the Social Justice Cohort 1 meetings, many teachers expressed
their concern with the training and professional development (PD) provided. Six of them had
discussed an issue with the PD leaders’ background, which was brought up in at the second
meeting. Further, many of the teachers expressed their frustration with how the PD was
developing. They found it very redundant and did not find value in it. They expressed that it
was boring and that they were not doing anything that they expected to do, but, rather, were
reading articles and regurgitating definitions and summarizing the social justice anchor standards
without any applicable examples or discussions.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers have the training to understanding their
own positionality within the district. Since only 58.3% of the teachers agree to an extent that
they have the training to understand their own positionality and the threshold is 100%, the
teachers did not demonstrate that they have the training to understanding their own positionality
within the district. The interview data shows that the district does provide training to understand
their positionality. However, only two of the trainings were described as effective. It was also
said that the district needs to provide more trainings and expose all teachers in the district to
them. The observation data and interview data further reveal that there is a gap and demonstrate
that the district does not provide teachers with the proper training to successfully implement the
social justice standards. Thus, there is room for improvement.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 186
Organization resources influence 1. Teachers have resources to be effective change
agent within the district.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Rate the level of your agreement for the
following statement: The district provides me with the resources to be an effective change agent
within the district” from a scale of five choices ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly
agree.” As shown in table 48, 16.7% strongly agree; 41.6% somewhat agree; 16.7% neither
agree or disagree; 16.7% somewhat disagree; and 8.3% strongly disagree. The threshold for this
item is 100%. These responses do not meet 100% threshold established and indicate that there is
a lack of organization resources in regard to WCUSD providing teachers with the resources to be
an effective change agent within the district. As a result, there is a gap in resources that needs to
be addressed.
Table 48
Survey Results for Organization Resources of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Organization Resources Item 2 % Count

Rate the level of your agreement for the following statement: The district
provides me with the resources to be an effective change agent within the
district.

1 Strongly Agree 16.7% 2
2 Somewhat Agree 41.6% 5
3 Neither Agree or Disagree 16.7% 2
4 Somewhat Disagree 16.7% 2
5 Strongly Disagree 8.3% 1
Total Percentage: 100% 12

Interview findings. The teachers were asked if they feel the district provides them with
the resources they need to be change agents in the classroom. In the interview, teachers
addressed different resources and trainings the district provides them with to be able to
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 187
implement a social justice curriculum. One teacher mentioned, “I think the Matrix of Bias was
amazing training. I think the Restorative Justice training is amazing training and I would
continue to make sure every staff goes through those.” However, this teacher also mentioned
that money is an issue within the district, especially for purchasing the resources necessary to
implement a social justice curriculum:
I need more money. Like, my class sets of books, I don’t have any right now so I have
what the textbook room has, which isn’t much. I don’t have any new, contemporary
literature by authors of color. And so I’m borrowing them from Lincoln and from SMASH
and then I don’t treat them well because I have five groups of kids every day using the
same 26 books. And so, I’ve been asking for two years. Like I want class set of The
Absolute True Diary of a Part-Time Indian and Brown Girl Dreaming and a couple
others and I still have met silence.
The teachers all agreed that money and access to materials is a challenge.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers have resources to be effective change
agent within the district. Since only 58.3% of the teachers agree to an extent that the district
provides them with the resources to be an effective change agent within the district and the
threshold is 100%, the teachers did not demonstrate that they have the resources to be effective
change agent within the district. The interview data confirms the survey findings. Thus, there is
room for improvement.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 188
Organization resources influence 1. Teachers have prep time to master and
implement the SJAS.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Rate the level of your agreement for the
following statement: The district provides me with enough prep time to master the SJAS” from a
scale of five choices ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” As shown in table 49,
16.7% strongly agree; 16.7% somewhat agree; 16.7% neither agree or disagree; 16.7% somewhat
disagree; and 33.3% strongly disagree. The threshold for this item is 100%. These responses do
not meet 100% threshold established and indicate that there is a lack of organization resources in
regard to teachers having preparation time to master and implement the SJAS. As a result, there
is a gap in resources that needs to be addressed.
Table 49
Survey Results for Organization Resources of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Organization Resources Item 3 % Count

Rate the level of your agreement for the following statement: The district
provides me with enough prep time to master the SJAS.

1 Strongly Agree 16.7% 2
2 Somewhat Agree 16.7% 2
3 Neither Agree or Disagree 16.7% 2
4 Somewhat Disagree 16.7% 2
5 Strongly Disagree 33.3% 4
Total Percentage: 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 189
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers have prep time to master and
implement the SJAS. Since only 33.3% of the teachers agree to an extent that the district
provides them with enough preparation time to master the SJAS and the threshold is 100%, the
teachers did not demonstrate that the district provides them with the resources to master and
implement the SJAS. Thus, there is room for improvement.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Rate the level of your agreement for the
following statement: The district provides me with enough prep time to implement a social
justice curriculum” from a scale of five choices ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly
agree.” As shown in table 50, 0% strongly agree; 25% somewhat agree; 16.7% neither agree or
disagree; 33.3% somewhat disagree; and 25% strongly disagree. The threshold for this item is
100%. These responses do not meet 100% threshold established and indicate that there is a lack
of organization resources in regard to teachers having preparation time to master and implement
the SJAS. As a result, there is a gap in resources that needs to be addressed.
Table 50
Survey Results for Organization Resources of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Organization Resources Item 4 % Count

Rate the level of your agreement for the following statement: The district
provides me with enough prep time to implement a social justice
curriculum.

1 Strongly Agree 0% 0
2 Somewhat Agree 25% 3
3 Neither Agree or Disagree 16.7% 2
4 Somewhat Disagree 33.3% 4
5 Strongly Disagree 25% 3
Total Percentage: 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 190
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers have prep time to master and
implement the SJAS. Since only 25% of the teachers somewhat agree that the district provides
them with enough preparation time to implement a social justice curriculum and the threshold is
100%, the teachers did not demonstrate that the district provides them with the resources to
master and implement the SJAS. Thus, there is room for improvement.
Organization resources influence 2. Teachers have the training to implement SJAS.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Rate the level of your agreement for the
following statement: The district provides me with the training I need to successfully implement
the SJAS” from a scale of five choices ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” As
shown in table 51, 33.3% strongly agree; 16.7% somewhat agree; 16.7% neither agree or
disagree; 8.3% somewhat disagree; and 25% strongly disagree. The threshold for this item is
100%. These responses do not meet 100% threshold established and indicate that there is a lack
of organization resources in regard to the district providing teachers with the training they need
to successfully implement the SJAS. As a result, there is a gap in resources that needs to be
addressed.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 191
Table 51
Survey Results for Organization Resources of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Organization Resources Item 5 % Count

Rate the level of your agreement for the following statement: The district
provides me with the training I need to successfully implement the SJAS.

1 Strongly Agree 33.3% 4
2 Somewhat Agree 16.7% 2
3 Neither Agree or Disagree 16.7% 2
4 Somewhat Disagree 8.3% 1
5 Strongly Disagree 25% 3
Total Percentage: 100% 12

Interview findings. The teachers were asked what kind of training the district provides
them with in order to successfully implement a social justice curriculum. All three respondents
replied that Social Justice Cohort 1 was the main attempt at providing training. Restorative
justice and anti-bias training were also mentioned. One teacher also added, “They provide social
justice workshops and support and literature we can use. Social justice and Olweus go together.
You can see they’re moving towards a better system to serve a variety of students, diverse
cultures, and backgrounds.” When asked if they believe the training is beneficial, each teacher
focused their response on the social justice cohort. A teacher responded,
I think the first 10 meetings were not very useful. There was 10 hours set aside and then
another 10 hours, so 20 hours total that I felt could have been done in four or five. It was
too much reading about each anchor standard and how it applied to the different
domains and how we reached community and parents and students and pedagogy and
classroom structure. I felt that could have been read and reported out very quickly and
not done in class. I know we weren't supposed to have homework so doing it in class was
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 192
good, but somehow it just seemed to drain a lot of time. They gave us time, and they gave
us compensation, and they gave us a group of people.
A second teacher also commented about the social justice cohort:
The didactic model of someone instructing didn't work. The example or the model of how
they were teaching us about social justice standards wasn't a socially just pedagogy. It
was ironic. “Here is the reading. Here are my discussion points. Here are the five
groups.” This is what we did during our cohort meetings. Out of the lessons that were
presented to us last year in cohort one were interesting. The most engaged we got was
when there was a one-page reading and we could read it as if we were students in a
socially just classroom and then talk about how we could modify it or bring in a different
reading but do the same strategy or use this reading but in a different way. If you were to
have one teacher present a lesson in a truncated version each meeting and then have time
to plan also, that would be great.
The teachers all agreed that the training during Social Justice Cohort 1, specifically, was not
useful and many people began to lose interest. However, one of the teachers did provide the
following insight:
The district’s trainings [bias training, social justice, restorative justice] are beneficial if
you’re trying to be benefited. I don’t think you can go in skeptical, but if you go in with
the idea that someday I’m going to be implementing this social justice then it will be.
Although I may not see the big picture now, I have to take it in and understand, which
just came clear for me. It’s starting to come clear what goals for the curriculum the
district has.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 193
The district does provide trainings; however, the classroom resources that teachers want and
need are lacking.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers have the training to implement
SJAS. Since only 50% of the teachers agree to an extent that the district provides them with the
training they need to successfully implement the SJAS and the threshold is 100%, the teachers
did not demonstrate that the district provides them with the training to successfully implement
the SJAS. The interview responses also confirm that there is a gap in resources that the district
provides to successfully implement the SJAS. Thus, there is room for improvement.
Organization resources influence 3. Teachers have prep time to analyze and
evaluate the effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Rate the level of your agreement for the
following statement: The district provides me with the prep time I need to analyze the
effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement” from a scale of five choices ranging from
“strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” As shown in table 52, 8.3% strongly agree; 33.3%
somewhat agree; 16.7% neither agree or disagree; 8.3% somewhat disagree; and 33.3% strongly
disagree. The threshold for this item is 100%. These responses do not meet 100% threshold
established and indicate that there is a lack of organization resources in regard to the district
providing preparation time for teachers to analyze and evaluate the effectiveness of curriculum
on student achievement. As a result, there is a gap in resources that needs to be addressed.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 194
Table 52
Survey Results for Organization Resources of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Organization Resources Item 6 % Count

Rate the level of your agreement for the following statement: The district
provides me with the prep time I need to analyze the effectiveness of
curriculum on student achievement.

1 Strongly Agree 8.3% 1
2 Somewhat Agree 33.3% 4
3 Neither Agree or Disagree 16.7% 2
4 Somewhat Disagree 8.3% 1
5 Strongly Disagree 33.3% 4
Total Percentage: 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers have prep time to analyze and evaluate
the effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement. Since only 41.7% of the teachers agree
to an extent that the district provides them with the prep time they need to analyze the
effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement and the threshold is 100%, the teachers did
not demonstrate that the district provides them with prep time to analyze and evaluate the
effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement. Thus, there is room for improvement.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Rate the level of your agreement for the
following statement: The district provides me with the prep time I need to evaluate the
effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement” from a scale of five choices ranging from
“strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” As shown in table 53, 0% strongly agree; 33.3%
somewhat agree; 16.7% neither agree or disagree; 16.7% somewhat disagree; and 33.3%
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 195
strongly disagree. The threshold for this item is 100%. These responses do not meet 100%
threshold established and indicate that there is a lack of organization resources in regard to the
district providing preparation time for teachers to analyze and evaluate the effectiveness of
curriculum on student achievement. As a result, there is a gap in resources that needs to be
addressed.
Table 53
Survey Results for Organization Resources of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Organization Resources Item 7 % Count

Rate the level of your agreement for the following statement: The district
provides me with the prep time I need to evaluate the effectiveness of
curriculum on student achievement.

1 Strongly Agree 0% 0
2 Somewhat Agree 33.3% 4
3 Neither Agree or Disagree 16.7% 2
4 Somewhat Disagree 16.7% 2
5 Strongly Disagree 33.3% 4
Total Percentage: 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that teachers have prep time to analyze and evaluate
the effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement. Since only 33.3% of the teachers agree
to an extent that the district provides them with the prep time they need to evaluate the
effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement and the threshold is 100%, the teachers did
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 196
not demonstrate that the district provides them with prep time to analyze and evaluate the
effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement. Thus, there is room for improvement.
Policies, Processes, and Procedures
Teachers in Social Justice Cohort 1 responded to surveys and interviews in order to
assess their perception of the district and their respective school site's policies, processes, and
procedures. Surveys and interviews were used to assess whether or not teachers in Social Justice
Cohort 1 feel the district and their school sites provide them with the policies and procedures that
will allow them to effectively create and implement a social justice curriculum at their respective
grade-level and content areas.
Organization policies, processes, and procedures influence 1. The policies and
procedures in the school and district are aligned with the goal of creating social justice
curriculum.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Please indicate to what extent you agree with the
following statement: The district’s policies and procedures align with the district’s goal of
creating a social justice curriculum” from a scale of five choices ranging from “strongly
disagree” to “strongly agree.” As shown in table 54, 8.3% strongly agree; 33.3% somewhat
agree; 16.7% neither agree or disagree; 33.3% somewhat disagree; and 8.3% strongly disagree.
The threshold for this item is 100%. These responses do not meet 100% threshold established
and indicate that there is a lack of organization policies, processes, and procedures in regard to
the district’s policies and procedures being aligned with the goal of creating social justice
curriculum. As a result, there is a gap in resources that needs to be addressed.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 197
Table 54
Survey Results for Organization Policies, Processes, and Procedures of SJAS
# Organization Policies, Processes, and Procedures Item 1 % Count

Please indicate to what extent you agree with the following statement:
The district’s policies and procedures align with the district’s goal of
creating a social justice curriculum.

1 Strongly Agree 8.3% 1
2 Somewhat Agree 33.3% 4
3 Neither Agree or Disagree 16.7% 2
4 Somewhat Disagree 33.3% 4
5 Strongly Disagree 8.3% 1
Total Percentage: 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that the policies and procedures in the school and
district are aligned with the goal of creating social justice curriculum. Since only 41.7% of the
teachers agree to an extent that the district’s policies and procedures are aligned with the goal of
creating social justice curriculum and the threshold is 100%, the teachers did not demonstrate
that the policies and procedures in the school and district are aligned with the goal of creating
social justice curriculum. Thus, there is room for improvement.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Please indicate to what extent you agree with the
following statement: My school’s policies align with the district’s goal of creating a social justice
curriculum” from a scale of five choices ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly
agree.” As shown in table 55, 16.7% strongly agree; 41.7% somewhat agree; 0% neither agree
or disagree; 33.3% somewhat disagree; and 8.3% strongly disagree. The threshold for this item is
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 198
100%. These responses do not meet 100% threshold established and indicate that there is a lack
of organization policies, processes, and procedures in regard to the teachers’ school site policies
and procedures being aligned with the goal of creating social justice curriculum. As a result,
there is a gap in resources that needs to be addressed.
Table 55
Survey Results for Organization Policies, Processes, and Procedures of SJAS
# Organization Policies, Processes, and Procedures Item 2 % Count

Please indicate to what extent you agree with the following statement:
My school’s policies align with the district’s goal of creating a social
justice curriculum.

1 Strongly Agree 16.7% 2
2 Somewhat Agree 41.7% 5
3 Neither Agree or Disagree 0% 0
4 Somewhat Disagree 33.3% 4
5 Strongly Disagree 8.3% 1
Total Percentage: 100% 12

Interview findings. The respondents were asked “To what extent does your school site
align with the district’s goal of creating a social justice curriculum?” All of the respondents felt
that their school site was beginning to make progress towards this goal. However, they felt that
it is “a work in progress” and that “better guidance and directives” are necessary from the school
site in order for this to be successful. One teacher said the following:
I think that we are starting to figure out that there are some kids who need it. I think a
couple of teachers have gotten an okay to start implementing slowly social justice
standards within their curriculum. I know we have a core group of kids that we really
want to, even as early as next semester or next year, we want to start teaching the social
justice curriculum to. We have that narrowed down. Then, we're also doing the teacher
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 199
trainings for bias and social justice and restorative justice.
A second teacher also believes that there is progress but the school site has its own obstacles:
I think there's high alignment in values and desire. I believe everyone buys in that it's a
good idea to close the achievement gap and to make sure everyone feels valued on campus and
visible on campus and affirmed. However, the tracking doesn't align because the tracking,
especially the English tracking, which is socioeconomically and racially segregated, and so it
furthers the achievement gap, and it doesn't really boost anyone's skills and success looking at
the scores. The actual structure of an eighth grade academy or a science exclusive magnet
separate from the Gen Ed eighth grade English or science is contradictory to the whole socially
just curriculum.
The responses resonate the idea that there is a gap in the alignment of the policies and procedures
in the school sites in relation to the district’s goal of creating a social justice curriculum.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that the policies and procedures in the school and
district are aligned with the goal of creating social justice curriculum. Since only 58.3% of the
teachers agree to an extent that their school site policies and procedures are aligned with the goal
of creating social justice curriculum and the threshold is 100%, the teachers did not demonstrate
that the policies and procedures in the school and district are aligned with the goal of creating
social justice curriculum. The interview data also confirms the gap shown in the survey findings.
Thus, there is room for improvement.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 200
Organization policies, processes, and procedures influence 2. The policies and
procedures in the school and district are aligned with the goal of implementing the SJAS.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Please indicate to what extent you agree with the
following statement: The district’s policies and procedures are aligned with the goal of
implementing the SJAS” from a scale of five choices ranging from “strongly disagree” to
“strongly agree.” As shown in table 56, 16.7% strongly agree; 33.3% somewhat agree; 16.7%
neither agree or disagree; 25% somewhat disagree; and 8.3% strongly disagree. The threshold for
this item is 100%. These responses do not meet 100% threshold established and indicate that
there is a lack of organization policies, processes, and procedures in regard to the district’s
policies and procedures being aligned with the goal of implementing the SJAS. As a result, there
is a gap in resources that needs to be addressed.
Table 56
Survey Results for Organization Policies, Processes, and Procedures of SJAS
# Organization Policies, Processes, and Procedures Item 3 % Count

Please indicate to what extent you agree with the following statement:
The district’s policies and procedures are aligned with the goal of
implementing the SJAS.

1 Strongly Agree 16.7% 2
2 Somewhat Agree 33.3% 4
3 Neither Agree or Disagree 16.7% 2
4 Somewhat Disagree 25% 3
5 Strongly Disagree 8.3% 1
Total Percentage: 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 201
Summary. The assumed influence is that the policies and procedures in the school and
district are aligned with the goal of implementing the SJAS. Since only 50% of the teachers
agree to an extent that the district’s policies and procedures are aligned with the goal of
implementing the SJAS and the threshold is 100%, the teachers did not demonstrate that the
policies and procedures in the school and district are aligned with the goal of implementing the
SJAS. Thus, there is room for improvement.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Please indicate to what extent you agree with the
following statement: The school’s policies and procedures are aligned with the goal of
implementing the SJAS” from a scale of five choices ranging from “strongly disagree” to
“strongly agree.” As shown in table 57, 25% strongly agree; 33.3% somewhat agree; 0% neither
agree or disagree; 33.3% somewhat disagree; and 8.3% strongly disagree. The threshold for this
item is 100%. These responses do not meet 100% threshold established and indicate that there is
a lack of organization policies, processes, and procedures in regard to their school site policies
and procedures being aligned with the goal of implementing the SJAS. As a result, there is a gap
in policies, processes, and procedures that needs to be addressed.
Table 57
Survey Results for Organization Policies, Processes, and Procedures of SJAS
# Organization Policies, Processes, and Procedures Item 4 % Count

Please indicate to what extent you agree with the following statement:
The school’s policies and procedures are aligned with the goal of
implementing the SJAS.

1 Strongly Agree 25% 3
2 Somewhat Agree 33.3% 4
3 Neither Agree or Disagree 0% 0
4 Somewhat Disagree 33.3% 4
5 Strongly Disagree 8.3% 1
Total Percentage: 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 202
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that the policies and procedures in the school and
district are aligned with the goal of implementing the SJAS. Since only 58.3% of the teachers
agree to an extent that their school site policies and procedures are aligned with the goal of
implementing the SJAS and the threshold is 100%, the teachers did not demonstrate that the
policies and procedures in the school and district are aligned with the goal of implementing the
SJAS. Thus, there is room for improvement.
Organization policies, processes, and procedures influence 3. The policies and
procedures in the school and district are aligned with the goal of evaluating the
effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Please indicate to what extent you agree with the
following statement: The district’s policies and procedures are aligned with the goal of
evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement” from a scale of five choices
ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” As shown in table 58, 8.3% strongly
agree; 33.3% somewhat agree; 33.3% neither agree or disagree; 16.7% somewhat disagree; and
8.3% strongly disagree. The threshold for this item is 100%. These responses do not meet 100%
threshold established and indicate that there is a lack of organization policies, processes, and
procedures in regard to the district’s policies and procedures being aligned with the goal of
evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement. As a result, there is a gap in
policies, processes, and procedures that needs to be addressed.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 203
Table 58
Survey Results for Organization Policies, Processes, and Procedures of SJAS
# Organization Policies, Processes, and Procedures Item 5 % Count

Please indicate to what extent you agree with the following statement:
The district’s policies and procedures are aligned with the goal of
evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement.

1 Strongly Agree 8.3% 1
2 Somewhat Agree 33.3% 4
3 Neither Agree or Disagree 33.3% 4
4 Somewhat Disagree 16.7% 2
5 Strongly Disagree 8.3% 1
Total Percentage: 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that the policies and procedures in the school and
district are aligned with the goal of evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on student
achievement. Since only 41.7% of the teachers agree to an extent that the district’s policies and
procedures are aligned with the goal of implementing the SJAS and the threshold is 100%, the
teachers did not demonstrate that the policies and procedures in the school and district are
aligned with the goal of evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on student
achievement. Thus, there is room for improvement.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Please indicate to what extent you agree with the
following statement: My school’s policies and procedures are aligned with the goal of evaluating
the effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement” from a scale of five choices ranging
from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” As shown in table 59, 16.7% strongly agree;
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 204
33.3% somewhat agree; 8.3% neither agree or disagree; 33.3% somewhat disagree; and 8.3%
strongly disagree. The threshold for this item is 100%. These responses do not meet 100%
threshold established and indicate that there is a lack of organization policies, processes, and
procedures in regard to the teachers’ school site policies and procedures being aligned with the
goal of evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement. As a result, there is a
gap in policies, processes, and procedures that needs to be addressed.
Table 59
Survey Results for Organization Policies, Processes, and Procedures of SJAS
# Organization Policies, Processes, and Procedures Item 6 % Count

Please indicate to what extent you agree with the following statement:
My school’s policies and procedures are aligned with the goal of
evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement.

1 Strongly Agree 16.7% 2
2 Somewhat Agree 33.3% 4
3 Neither Agree or Disagree 8.3% 1
4 Somewhat Disagree 33.3% 4
5 Strongly Disagree 8.3% 1
Total Percentage: 100% 12
Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that the policies and procedures in the school and
district are aligned with the goal of evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on student
achievement. Since only 50% of the teachers agree to an extent that the district’s policies and
procedures are aligned with the goal of implementing the SJAS and the threshold is 100%, the
teachers did not demonstrate that the policies and procedures in the school and district are
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 205
aligned with the goal of evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on student
achievement. Thus, there is room for improvement.
Culture Setting
Teachers in Social Justice Cohort 1 responded to surveys and interviews in order to
assess their perception of the district and their respective school site's culture setting. Surveys
and interviews were used to assess whether or not teachers in Social Justice Cohort 1 feel the
district and their school sites provide them with an environment that is conductive to effectively
create and implement a social justice curriculum at their respective grade-level and content areas.
Organization culture setting influence 1. There is a setting conducive to
understanding your own positionality.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Please indicate to what extent you agree with the
following statement: The district and my school site provide an environment conducive to
understanding your own positionality” from a scale of five choices ranging from “strongly
disagree” to “strongly agree.” As shown in table 60, 16.7% strongly agree; 33.3% somewhat
agree; 8.3% neither agree or disagree; 33.3% somewhat disagree; and 8.3% strongly disagree.
The threshold for this item is 100%. These responses do not meet 100% threshold established
and indicate that there is a lack of organizational culture setting in regard to there being a setting
conducive to teachers understanding their own positionality. As a result, there is a gap in culture
setting that needs to be addressed.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 206
Table 60
Survey Results for Organization Culture Setting of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Organization Culture Setting Item 1 % Count

Please indicate to what extent you agree with the following statement:
The district and my school site provide an environment conducive to
understanding your own positionality.

1 Strongly Agree 16.7% 2
2 Somewhat Agree 33.3% 4
3 Neither Agree or Disagree 8.3% 1
4 Somewhat Disagree 33.3% 4
5 Strongly Disagree 8.3% 1
Total Percentage: 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that there is a setting conducive to understanding
your own positionality. Since only 50% of the teachers agree to an extent that the district and the
teachers’ school site provide an environment conducive to understanding their own positionality
and the threshold is 100%, the teachers did not demonstrate that there is a setting conducive to
teachers understanding their own positionality. Thus, there is room for improvement.
Organization culture setting influence 1. There is a setting conducive to being a
change agent.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Please indicate to what extent you agree with the
following statement: The district and my school site provide an environment conducive to being
a change agent” from a scale of five choices ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly
agree.” As shown in table 61, 16.7% strongly agree; 41.7% somewhat agree; 16.7% neither
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 207
agree or disagree; and 25% somewhat disagree. The threshold for this item is 100%. These
responses do not meet 100% threshold established and indicate that there is a lack of
organizational culture setting in regard to there being a setting conducive to teachers being
change agents. As a result, there is a gap in culture setting that needs to be addressed.
Table 61
Survey Results for Organization Culture Setting of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Organization Culture Setting Item 2 % Count

Please indicate to what extent you agree with the following statement:
The district and my school site provide an environment conducive to
being a change agent.

1 Strongly Agree 16.7% 2
2 Somewhat Agree 41.7% 5
3 Neither Agree or Disagree 16.7% 2
4 Somewhat Disagree 25% 3
5 Strongly Disagree 0% 0
Total Percentage: 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that there is a setting conducive to being a change
agent. Since only 58.3% of the teachers agree to an extent that the district and their school site
provide an environment conducive to being a change agent and the threshold is 100%, the
teachers did not demonstrate that there is a setting conducive to teachers being agents of
change. Thus, there is room for improvement.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 208
Organization culture setting influence 1. There is a setting in the school and district
that supports the creation of a social justice curriculum.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Please indicate to what extent you agree with the
following statement: The district and my school site provide an environment that supports the
creation of a social justice curriculum” from a scale of five choices ranging from “strongly
disagree” to “strongly agree.” As shown in table 62, 16.7% strongly agree; 50% somewhat
agree; 16.7% neither agree or disagree; and 16.7% somewhat disagree. The threshold for this
item is 100%. These responses do not meet 100% threshold established and indicate that there is
a lack of organizational culture setting in regard to there being a setting in the school and district
that supports the creation of a social justice curriculum. As a result, there is a gap in culture
setting that needs to be addressed.
Table 62
Survey Results for Organization Culture Setting of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Organization Culture Setting Item 3 % Count

Please indicate to what extent you agree with the following statement:
The district and my school site provide an environment that supports the
creation of a social justice curriculum.

1 Strongly Agree 16.7% 2
2 Somewhat Agree 50% 6
3 Neither Agree or Disagree 16.7% 2
4 Somewhat Disagree 16.7% 2
5 Strongly Disagree 0% 0
Total Percentage: 100% 12

Interview findings. The teachers were asked “What are some ways that the district
provides you with the environment that helps support your creation of a social justice
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 209
curriculum?” The respondents believe the district is providing a good environment. One teacher
said,
I think the PLCs do that. I think the diverse student body does that by just maybe they’re
giving a few more permits to people who have city employees or something that
increases our diversity to have rich conversations where a lot of different voices can be
heard with different experiences. The district is providing me with some money to
develop this. They're providing me with colleagues from other campuses and time to
meet with those colleagues who are interested because I typically wouldn't meet with
great teachers with diverse backgrounds so I'm getting to meet with people at other
schools who have the same passion and interest and expertise, and we can collaborate
together.
Another teacher believes “the district provides much Academic Freedom to implement social
justice curriculum in one’s content.” However, a third teacher said,
I'm not sure what our district's doing for the school so far because I haven't really
checked outside of my room. I'll be honest. I tend to stay in here. But I don't know the
environment they have planned for the implementation for this. I have an idea of what I'd
like to see and I think would be great. But no one's asked me, so I can't tell anybody
This teacher is not sure about the environment and feels the district has not asked teachers for
their opinions on how they can be supported in the implementation of a social justice curriculum.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that there is a setting in the school and district that
supports the creation of a social justice curriculum. Since only 66.7% of the teachers agree to an
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 210
extent that the district and the teachers’ school site provide an environment that supports the
creation of a social justice curriculum and the threshold is 100%, the teachers did not
demonstrate that there is a setting in the school and district that supports the creation of a social
justice curriculum. In the interview responses, two of the teachers felt that the district provides
an environment that supports the creation of a social justice curriculum; however, one of the
three did not agree and felt that she is not sure about the environment provided and also stated
that she felt the district should ask teachers for their thoughts on how they could be
supported. Thus, due to the survey results and interview data, there is room for improvement.
Organization culture setting influence 2. The school and district provide a setting
that supports the implementation of the SJAS.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Please indicate to what extent you agree with the
following statement: The district and my school site support the implementation of a social
justice curriculum” from a scale of five choices ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly
agree.” As shown in table 63, 33.3% strongly agree; 50% somewhat agree; 8.3% neither agree
or disagree; and 8.3% somewhat disagree. The threshold for this item is 100%. These responses
do not meet 100% threshold established and indicate that there is a lack of organizational culture
setting in regard to the school and district providing a setting that supports the implementation of
the SJAS. As a result, there is a gap in culture setting that needs to be addressed.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 211
Table 63
Survey Results for Organization Culture Setting of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Organization Culture Setting Item 4 % Count

Please indicate to what extent you agree with the following statement:
The district and my school site support the implementation of a social
justice curriculum.

1 Strongly Agree 33.3% 4
2 Somewhat Agree 50% 6
3 Neither Agree or Disagree 8.3% 1
4 Somewhat Disagree 8.3% 1
5 Strongly Disagree 0% 0
Total Percentage: 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that the school and district provide a setting that
supports the implementation of the SJAS. Since only 83.3% of the teachers agree to an extent
that the district and the teachers’ school site provide an environment that supports the
implementation of a social justice curriculum and the threshold is 100%, the teachers did not
demonstrate that there is a setting in the school and district that supports the implementation of a
social justice curriculum. Thus, there is room for improvement.
Organization culture setting influence 3. The school and district provide a setting
that supports the evaluation of the effectiveness of the curriculum on student achievement.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Please indicate to what extent you agree with the
following statement: The district and my school site provide an environment that supports the
evaluation of the effectiveness of the curriculum on student achievement” from a scale of five
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 212
choices ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” As shown in table 64, 8.3%
strongly agree; 41.7% somewhat agree; 25% neither agree or disagree; 16.7% somewhat
disagree; and 8.3% strongly disagree. The threshold for this item is 100%. These responses do
not meet 100% threshold established and indicate that there is a lack of organizational culture
setting in regard to the school and district providing a setting that supports the evaluation of the
effectiveness of the social justice curriculum on student achievement. As a result, there is a gap
in culture setting that needs to be addressed.
Table 64
Survey Results for Organization Culture Setting of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Organization Culture Setting Item 5 % Count

Please indicate to what extent you agree with the following statement:
The district and my school site provide an environment that supports the
evaluation of the effectiveness of the curriculum on student achievement.

1 Strongly Agree 8.3% 1
2 Somewhat Agree 41.7% 5
3 Neither Agree or Disagree 25% 3
4 Somewhat Disagree 16.7% 2
5 Strongly Disagree 8.3% 1
Total Percentage: 100% 12

Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that the school and district provide a setting that
supports the evaluation of the effectiveness of the curriculum on student achievement. Since
only 50% of the teachers agree to an extent that the district and their school site provide an
environment that supports the evaluation of the effectiveness of the social justice curriculum on
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 213
student achievement and the threshold is 100%, the teachers did not demonstrate that there is a
setting in the school and district that supports the evaluation of the effectiveness of the social
justice curriculum on student achievement. Thus, there is room for improvement.
Culture Model
Teachers in Social Justice Cohort 1 responded to surveys and interviews in order to
assess their perception of the district and their respective school site's culture model. Surveys
and interviews were used to assess whether or not teachers in Social Justice Cohort 1 feel the
district and their school sites provide a shared and supportive culture that will allow them to
effectively create and implement a social justice curriculum at their respective grade-level and
content areas.
Organization culture model influence 1. There is a shared supportive culture in the
district and school site for integrating social justice topics into curriculum.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Please indicate to what extent you agree with the
following statement: There is a shared supportive culture in the district and school site for
integrating social justice topics into curriculum” from a scale of five choices ranging from
“strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” As shown in table 65, 8.3% strongly agree; 41.7%
somewhat agree; 33% neither agree or disagree; and 16.7% somewhat disagree. The threshold
for this item is 100%. These responses do not meet 100% threshold established and indicate that
there is a lack of an organization culture model in regard to there being a shared supportive
culture in the district and school site for integrating social justice topics into curriculum. As a
result, there is a gap in culture model that needs to be addressed.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 214
Table 65
Survey Results for Organization Culture Model of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Organization Culture Model Item 1 % Count

Please indicate to what extent you agree with the following statement:
There is a shared supportive culture in the district and school site for
integrating social justice topics into curriculum.

1 Strongly Agree 8.3% 1
2 Somewhat Agree 41.7% 5
3 Neither Agree or Disagree 33.3% 4
4 Somewhat Disagree 16.7% 2
5 Strongly Disagree 0% 0
Total Percentage: 100% 12
Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that there is a shared supportive culture in the
district and school site for integrating social justice topics into curriculum. Since only 50% of
the teachers agree to an extent that there is a shared supportive culture in the district and school
site for integrating social justice topics into curriculum and the threshold is 100%, the teachers
did not demonstrate that there is a culture model in the district and school site that supports
integrating social justice topics into curriculum. Thus, there is room for improvement.
Organization culture model influence 2. There is a shared supportive culture in the
district and school site for implementing the SJAS in curriculum.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Please indicate to what extent you agree with the
following statement: There is a shared supportive culture in the district and school site for
implementing the SJAS in curriculum” from a scale of five choices ranging from “strongly
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 215
disagree” to “strongly agree.” As shown in table 66, 8.3% strongly agree; 50% somewhat agree;
25% neither agree or disagree; 8.3% somewhat disagree; and 8.3% strongly disagree. The
threshold for this item is 100%. These responses do not meet 100% threshold established and
indicate that there is a lack of an organization culture model in regard to there being a shared
supportive culture in the district and school site for implementing the SJAS in curriculum. As a
result, there is a gap in culture model that needs to be addressed.
Table 66
Survey Results for Organization Culture Model of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Organization Culture Model Item 2 % Count

Please indicate to what extent you agree with the following statement:
There is a shared supportive culture in the district and school site for
implementing the SJAS in curriculum.

1 Strongly Agree 8.3% 1
2 Somewhat Agree 50% 6
3 Neither Agree or Disagree 25% 3
4 Somewhat Disagree 8.3% 1
5 Strongly Disagree 8.3% 1
Total Percentage: 100% 12

Interview findings. The respondents were asked “How would you describe the culture in
the district and your school site in terms of being able to implement the SJAS in
curriculum?” One of the respondents discussed the demographic of teachers and relating to
students in the district:
We don't have enough men on staff. We don't have enough African-Americans on staff. I
feel like if I was to collaborate and be really sensitive, so as a white woman, I'm in the
majority of teachers. It's hard for me to feel like I really know, can relate to the
experiences of a lot of my students. And role model wise, I feel like the district needs to
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 216
be better. Like we're getting better. Like the diversity on our staff is certainly increased
over the last five years, but it’s not where it should be.
Another teacher noted the following about the culture of the district in regards to being
conducive to implementing a social justice curriculum:
The culture of the district is going to be one that's difficult to change, but I don't think it'll
be impossible. I think they first are trying to assess the teachers that are interested so that
they can have a core group of people who are behind it. They can help another core
group. More people come, get behind and support it, and then also get interested in
teaching it. I think that feeling is there. It feels like there are two different environments.
It's the people who are interested in this and then those who aren't or aren't aware of it.
So, we don't know who will and will not be interested in it.
This teacher expressed that there is a lot of uncertainty in regards to the views of the faculty
which creates a culture that is divided between being conducive and challenging the
implementation of a social justice curriculum.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that there is a shared supportive culture in the
district and school site for implementing the SJAS in curriculum. Since only 58.3% of the
teachers agree to an extent that there is a shared supportive culture in the district and school site
for implementing the SJAS in curriculum and the threshold is 100%, the teachers did not
demonstrate that there is a culture model in the district and school site that supports
implementing the SJAS in curriculum. Further, the interview data also confirms the survey
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 217
findings as the teachers mentioned gaps in the culture that they feel need to be addressed. Thus,
there is room for improvement.
Organization culture model influence 3. There is a shared supportive culture in the
district and school site for evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on student
achievement.
Survey results. Teachers were asked to “Please indicate to what extent you agree with the
following statement: There is a shared supportive culture in the district and school site for
evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement” from a scale of five choices
ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” As shown in table 67, 16.7% strongly
agree; 50% somewhat agree; 16.7% neither agree or disagree; 8.3% somewhat disagree; and
8.3% strongly disagree. The threshold for this item is 100%. These responses do not meet 100%
threshold established and indicate that there is a lack of an organization culture model in regard
to there being a shared supportive culture in the district and school site for evaluating the
effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement. As a result, there is a gap in culture model
that needs to be addressed.
Table 67
Survey Results for Organization Culture Model of Social Justice Anchor Standards
# Organization Culture Model Item 3 % Count

Please indicate to what extent you agree with the following statement:
There is a shared supportive culture in the district and school site for
evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement.

1 Strongly Agree 16.7% 2
2 Somewhat Agree 50% 6
3 Neither Agree or Disagree 16.7% 2
4 Somewhat Disagree 8.3% 1
5 Strongly Disagree 8.3% 1
Total Percentage: 100% 12

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 218
Interview findings. Interviews were not conducted for this influence.
Observation. Observations were not conducted for this influence.
Document analysis. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence.
Summary. The assumed influence is that there is a shared supportive culture in the
district and school site for evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on student
achievement. Since only 66.7% of the teachers agree to an extent that there is a shared
supportive culture in the district and school site for evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on
student achievement and the threshold is 100%, the teachers did not demonstrate that there is a
culture model in the district and school site that supports evaluating the effectiveness of
curriculum on student achievement. Thus, there is room for improvement.
Summary of Determined Influences and Assets
Knowledge
Gaps were determined for eight out of ten declarative factual knowledge influences, five
out of six declarative conceptual knowledge influences, five out of five procedural knowledge
influences, and one out of one metacognitive knowledge influence through surveys and
interviews. Table 68 presents an overview of the results of the assessment of each assumed
knowledge influence. Recommendations to improve each identified cause are discussed in
Chapter Five.
Table 68
Summary of Assumed Knowledge Causes Demonstrated

Assumed Knowledge Influences Need Determined
Declarative Factual
Teachers know what positionality is. Yes
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 219
Teachers know what bias is. Yes
Teachers know their own positionality and biases. Yes
Teachers know what an agent of change is. No
Teachers know what a curriculum is. Yes
Teachers know what pedagogical connections are. Yes
Teachers know what the Social Justice Anchor Standards (SJAS) are. Yes
Teachers know the State Standards (SS) for their subject areas and grade-level. Yes
Teachers know what domains of SJAS go into each lesson. Yes
Teachers know what Assessments are best for evaluating the effectiveness of No
curriculum on student achievement.

Declarative Conceptual
Teachers know the relationship between their own positionality and biases in Yes
creating and implementing a curriculum that incorporates SJAS.

Teachers understand how change agents can affect student achievement. Yes

Teachers understand the relationship between the domains of the SJAS and the SS. Yes

Teachers know the relationship or categories between pedagogy and the SJAS and SS. Yes

Teachers understand the relationship between SJAS principles and categories and Yes
which SJAS components go with each lesson section.

Teachers understand the relationship between effective curriculum and student No
achievement.

Procedural

Teachers know how to use their positionality to create an open-minded and Yes
anti-bias curriculum which recognizes and respects students of all races, beliefs,
classes, and social groups.

Teachers know how to act as change agents and work together for the betterment Yes
of their students.

Teachers know how to embed the SJAS within their curriculum. Yes

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 220
Teachers know how to utilize instructional strategies in order to effectively Yes
implement the SJAS curriculum in their teaching.

Teachers know how to assess the collected student data and monitor student Yes
achievement.

Metacognitive

Teachers reflect on their own positionality. Yes

Motivation
Gaps in zero out of five value motivation influences, five out of five self-efficacy
motivation influences, five out of five emotion motivation influences, and one out of five goal
orientation motivation influences were demonstrated through surveys and interviews. Table 69
presents an overview of the results of the assessment of each assumed motivation influence.
Recommendations to improve each demonstrated cause will be discussed in Chapter Five.
Table 69
Summary of Assumed Motivation Causes Demonstrated

Assumed Motivation Influences Need Determined?

Value

Teachers value their own positionality. No

Teachers value the idea of a change agent. No
Teachers value creating a curriculum at respective grade-level and content No
area that develops pedagogical connections through the Social Justice
Anchor Standards.

Teachers value the implementation of the SJAS curriculum. No

Teachers value evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum based on student No
achievement data.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 221
Self-Efficacy

Teachers are confident about their positionality. Yes

Teachers are confident they can be an agent of change. Yes

Teachers are confident about creating a curriculum at respective grade-level Yes
and content area that develops pedagogical connections through the Social
Justice Anchor Standards.

Teachers are confident about implementing the SJAS curriculum. Yes

Teachers are confident about evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on Yes
student achievement.

Emotion

Teachers feel positive about understanding their positionality. Yes

Teachers feel positive about being agents of change. Yes

Teachers feel positive about creating a curriculum at respective grade-level Yes
and content area that develops pedagogical connections through the Social
Justice Anchor Standards.

Teachers feel positive about implementing the SJAS curriculum. Yes

Teachers feel positive about evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on Yes
student achievement.

Goal Orientation

Teachers view understanding their positionality as a learning opportunity. No

Teachers view being agents of change as a learning opportunity. No

Teachers view creating a curriculum at respective grade-level and content No
area that develops pedagogical connections through the SJAS as a learning
opportunity.

Teachers want to master the implementation of the SJAS curriculum. No

Teachers want to gain knowledge about their students and practice through Yes
the evaluation of the effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 222
Organization
Gaps in five out of five organization resource influences; three out of three organization
policies, processes, and procedures influences; five out of five organization culture setting
influences; and three out of three organization culture model influences were demonstrated
through surveys and interviews. Table 70 presents an overview of the results of the assessment of
each assumed organization influence. Recommendations to improve each demonstrated cause
are discussed in Chapter Five.
Table 70
Summary of Assumed Organization Causes Demonstrated

Assumed Organization Influences Need Demonstrated?

Resources

Teachers have the training to understanding their own positionality within Yes
the district.

Teachers have resources to be effective change agent within the district. Yes

Teachers have prep time to master and implement the SJAS. Yes

Teachers have the training to implement SJAS. Yes

Teachers have prep time to analyze and evaluate the effectiveness of Yes
curriculum on student achievement.

Policies, Processes, & Procedures

The policies and procedures in the school and district are aligned with Yes
the goal of creating social justice curriculum.

The policies and procedures in the school and district are aligned with Yes
the goal of implementing the SJAS.

The policies and procedures in the school and district are aligned with Yes
the goal of evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 223
Culture Setting

There is a setting conducive to understanding your own positionality. Yes

There is a setting conducive to being a change agent. Yes

There is a setting in the school and district that supports the creation of a Yes
social justice curriculum.

The school and district provide a setting that supports the implementation Yes
of the SJAS.

The school and district provide a setting that supports the evaluation of the Yes
effectiveness of the curriculum on student achievement.

Culture Model

There is a shared supportive culture in the district and school site for integrating Yes
social justice topics into curriculum.

There is a shared supportive culture in the district and school site for implementing Yes
the SJAS in curriculum.

There is a shared supportive culture in the district and school site for evaluating the Yes
effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement.

Chapter Five examines proposed solutions for each demonstrated cause. Each proposed
solution utilizes evidence-based recommendations identified through relevant academic
literature. Proposed solutions will be shared with the administrative leaders of WCUSD.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 224
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS AND EVALUATION
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this study is to use the Clark and Estes (2008) knowledge, motivation and
organization performance framework to conduct an analysis to identify and understand the assets
and needs for WCUSD to motivate, support, and prepare teachers to implement the Social Justice
Anchor Standards in all curricula. The Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework diagnoses
the human causes behind gaps between desired and actual performance through an analysis of
organizational goals and an analysis of the causes of the gaps along three critical dimensions:
knowledge, motivation, and organizational policies, resources, and culture (Clark & Estes, 2008;
Rueda, 2011). Clark and Estes (2008) describe the use of the gap analysis process model, which
consists of seven steps:
• Step 1: Goals: Identify the organizational goal.
• Step 2: Current Achievement: Identify the current achievement of performance
goals.
• Step 3: Gaps: Determine performance gaps.
• Step 4: Causes: Analyze gaps to determine causes (KMO).
The following three steps are later in this chapter of the study:
• Step 5: Solutions: Recommend knowledge solutions, motivation solutions, and
organizational process and material solutions to close gap.
• Step 6: Implement: Plan for the implementation of the KMO solutions.
• Step 7: Evaluate: Evaluate the results, fine-tune the system, and revise goals.
For the purpose of this study, the gap analysis framework is adapted to identify the assets
and needs of WCUSD to innovate the new curriculum that implements the SJAS throughout the
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 225
district. Because this is an innovation study, assets and needs, rather than gaps, are identified
and analyzed. In this Chapter, the critical behaviors identified in Chapter Two, and validated in
Chapters Three and Four, are analyzed to determine any needs that the teachers have that could
be a barrier in the creation of a curriculum that implements the SJAS.
This study focused on teachers that are part of Social Justice Cohort 1 which has been
receiving training for over a year to learn about social justice and be able to create and
implement a social justice curriculum at their respective grade levels and content areas. The
analysis focuses on causes for any possible gaps in teachers’ knowledge and skill, motivation,
and organizational resources that would hinder the district’s goal of having a social justice
curriculum created and implemented at every grade level and at every content area. The analysis
began by generating a list of possible or assumed influences, which was examined systematically
in order to determine if any gaps exist.
The study was guided through the following questions:
1. What are teachers’ knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational assets and needs
to implement the Social Justice Anchor Standards throughout WCUSD?
2. What are the knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational recommendations for
providing these assets and needs for implementing the Social Justice Anchor Standards
across all subject areas and grade-levels?
Recommendations to Address Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization Influences
The assumed knowledge, motivation, and organization influences in the following tables
have all demonstrated gaps through surveys and interviews completed by participants in Social
Justice Cohort 1. As indicated in the tables, each influence has been designated high priority for
achieving the organization’s goal. Moreover, each table lists the evidence-based principles that
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 226
support the recommendation. Each recommendation for the causes was founded on the
application of the principle. The tables are followed by an analysis for each high priority cause,
the principle, and support for the solution based on the literature.
Knowledge Recommendations
Introduction. An analysis of the data collected shows that there are eight declarative
factual knowledge needs, six declarative conceptual knowledge needs, five procedural
knowledge needs, and one metacognitive knowledge need. All of these knowledge types are
considered high priority due to their emphasis in the literature regarding social justice education.
Table 71 lists the causes, priority, principle and recommendations. Following the table, a
detailed discussion for each high priority cause and recommendation and the literature
supporting the recommendation is provided.
Table 71
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Knowledge
Influence
Priority
High
Low
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Declarative Factual
Teachers need to know:

• What positionality
is.
• What bias is.
• Their own
positionality and
biases.
• What a curriculum
is.
• What pedagogical
connections are.
• What the Social
Justice Anchor
Standards (SJAS)
are.
High Information learned
meaningfully and
connected with prior
knowledge is stored
more quickly and
remembered more
accurately because it
is elaborated with
prior learning
(Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Provide teachers with social
justice PD, which presents and
develops concepts in a
meaningful way to help retain
the knowledge
learned. Provide multimodal
instruction to teachers.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 227
• The State
Standards (SS) for
their subject areas
and grade-level.

Teachers need to know:
• What domains of
SJAS go into each
lesson.
High How individuals
organize knowledge
influences how they
learn and apply what
they know (Schraw
& McCrudden,
2006).

Encourage
elaboration and
organization by
creating concept
maps, mnemonics,
advance organizers
and analogies
(Anguinis & Kraiger,
2009).
Instruct teachers on how the
domains of SJAS can be
integrated into lessons through
demo lessons in person or on
video to watch.

Show examples of
assessments used to evaluate
the effectiveness of a social
justice curriculum. Have
teachers try to create their
own mini-lessons where they
incorporate the SJAS and then
use a learned assessment
method to evaluate the
effectiveness.
Conceptual
Teachers understand:

• The relationship
between their own
positionality and
biases in creating
and implementing
a curriculum that
incorporates
SJAS.
• How change
agents can affect
student
achievement.
• The relationship
between the
domains of the
SJAS and the SS.
• The relationship or
categories between
pedagogy and the
SJAS and SS.
High How individuals
organize knowledge
influences how they
learn and apply what
they know (Schraw
& McCrudden,
2006).
Provide teachers with
Professional Learning
Communities (PLC) to
collaborate with teachers
within their grade level and/or
content area to discuss their
role as agents of change and
to analyze the relationship
between positionality and
biases, a social justice
curriculum, its components,
the State Standards, and
student achievement. Have
teachers discuss their personal
experiences so they can
internalize the concepts and
how they are intertwined.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 228
• The relationship
between SJAS
principles and
categories and
which SJAS
components go
with each lesson
section.

Procedural
Teachers know how to:

• Use their
positionality to
create an open-
minded and anti-
bias curriculum
which recognizes
and respects
students of all
races, beliefs,
classes, and social
groups.
• Act as change
agents and work
together for the
betterment of their
students.
• Embed the SJAS
within their
curriculum.
• Utilize
instructional
strategies in order
to effectively
implement the
SJAS curriculum
in their teaching.
• Assess the
collected student
data and monitor
student
achievement.

High To develop mastery,
individuals must
acquire component
skills, practice
integrating them, and
know when to apply
what they have
learned (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).

Break down complex
tasks and encourage
individuals to think
about content in
strategic ways
(Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).

Provide teachers with the
training to work as change
agents, to show them how to
use their positionality to
create a social justice
curriculum to benefit all
students, to embed the SJAS
within the curriculum, to
utilize instructional effective
strategies, and to assess and
monitor student achievement
through this social justice
curriculum.

Provide them with the
opportunity to practice and
give them feedback.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 229
Metacognitive
Teachers know how to
reflect on:
• Their own
positionality.

High The use of
metacognitive
strategies facilitates
learning (Baker,
2006).

Model your own
metacognitive
process by talking
out loud and
assessing strengths
and weaknesses
(Baker, 2006).

Provide PD to teachers that
allows them to read about and
to see video or live
demonstrations of strategies to
reflect upon themselves and
their instruction.

Declarative knowledge solutions. Eight out of ten assumed knowledge influences
demonstrated needs. Teachers need to know the meaning of positionality, bias, a curriculum,
pedagogical connections, the Social Justice Anchor Standards, the State Standards for their
grade-level and content area, and their own positionality and bias. Schraw and McCrudden
(2006) recommend learning information in a meaningful way that connects it with prior
knowledge so the information is stored more quickly and remembered more accurately because it
is elaborated with prior learning. Further, knowing how to organize knowledge influences how
individuals learn and apply what they know (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). Finally, Anguinis
and Kraiger (2009) recommend encouraging elaboration and organization through the creation
and use of concept maps, mnemonics, advance organizers and analogies.
In a study on multimodal teaching, the concept of “blood circulation” was taught to a
classroom through a multimodal approach (Kress, 2001). The concept was taught orally then
through a model of the human body that could be manipulated and given to the students and then
through a detailed diagram in the textbook. All of these models were linked together and,
according to Kress (2001), each representational mode enabled the unfolding of a different and
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 230
deeper view of the concept and removed another layer of individuality of what was being
represented to create a clearer complete picture to the students.
WCUSD can utilize Schraw and McCrudden’s (2006) principle and Kress’ (2001) idea of
utilizing meaningful and multimodal instruction to close the gap in teachers’ declarative factual
knowledge by providing teachers with social justice professional development, which presents
and develops concepts in a meaningful way to help teachers retain the knowledge learned.
Conceptual knowledge solutions. Five out of six conceptual knowledge influences
demonstrated needs. Teachers need to understand how change agents can affect student
achievement and the relationship between their own positionality and biases in creating and
implementing a curriculum that incorporates SJAS; the domains of the SJAS and the State
Standards; pedagogy and the SJAS and State Standards; and the SJAS principles and categories
and which SJAS components go with each lesson section. Schraw and McCrudden (2006) assert
that knowing how to organize knowledge influences how individuals learn and apply what they
know.
According to Ambrose et al. (2010), individuals make connections between different
pieces of knowledge. Further, if those connections are meaningfully organized, then individuals
are better able to draw upon and apply their knowledge when needed (Ambrose et al., 2010). In
order to facilitate these connections, Ambrose et al. (2010) discuss asking individuals to sort
different problems, concepts, or situations into categories in order to reveal how they organize
their knowledge.
When teachers collaborate with other teachers, they are able to sort out different
problems or concepts out loud with another expert. WCUSD can provide teachers with the
opportunity to collaborate and discuss complex and highly connected knowledge structures as
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 231
experts, which will enable them to access and use their meaningfully organized knowledge and
process information in coherent chunks to build more interconnected knowledge structures.
Procedural knowledge solutions. Five procedural knowledge influences demonstrated
needs. Teachers need to know how to use their positionality to create an open-minded and anti-
bias curriculum which recognizes and respects students of all races, beliefs, classes, and social
groups; act as change agents and work together for the betterment of their students; embed the
SJAS within their curriculum; utilize instructional strategies in order to effectively implement the
SJAS curriculum in their teaching; and assess the collected student data and monitor student
achievement. Schraw and McCrudden (2006) recommend that in order to develop mastery,
individuals must acquire component skills, practice integrating them, and know when to apply
what they have learned; and that complex tasks must be broken down and individuals
encouraged to think about content in strategic ways.
According to the National Research Council (1994), training in groups is used to increase
individual procedural knowledge and proficiency. Bosse et al. (2015) note that improvement in
individuals’ procedural skill acquisition is directly related to deliberate practice with both high-
and low-frequency intermittent feedback. Bosse et al. (2015) discuss four important factors for
improved knowledge, skills, and behaviors: observational practice, the learner’s focus of
attention, feedback, and self-controlled practice. In their study regarding using medical
simulations that lead to effective learning, Issenberg et al. (2005) reinforce this idea by
describing similar factors in the procedural learning process: repetitive and active educational
experiences, educational feedback, and embedding the training in the standard curriculum.
Hands-on activities, repetition, and feedback are key components to enhancing procedural
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 232
knowledge and skills (Bosse et al., 2015; Issenberg et al., 2005; Lammers, 2008; Ericsson,
2007).
Thus, WCUSD can provide teachers with training that allows them to develop and
enhance their procedural knowledge and skill through observation, repetitive practice, and
feedback.
Metacognitive knowledge solutions. One metacognitive knowledge influence
demonstrated a need. Teachers need to know how to reflect on their own positionality. Baker
(2006) suggests that the use of metacognitive strategies facilitates learning and advocates
modeling one’s own metacognitive process by talking out loud and assessing strengths and
weaknesses.
According to Pintrich (2002), metacognitive thinking and self-regulation are cognitive
processes that learners use to monitor, control, and regulate their thinking and learning. Through
self-reflection after meaningful activities, individuals become more aware of their own
metacognitive knowledge and their own strategies for learning and thinking (Pintrich, 2002). In
their study, Calegari et al. (2015) use structured reflective discussions to facilitate the
improvement of faculty members’ knowledge and skills related to assessment and evaluation.
For WCUSD, as teachers think about and talk out loud about their metacognitive
processes, they are able to reflect on their abilities and identify areas of strength and any need for
support.
Motivation Recommendations
Introduction. An analysis of the data collected shows that there are no value motivation
needs, five self-efficacy motivation needs, five emotion motivation needs, and one goal
orientation motivation need. All of these motivation types are considered high priority due to
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 233
their emphasis in the literature regarding social justice education. Table 72 lists the causes,
priority, principle and recommendations. Following the table, a detailed discussion for each high
priority cause and recommendation and the literature supporting the recommendation is
provided.
Table 72
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Motivation
Influence
Priority
High
Low
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Value

None

Self-Efficacy
Teachers are confident
about:

• Their positionality.
• Being an agent of
change.
• Creating a curriculum
at respective grade-
level
and content area that
develops pedagogical
connections through
the Social Justice
Anchor Standards.
• Implementing the
SJAS curriculum.
• Evaluating the
effectiveness of
curriculum on student
achievement.
High High self-efficacy
can positively
influence
motivation (Pajares,
2006).

Feedback and
modeling increases
self-efficacy
(Pajares, 2006).

Provide teachers with
opportunities to observe
multiple models (videos,
live classrooms, etc.)
engaging in the desired
behavior and/or action.

Provide teachers with PD
geared towards goal-directed
practice with frequent and
constructive feedback on
progress of learning and
performance.

Emotion
Teachers feel positive about:

• Understanding their
positionality.
High Positive emotional
environments
support motivation
Provide administrative
support to teachers at both
the district and site level.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 234
• Being agents of
change.
• Creating a curriculum
at respective grade-
level and content area
that develops
pedagogical
connections through
the Social
Justice Anchor
Standards.
• Implementing the
SJAS curriculum.
• Evaluating the
effectiveness of
curriculum on
student achievement.

(Clark & Estes,
2008).

Support learners’
need for autonomy
and choice (Bono
et al., 2007).
Ensure teachers that they
have complete control of
their pedagogy and will be
supported in the process of
creating and implementing a
social justice curriculum.
Goal Orientation
Teachers want to gain
knowledge about their
students and practice through
the evaluation of the
effectiveness of curriculum
on student achievement.
High Focusing on
mastery, individual
improvement,
learning, and
progress promotes
positive motivation
(Yough &
Anderman, 2006).

Create a community
of learners where
everyone supports
everyone else’s
attempts to learn
(Yough &
Anderman, 2006).
Show teachers different
methods of evaluation that
they find useful and valuable
and provide them with the
autonomy to use the method
that they feel is best for their
classroom setting and
students.

Provide PD and coaching
focusing on the mastery and
individual improvement of
teachers learning new
methods of evaluation.

Provide opportunities to
collaborate with other
teachers to support each
other in the process of
learning different methods
of evaluation.

Value solutions. No value motivation influences were validated. Therefore, there is no
gap in this motivation area.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 235
Self-Efficacy solutions. Five self-efficacy motivation influences demonstrated
need. Teachers need to be confident about their positionality, being an agent of change, creating
a curriculum at respective grade-level and content area that develops pedagogical connections
through the Social Justice Anchor Standards, implementing the SJAS curriculum, and evaluating
the effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement. Pajares (2006) asserts that high self-
efficacy can positively influence motivation and that feedback and modeling increase self-
efficacy.
According to Gurol, Altunbas and Karaarslan (2010) a teacher’s self-efficacy is effective
affects a teacher’s classroom management, implementation of curriculum and pedagogy, and the
use of the technology and instructional tools. In a study by Kraaijeveld et al. (2013) discuss a
study on a workplace intervention to raise the self-efficacy of supervisors in supporting
employees. In this study, supervisors’ self-efficacy was raised through supervisor training and
coaching, which was geared towards goal oriented practice and provided supervisors with
feedback from the coaches. Wilkerson et al. (2017) also utilized training where doctoral students
were taught alternate teaching methods to teach health promotion theory and given opportunities
to practice the new methods and skills on master’s-level students. Through surveys, the
researchers found that teachers’ self-efficacy increased to levels necessary for lifelong learning.
Thus, WCUSD can provide teachers with professional development and training
opportunities to observe multiple models engaging in the desired behavior and/or action. Further,
professional development and training geared towards goal-directed practice with frequent and
constructive feedback on progress of learning and performance should also be provided to help
raise self-esteem.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 236
Emotion solutions. Five emotion motivation influences demonstrated need. Teachers
need to feel positive about understanding their positionality, being agents of change, creating a
curriculum at respective grade-level and content area that develops pedagogical connections
through the Social Justice Anchor Standards, implementing the SJAS curriculum, and evaluating
the effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement. Clark and Estes (2008) suggest that
positive emotional environments support motivation. Bono et al. (2007) add that an organization
must support learners’ need for autonomy and choice in order to increase emotion motivation.
In a study by Bruning and Horn (2010), creating a positive emotional environment is
identified as one of the critical conditions for increasing motivation. One of the factors of
creating a positive emotional environment that Bruning and Horn (2010) mention is giving
individuals a significant measure of control. A second factor they discuss is providing a
supportive context to help individuals meet their goals. In order to achieve such a positive
emotional environment and to provide a supportive context, Bruning and Horn (2010) suggest
breaking complex tasks into more manageable tasks to afford individuals multiple opportunities
to practice and improve their skills. This is an effective method to structure professional
development and training of difficult ideas and tasks.
For WCUSD, teachers should be provided administrative support at both the district and
site level and ensured that they have complete control of their pedagogy and will be supported in
the process of creating and implementing a social justice curriculum. Collaborative training
opportunities should be provided to teachers where they are able to feel safe and unjudged and
where the tasks they face are broken down into manageable subtasks so they are not
overwhelmed, especially when facing sensitive or uncomfortable topics.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 237
Goal orientation solutions. One goal orientation motivation influence demonstrated
need. Teachers should want to gain knowledge about their students and practice through the
evaluation of the effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement. Yough and Anderman
(2006) assert that focusing on mastery, individual improvement, learning, and progress promotes
positive motivation; and that creating a community of learners where everyone supports
everyone else’s attempts to learn helps increase goal orientation within an organization.
Colquitt and Simmering (1998) describe goal orientation as a learning orientation where
the focus is to increase competence by developing new skills. Button et al. (1996) discuss that
the more learning oriented individuals are, the more they approach learning and skill
development with increased expectancy of success. In their study, Colquitt and Simmering
(1998) found that learners who exhibited goal orientation showed signs of higher motivation
levels, throughout the entire learning process and were more successful than those who did not.
As a result, WCUSD should support and encourage teachers’ goal orientation regarding
gaining knowledge about their students and practice through the evaluation of the effectiveness
of their curriculum on student achievement by showing teachers different methods of evaluation
that teachers will find useful and valuable. WCUSD should also provide teachers with the
autonomy to utilize the method that they feel is best for their classroom setting and students.
Further, professional development and coaching focusing on the mastery and individual
improvement of teachers learning new methods of evaluation and opportunities to collaborate
with other teachers to support each other in the process of learning different methods of
evaluation should be provided by the district.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 238
Organization Recommendations
Introduction. An analysis of the data collected shows that there are five resource
organization needs; three policy, process, and procedure organization needs; five culture setting
needs; and three culture model organization needs. All of these organization types are
considered high priority due to their emphasis in the literature regarding social justice education.
Table 73 lists the causes, priority, principle and recommendations. Following the table, a
detailed discussion for each high priority cause and recommendation and the literature
supporting the recommendation is provided.
Table 73
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Organization
Influence
Priority
High
Low
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Resources
Teachers have:

• The training to
understanding their
own positionality
within the
district.
• Resources to be
effective change
agent within the
district.
• Prep time to master
and implement the
SJAS.
• The training to
implement SJAS.
• Prep time to
analyze and
evaluate the
effectiveness of
curriculum on
High Effective change
efforts ensure that
everyone has the
resources needed to
do their job (Clark &
Estes, 2008).
Survey teachers to see what
their specific resource needs
are, aggregate the data, and
allocate resources where
there is the most need.

Provide teachers with
additional stipends for extra
resources for use towards
social justice training and
curriculum creation,
preparation, and
implementation.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 239
student
achievement.

Policies, Processes, and
Procedures

The policies and
procedures in the school
and district are aligned
with the goal of:

• Creating social
justice curriculum.
• Implementing the
SJAS.
• Evaluating the
effectiveness of
curriculum on
student
achievement.
High Effective
organizations ensure
that organizational
messages, rewards,
policies and
procedures that
govern the work of
the organization are
aligned with or are
supportive of
organizational goals
and values (Clark &
Estes, 2008).
The policies and procedures
in the school and district
should be evaluated and
realigned towards the goal
of promoting social justice
throughout the district at all
grade levels and content
areas.
Cultural Settings
There is a setting
conducive to:

• Understanding your
own positionality.
• Being a change
agent.
• Supporting the
creation of a social
justice curriculum
in the school and
district.
• Providing a setting
that supports the
implementation of
the SJAS in the
school and district.
• Providing a setting
that supports the
evaluation of the
effectiveness of the
curriculum on
student
achievement in the
school and district.
High Effective change
efforts use evidence-
based solutions and
adapt them, where
necessary, to the
organization's culture
(Clark & Estes,
2008).
Collaborate with faculty and
administration to develop a
plan for creating a safe and
supportive environment
throughout the district and at
individual school sites for
the promotion of the
utilization and
implementation of social
justice at every grade level
and content area.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 240
Cultural Models
There is a shared
supportive culture in the
district and school site for:

• Integrating social
justice topics into
curriculum.
• Implementing the
SJAS in
curriculum.
• Evaluating the
effectiveness of
curriculum on
student
achievement.

High Effective change
efforts use evidence-
based solutions and
adapt them, where
necessary, to the
organization's culture
(Clark & Estes,
2008).

Performances
improve when
organizational goals,
policies and
procedures are
aligned with the
organizational culture
(Clark & Estes,
2008).
The district, site
administrators and teachers
collaborate to collect and
analyze data from teachers at
each individual site to
identify teachers’ support
needs of creating and
implementing a social
justice curriculum.

Once this data is collected
and analyzed, the district,
site administrators and
teachers collaborate to
ensure a clear vision of the
goal and to ensure that
policies and procedures are
aligned with the goal and to
begin to methodically
address these support needs
and create a plan to remedy
them.

Resources solutions. Five resource organization influences demonstrated
need. Teachers need to have training to understanding their own positionality, resources to be
effective change agent within the district, prep time to master and implement the SJAS, training
to implement SJAS, pep time to analyze and evaluate the effectiveness of curriculum on student
achievement. Clark and Estes (2008) indicate that effective change efforts ensure that everyone
has the resources needed to do their job.
In a study by Waugh and Godfrey (2018) regarding the implementation of the Unit
Curriculum in Western Australian secondary schools, the implementation failed due to a lack of
adequate consultation with teachers, which led to insufficient resources being provided during
the implementation. Dello-Iacovo (2009) discuss that insufficient resources hamper the
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 241
implementation of educational reforms. Thus, teachers’ needs must be known so that they can
create and implement a social justice curriculum.
Consequently, WCUSD should survey teachers to see what their specific resource needs
are, aggregate the data, and allocate resources where there is the most need. Further, the district
should provide teachers with additional stipends for extra resources for use towards social justice
training and curriculum creation, preparation, and implementation.
Policies, processes, and procedures solutions. Three policies, processes, and
procedures organization influences demonstrated need. The policies and procedures in the
school and district are aligned with the goal of creating social justice curriculum, implementing
the SJAS, and evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement. According to
Clark and Estes (2008), effective organizations ensure that organizational messages, rewards,
policies and procedures that govern the work of the organization are aligned with or are
supportive of organizational goals and values.
Fratura and Capper (2007) state that policies must be quality driven and should maintain
the goals indicated by an organization. Skrla, Scheurich, Johnson, and Koschoreck (2010)
discuss districts implementing social justice education consider what educational policies and
practices are desirable and beneficial for meeting their goal of being more equitable and socially
just as a district. They further relate reforming policies and procedures in ways that help
facilitate academic success for all children.
Therefore, WCUSD should evaluate and realign the policies and procedures in the district
and individual school sites in order to meet the goal of promoting social justice throughout the
district at all grade levels and content areas.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 242
Cultural settings solutions. Five cultural setting organization influences demonstrated
need. Within the district, there needs to be a setting conducive to understanding your own
positionality, to being a change agent, to supporting the creation of a social justice curriculum in
the school and district, to providing a setting that supports the implementation of the SJAS in the
school and district, and to providing a setting that supports the evaluation of the effectiveness of
the curriculum on student achievement in the school and district. Clark and Estes (2008) state
that effective change efforts use evidence-based solutions and adapt them, where necessary, to
the organization's culture.
According to Kraft and Papay (2014), teachers working in more supportive professional
environments improve their effectiveness more over time than teachers working in less
supportive contexts. Further, Banks and Mayes (2001) assert that teachers are more effective in
work environments characterized by mutual dependence where sharing is the norm and
individuals are not afraid to admit failure or when they are uncomfortable. Teachers are also
more effective in environments where relationships between staff are built where they can
collaborate and provide each other with support to grow as professionals (Banks & Mayes,
2001).
Thus, WCUSD should collaborate with faculty and administration to develop a plan for
creating a safe and supportive environment throughout the district and at individual school sites
for the promotion of the utilization and implementation of social justice at every grade level and
content area.
Cultural model solutions. Three cultural model organization influences demonstrated
need. There is a shared supportive culture in the district and school site for integrating social
justice topics into curriculum, implementing the SJAS in curriculum, and evaluating the
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 243
effectiveness of curriculum on student achievement. Clark and Estes (2008) assert that effective
change efforts use evidence-based solutions and adapt them, where necessary, to the
organization's culture, and that performances improve when organizational goals, policies and
procedures are aligned with the organizational culture.
According to Clark and Estes (2008), effective change efforts are necessary to create and
implement solutions and align goals, policies and procedures with organizational
culture. However, Dowd et al. (2012) describe that some practitioners may be reluctant
implement such improvement efforts because of the negative connotations correlated to their
reports. Further, Grubb and Badway (2005) describe that teachers may be unwilling to partake
in improvement efforts if they do not feel comfortable with the approach taken and if the effort is
driven by an external party. As a result, transparency between the district, school site
administrators and teachers must exist so that they can have a clear understanding of the district
goals and collaborate in the improvement effort together. Clark and Estes (2008) reiterate this
notion by noting that a clear vision, goals, and measures are necessary for successful
organizational change.
As a result, WCUSD should ensure that the district, site administrators and teachers
collaborate to collect and analyze data from teachers at each individual site to identify teachers’
support needs of creating and implementing a social justice curriculum. Once this data is
collected and analyzed, the district, site administrators and teachers collaborate to ensure a clear
vision of the goal and to ensure that policies and procedures are aligned with the goal and to
begin to methodically address these support needs and create a plan to remedy them.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 244
Summary of Knowledge, Motivation and Organization Recommendations
The knowledge recommendations will be implemented in a purposeful manner. Teachers
will be provided with professional development using a multimodal approach that facilitates
meaningful connections to the concepts learned in order to develop declarative factual
knowledge. Professional Learning Communities will also be provided to collaborate with other
teachers within their content area and grade levels to facilitate conceptual knowledge
development. Training in mastery and skill development will be provided along with the
opportunity to practice and receive meaningful feedback in order to facilitate procedural
knowledge development. Goal oriented professional development geared towards reflective
strategies will be provided to facilitate metacognitive knowledge development.
Motivation recommendations will be implemented to improve self-efficacy, emotion, and
goal orientation. The district will facilitate the development of teachers' self-efficacy through
professional development geared towards goal-directed practice paired with constructive
feedback. Further, teachers will be provided administrative support at the district and site level
to ensure complete autonomy of their pedagogy and development process in order to facilitate
emotion motivation. Finally, teachers will be shown different methods of evaluation and
provided professional development and coaching on their use and opportunities to collaborate
with other teachers to facilitate goal orientation.
Organization recommendations include realigning policies and procedures, creating a
supportive work environment, and establishing practices that promote the district's goal of
creating and implementing a social justice curriculum at every grade level and content
area. Moreover, data will be collected and analyzed to better understand the resources that
teachers need to be successful in achieving the district's goal. Finally, the district, site
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 245
administrators, and teachers will collaborate to collect and analyze data to methodically address
teachers' support needs.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations
The mission of WCUSD is “Extraordinary achievement for all students while
simultaneously closing the achievement gap, guides the work of the Excellence through Equity
plan that includes the following three priorities: All graduates are ready for college and careers;
English learners will become proficient in English while engaging in a rigorous, standards-
aligned curriculum and all students engage in schools that are safe, well-maintained and family-
friendly.” The goal of WCUSD is that in August 2020, WCUSD will implement a curriculum
embedded with Social Justice Anchor Standards throughout the district and across all subjects
and grade-levels. However, teachers in WCUSD are not ready to implement a curriculum
embedded with the SJAS and need the proper training and support.
The district’s goal requires that WCUSD teachers be primarily responsible for making
pedagogical connections through the Social Justice Anchor Standards within the context in
which they are teaching. As such, it is necessary to identify teachers’ knowledge, motivation,
and organization assets and needs required to implement the program. Thus, the stakeholders of
focus for this study are elementary and secondary teachers in WCUSD. Further, the goal of the
teachers is that all teachers will demonstrate the skills and knowledge to develop pedagogical
connections through the Social Justice Anchor Standards within the context in which they are
teaching by August 2020.
This study examined the knowledge and skills, motivational, and organizational barriers
that prevent the teachers in WCUSD from being able to achieve their stakeholder and the
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 246
district's goals. The proposed solution—a comprehensive and purposeful professional
development training program for teachers, realigned policies and procedures relating to the
district goal, proper resources, and a supportive culture—should produce the desired outcome of
implementing a curriculum embedded with Social Justice Anchor Standards throughout the
district and across all subjects and grade-levels.
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
The implementation and evaluation plan is informed by the New World Kirkpatrick
Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016), which is based on the Kirkpatrick Four Level Model
of Evaluation. The Kirkpatrick Model is designed to monitor the impact training has on an
organization. One of the foundational principles of the Kirkpatrick Model is that “the end is the
beginning” (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016), which refers to the fact that any effective training
needs to be built around the end-goal and desired results of the organization and then worked
backwards towards participants’ behavior, learning and reactions. Thus, the Kirkpatrick Model
relies on the Four Levels. The Four Levels of the Kirkpatrick Model are as follows: Level 4 -
Results, or the degree to which targeted outcomes occur as a result of training and support; Level
3 - Behavior, or the degree to which participants apply what they learned through training at
work; Level 2 - Learning, or the degree to which participants acquire the intended knowledge,
skills, demeanor, confidence, and commitment based on their training; and Level 1 - Reaction, or
the degree to which participants find the training favorable, engaging and relevant to their jobs
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The Four Levels are in reverse order to emphasize the
importance of the implementation outcomes during the planning phase. Once emphasis has been
placed on the goal, indicators that learning occurred during implementation must be identified,
which should be followed by the identification of any indicators of participant satisfaction
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 247
towards the implementation strategies. As a result, the Kirkpatrick Model is used to help design
the implementation and evaluation plan through the Four Levels in order to create connections
between the immediate solutions and the larger goal and to promote validation in order to ensure
success (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
The original version of the Kirkpatrick model is an outcome-focused evaluation
model. The model examines the elements of a program to explain its success or lack of
success. However, this model does not provide evaluators with influences that impede or
facilitate the achievement of the organizational goals. The biggest difference between the old
Kirkpatrick Model and the New World Kirkpatrick Model is the inclusion of processes that
promote or hinder the application of learned knowledge or skills, which is found in Level
3. Further, the New Kirkpatrick Model also adds the elements of learners' confidence,
commitment, and engagement to Level 2 and Level 1, which broadens the scope of evaluation.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
The New World Kirkpatrick Model (2016) Level 4 is the result of the training and
support, which is the reason that training is performed. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016)
suggest that an evaluator must identify the leading indicators that exhibit an organization's
progress towards accomplishing its goal. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) define leading
indicators as short-term observations and measurements that provide a metric to determine
whether or not critical behaviors will positively influence the organization's desired results. This
section will focus on internal and external indicators, which will serve to keep the organization’s
initiatives on track, to reassure stakeholders through interim updates, to act as motivators for
training teachers how to create and implement a social justice curriculum, and to provide
important data connecting training, job performance, and the highest possible result (Kirkpatrick
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 248
& Kirkpatrick, 2016). Internal indicators are defined as individual, team, departmental, and
organizational outcomes. External indicators are defined as customer, client, market, and
industry response. The proposed leading external and internal indicators, metrics, and methods
are shown in Table 74.
Table 74
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
Increase in State Testing
scores
California Assessment of
Student Performance and
Progress (CAASPP) State
Test scores
State Testing Report
District reporting
Decrease parent
complaints regarding
achievement gap for
students of color
Number of complaints from
parents

Feedback from parents at
school meetings and Board of
Education meetings.
Increase in community
perception
Number of positive
comments
Community organization
feedback at Board of Education
meetings
Increase in positive media Number of positive articles or
mentions in media
District data collection and
reporting
Internal Outcomes
Increase in the use of
Social Justice Anchor
Standards within
classrooms
Number of times a teacher is
observed using the SJAS
Site administrators’
observations through formal
and informal walkthroughs
(quick visits)
Increase in the number of
classrooms using the SJAS
Number of teachers using
SJAS
Site administrators’ informal
walkthroughs
Increase in student
achievement among
students of color
Student GPA and student
engagement and participation
Site administrators’ informal
walkthroughs

Student report cards and grade
reports provided by the district
Increase in equitable
education for all students
GPA among all student
populations
Student report cards and grade
reports provided by the district

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 249
Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. Level 3 of the New World Kirkpatrick Model refers to “the degree
to which participants apply what they learned during training when they are back on the job”
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016, p. 13). Level 3 is considered the most important level because
it requires a comprehensive and continuous performance monitoring and improvement system,
which can disrupt traditional training evaluation practices. However, Level 3 must be defined
before it can be evaluated. Defining Level 3 is accomplished by identifying the critical
behaviors that will most influence Level 4 and establish the critical behaviors as the bridge that
connects learning to desired outcomes. Critical behaviors are "the few, key behaviors that the
primary group will have to consistently perform on the job to bring about targeted outcomes"
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016, p. 14). In this study, the primary group, which is the
stakeholder of focus, refers to the teachers in Social Justice Cohort as they are the first group of
teachers that are expected to create and implement a social justice curriculum at their grade level
and content area. The critical behaviors, specific metrics, methods, and timing for evaluating
outcome behaviors are shown in Table 75.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 250
Table 75
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
1. Create a curriculum at
respective grade-level and
content area that develops
pedagogical connections
through the Social Justice
Anchor Standards.
Number of teachers
creating social justice
curriculum.

Number of grade-
level and content
area social justice
curricula and
curriculum maps
created.
Site administrators’
observations through
formal and informal
walkthroughs (quick
visits)

District collection of
curriculum maps,
which are uploaded
online
Monthly
between
September and
May.

Once per
semester and
once in summer
in July for each
content area.
2. Implement SJAS-
influenced curriculum
Number of teachers
implementing SJAS-
influenced
curriculum.

Site administrators’
observations through
formal and informal
walkthroughs (quick
visits)
Monthly
between
September and
May.
3. Evaluate effectiveness
of curriculum on student
achievement
Student GPA and
student engagement
and participation

California
Assessment of
Student Performance
and Progress
(CAASPP) State Test
scores
Site administrators’
informal
walkthroughs

Student report cards
and grade reports
provided by the
district

State Testing Report
District reporting

Monthly
between
September and
May.

Every six weeks,
during each
grading period
progress report
or report card.

Once a year
after State
Testing Report
release.

Required drivers. According to Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick, required drivers are
"processes and systems that reinforce, monitor, encourage, and reward performance of critical
behaviors" (p. 53). Required drivers decrease the likelihood of anyone being overlooked and
holding everyone accountable. Teachers require the support of their site administrators, fellow
teachers, other school sites' teachers and administrators within WCUSD, parents, the community,
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 251
and the district administrators to reinforce, encourage, reward, and monitor their efforts to create
and implement a social justice curriculum embedded by the SJAS at every grade-level and
content area. Reinforcement holds teachers accountable and is used to remind teachers of what
they learned during social justice training. By reinforcing knowledge and skills learned with
accountability and support systems, organizations can expect as much as 85% job applicability.
Encouragement is a formal method of coaching and mentoring, while rewarding provides
teachers with incentive for critical behaviors. Monitoring the performance of teachers ensures
accountability. Active monitoring of required drivers is considered one of the biggest indicators
of program success for any initiative. The required drivers to support critical behaviors are
shown in Table 76.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 252
Table 76
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical
Behaviors
Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Reinforcing
District-wide meetings to discuss goals of creation and
implementation of SJAS curriculum and evaluation of
outcomes.
Ongoing 1, 2 and 3
Job aid including checklist for outcome evaluation process Ongoing 3
Provide training on social justice anchor standards and how
they can be embedded in curriculum.
Ongoing 1 and 2
Encouraging
Peer feedback and collaboration towards the creation and
implementation of a social justice curriculum at each grade
level and content area
Weekly 1 and 2
Coaching provided by the district on developing skills and
pedagogy for creation and implementation of social justice
curriculum.
Monthly 1 and 2
Informal feedback from site administrators on effectiveness. Monthly 3
Rewarding
Additional stipend provided by the district for attending
trainings and creating and implementing a social justice
curriculum.
Monthly 1 and 2
Based on monitoring of teachers creating and implementing
social justice curriculum, site level administrators will
recognize teachers as mentors and create a list of mentors that
other teachers may utilize for individual help for the creation
and implementation of social justice curriculum.
End of
each
semester
3
Monitoring
Observation by site administrators Monthly 1 and 2
Audit of curriculum maps Every year 1
Touch bases/meetings with teachers and site administrators
regarding progress and outcomes of creating and implementing
social justice curriculum.
End of
each
semester
1, 2, and 3

Organizational support. Organizational supports are necessary to ensure that the
required drivers are implemented within WCUSD. Critical behaviors will be reinforced through
the following methods: First, job aids will be developed to help establish and improve
declarative knowledge in regards to the SJAS, positionality and bias. The district will also
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 253
provide training on social justice anchor standards and how they can be embedded in curriculum.
Further, job aids will also be developed to help improve procedure knowledge related to creating
and implementing a social justice curriculum as well as curriculum evaluation. Finally, district-
wide meetings will be held to discuss goals of creation and implementation of SJAS curriculum
and evaluation of outcomes.
Critical behaviors will also be encouraged through required drivers. First, teachers will
be placed in professional learning communities (PLCs) where they will collaborate towards the
creation and implementation of a social justice curriculum at each grade level and content
area. The teachers in these PLCs will also be given opportunities to observe each other and give
each other feedback on their social justice lessons. Moreover, the district will provide coaching
to these teachers to help them develop their skills and pedagogy towards the creation and
implementation of the social justice curriculum. Lastly, site administrators will conduct informal
observations and provide informal feedback on the effectiveness of the curriculum.
Rewarding is another driver that supports the critical behaviors. The first method of
rewarding is for the district to provide an additional stipend to teachers for attending monthly
trainings and creating and implementing a social justice curriculum through the skills and
pedagogy developed during this professional development. Further, site administrators will
monitor teachers as they create and implement their social justice curriculum and will recognize
those who are successful. These successful teachers will be identified as mentors and site
administrators will create a list of mentors that other teachers may utilize for individual help for
the creation and implementation of social justice curriculum.
Monitoring is the final required driver that supports the critical behaviors. The first
method of monitoring is for site administrators to informally monitor teachers implementing
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 254
their social justice curriculum in order to provide informal feedback to help evaluate the use of
and effectiveness of the curriculum. Further, the district will monitor the progress of the creation
of social justice curricula at each grade level and content area by auditing curriculum maps and
guides for each respective grade level and content area. Finally, teachers and site administrators
will meet at the end of each semester by grade level and content area regarding progress and
outcomes of creating and implementing a social justice curriculum.
Level 2: Learning
According to Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016), learning is "the degree to which
individuals acquire intended knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence and commitment based on
their participation in the training (p. 42). Through effective training provided by the district,
teachers should be able to display confidence and commitment as well as develop their
knowledge, skills, and attitude. A positive correlation exists between the degree that teachers
acquire the intended attributes and the quality of the learning goals, implementation, and
evaluation.
Learning goals. Based on the needs determined in Chapter Four, learning goals have
been developed. Upon completion of the recommended solutions, teachers will be able to:
1. Describe what positionality, bias, change agents, curriculum, pedagogical connections,
the Social Justice Anchor Standards, and the State Standards are and how they relate to
each other (Declarative Factual and Conceptual).
2. Apply concepts of positionality, change agency, and SJAS into instructional strategies to
effectively create and implement a social justice curriculum (Procedural).
3. Understand, monitor and reflect upon their own positionality (Metacognitive).
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 255
4. Increase confidence regarding teachers' positionality, change agency, social justice
curriculum creation and implementation, and social justice curriculum evaluation (Self-
efficacy).
5. Receive feedback regarding social justice creation, implementation, and evaluation (Self-
efficacy).
6. Appraise feelings regarding teachers' positionality, change agency, and social justice
curriculum creation, implementation, and evaluation (Emotion).
7. Gain knowledge about students and instructional practice (Goal orientation).
Program. The learning goals in the above section will be achieved through training and
development that will increase the knowledge and motivation of teachers to successfully create
and implement an effective curriculum at their respective grade level and content area. The
program will focus on teachers' knowledge and motivation as well as teachers' input regarding
organizational policies, practices, and procedures.
In order to develop teachers' knowledge and skills, WCUSD will provide teachers with
monthly training regarding social justice education and the components involved such as
positionality, bias, and change agency as well as curriculum writing and implementation, which
will be led by a district professional development leader. This training will take place monthly
for a year and through cohorts at both the secondary and primary levels. After the first year of
training, each cohort will be split into professional learning communities (PLCs) by school site,
grade level, and/or content area so that teachers can collaborate to create lesson plans and
embedding the Social Justice Anchor Standards into curriculum. These PLCs will be given
specific time monthly to collaborate and create these social justice lessons. To facilitate this
process, a coach will be provided to each PLC that will work with teachers both individually and
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 256
as a group to help them create pedagogical connections between their own instruction and the
Social Justice Anchor Standards and develop instructional strategies that teachers value and feel
positive about.
Once lessons are created within a social justice framework, teachers will work with their
PLCs and coaches in order to practice implementing their lessons. These practices will occur in
both a mock classroom setting where teachers practice with a classroom full of their peers in
their PLCs and also in an actual classroom where teachers and site administrators can informally
observe the lesson and how students respond to it. After each of these trials, teachers will be
given feedback and will strategize how to further develop and fine tune their lessons, which will
also inform teachers’ practices and future lessons. Teachers will be given feedback the same day
as their observation.
Moreover, teachers will receive a stipend for all of these trainings that occur outside of
the school day. The district will also pay for a substitute teacher on days that a teacher in the
Social Justice PLC wants to observe another teacher implementing their social justice
lesson. This will help teachers learn from each other and create a more positive attitude
regarding social justice education as they see it firsthand.
Evaluation of the components of learning. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) promote
the use of formative and summative evaluation methods including but not limited to discussions,
knowledge checks, role play, group demonstrations, surveys, interviews, and action plans. Both
formative and summative methods will be employed to monitor teachers' knowledge and
motivation. Table 77 outlines the methods and activities that will be evaluated throughout the
program as well as the timing of each method.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 257
Table 77
Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program.
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”
Discussions focusing on positionality and bias,
change agency, curriculum, and social justice
anchor standards during training sessions.
Monthly during training
Knowledge checks using multiple choice items
and collaborative matching games related to
social justice anchor standards during training
sessions.
At conclusion of each training session
Collaborative activities and full cohort
debriefing discussion with peers and PD leader.
Monthly during training
Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”
Checklist of components needed to create a
social justice curriculum.
During the training
Feedback from peers and coach on social
justice curriculum development.
End of training session
Rubric of components for evaluation of the
implementation of social justice curriculum.
During the training
Use classroom scenarios to practice
implementation of social justice curriculum
with peers.
During the training
Feedback from peers after completing practice
implementation scenarios.
End of training session
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Open-ended survey item regarding value of
training program and outcome evaluation.
Beginning and end of each training on a
specific topic.
Open-ended survey regarding any issues with
training program and creation and
implementation of social justice curriculum.
End of each training on a specific topic.
Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”
Discussion in small groups about fears,
obstacles, and concerns with creation and
implementation of social justice curriculum.
During training sessions.
Mentorship, coaching, and peer check ins for
new cohorts or teachers who need extra
support.
Retrospective pre-/post training. Beginning
of each semester after first cohort goes
through successful creation and
implementation.
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”
Creation of action plan with input from all
cohort members to establish dates and actions
for program outcome evaluation process.
During training
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 258
Self-reporting on progress of training and
creation and implementation of social justice
curriculum.
End of each training session
Create action plan with input from all cohort
members to develop communication plan for
program outcome evaluation.
During training.

Level 1: Reaction
Level 1 Reaction is the "degree to which participants find the training favorable,
engaging, and relevant to their jobs" (p. 39). In this section, each aspect of Level 1 will be
evaluated both formatively and summatively. In order to confirm the quality of the training
program was acceptable to the teachers, teachers' reactions to the program is essential. Table 78
lists the methods used to determine the teachers' reaction to the training program being favorable,
engaging, and relevant.
Table 78
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program.
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Attendance rate. At the beginning of
each training session.
Active participation during activities. During training.
Creating meaningful connections between training and classroom
instruction.
During training and
after training.
Completion of curriculum creation, practice scenarios, and
implementation.
During training.
Relevance
Pulse check. During training.
Post-training survey on relevance of training to classroom
instruction.
1 month after each
training session.
Customer Satisfaction
Post-program survey including overall satisfaction with the training
program, engagement in the training, relevance of the training, and
general views of training program quality.
One week after each
training component is
taught.
Instructor observation gauging participant engagement. During training.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 259
Evaluation Tools
The teachers participating in the social justice training program will be asked to engage in
the evaluation of the impact the program had on their knowledge, motivation, and practice within
the organization. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) recommend evaluating the impact of a
program immediately after implementation and refer to two types of evaluation tools: immediate
and delayed.
Immediately following the program implementation. By immediately evaluating the
training program after implementation, Level 1 (engagement, relevance, and participant
satisfaction) and Level 2 (knowledge and motivation) outcomes are specifically
evaluated. Immediately following the social justice training, teachers will complete a survey.
The survey will indicate the relevance of the components and content of the training to their job
and satisfaction of the training program, commitment, attitude, and confidence in applying what
was learned. Further, an open-ended question regarding any issues with training program and
creation and implementation of social justice curriculum will also be part of the survey. During
the training sessions, the professional development leader will conduct pulse checks by asking
teachers if the content is relevant to their classrooms and address any questions or concerns they
have about the creation or implementation of social justice curriculum. Professional
development leaders will also check to see if the environment is conducive to the teachers'
learning and will identify any barriers to their learning. The proposed evaluation tool to be used
immediately following the program implementation is presented in Appendix A.
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick
(2016) state that evaluating the impact of the training program after a specific period of time has
lapsed allows participants to reflect on the impact of the program and gives participants time to
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 260
apply what they have learned. For the purpose of this program, the delayed evaluation will be
sent to teachers one month after their final training session. The delayed evaluation will address
Level 1 (reaction), Level 2 (learning), Level 3 (behavior), and Level 4 (results and leading
indicators) outcomes (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Participants will be given the
opportunity to provide feedback about the impact of the program through open-ended questions
and multiple choice items. The proposed evaluation tool to be used a semester after the program
implementation is presented in Appendix B.
Data Analysis and Reporting
The researcher of this study will provide an analysis of findings which will be presented
to WCUSD faculty members, site administrators, and district administrators. Findings will
include results and themes from both immediate and delayed evaluation, internal and external
outcomes from Level 4, and metrics related to critical behaviors from Level 3. At the end of each
semester, a reporting period will occur where the evaluator will compile data from the delayed
evaluation tool (See Appendix B). Each cohort will be evaluated separately and the data from
each year will be compared to measure growth. The district administrators will receive this data
in the form of dashboards for each item and how it compared to the previous years and previous
cohorts. This information will inform the district where the teachers are in comparison to where
they were previously after each semester of training and coaching. Bar graphs and, pie charts,
and other dashboards will be created through Microsoft Excel. An example of a dashboard is
provided in Appendix C.
Summary of the Implementation and Evaluation
The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) provides the
framework for implementation and evaluation of this study. The Four Levels of training and
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 261
evaluation are used to certify that teachers have the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
support to create and implement a social justice education that will create equitable education
opportunities for all students and help narrow the achievement gap. In this model, the training
program begins by identifying outcomes, metrics, and methods to measure the results of the
targeted outcomes of the organization's goal. The model not only provides a framework for
identifying measurable outcomes related to the broad, organizational goal-oriented indicators but
also smaller learning outcomes and reactions. Further, the critical behaviors are identified and
established to assess if teachers are using the training they receive in their classrooms. As
learning outcomes are identified, teachers will be evaluated on their learning and knowledge,
attitude, commitment, and confidence during the training. Finally, methods will be developed to
determine the teachers' satisfaction, engagement, and relevance of the training to assess how
teachers are reacting and implementing the training. Data must be collected, evaluated, and
analyzed during program implementation to maximize program results and facilitate change
within the district to promote the organizational goals.
If the level of reaction and learning does not meet expectations during the training, the
professional development leader must identify the issue and make any necessary changes to the
program to improve this. Pulse checks and asking for feedback from teachers during the training
are valuable methods for collecting data to address any issues regarding any obstacles in
teachers’ learning or less positive reactions than expected of the training.
If the level of behavior does not meet expectations after the training, communication with
teachers must be established to find out what problems are associated with the required drivers
and critical behaviors. Further, the professional development leader can solicit feedback from
the teachers in the social justice cohort through surveys and conversations by inquiring about
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 262
what behaviors would allow teachers to move forward to achieve their performance goal of
creating and implementing a social justice curriculum. If the level of behavior and results meet
expectations, then the teachers meeting these goals should be surveyed and interviewed to
identify what they are doing to increase their performance and share these practices with their
peers through mentoring and coaching opportunities (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
A final report to teachers and district administrators is necessary to provide an analysis on
the training outcomes. Organizational support is an essential component of any successful
training program (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) suggest
providing reports and regular meetings throughout the implementation process.
To summarize, current data should be compared to predetermine expectations. If the data
indicates that expectations are not met, causes for the problems must be identified, addressed,
and corrected to get the program back on track. If the outcomes are meeting expectations, then
communication of early successes must be established to keep everyone motivated towards the
overall goal and to help understand how to leverage success factors into future training programs
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
The value of utilizing the New World Kirkpatrick Model in this specific project is that it
will provide the teachers in the social justice cohort and the district administration with
information regarding the effectiveness of the recommended program as well as the district's
ability to actualize its mission. Providing evidence of the district actualizing its mission will help
teachers and administrators understand the impact of the social justice training program and how
it will help prepare teachers become change agents in the classroom and narrow the achievement
gap through social justice. Finally, evaluating the quality of the program will help inform future
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 263
trainings by identifying what the program is lacking or needs changed to maximize its
effectiveness.
Limitations and Delimitations
This study focuses on the knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs and assets
that contribute to WCUSD teachers' ability to create and implement a social justice curriculum at
their respective grade level and content area in order to narrow the achievement gap within the
district and provide equitable education opportunities for all students. Though the study focused
only on teachers in the social justice cohorts, other stakeholders are the district administration,
site administrators, all teachers, students, parents, and the community. Approximately 2% of
teachers within WCUSD participated in this study. All of the teachers in this study had
participated Social Justice Cohort 1 for one year before participating in the study. Because the
sample size was small, the number of teachers participating in this study is a critical limitation.
Further, this study focused on a single group, teachers within Social Justice Cohort
1. However, this study could have benefited by broadening the sample to all teachers within the
district. Because the district goal is to have all teachers participating in the creation and
implementation of a social justice curriculum, data from all of the teachers in the district
regarding knowledge, motivation and organizational needs and assets would greatly benefit this
study. Although the data from the first social justice cohort will help inform future professional
developments for the current and future cohorts.
Moreover, this study failed to examine the impact of demographic data including
race/ethnicity, age, gender, sexuality, and years working as an educator. This demographic
information could impact participants’ responses to survey and interview items regarding their
knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs and assets. However, due to the small sample
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 264
size, demographic information was not collected and analyzed as this information could
potentially identify a participant.
Finally, this study only focuses on one stakeholder, the teachers. A more complete study
would benefit more from the inclusion of additional stakeholders, which would include students,
site administrators, district administrators, and parents. The data collected from these additional
stakeholders would inform this study further and give different lenses of the effectiveness of the
social justice curricula being implemented.
Recommendations for Future Research
Future research can address the limitations identified in this study. Future research could
widen the scope of the study to include input from key stakeholders such as students and site
administrators. Increasing the scope to students would give beneficial evaluative input regarding
the effectiveness of social justice curriculum from a student's perspective. Moreover, future
research could examine teachers' knowledge, motivation, and experience with organizational
processes throughout WCUSD in order to uncover any needs that affect the entire district
regarding the creation and implementation of a social justice curriculum at every grade level and
content area. A wider scope within WCUSD can examine the impact of various demographics
and levels of experience of teachers' knowledge, motivation, and practice within organizational
structures.
Finally, teachers' knowledge, motivation, and practice within organizational structures
should be studied both before and after participating in the social justice cohort in order to better
understand the impact of the training and to provide additional information to identify and
resolve knowledge and motivation needs and improve organizational processes, policies, and
procedures.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 265
Conclusion
This study is based on WCUSD’s desire to examine the assets and needs for the school
district to motivate, support, and prepare teachers to implement the Social Justice Anchor
Standards into all curricula at every grade level. Thus, this study focused on the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational aspects that impact teachers in their ability to create and
implement a social justice curriculum. Consequently, needs in knowledge, motivation, and
organizational processes were identified.
Training activities were developed using The New World Kirkpatrick Model (2016), and
recommendations focusing on each determined need were discussed and established through The
New World Kirkpatrick Model (2016). Finally, evaluation activities were also developed to take
place throughout a range of performance outcomes.
Finally, WCUSD will engage in implementing and evaluating recommendations. Survey
and interview data found that teachers value evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum based on
student achievement data. As a result of this value being established, WCUSD will be able to
execute the discussed recommendations and will benefit from the cycle of improvement practices
posed in this study.
Consequently, it is important to note that the need for equity and inclusion through
diversity and inclusion is not only an WCUSD effort. National efforts towards diversity, equity,
and inclusion are being conducted by districts, teacher preparation programs, and nonprofit
organizations throughout the United States. The research and findings in this study contribute to
this nation-wide effort and can be used to inform future efforts by similar districts or
organizations trying to achieve a similar goal.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 266
References
Acevedo, S. M., Aho, M., Cela, E., Chao, J. C., Garcia-Gonzales, I., MacLeod, A., Moutray, C.,
& Olague, C. (2015). Positionality as Knowledge: From Pedagogy to Praxis. Integral
Review: A Transdisciplinary & Transcultural Journal for New Thought, Research, &
Praxis, 11(1).
Adams, M., Bell, L. A., & Griffin, P. (2007). Teaching for diversity and social justice. New
York: Routledge.
Adamson, F., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2012) Funding disparities and the inequitable
distribution of teachers: Evaluating sources and solutions. Education Policy Analysis
Archives, 20. Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/1053
Aelterman, A., Engels, N., Van Petegem, K., & Verhaeghe, J.P. (2007). The well-being of
teachers in Flanders: the importance of a supportive school culture. Educational studies,
33(3), 285-297.
Agirdag, O., Merry, M. S., & Van Houtte, M. (2016). Teachers’ understanding of multicultural
education and the correlates of multicultural content integration in Flanders. Education
and Urban Society, 48(6), 556-582.
Alberta Learning. (2015). Health and life skills guide to implementation (K–9): Instructional
Strategies. Retrieved from Alberta Learning website
https://education.alberta.ca/media/482311/is.pdf
Alkharusi, H., Aldhafri, S., Alnabhani, H., & Alkalbani, M. (2014). Classroom assessment:
Teacher practices, student perceptions, and academic self-efficacy beliefs. Social
Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 42(5), 835-855.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 267
Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How
learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. John Wiley & Sons.
Anyon, J. (2005). Radical possibilities: Public policy, urban education, and a new social
movement. New York, NY: Routledge.
Apple, M. W. (2011). Global crises, social justice, and teacher education. Journal of Teacher
Education, 62(2), 222-234.
Archer, M. S. (2000). Being human: The problem of agency. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Aronson, B., & Laughter, J. (2016). The theory and practice of culturally relevant education: A
synthesis of research across content areas. Review of Educational Research, 86(1), 163-
206.
Ballard, K. (2012). Inclusion and social justice: teachers as agents of change. In Teaching in
Inclusive School Communities, S. Carrington & J. Macarthur (eds.), 6587. John Wiley &
Sons Australia.
Banks, J. A. (1993). Multicultural education: Development, dimensions, and challenges. The Phi
Delta Kappan, 75(1), 22-28.
Barry Issenberg, S., McGaghie, W. C., Petrusa, E. R., Lee Gordon, D., & Scalese, R. J. (2005).
Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: a
BEME systematic review. Medical teacher, 27(1), 10-28.
Bell, L. A. (2007). Theoretical foundations for social justice education. In M. Adams, L. A. Bell,
& P. Griffin (Eds.), Teaching for diversity and social justice (2nd ed., pp. 1–14). New
York: Routledge.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 268
Bettez, S. C. (2008). Social justice activist teaching in the university classroom. In J. Deim, & R.
J. Helfenbein (Eds), Unsettling beliefs: Teaching theory to teachers (pp. 279-296).
Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Biesta, G., & Tedder, M. (2007). Agency and learning in the lifecourse: Towards an ecological
perspective. Studies in the Education of Adults, 39(2), 132-149.
Bosse, H. M., Mohr, J., Buss, B., Krautter, M., Weyrich, P., Herzog, W., & Nikendei, C. (2015).
The benefit of repetitive skills training and frequency of expert feedback in the early
acquisition of procedural skills. BMC medical education, 15(1), 22.
Bossert, S. T., Dwyer, D. C., Rowan, B., & Lee, G. V. (1982). The instructional management
role of the principal. Educational Administration Quarterly, 18(3), 34-64.
Brookfield, S. D. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Brooks, J. S., Jean-Marie, G., Normore, A. H., & Hodgins, D. W. (2007). Distributed leadership
for social justice: Exploring how influence and equity are stretched over an urban high
school. Journal of School Leadership, 17, 378-408.
Brown, K. M. (2006). Leadership for social justice and equity: Weaving a transformative
framework and pedagogy. Educational administration quarterly, 40(1), 700-745.
Bruning, R., & Horn, C. (2000). Developing motivation to write. Educational psychologist,
35(1), 25-37.
Bryk, A.S., Lee, V.E. & Holland, P.B. (1993). Catholic schools and the common good.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Burns, L. D., & Miller, S. (2017). Social Justice Policymaking in Teacher Education From
Conception to Application: Realizing Standard VI. Teachers College Record, 119(2).
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 269
Button, S. B., Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. (1996). Goal orientation in organizational research:
A conceptual and empirical foundation. Organizational behavior and human decision
processes, 67(1), 26-48.
Calegari, M. F., Sibley, R. E., & Turner, M. E. (2015). A roadmap for using kotter’s
organizational change model to build faculty engagement in accreditation. Academy of
Educational Leadership Journal, 19(3).
Calvert, L. (2016). The power of teacher agency. Journal of Staff Development, 37(2), 51-56.
Campbell, L., & Campbell, B. (2008). Beginning with what students know: The role of prior
knowledge in learning. L. Campbell, y B. Campbell. Mindful learning, 101, 7-21.
Carl, A. E. (2009). Teacher empowerment through curriculum development: Theory into
practice. Juta and Company Ltd.
Carlisle, L.R., Jackson, B.W., & George, A. (2006). Principles of social justice education: the
social justice education in schools project, equity & excellence in education, 39:1, 55-64.
Casella, R. (2003). Zero tolerance policy in schools: Rationale, consequences, and alternatives.
Teachers College Record, 105(5), 872-892.
Clark, B.S. & Elliott, J.E. (2010). John stuart mill's theory of justice, review of social economy,
59:4, 467-490, DOI: 10.1080/00346760127100.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Information Age Pub Incorporated.
Cobb-Roberts, D., & Agosto, V. (2011). Underrepresented women in higher education: An
overview. Negro Educational Review, 62(1-4), 7.
Cochran-Smith, M. (2004). Walking the road: Race, diversity, and social justice. New York:
Teachers College Press.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 270
Colquitt, J. A., & Simmering, M. J. (1998). Conscientiousness, goal orientation, and motivation
to learn during the learning process: A longitudinal study. Journal of applied psychology,
83(4), 654.
Cooper, C. W. (2003). The detrimental impact of teacher bias: Lessons learned from the
standpoint of African American mothers. Teacher Education Quarterly, 30(2), 101-116.
Cornbleth, C. (2008). Diversity and the new teacher: Learning from experience in urban schools.
New York: Teachers College Press.
Corrigan, D., Beebe, R. S., & Sell, C. R. (Eds.). (2013). Professional development schools and
social justice: Schools and universities partnering to make a difference. Lexington Books.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Sage publications.
"Critical Social Theory." Encyclopedia of Science, Technology, and Ethics. . Retrieved April 04,
2018 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/science/encyclopedias-
almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/critical-social-theory
Cruickshank, D. & Applegate, J. (1981) Reflective teaching as a strategy for teacher growth:
Educational Leadership, 38(7), 553 – 554.
Daniel, Y., & Bondy, K. (2008). Safe Schools and Zero Tolerance: Policy, Program and Practice
in Ontario. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 70, 1-20.
Dantley, M. E., & Tillman, L. C. (2006). Social justice and moral transformative leadership. In
C. Marshall & M. Oliva (Eds.), Leadership for social justice: Making revolutions in
education (2nd ed., pp. 19-34). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Darling-Hammond, L., French, J., & Garcia-Lopez, S. (Eds.). (2002). Learning to teach for
social justice. New York: Teachers College Press.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 271
Day, C., Harris, A., & Hadfield, M. (2001). Grounding knowledge of schools in stakeholder
realities: A multi-perspective study of effective school leaders. School leadership &
management, 21(1), 19-42.
Dello-Iacovo, B. (2009). Curriculum reform and ‘quality education’ in China: An overview.
International Journal of Educational Development, 29(3), 241–249.
Dellinger, A. B., Bobbett, J. J., Olivier, D. F., & Ellett, C. D. (2008). Measuring teachers’ self-
efficacy beliefs: Development and use of the TEBS-Self. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 24(3), 751-766.
DeMatthews, D., & Mawhinney, H. (2014). Social justice leadership and inclusion: Exploring
challenges in an urban district struggling to address inequities. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 50(5), 844-881.
Dover, A.G. (2013). Teaching for social justice: from conceptual frameworks to classroom
practices, multicultural perspectives, 15:1, 3-11, DOI: 10.1080/15210960.2013.754285
Dowd, A. C., Malcom, L. E., Nakamoto, J., & Bensimon, E. M. (2012). Institutional researchers
as teachers and equity advocates: Facilitating organizational learning and change.
Confronting equity issues on campus: Implementing the equity scorecard in theory and
practice, 17-44.
Edwards, A. (2010). Relational agency: working with other practitioners. In Being an Expert
Professional Practitioner, Anne Edwards (ed.), 6179. Netherlands: Springer.
Epstein, T. (2009). Interpreting national history: Race, identity, and pedagogy in classrooms and
communities. New York: Routledge.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 272
Esposito, J., & Swain, A. N. (2009). Pathways to Social Justice: Urban Teachers' Uses of
Culturally Relevant Pedagogy as a Conduit for Teaching for Social Justice. Penn GSE
Perspectives on Urban Education, 6(1), 38-48.
Florian, L. (2009). Preparing teachers to work in ‘schools for all’. Teaching and Teacher
Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies, 25(4), 533e534.
Florian, L. (2012). Preparing teachers to work in diverse classrooms: key lessons for the
professional development of teacher educators from Scotland’s Inclusive Practice Project.
Journal of Teacher Education, 63(4), 275285.
Frattura, E. M., & Capper, C. A. (2007). Leading for social justice: Transforming schools for all
learners. Corwin Press.
Frost, D., & Durrant, J. (2002). Teachers as leaders: Exploring the impact of teacher-led
development work. School leadership & management, 22(2), 143-161.
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45-56.
Gay, G. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). New
York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Gibson, R. 1999. Paulo Freire and pedagogy for social justice. Theory and Research in Social
Studies Education, 27(2): 129–59.
Gorlewski, Julie. "Research for the classroom: Standards, standardization, and student learning."
The English Journal 102.5 (2013): 84-88.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 273
Grant, C. A., & Engdahl, A. K. (2014). Politics of difference, intersectionality, pedagogy of
poverty and missed opportunities at play in the classroom. Educational inequalities:
Difference and diversity in schools and higher education, 146-164.
Greenfield, W. D. (1995). Toward a theory of school administration: The centrality of leadership.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 31, 61-85.
Gurol, A., Altunbas, S., & Karaarslan, N. (2010). A study of self-efficacy and epistemological
beliefs of prospective teachers. E-Journal of New World Sciences Academy, 5(3),
1395e1404.
Gutstein, E. (2006). Reading and writing the world with mathematics: Toward a pedagogy for
social justice. Taylor & Francis.
Hackman, H. W. (2005). Five essential components for social justice education. Equity &
Excellence in Education, 38(2), 103-109.
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: a synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement.
1st ed. UK: Routledge.
Henault, C. (2001). Chalktalk: Zero tolerance in schools. Journal of Law and Education, 30(3),
547-553.
Hooks, B. (1995). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York:
Routledge.
Howard, G. R. (2007). As diversity grows, so must we. Educational Leadership, 64(6), 16.
Huttunen, I. (2003). Planning learning: The role of teacher reflection. Learner autonomy in the
foreign language classroom: Teacher, learner, curriculum and assessment, 122-134.
Hytten, K., & Bettez, S. C. (2011). Understanding education for social justice. The Journal of
Educational Foundations, 25(1/2), 7.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 274
Irvine, J. J., & Armento, B. J. (2001). Culturally responsive teaching: Lesson planning for
elementary and middle grades. Education Review//Reseñas Educativas.
Jenlink, P. M. (Ed.). (2014). Teacher identity and the struggle for recognition: Meeting the
challenges of a diverse society. R&L Education.
Johnston, D. (2011). A brief history of justice. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley.
Kelley, B., Hosp, J.L., & Howell, K.W. (2008). Curriculum-Based Evaluation and Math: An
Overview. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 33(4), 250-256.
Katzenmeyer, M., & Moller, G. (2009). Awakening the sleeping giant: Helping teachers develop
as leaders. Corwin Press.
Kelly, D. M., Brandes, G. M., & Orlowski, P. (2004). Teaching for Social Justice: Veteran High
School Teachers' Perspectives. Scholar-Practitioner Quarterly, 2(2), 39-57.
Kezar, A. (2002). Reconstructing static images of leadership: An application of positionality
theory. Journal of Leadership Studies, 8(3), 94-109.
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation.
Association for Talent Development.
Kokemuller, Neil. (n.d.). The Role of the Organization's Policies. Small Business - Chron.com.
Retrieved from http://smallbusiness.chron.com/role-organizations-policies-68191.html
Korthagen, F. A. J. (2004). In search of the essence of a good teacher: towards a more holistic
approach in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(1), 7797.
Korthagen, F., Loughran, J., & Russell, T. (2006). Developing fundamental principles for teacher
education programs and practices. Teaching and teacher education, 22(8), 1020-1041.
Kraaijeveld, R. A., Schaafsma, F. G., Boot, C. R., Shaw, W. S., Bültmann, U., & Anema, J. R.
(2013). Implementation of the Participatory Approach to increase supervisors’ self-
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 275
efficacy in supporting employees at risk for sick leave; design of a randomised controlled
trial. BMC Public Health, 13(1), 750.
Kraft, M. A., & Papay, J. P. (2014). Can professional environments in schools promote teacher
development? Explaining heterogeneity in returns to teaching experience. Educational
evaluation and policy analysis, 36(4), 476-500.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into practice,
41(4), 212-218.
Kress, G. (Ed.). (2001). Multimodal teaching and learning: The rhetorics of the science
classroom. A&C Black.
Kugelmass, J. W. (2000). Subjective experience and the preparation of activist teachers:
confronting the mean old snapping turtle and the great big bear. Teaching and Teacher
Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies, 16(2), 179e194.
Larrivee, B. (2006). In J.M. Cooper (Ed.) Houghton Mifflin Guide Series An educator’s guide to
teacher reflection. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Lee, Y. A. (2011). What does teaching for social justice mean to teacher candidates? The
Professional Educator, 35(2), 1.
Leonardo, Z. (2004). Critical social theory and transformative knowledge: The functions of
criticism in quality education. Educational Researcher, 33(6), 11-18.
Lingard, B., & Mills, M. (2007). Pedagogies making a difference: Issues of social justice and
inclusion. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 11(3), 233-244.
Love, N. (2004). Taking data to new depths. Journal of Staff Development, 25(4), 22-26.
Lunneblad, J., & Johansson, T. (2012). Learning from each other? Multicultural pedagogy,
parental education and governance. Race Ethnicity and Education, 15(5), 705-723.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 276
Lysaker, J. T., & Furuness, S. (2011). Space for transformation relational, dialogic pedagogy.
Journal of Transformative Education, 9, 183–197.
Marsh, J. A., Pane, J. F., & Hamilton, L. S. (2006). Making sense of data-driven decision making
in education.
Martin, R. J., & Van Gunten, D. M. (2002). Reflected identities: Applying positionality and
multicultural social reconstructionism in teacher education. Journal of Teacher
Education, 53(1), 44-54.
McAlpine, L., & Weston, C. (2000). Reflection: Issues related to improving professors' teaching
and students' learning. Instructional science, 28(5), 363-385.
McKean, E. (2005). The new Oxford American dictionary. New York, N.Y: Oxford University
Press.
Mclaren, P., & Crawford, J. (2010). Critical pedagogy. In C. Kridel (Ed), Encyclopedia of
Curriculum Studies (pp. 147-8). Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
McLaughlin, M. W., & Talbert, J. E. (2001). Professional communities and the work of high
school teaching. University of Chicago Press.
Mestry, R., Pillay, J., & Plessis, P. (2006). The role of leaders in shaping school culture.
Fromwww.nmmu.ac.za/easakenton2006/article%
20leaders%20influence%20in%20shaping% 20school%20culture%202doc.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Fostering transformative adult learning. In Transformative dimensions of
adult learning, (pp. 196-226). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mill, J.S. (2009). Utilitarianism. Auckland, NZ: The Floating Press.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 277
Moore, F. M. (2008). Agency, identity, and social justice education: Preservice teachers’
thoughts on becoming agents of change in urban elementary science classrooms.
Research in Science Education, 38(5), 589.
Mthethwa-Sommers, S. (2014). Narratives of social justice educators: Standing firm. Springer.
Muijs, D., & Harris, A. (2003). Teacher leadership—Improvement through empowerment? An
overview of the literature. Educational Management & Administration, 31(4), 437-448.
National Association of Elementary School Principals. (2011). Using Student Achievement Data
to Support Instructional Decision Making. Retrieved from the NAESP website
http://www.naesp.org/sites/default/files/Student%20Achievement_blue.pdf
National Research Council. (1994). Learning, remembering, believing: Enhancing human
performance. National Academies Press.
National Research Council. (2003). Evaluating and improving undergraduate teaching in science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics. National Academies Press.
Oyler, C. (2011). Teacher preparation for inclusive and critical (special) education. Teacher
Education and Special Education, 34(3), 201-218.
Pantić, N., & Florian, L. (2015). Developing teachers as agents of inclusion and social justice,
Education Inquiry, 6:3, 27311, DOI: 10.3402/edui.v6.27311
Pantić, N. (2015). A model for study of teacher agency for social justice. Teachers and Teaching:
Theory and Practice, 21(6), 759-778.
Papa, R., Eadens, D. M., & Eadens, D. W. (Eds.). (2016). Social justice instruction:
empowerment on the chalkboard. Springer.
Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing.
Theory into practice, 41(4), 219-225.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 278
Poplin, M., & Rivera, J. (2005). Merging social justice and accountability: Educating qualified
and effective teachers. Theory into Practice, 44(1), pp. 27- 37.
Posner, G. J. (2005). Field Experience: A guide to reflective teaching, Sixth Ed. Boston:
Pearson- Allyn & Bacon.
Progressive education. (2018). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved from https://academic-eb-
com.libproxy2.usc.edu/levels/collegiate/article/progressive-education/61504
Pudelko, C. E., & Boon, H. J. (2014). Relations between teachers’ classroom goals and values: A
case study of high school teachers in far North Queensland, Australia. Australian Journal
of Teacher Education, 39(8), 1.
Riester, A. F., Pursch, V., & Skrla, L. (2002). Principals for social justice: Leaders of school
success for children from low-income homes. Journal of School Leadership, 12, 281-304.
Roby, D. E. (2011). Teacher leaders impacting school culture. Education, 131(4).
Rodman, G. J. (2010). Facilitating the teaching-learning process through the reflective
engagement of pre-service teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education (Online),
35(2), 20.
Ross, J., & Bruce, C. (2007). Professional development effects on teacher efficacy: Results of
randomized field trial. The journal of educational research, 101(1), 50-60.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 Dimensions of Improving Student Performance: Finding the Right
Solutions to the Right Problems. Teachers College Press. 1234 Amsterdam Avenue, New
York, NY 10027.
Scott, D. (2016). Introduction: Curriculum, learning and assessment. In New Perspectives on
Curriculum, Learning and Assessment (pp. 1-9). Springer, Cham.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 279
Shields, C., Larocque, L., & Oberg, S. (2002). A dialogue about race and ethnicity in education:
Struggling to understand issues in cross-cultural leadership. Journal of School
Leadership, 12(2), 116-137.
Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard
educational review, 57(1), 1-23.
Shulman, L. S., & Shulman, J. H. (2004). How and what teachers learn: A shifting perspective.
Journal of curriculum studies, 36(2), 257-271.
Skrla, L., Scheurich, J. J., Johnson Jr, J. F., & Koschoreck, J. W. (2001). Accountability for
equity: Can state policy leverage social justice?. International Journal of Leadership in
Education, 4(3), 237-260.
Slee, R. (2010). Political economy, inclusive education, and teacher education. In Teacher
Education for Inclusion: Changing Paradigms and Innovative Approaches, C. Forlin
(ed.), 1322. New York: Routledge.
Sleeter, C. E. (1988). Preservice coursework and field experiences in multicultural education:
Impact on teacher behavior. Kenosha, WI: University of Wisconsin-Parkside School of
Education.
Sleeter, C. E. (2001). Preparing teachers for culturally diverse schools: Research and the
overwhelming presence of whiteness. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(2), 94–106.
Sleeter, C. & Grant, C. (1999). Making choices for multicultural education: Five approaches to
race, class, and gender (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
Solorzano, D. G. (1997). Images and words that wound: Critical race theory, racial stereotyping,
and teacher education. Teacher Education Quarterly, 5-19.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 280
Taylor, E., Tisdell, E. J., & Stone Hanley, M. (2000). The role of positionality in teaching for
critical consciousness: Implications for adult education.
Teaching Tolerance. (2016a). A Framework for Anti-bias Education. Retrieved from Teaching
tolerance website https://www.tolerance.org/frameworks/social-justice-standards
Theoharis, G. (2007). Social justice educational leaders and resistance: Toward a theory of social
justice leadership. Educational administration quarterly, 43(2), 221-258.
Thompson, E. P. (2016). The making of the English working class. Open Road Media.
Tigelaar, D. E. H., Dolmans, D. H. J. M., Wolfhagen, I. H. A. P. & van der Vleuten, C. P. M.
(2004). The development and validation of a framework for teaching competencies in
higher education. Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher Education and
Educational Planning, 48(2), 253268.
Theoharis, G. (2007). Social justice educational leaders and resistance: Toward a theory of social
justice leadership, Educational Administration Quarterly, 43, 221-258.
Valencia, R. R.(1997). Conceptualizing the notion of deficit thinking. The evolution of deficit
thinking Educational thought and practice, 1-12.
Van Huizen, P., van Oers, B. & Wubbels, T. (2005). A Vygotskian perspective on teacher
education. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(3), 267290.
VeneKlasen, L., Miller, V., (2002). Power and empowerment. PLA Notes, 43: 39-41.
Vieluf, S., Kunter, M., & van de Vijver, F. J. (2013). Teacher self-efficacy in cross-national
perspective. Teaching and Teacher Education, 35, 92-103.
Villegas, A. M. (2007). Dispositions in teacher education: A look at social justice. Journal of
Teacher Education, 58(5), 370-380.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 281
Villegas, A. M. & Lucas, T. (2002). Educating culturally responsive teachers. Albany, NY: State
University of New York Press.
Wade, R.C. (2001). Social action in the social studies: From the ideal to the real. Theory Into
Practice, 40(1), 23-28.
Wade, R.C. (2001). Social action in the social studies: From the ideal to the real. Theory Into
Practice, 40(1), 23-28.
Wade, R.C. (2004). Citizenship for social justice. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 40(2), 64-68.
Waugh, R., & Godfrey, J. (1993). Teacher receptivity to system-wide change in the
implementation stage. British Educational Research Journal, 19(5), 565-578.
Westheimer, J., & Kahne, J. (2004). What kind of citizen? The politics of educating for
democracy. American educational research journal, 41(2), 237-269.
Wilkerson, J. M., Gallardo, K. R., Butame, S. A., Hoelscher, D. M., Reininger, B., & Shegog, R.
(2017). Increasing Doctoral Students’ Self-Efficacy to Teach Health Promotion Theory.
Pedagogy in Health Promotion, 3(4), 255-264.
Zakin, A. (2012). Hand to hand: Teaching tolerance and social justice one child at a time.
Childhood education, 88(1), 3-13.
Zeichner, K. M. (2009). Teacher education and the struggle for social justice. UK: Routledge.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 282
Appendix A

For each of the following questions please select the number that best correlates with how you
feel about the statement. A choice of 1 indicates that you Strongly Disagree and a 5 indicates
that you Strongly Agree.

The training held my interest. (L1) 1 2 3 4 5

During training we discussed how to 1 2 3 4 5
apply what was learned. (L1)

I believe that bias influences my work. (L1) 1 2 3 4 5

I feel positive about applying what I learned 1 2 3 4 5
in training in my own classroom. (L1)

The feedback I received in training has given 1 2 3 4 5
me the confidence to apply what I learned in
my own classroom. (L1)

I am committed to applying what I learned 1 2 3 4 5
during my discussions. (L1)

I found the feedback during the scenarios 1 2 3 4 5
valuable for informing my practice. (L1)

I was satisfied with the training on creating 1 2 3 4 5
and implementing social justice curriculum. (L1)

Please provide feedback for the following questions, remember your responses will remain
anonymous:

1. What part of the training did you find not useful for your goal to create and implement a
social justice curriculum? How would you change the training? (L1)

2. What is one major concept you learned today that you will be able to apply in your own
classroom? (L2)

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 283
Appendix B

Evaluation Tool Delayed for a Period After the Program Implementation

The purpose of the following questions is to evaluate the quality of performance results since
completion of the social justice training.

1. I feel more confident about the implementing a social justice curriculum. (L1)

1 Strongly Disagree

2

3

4 Neither Agree or Disagree

5

6

7 Strongly Agree

2. I feel more positive about the impact that a social justice curriculum has on my students.
(L1)

1 Strongly Disagree

2

3

4 Neither Agree or Disagree

5

6

7 Strongly Agree

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 284
3. Please describe a social justice lesson you taught and the impact it had on your students.
(L2, L3, L4)

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

4. I embedded the social justice anchor standards in most of my lessons this semester. (L3,
L4)

1 Strongly Disagree

2

3

4 Neither Agree or Disagree

5

6

7 Strongly Agree

5. Since completion of the social justice training, describe any changes in your classroom
instruction. (L2, L4)

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 285
6. Please describe the value of social justice education in your classroom. (L1, L2)

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

7. I am more confident in my ability to create a social justice curriculum.

1 Strongly Disagree

2

3

4 Neither Agree or Disagree

5

6

7 Strongly Agree

8. I am more confident in my ability to implement a social justice curriculum.

1 Strongly Disagree

2

3

4 Neither Agree or Disagree

5

6

7 Strongly Agree

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 286
9. I have been able to utilize the information and skills I learned in the in the social justice
training program. (L1, L3)

1 Strongly Disagree

2

3

4 Neither Agree or Disagree

5

6

7 Strongly Agree

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 287
Appendix C

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 288
Appendix D
Informed Consent/Information Sheet
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
3470 Trousdale Pkwy, Los Angeles CA, 90089
A Needs Assessment of the Implementation of the Social Justice Anchor Standards in the
West Coast Unified School District
You are invited to participate in a research study. Research studies include only people who
voluntarily choose to take part. This document explains information about this study. You should
ask questions about anything that is unclear to you.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
This study aims to use the Clark and Estes (2008) knowledge, motivation and organization
performance framework to conduct an analysis to identify and understand the assets and needs
for WCUSD to motivate, support, and prepare teachers to implement the Social Justice Anchor
Standards in all curricula.

PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
If you agree to take part in this study, you will be asked to respond to a brief survey and be given
a choice to opt into an interview.

CONFIDENTIALITY
There will be no identifiable information obtained in connection with this study. Your name,
address or other identifiable information will not be collected.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ANCHOR STANDARDS 289
Required language:
The members of the research team, the funding agency 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.

When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used. (Remove this statement if the data are anonymous)

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
The Principal Investigator is Paul Karaiakoubian, karaiako@usc.edu, (323) 804-0115.
The Faculty Advisors are Kenneth Yates, kennetay@usc.edu, (213) 740-6793, David Cash,
dcash@usc.edu, and Sandra Kaplan, skaplan@usc.edu, (213) 740-3291.

IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
University Park Institutional Review Board (UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los
Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study utilized the gap analysis problem-solving framework (Clark & Estes, 2008) to understand the teachers’ needs in creating and implementing a social justice curriculum across all grade levels and content areas. The purpose of this study was to conduct an analysis to identify and understand the assets and needs for West Coast Unified School District (WCUSD) to motivate, support, and prepare teachers to implement the Social Justice Anchor Standards in all curricula. The knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational resources of teachers participating in Social Justice Cohort 1 in WCUSD were assessed using survey and interview data. Twelve teachers participating in Social Justice Cohort 1 participated in the survey and four of these teachers were interviewed. Survey data was analyzed using descriptive statistics through Qualtrics and interviews were analyzed in an effort to establish whether or not gaps existed. The validated assumed causes for declarative factual knowledge, conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge, metacognitive knowledge, value, self-efficacy, emotion, goal orientation, resources, policies and procedures, cultural setting, and cultural models were identified. Solutions to the validated causes were developed and recommended to improve the knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational components of teachers. Moreover, this study contribute to this nation-wide effort and can be used to inform future efforts by similar districts or organizations trying to achieve a similar goal.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

An examination of a social justice teacher cohort and its capacity to support transformational professional learning

PDF

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

PDF

A-G course completion percentage upon high school graduation. A gap analysis

PDF

A capstone project: closing the achievement gap of English language learners at Sunshine Elementary School using the gap analysis model

PDF

Establishing a systematic evaluation of positive behavioral interventions and supports to improve implementation and accountability approaches using a gap analysis framework

PDF

The implementation of a multi-tiered system of support in Downtown Unified School District: an analysis of site administrator needs

PDF

Examining teachers' roles in English learners achievement in language arts: a gap analysis

PDF

Increasing parent involvement in social-emotional learning workshops in high school using the gap analysis approach

PDF

The African American male achievement gap: teachers as change agents

PDF

Promoting equity in discipline practices for Latino students: a gap analysis

PDF

Establishing a systematic evaluation of an academic nursing program using a gap analysis framework

PDF

Addressing the challenges for teachers of English learners in a California elementary school using the gap analysis approach

PDF

Implementation of the International Baccalaureate Middle Years Program in an urban secondary school: an improvement practice to address closing the achievement gap

PDF

Comprehensive school reform implementation: A gap analysis inquiry project for Rowland Unified School District

PDF

Examining regular high school teachers’ roles in enhancing students academic performance: a gap analysis

PDF

Increasing student performance on the Independent School Entrance Exam (ISEE) using the Gap Analysis approach

PDF

Teachers’ role in improving advanced placement exam scores: a gap analysis

PDF

The continuous failure of Continuous Improvement: the challenge of implementing Continuous Improvement in low income schools

PDF

Stress in the Fire Service

PDF

Enhancing socially responsible outcomes at a major North American zoo: an innovation study

Asset Metadata

Creator Karaiakoubian, Paul (author)

Core Title Implementation of the Social Justice Anchor Standards in the West Coast Unified School District: a gap analysis

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 02/27/2019

Defense Date 02/04/2019

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

Tag achievement gap,agent of change,anti-bias education,bias,conceptual knowledge,curriculum,factual knowledge,gap analysis,implementation,metacognitive knowledge,Motivation,OAI-PMH Harvest,organization,positionality,procedural knowledge,Social Justice,social justice anchor standards,social justice pedagogy,teacher pedagogy

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Yates, Kenneth (committee chair), Cash, David (committee member), Kaplan, Sandra (committee member)

Creator Email karaiako@usc.edu,karaiakoubian@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-128424

Unique identifier UC11676680

Identifier etd-Karaiakoub-7121.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-128424 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Karaiakoub-7121.pdf

Dmrecord 128424

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Karaiakoubian, Paul

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