University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Classroom environment for Common Core

(USC Thesis Other)

Classroom environment for Common Core

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR COMMON CORE

1

Classroom Environment For Common Core
by
Dan Borgen

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

5/2019

Copyright 2019 Dan Borgen
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thank you to the middle school staff and students that I have the honor of leading for 180
days every year. You have supported me and my involvement in the OCL Ed.D. program by
your relentless vision on doing what is best for students, thereby making my leadership
responsibilities enjoyable and doable. By understanding the level of work I had to complete for
the doctoral program, you all stepped up to form a guiding coalition of support to lighten my
load at the school. Thank you for making it easy and enjoyable for me to wake up every
morning to go to “work”.
I would like to thank Dr. Gary Rutherford for his friendship and the guidance he provided
when he told me that I had to get an Ed.D. – that my leadership skills were primed for the next
step of learning and growing as a leader. I congratulate him on his perseverance as he reminded
my wife every time he saw her that I needed to enroll in a doctoral program. Well played, Gary!
I am extremely grateful to my dissertation committee, Dr. David Cash and Dr. Darline
Robles. How lucky can I be to have two former school superintendents provide me with the
encouragement, support, and guidance through this journey. I appreciate the public school
connection that we have and the individualized insight that was directly geared to me and my
learning as a public school administrator. You will both hold a special spot in my heart and head
forever and will continue to have an influence on my career well beyond our time together at
USC. Do not be surprised by an email or phone call from me in the future for advice about how
to best handle a situation or issue when I am the superintendent.
Last, but certainly not least, my dissertation chair, Dr. Artineh Samkian. How lucky was
I to land on your caseload?! I can only imagine that I would have not felt the total support in this
process if I would have landed with a different chair than you. Your calm demeanor, strategic
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

3
guidance, and soft handed critiques were always well-received and appreciated by me. I am
100% sure that you cared about my learning and my successful completion of the OCL Ed.D.
program. Your open availability, extreme knowledge, and ability to provoke extended thinking
were helpful during those times that I hit writing roadblocks, cognitive overload, and lack of
motivation. You are truly a gem and I am a better person because of you and the influence you
had on me. Thank you!
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

4
DEDICATION
To my wife, Angela – thank you for your continuous love, support, commitment to
family, and being my sounding board throughout this process. I know that I would have never
come close to completing this process if you were not by my side. You are not only the best
wife in the world, but you are also my best friend. I commend you for your tireless ability to
keep me focused on the end, even when I wasn’t “feeling it.” Your strength has always been the
guiding force for our family and has never showed more than it has during my time in the OCL
Ed.D. program. I love you and love that you want what is best for me.
To my children, Dakota and KyLee – I appreciate how both of you generously gave up
time with your dad during my involvement with my doctoral program. I know that I had to miss
some important events, stories, and time together during this process. You were understanding
and handled it with class by never complaining or making me feel unworthy as a father. I thank
you for taking care of your mom, the dogs, and the household responsibilities during those times
that I couldn’t. I could have not done this without you two supporting our family by all that you
did. I love you and love that you are both very caring and grown-up beyond your ages.
To my parents, Ole and Sharon – thank you for everything that you did that helped get
me to where I am now. You two set the groundwork for everything that I have been able to
accomplish in my life. I know that you would never take credit for it, nor want it, but the solid
foundation that you provided was obviously enough to keep me going and focus on what is right,
worthy, and beneficial in life. I love you and love that you made me.

CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 2
DEDICATION 4
LIST OF TABLES 7
ABSTRACT 8
INTRODUCTION 9
Introduction of the Problem of Practice 9
Organizational Context and Mission 10
Importance of the Study 12
Organizational Performance Goal 13
Description of Stakeholder Groups 14
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals 15
Stakeholder Group for the Study 16
Purpose of the Project and Questions 17
Methodological Approach 18
Related Literature 19
Classroom Experiences Needed to Become College and Career Ready 19
21
st
Century Interior Designed Classrooms 20
LITERATURE REVIEW 21
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences 21
The Clark and Estes (2002) gap analysis framework 21
Knowledge and Skills Influences 22
Motivation Influences 27
Organizational Influences 30
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and
Motivation and the Organizational Context 34
Figure 1. Conceptual Framework – KMO Influences 37
METHODS 38
Data Collection and Instrumentation 38
Interviews 38
Observations 40
Data Analysis 41

RESULTS AND FINDINGS 42
Findings 43
Theme 1 44
Theme 2 56
Theme 3 62

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PRACTICE 67
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

6
Knowledge Recommendations 67
Procedural knowledge solutions 67
Metacognitive knowledge solutions 69
Motivation Recommendations 70
Self-efficacy solutions 71
Organization Recommendations 72
Cultural Setting 72
Cultural Model 74
Future Research 75

Conclusion 76

References 78

Appendices 83
Appendix A: Participating Stakeholders with Sampling Criteria for Interview
and Observation 83
Appendix B: Protocols 86
Appendix C: Credibility and Trustworthiness 90
Appendix D: Ethics 92
Appendix E: Limitations and Delimitations 94

CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

7
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Stakeholders’ Performance Goals 15
Table 2. Knowledge Influences and Knowledge Types 27
Table 3. Motivation Influences and Motivation Type 30
Table 4. Organizational Influences and Organizational Actions 34
Table 5. Learning Environment Arrangement 51

CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

8
ABSTRACT
This study focuses on the problem that the physical arrangement within the typical
classroom has not evolved over time to benefit student learning. In order for students to access
the demands embedded in the Common Core State Standards, learning environments need to
promote and support both individual and group work, dedicate spaces for presentations and
exploration, and support multiple modes of learning. The Clark and Estes (2002) gap analysis
framework was used as the key conceptual framework in this study. This conceptual framework
assisted the study by identifying, examining, and addressing any gaps in the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational (KMO) work processes and material resources to determine
whether teachers utilize flexible furniture to design classroom environments that support specific
learning tasks in the classroom. Using teacher interviews and classroom observations, the
findings indicated that the amount of student exposure to daily experiences that effectively
utilize flexible furniture during classroom instruction was dependent on the knowledge and
motivation of the classroom teacher to provide flexible environments to enhance student
learning. It was discovered that the site administrators didn’t demonstrate instructional
leadership when it came to purchasing and/or using the new furniture in the classrooms. The
organizational practices did not provide the direct support that the teachers needed to provide
students with daily experiences that effectively utilize flexible furniture during classroom
instruction. The recommendations identified the need for additional organizational support by
designing a robust professional development program in order for teachers to successfully
implement flexible learning environments in their classrooms.

CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

9
INTRODUCTION

Introduction of the Problem of Practice
Despite recent changes in pedagogy that facilitate student use of 21
st
century skills as
identified by the Partnership for 21
st
Century Skills (2013) and embedded in the Common Core
State Standards (CCSS, 2010), the physical learning environment of the classroom has mostly
remained “traditional” and unchanged (Kuuskorpi & González, 2011). The problem that the
physical arrangement within the typical classroom has not evolved over time is a critical issue
that needs to be solved to benefit student learning. The “traditional” setting within a classroom
consists of individual student desks set in rows and a teacher desk usually in front of the
classroom where he/she delivers instruction. Embedded into the CCSS are critical 21
st
century
learning skills that emphasize critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity
(Partnership, 2013). Students cannot fully experience and practice these skills within the
traditional classroom set-up. Soulé and Warrick (2015) explain that in the 21
st
century, the
learning environment needs to be the support system that can accommodate the individual needs
of every learner while supporting the positive human relationships needed for effective learning.
Schools need to provide 21
st
century interior designed classrooms for group, team, and individual
learning (Soulé & Warrick, 2015) in order to provide students with the opportunity to build the
skills necessary for the 21
st
century.
The CCSS explicitly call for, and integrate, higher-order thinking skills as a requirement
for students to be college and career ready (Soulé & Warrick, 2015). If learning spaces are not
redesigned to allow the students to experience a variety of places, ideas, and people, then
students will not be prepared to face these 21
st
century demands beyond high school (Marzano,
Marzano, & Pickering, 2003). Effective learning environments promote and support both
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

10
individual and group work, dedicate spaces for presentations and exploration, and support
multiple modes of learning. Duncanson (2014) elaborates that the open space and furniture in
the classroom should be conducive to a variety of teaching/learning situations: group instruction
to teach skills, laboratory settings for discovery, project work, practice space, and both individual
and group work. Traditional learning spaces are not conducive with the learning demands
required within the CCSS.
To address this problem of practice, my organization, College and Career Unified School
District (CCUSD) (pseudonym for the actual district) established a flexible classroom furniture
pilot program to provide a select group of teachers the flexible classroom furniture and
professional development training needed to provide a variety of learning environments for the
students. The district expectation was that these teachers explore and implement flexible
learning environments within their daily instructional practices. Classroom furniture
arrangement options include rows, circles, semi-circles, group clustering, and individual isolation
to create a specific learning environment that is supportive of the required learning task. The
goal for the teachers was to insure academic growth for all the students by utilizing at least two
flexible learning environments within their classrooms during daily instruction.
Organizational Context and Mission
The College and Career Unified School District (CCUSD) is a K-12 district located in
California and serves approximately 28,000 students in elementary, middle, and high schools.
According to the district web page, around 70% of the current enrolled student population are
identified as Hispanic, 20% as White, 2% African American, 2% Asian, and 3% other. CCUSD
currently has approximately 70% of the students qualifying for Free-Reduced Lunch and about
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

11
25% of the enrolled students are identified as English Language Learners (CCUSD Website,
2016).
The mission of CCUSD is to develop the skills, knowledge, and motivation that students
need to succeed as citizens in the global community. All students will have equal access to
learning provided by a staff that will work with families in a caring and collaborative learning
environment (CCUSD Website, 2016). The 2016-2019 Local Control Accountability Plan
(LCAP) developed by CCUSD identifies the following three statements as goals for the district;
1) Students will achieve academic growth on federal, state, and district assessments, 2) Students
will graduate and be prepared for further education and/or career opportunities, and 3) Students
will demonstrate ethically responsible and respectful behavior in a safe learning environment.
The focus for this study addresses the district identified strategy of providing a 21
st
century
learning environment for students and teachers by promoting and investing in the use of flexible
learning environments to deliver a rigorous and relevant curriculum aligned to the core content
standards, taught through 21
st
Century Learning Skills (CCUSD Website, 2016). Prior to the
implementation of the flexible furniture pilot program, classrooms in the district were constricted
by the inability of time and furniture structure needed to rearrange classroom furniture during the
instructional day. Flexible furniture was purchased for the second half of the 2016-17 school
year by the district to outfit 80 participating teachers’ classrooms across the district with the
expectation that the participants would immediately begin exploring the use of different furniture
arrangements for daily instruction. Each school and the corresponding teachers participating in
the pilot had full autonomy to explore, learn, and develop individualized furniture arrangement
strategies aligned to the needs of the students in the class. The pilot program looked different in
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

12
each of the 80 classrooms as the participants engaged in action research within their classrooms
without direct implementation directives and/or strategies from the school district.
The common practice with innovative programs in CCUSD was to focus on a fast-track
implementation by identifying the participants and deploying the resources immediately. This
was a common approach utilized by the district with new programs and technologies. It was a
part of the culture in the district for administrators and teachers to openly receive new
technologies without a lot of prior experience with them. A focus on action research was the
strategy utilized by the district to gain understanding on what follow-up training and support was
needed for full implementation.
Importance of the Study
It is important to examine the organization’s performance in relation to the performance
goal of 100% of the students demonstrating growth as measured by federal, state, and district
assessments for a variety of reasons. If the organization does not demonstrate adequate yearly
growth, federal and state sanctions will be enforced. The organization will fall into program
improvement status with the possibility of losing local control rights and responsibilities.
Additionally, students not demonstrating yearly growth will continue to fall behind and may not
reach required graduation requirements. CCUSD has the responsibility to provide all students
with an outstanding educational program based on the yearly acquisition of the skills and
knowledge required within the Common Core State Standards. Creativity, critical thinking,
communication, and collaboration are learning skills embedded within the CCSS and are
necessary to prepare students for life and work environments in today’s world (Donovan, Green,
& Mason, 2014). Examining the organization’s performance in relation to the established
performance goal will enable stakeholders to gather formative data that can be later used to
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

13
assess the extent to which creating flexible classroom environments have an impact on student
access to rigorous and relevant curriculum aligned to the core content standards and participation
in 21
st
century learning activities.
Failure to accomplish this goal will lead to district, state, and federal academic and
organizational sanctions. Sanctions will be imposed for schools that fail to show positive
academic growth for all students. Program improvement interventions will be designated based
on the number of students not meeting the established academic growth criteria. Most
importantly, the opportunity for students to master the critical knowledge, skills, and 21
st
century
learning strategies designed with the CCSS, will not be fulfilled within the traditional classroom
furniture set-up which limits the opportunities to think critically, communicate, and be creative
in collaborative student groups throughout the instructional day.
Organizational Performance Goal
College and Career Unified School District’s (CCUSD) yearly goal is to have 100% of all
students demonstrate individual growth as measured by federal, state, and district assessments.
This goal was established through the strategic planning process and transferred to the 2016-
2019 Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) by the LCAP committee. Key stakeholder
groups had representation on the LCAP committee as well as opportunities to provide input at
open forums and participation in online surveys. Student growth will be measured with district
summative assessments and the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress
(CAASPP) system of assessments. These multiple measures of student growth are used by the
school district to evaluate the goal while also providing all stakeholders of CCUSD with useful
data to assess current instructional practices and strategies. The current system of assessments is
designed to assess, not only grade level content standards, but also 21
st
century skills. Creating
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

14
physical learning environments that allow the students to practice critical thinking, creativity,
collaboration, and communication will move the district closer to students having a working
command of these skills and thus the ability to demonstrate success on the assessments.
Creating classroom environments that will allow students to participate fully in 21
st
century
learning opportunities will influence how the students are able to demonstrate growth as
measured on the federal, district, and state summative assessments. To positively affect
students’ ability to participate in the critical 21
st
century learning skills, CCUSD has established
an innovative flexible learning environment pilot program for 80 teachers in the district’s
schools.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
Three key stakeholder groups in CCUSD are teachers, administrators, and students.
Classroom teachers facilitate student learning through standards aligned objectives designed for
acquisition of skills and knowledge. The Common Core States Standards require the students to
participate in not only skill development, but also learning practices that will help them develop
important college and career attributes for their future endeavors. Learning practices within the
state standards include the ability to collaborate with others, argue and defend with evidence, and
adjust to a variety of learning tasks.
Teachers establish environments where students experience individual, partner, small
group, and whole group learning depending on the task and/or objective. Learning environments
are adjustable by the teacher and include all needed resources and technologies to allow for
student application of skills in a real world context. As the facilitators, teachers have the
responsibility to design learning environments that will have a positive impact on student success
and academic growth as measured by the SBAC assessments.
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

15
Site level administrators have the responsibility to provide teachers with the resources
that they need to facilitate the learning for all students under their guidance. Funding for flexible
furniture and professional development for strategic implementation need to focus on how to
best manipulate the classroom for positive student experiences and enhance the students’ ability
to access the curriculum. Site level administrators need to work with teachers to design learning
environment structures that enable collaboration, communication, critical thinking, and
creativity. They also need to hold teachers accountable for using these flexible learning
environments during classroom instruction.
Students participate in instruction and assessment designed for mastery of grade specific
Common Core State Standards, and as such are another stakeholder group. Yearly SBAC results
indicate the proficiency level a student demonstrates in Math and English Language Arts.
Students are not only assessed on general content knowledge, but they are also required to
demonstrate proficiencies in computer adapted performance tasks that measure critical thinking,
creativity, communication, and collaboration.
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals
Table 1 below includes the organizational mission, organizational global goal, and a
stakeholder goal for each of the three key stakeholders: Teachers, administrators, and students.
Table 1
Organizational Mission, Global Goal and Stakeholder Goals
Organizational Mission
The mission of CCUSD is to develop the skills, knowledge, and motivation that students need to
succeed as citizens in the global community. All students will have equal access to learning
provided by a staff that will work with families in a caring and collaborative learning
environment.
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

16
Table 1 (continued)
Organizational Performance Goal
By June 2019, 100% of CCUSD students in the “Innovative Classroom Environment” pilot

program will demonstrate academic growth in Math and English Language Arts as measured by

the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) summative assessment.

Stakeholder Goals

Teachers Administrators Students

By November 2018, 100% of
all CCUSD “Innovative
Classroom Environment”
participating teachers will
utilize at least two flexible
learning environments within
daily classroom instruction.

By November 2018, 100% of
CCUSD site administrators
will include a physical
classroom environment rating
on the teacher evaluation tool.

By June 2019, 100% of
CCUSD students from
“Innovative Classroom
Environment” participating
classrooms will demonstrate
adequate yearly growth in
math and language arts on the
SBAC summative
assessment.

Stakeholder Group for the Study
Although a complete analysis would involve all three stakeholder groups, for practical
purposes, the innovative classroom pilot teachers were the stakeholder group of focus for this
study. The goal for the teachers was to insure academic growth for all the students by utilizing at
least two flexible learning environments within their classrooms during daily instruction. This
stakeholder group was selected since they will be the firsthand practitioners for the “Innovative
Classroom Environment” pilot program in CCUSD. The teachers selected for this pilot were
advised to attend all required district level professional development and trainings on flexible
learning environments for California Common Core State Standards instruction. The district
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

17
expectation was that these teachers fully implement a variety of physical learning environments
within their daily instructional practices. Eighty total teachers agreed to be a part of the pilot
furniture program, representing all elementary, middle, and high schools in the district. The
sample for this study was drawn from this population of teachers.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project was to explore the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences that play a role in the degree to which CCUSD is meeting its goal that teachers in the
“Innovative Classroom Environment” pilot will effectively explore important 21
st
century
teaching skills embedded within the Common Core State Standards by using flexible learning
environments during daily instruction. The analysis focused on teachers’ knowledge and
motivation as well as the organizational influences related to achieving this stakeholder goal.
The following questions guided this study and addressed the knowledge and skills,
motivation, and organization influences for the teachers.
1. What is the teacher knowledge and motivation related to achieving the goal that
100% CCUSD students in the “Innovative Classroom Environment” pilot program
are provided daily experiences that effectively utilize flexible furniture during
classroom instruction?
2. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and teacher
knowledge and motivation to achieve the goal that 100% CCUSD students in the
“Innovative Classroom Environment” pilot program are provided daily experiences
that effectively utilize flexible furniture during classroom instruction?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources to achieve the goal that 100% CCUSD
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

18
students in the “Innovative Classroom Environment” pilot program will be exposed to
daily experiences that effectively utilize flexible furniture during classroom
instruction?
Methodological Approach
A qualitative approach was most appropriate for this particular study because it allowed
observations of the action of the pilot classroom teachers to develop an in-depth analysis of the
“Innovative Classroom Environment” pilot program. Creswell (2014) states that a qualitative
design brings the researcher into the participants’ natural setting to gather information by talking
directly to people and seeing how they behave and act within these settings. This study focused
on the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences that shape the teachers’ ability to
facilitate the achievement of the students in the “Innovative Classroom Environment” pilot
program, therefore, relying on interviews, observations, and documents was more reliable than a
single source of data. A qualitative approach allowed me to focus on process, meaning, and
understanding, as I served as the primary instrument of data collection and analysis for the study
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Lastly, since the qualitative approach is an emergent design, there
was some flexibility as the initial plan of study may have shifted after entering the field,
questions could have changed, forms of data collection tweaked, and study participants and sites
visited could be modified (Creswell, 2014). Considering that the expectation from CCUSD was
that these teachers explore and implement flexible furniture within their daily instructional
practices, I had limited prior knowledge of where the teachers were in implementation.
Information from the interview data could have contradicted assumptions about thorough
implementation of flexible learning environments established prior to my immersion into the
field. This flexibility allowed for a more thorough study of the knowledge, motivation and
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

19
organizational influences that have been shown to affect the teachers’ influence on the
achievement of the students in the pilot program classrooms throughout CCUSD. Interviews
specifically provided me with self-reported answers related to the implementation of the pilot
program and the degree of knowledge and motivation that the teachers have had since the
beginning of the pilot program. Observing in the pilot program classrooms provided rich
implementation data as another measure of whether and how the teachers were implementing the
program as designed by CCUSD.
Related Literature
Classroom Experiences Needed to Become College and Career Ready
To fully experience and practice college and career readiness skills, students need
opportunities to learn skills and gain knowledge outside of the traditional classroom set-up.
Embedded into the CCSS are critical 21
st
century learning skills that emphasize critical thinking,
communication, collaboration, and creativity (Partnership, 2013). Daily classroom activities and
experiences need to be designed to allow the students the opportunity to practice higher-order
thinking skills in collaboration with each other. The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) call
for students to be engaged in risk-taking, have authentic learning experiences, and modified
instruction based on prior knowledge and skills (Porter, McMaken, Hwang, & Yang, 2011).
Spaces for technology, projects, and group work are all necessary for meeting the learning
outcomes and knowledge application skills included within the CCSS (Partnership, 2013). As
schools focus on preparing students to be college and career ready, the learning environment has
to evolve to allow the students to practice the skills they will need. Porter, et al., (2011) explain
that the CCSS classroom environment needs to be designed to provide students with relevant,
thoughtful, and engaging cooperative student-centered learning experiences.
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

20
21
st
Century Interior Designed Classrooms
Twenty-first Century learning environments promote and support both individual and
group work, dedicate separate spaces for presentations and exploration, and support multiple
modes of learning. Kuuskorpi and González (2011) contend that there is an urgent need for a new
generation of classrooms designed to support 21
st
century teaching and learning. The 21
st
century
learning environment needs to be the support system that can accommodate the individual needs
of every learner while supporting the positive human relationships needed for effective learning
(Soulé &Warrick, 2015) and schools need to provide 21
st
century interior designed classrooms for
group, team, and individual learning. Duncanson (2014) contends that classrooms should be
designed for needed group instruction to teach skills, as well as laboratory settings for discovery,
project work, practice space as well as dedicated areas for both individual and group work. The
unfortunate reality is that the physical learning environment of the classroom has mostly remained
“traditional” and unchanged – consisting of individual student desks set in rows and a teacher desk
usually in front of the classroom where he/she delivers instruction (Kuuskorpi & González, 2011).
Space and furniture in the classroom should be conducive to a variety of teaching/learning
situations (Duncanson, 2014). The physical environment of the classroom is the “silent
curriculum”, that the classroom physical design can support and improve the learning process like
the stated curriculum (Suleman & Hussain, 2014).
The literature shows that the “traditional” structured physical environment in classrooms
is not conducive to teaching and learning of the critical 21
st
century skills embedded within the
Common Core State Standards. CCSS support the need for students to acquire the 21
st
century
skills of gathering, understanding, evaluating, synthesizing, and sharing information and ideas
(Partnership, 2013). Teachers and school administration have the responsibility of determining
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

21
whether the physical classroom environment provides an optimal learning context in accordance
with the expectations of the CCSS (Kendall, 2011).
Traditional classroom environments are designed and controlled by the teacher with little
flexibility beyond whole group instruction and individual student work. Student desks are
typically aligned in rows to ensure attention is focused on the teacher or the front of the room in
an effort to limit social interactions and distractions (Barbash, 2012). Conversely, the CCSS
classroom environment needs to be designed to provide students with relevant, thoughtful, and
engaging cooperative student-centered learning experiences (Partnership, 2013). Skills that
include working creatively with others by developing, implementing, and communicating new
ideas to others; these being open to new and diverse perspectives: incorporating group input and
feedback: being original and inventive: and seeing failure as an opportunity to learn (Soulé &
Warrick, 2015). McKinney (2013) states that the CCSS expect a classroom environment and
culture which encourages innovation and academic excellence. Flexible learning environments
allow students to arrange the classroom to work as dyads, clusters, or groups and experience
many opportunities for critical thinking, shared meaning, and collaborative learning (Donovan,
Green, & Mason, 2014).
LITERATURE REVIEW
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences
The Clark and Estes (2002) gap analysis framework
Three critical factors are theorized to be examined to determine if any performance gaps
exist in an organization: teachers’ knowledge and skills; their motivation to achieve the goal; and
organizational barriers that negatively impact the ability to perform. The Clark and Estes (2002)
gap analysis framework was used as the key conceptual framework in this study. Successful
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

22
organizations take the time to increase knowledge and skills, motivation, and then focus both of
those assets on organizational goals (Clark & Estes, 2002). This conceptual framework assisted
the study by identifying, examining, and addressing any gaps in the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational (KMO) work processes and material resources to determine whether people know
how to achieve the established performance goals. When a gap is discovered between the
measure of current performance and preferred measureable outcome goal, an analysis of the
knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational influences required to close the gap is
necessary (Clark & Estes, 2002).
Each of the three elements of Clark and Estes’ (2002) gap analysis are addressed in the
sections below with a focus on the teachers’ knowledge, motivation and the organizational
influences required to meet the goal of implementing flexible physical learning environments.
The first section is a discussion of assumed influences on the stakeholder performance goal in
the context of knowledge and skills. Next, assumed influences on the attainment of the
stakeholder goal from the perspective of motivation are considered. Finally, assumed
organizational influences on achievement of the stakeholder goal were explored. Each of these
assumed stakeholder knowledge and skills, motivation and organizational influences on
performance were then related in the conceptual framework section and a discussion of how each
were studied continues in the Data Collection and Instrumentation section.
Knowledge and Skills Influences
Knowledge and skills are needed to address any gaps between current performance and
expected outcomes of the teachers. The following literature review focuses on the knowledge-
related influences that are pertinent to teachers for successful incorporation of flexible learning
environments within their classrooms during daily instruction. As a key stakeholder group in
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

23
CCUSD, the classroom teachers were asked to incorporate flexible furniture within the
classroom to meet the established organizational goal of 100% of students demonstrating
academic growth in Math and English Language Arts as measured by the Smarter Balanced
Assessment Consortium (SBAC) summative assessment. It is important to identify, examine,
and address any gaps in the knowledge and skills necessary to determine whether people know
how to achieve performance goals (Clark & Estes, 2002). Clark and Estes (2002) explain that
the gap between desired outcomes and current performance must be measured and closed if
organizational goals are to be met.
As the key stakeholder group within this study, the literature review focuses on the
specific knowledge and skills that teachers need to achieve their stakeholder goal. As stated in
Carrington, Deppeler, and Moss (2010), teachers’ knowledge and beliefs guide their actions
around pedagogy, curriculum, subject matter and the learning environment. When a gap is
discovered between the measure of current performance and preferred measureable outcome
goal, an analysis of the knowledge and skills required to close the gap is necessary (Clark &
Estes, 2002). Literature was examined around the specific knowledge influences that could
address any gaps between current performance and expected outcomes of the teachers.
Determining which of the four knowledge types are needed to improve performance will
help identify the knowledge influences needed for the teachers. Knowledge influences are
categorized into one of the four knowledge types explained by Krathwohl (2002): Factual
knowledge, conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge, and metacognitive knowledge.
Factual knowledge consists of the basic elements that one must know to be acquainted
with and access a subject matter (Krathwohl, 2002). Anderson (2005) states that knowing what
to call something is factual knowledge. Conceptual knowledge is the interrelationships among
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

24
the basic elements within a larger body that enable the elements to function together (Krathwohl,
2002). Understanding of theories, models, structures, classifications, and categories all require
conceptual knowledge (Anderson, 2005). Procedural knowledge is knowing how to do
something through inquiry, algorithms, techniques, and/or methods (Krathwohl, 2002).
Anderson (2005) states that procedural knowledge also includes the criteria one uses to know
when to use this knowledge type. Metacognitive knowledge is knowledge of cognition in
general as well as awareness and knowledge of one’s own cognition (Krathwohl, 2002).
Strategic knowledge, task knowledge, and self-knowledge are included in metacognitive
knowledge (Anderson, 2005).
All four of the knowledge types are important when determining the specific knowledge
influences needed to influence goal attainment. This study focused on two knowledge influences
that were established based on what initial knowledge and skills the teachers need to effectively
establish and support flexible learning environments for the students. The procedural knowledge
influence for this study states that teachers need to know how to utilize flexible furniture within
the classroom to design appropriate physical learning spaces based on the type of learning
application required. Additionally, the metacognitive knowledge influence states that teachers
need to know how to reflect on their practices and progress with flexible learning environment
implementation. Focusing on these two influences provided descriptive data about what the
teachers are doing and how they are using their knowledge and motivation to implement flexible
furniture arrangements in their classrooms.
Teachers need to know how to utilize the flexible furniture within the classroom to
design appropriate physical learning spaces to allow the students to experience a variety of
student-centered learning experiences. They need to have the procedural knowledge required
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

25
to design physical learning spaces that align to the learning task. Blackmore, Bateman,
Loughlin, O'Mara, and Aranda (2011) state that learning spaces must be flexible both physically
and pedagogically with a focus on designs characterized by flexibility of structures and the
grouping of desks in order the facilitate multimodal pedagogies that accommodate individual
learner’s needs. Physical classroom design needs to facilitate three interaction choices for
students; teacher-to-student, student-to-student, and student-to-resources within individual, small
group, and large group activities (Boettcher, 2007). Higgins, Hall, Wall, Woolner, and
McCaughey (2005) explain that classrooms must have a degree of flexibility since different
purposes of learning require different room arrangements. To enhance their pedagogical
repertoire, teachers need to arrange classroom spaces around multiple activity centers to facilitate
individual, group, and whole class learning opportunities (Blackmore, et al., 2011). Suleman and
Hussain (2014) contend that the physical environment of the classroom should be well-
organized, equipped, and facilitated by the teacher with the intention that students feel
comfortable and can physically adjust to the primary sources and/or different sources of
information (Suleman & Hussain, 2014). Teachers should utilize a variety of physical learning
spaces within their classrooms during daily instruction which allow the students to experience a
variety of communication and collaboration opportunities required of the expected learning task.
Teachers need to self-reflect on their practices and progress with flexible learning
environment implementation. They need to have the metacognitive knowledge required to
reflect on their practices and progress with flexible learning environment implementation.
Teachers need to reflect on where, with whom, with what resources, and what are the expected
outcomes for every planned instructional activity (Boettcher, 2007). Higgins et al. (2005) report,
thinking about the organization of the classroom to fulfill educational goals instead of
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

26
convenience, facilitates learning and enhances cognitive development. As teachers reflect on
their progress in utilizing a variety of instructional spaces and settings within the classroom, they
must overtly think about how they will modify the physical space when designing lessons.
Suleman and Hussain (2014) contend, the physical environment of the classroom is the “silent
curriculum”, that the classroom physical design can support and improve the learning process
like the stated curriculum. Attention to learner needs is equally important and fundamental to the
learning of curriculum and content (McCombs, 1997). Teachers need to self-assess and reflect
on important aspects required for learner-centered environments. As McCombs (1997) states,
learner-centered principles comprise an organized knowledge framework that guides decisions
about the content, environment, and opportunities for learning for the student. Thoughtful self-
reflection, according to McCombs (1997), supports that for teachers to successfully implement
innovations that improve learning and achievement, they must:
• Believe in the need for change
• Be willing and able to modify their practice
• Have opportunities to see models
• Have an administration and school that supports the change
• Be held accountable for maintaining consistent practices
• Be provided with instructional guidance
Blackmore (2011) warns that unless teachers are prepared and provided with the necessary
knowledge and skills, tools, and resources to change their practices, newly designed learning
spaces will not result in innovative teaching practices. While Higgins et al. (2005) reference that
the empowering process of redesigning and “owning” learning spaces will spill over into
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

27
motivation and empowerment in other areas, encourage creativity and experimentation in the
curriculum, and increase motivation towards academic and social goals.
Table 2 below displays the two identified knowledge influences and corresponding
knowledge types explained in the review.
Table 2
Knowledge Influences and Knowledge Types.
Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type
Teachers need to know how to utilize flexible
furniture within the classroom to design
appropriate physical learning spaces that
allow the students to experience a variety of
student-centered learning experiences.

Teachers need to self-reflect on their progress
in designing and implementing a flexible
learning environment within their classroom.

Procedural

Metacognition

Motivation Influences
The following literature focuses on the motivational-related influence that is pertinent to
teachers for successful incorporation of flexible learning environments within their classrooms
during daily instruction. As a key stakeholder group in CCUSD, the classroom teachers will
incorporate flexible learning environments within the classroom to meet the established
organizational goal of 100% of students demonstrating academic growth in Math and English
Language Arts as measured by the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC)
summative assessment. Clark and Estes (2002) explain that motivation gets us going, keeps us
moving, and helps us get the job done. A review of the literature identified motivational
influences that will decrease gaps between performance and goals. Of these possible influences,
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

28
this study focused on the self-efficacy theory to help identify motivational issues that impact
teacher goal attainment.
Self-efficacy theory. As a component of social cognitive theory, the beliefs that people
hold about themselves that influence their day-to-day existence are identified as self-efficacy
beliefs (Pajares, 2006). Additionally, self-efficacy refers to one’s belief or confidence about his
or her capabilities to perform a specific task (Stajkovic & Luthans, 1979). Pajares (2006)
explains that self-efficacy beliefs are the foundation for human motivation and well-being as
they are the judgements that individuals hold about their own capabilities to learn or to perform
tasks. Stajkovic & Lethans (1979) contend that self-efficacy is critical in that if people cannot
solidify the necessary behavioral, cognitive, and motivational resources needed to successfully
tackle the assigned task, they will most likely dwell on the simplest aspect of the required
performance, exert subpar effort, and, therefore, not do well or even fail on the task. Self-
efficacy beliefs help determine how much effort people will devote to an activity, how long they
will persevere with it, and how resilient they will be when faced with adversity (Pajares, 2006).
Bandura (2006) states that people with a tenacious belief in their own capabilities will persevere
regardless of the obstacles and difficulties that are presented along the way.
Teachers need to believe they are capable of effectively implementing flexible furniture
to design classroom environments that support specific learning tasks in the classroom.
Teachers’ professional efficacy is the primary motivator in teachers’ work, therefore,
contributes positively to teachers' change in level of motivation (Canrinus, Helms-Lorenz,
Beijaard, Buitink, & Hofman, 2012). Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2001) contend that teachers
with strong self-efficacy demonstrate greater levels of planning and organization as well as more
openness to new ideas while being more apt to experiment with new methods. Teachers that
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

29
demonstrate high levels of self-efficacy and intrinsic motivation are more satisfied with their
jobs and experience less stress (Pearson & Moomaw, 2006). When teachers believe that they
are capable of effectively implementing flexible furniture in their classrooms, positive outcomes
will follow. Bandura (2006) provides support in that the outcomes that are anticipated depend
largely on their individual judgements of how well they will be able to perform in the given
situation. Efficacy affects the effort that teachers invest in teaching, the goals they establish, and
their level of aspirations, while collective efficacy of a whole staff can be a stronger predictor of
student learning than the socioeconomic level of the student (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001).
Teacher efficacy is a personal judgement of capability and a belief that outcomes are determined
by one’s actions, not by forces outside one’s control (Bandura, 2006). Successful use of flexible
furniture for students require that teachers feel confident in their ability to implement various
physical classroom arrangements throughout the school day. Current research was not found
specifically related to teachers’ self-efficacy in designing flexible learning environments due to
the timeliness of the topic.
Having a variety of physical classroom arrangement possibilities will allow teachers to
prescribe the best scenarios and treatments based on specific learning tasks and therefore,
positively influence student learning. Teachers need to establish effective teaching practices,
such as presenting challenging work to students, integrating real-life significance to their
learning activities, stimulating their curiosity in the learning tasks, acknowledging their efforts or
improvement, and providing them with useful feedback (Lam, Cheng, & Ma, 2009). Designing
flexible learning environments for students has to be included in the instructional design process
when teachers create lessons. Distinguishing what type of furniture arrangement will best match
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

30
the instructional objectives can be added to both current and future lesson plans developed by the
teachers.
Table 3 below displays the identified assumed motivation influence explained in the
review.
Table 3
Assumed Motivation Influence and Motivational Type
Motivation Influence Motivation Type
Teachers need to believe they are capable of
effectively implementing flexible furniture to
design classroom environments that support
specific learning tasks in the classroom.
Self-Efficacy

Organizational Influences
General Theory. The following literature review focused on the organizational-related
influences that are pertinent to teachers for successful incorporation of flexible furniture within
their classrooms during daily instruction. As a key stakeholder group in CCUSD, the classroom
teachers incorporated flexible learning environments within the classroom to meet the
established organizational goal of 100% of students demonstrating academic growth in Math and
English Language Arts as measured by the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC)
summative assessment. Clark and Estes (2002) explain that organizational factors serve as the
current road conditions that make it easier or more difficult for the organization to reach the
desired destination. These organizational features include resources, structure and organization
of the setting, what policies and practices are held in high regard, and even how people interact
with each other (Rueda, 2011). Employees with adequate knowledge, skills, and high motivation
will not successfully close performance gaps and achieve performance goals when faced with
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

31
inefficient work processes and/or material resources (Clark & Estes, 2002). A review of the
literature identified organizational influences that will decrease gaps between performance and
goals. Rueda (2011) contends that it is important that organizational gaps be systematically
uncovered and considered in order to find solutions and garner resources effectively and that
organizational culture, structure, policies, and practices are the specific features that need to be
considered for gap analysis.
Organizational Factors Affecting Teacher Performance. As the key stakeholder
group within this study, the literature review focused on the specific organizational influences
that impact the teachers’ need to achieve their stakeholder goal. When a gap is discovered
between the measure of current performance and preferred measureable outcome goal, an
analysis of the organizational influences is required to close the gap is necessary (Clark & Estes,
2002). Literature was examined around the specific organizational factors that will address any
gaps between current performance and expected outcomes of the teachers.
This study focused on two assumed organizational factors: (a) The organization needs to
provide professional development at both district and site level to support the effective design
and implementation of innovative flexible learning environments, and (b) The organization needs
to support the teachers by providing them the autonomy to rearrange the classroom so that the
students have the opportunity for total involvement in the assigned learning tasks.
The organization needs to provide professional development at both district and site
levels to support the effective design and implementation of innovative flexible furniture in the
classroom. Louis (2007) defines trust as confidence in or reliance on the integrity, veracity,
justice, friendship, or other sound principle, of another person or group and contends that low
levels of trust lead to low levels of student achievement, parent collaboration, and teacher
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

32
burnout. For schools to become more centered around professional learning, conditions need to
be cultivated to foster greater trust between teachers and school leaders (Tschannen-Moran,
2009). Creating school cultures that value professional growth requires that school leaders
initiate changes that place professional development and continuous professional learning at the
core of teacher duties (Scribner, 1999). Pedder, James, and MacBeath (2005) explain that
classrooms need to become laboratories of learning for teachers as much as for the students and
occurs when schools develop the processes and practices of an effective learning organization.
Morrissey (2000) identifies teacher development and improvement as critical components of
bringing quality learning experiences to the classroom. When teachers are provided the support
and development they need for their own learning, significant value is placed on the effect that
learning has on their work (Morrissey, 2000).
The organization needs to support the teachers by providing them the autonomy to
rearrange the classroom so that the students have the opportunity for total involvement in the
assigned learning tasks. Research suggests that school culture and structure can influence
teachers’ sense of efficacy and professional motivation (Scribner, 1999). Teachers want to retain
authority over what and how they teach, while resisting mandated curricula and close
supervision, in an effort to feel professional pride and diminish the fear of losing spontaneity
(Kauffman, Johnson, Kardos, Liu & Peske, 2002). According to Boyd, Grossman, Ing,
Lankford, Loeb, and Wyckoff (2011), teachers demonstrate greater satisfaction from their work
and most likely will stay in the teaching profession when they perceive themselves to have
greater autonomy. School policies and practices must demonstrate the commitment to
supporting trustworthy behavior on the part of teachers and other staff, thereby creating decision-
making structures and granting discretion in instructional decisions that rely on teachers’
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

33
expertise and commitment to students (Tschannen-Moran, 2009). Professional structures -
collective inquiry, scrutiny, reflection, shared decision making - need to be integrated into school
practices to promote teacher professionalism and school success (Tschannen-Moran, 2009).
Morrissey (2000) discovered that student learning depends on how supportive schools are with
ongoing development and productive exercise of teachers’ knowledge and skills. Kauffman et
al. (2002) argue that the current practice of using a complete standards-based curriculum with
specific content, skills, timelines, instructional approaches and detailed prescription constrains
teachers and compromises the intrinsic rewards of teaching. Teachers tend to resent the one-
size-fits-all curricula designed to “teacher-proof” the work of schools; they view them as assaults
on their professional status and as impediments to student achievement and growth (Tschannen-
Moran, 2009).
For schools to become more centered around professional learning, conditions need to be
cultivated to foster greater trust between teachers and school leaders. If teachers are to be
empowered and regarded as professionals, then, like other professionals, they must have the
freedom to prescribe the best treatment for their students (as doctors and lawyers do for their
patients and clients) (Pearson & Moomaw, 2006). Teachers need to be explicitly granted the
autonomy to design the physical learning environment how they choose.
Table 4 below displays the two identified organizational influences explained in this
review.

CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

34
Table 4
Organizational Influences and Organizational Actions
Organizational Influences Organizational Actions
The organization needs to provide
professional development at both district and
site level to support the effective design and
implementation of innovative flexible
furniture in the classroom.

The organization needs to support the
teachers by providing them the autonomy to
rearrange the classroom so that the students
have the opportunity for total involvement in
the assigned learning tasks.

Professional Development

Provide Autonomy

Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and Motivation and
the Organizational Context
The purpose of a conceptual framework is to provide the scaffolding or frame for a study.
Maxwell (2013) explains the conceptual framework as the system of concepts, assumptions,
expectations, beliefs, and theories that support and inform the research. Merriam and Tisdell
(2016) go on to say that the conceptual framework is derived from the orientation or stance that
the researcher brings to the study. A conceptual framework serves as the lens through which you
view the world, what you are curious about, what is puzzling, what questions you ask which, in
turn, give form to your study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Each of the knowledge, motivation,
and organizational (KMO) influences have been presented in the previous section independent of
each other. In reality, they do not stand in isolation but rather crossover, interact, and influence
each other. This conceptual framework demonstrates how the KMO influences interact and
influence each other in the context of the knowledge, motivation, and organization factors
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

35
needed for the teachers to implement flexible learning environments within their classrooms.
Figure 1 presents the key knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences needed in order
to reach the goal of 100% of all CCUSD “Innovative Classroom Environment” participating
teachers will utilize at least two flexible learning environments within their classrooms during
daily instruction as measured by classroom observations.
As the key stakeholder group for this study, a brief summary of the critical knowledge
and motivation needed by the teachers is represented in the inner circle of the figure. The
conceptual framework states that teachers need to have the procedural knowledge required to
effectively utilize the flexible furniture within the classroom to design physical learning spaces
that are aligned to the learning task. Higgins et al. (2005) explain that classrooms must have a
degree of flexibility since different purposes of learning require different room arrangements.
Teachers also need to have the metacognitive knowledge required to reflect on their practices
and progress with flexible furniture implementation. Teachers need to reflect on where, with
whom, with what resources, and what are the expected outcomes for every planned instructional
activity (Boettcher, 2007). Lastly, teachers need to believe they are capable of effectively
implementing flexible furniture to design classroom environments that support specific learning
tasks in the classroom. When teachers believe that they are capable of effectively implementing
flexible learning classroom environments conductive to learning, positive outcomes will follow.
Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2001) contend that teachers with strong self-efficacy demonstrate
greater levels of planning and organization as well as more openness to new ideas while being
more apt to experiment with new methods.
The large circle on the figure represents College and Career Unified School District as
the organization in which this study took place. Notice that the teachers are one group within the
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

36
organization’s circle of influence – that it is a given that the organization’s programs, policies,
and practices directly impact their work. The conceptual framework offers two critical
organizational issues that need to be addressed for the teachers to reach their goal of 100%
implementation of flexible learning environments, as measured by at least two approaches being
used in daily instruction. First, if the school district establishes a norm for teachers to be allowed
autonomy within their classrooms, teachers will be more likely to reach their stakeholder goal.
As Boyd et al. (2011) state, teachers will demonstrate greater satisfaction from their work and
most likely will stay in the teaching profession when they perceive themselves to have greater
autonomy. Secondly, the district needs to establish a professional development plan at both the
district and site level that supports effective use of innovative classroom designs for instruction.
Tschannen-Moran (2009) states that for schools to become more centered around professional
learning, conditions need to be cultivated to foster greater trust between teachers and school
leaders. Scribner (1999) also contends that creating school cultures that value professional
growth requires that school leaders initiate changes that place professional development and
continuous professional learning at the core of teacher duties.

CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

37

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework – KMO Influences
By November 2018, 100% of all CCUSD “Innovative Classroom
Environment” participating teachers will utilize at least two flexible
learning environments within their classrooms during daily instruction
as measured by classroom observations.
Teachers
• Need the knowledge and skills, related
to utilizing and reflecting on flexible
furniture within the classroom to
design physical learning spaces that are
aligned to the learning task.
• Need to be self-efficacious about their
capability to implement appropriate
physical learning environments
conducive to learning.

College and Career Unified School District
Need to establish a norm for teachers to be allowed autonomy within
their classrooms while also establishing a professional development
plan at both the district and site level that supports effective use of
innovative classroom designs for instruction.

CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

38
As can be seen from Figure 1, the stakeholder goal is displayed in the rectangle outside of
the circles representing CCUSD and the teachers. This shows that the stakeholder goal is
designed as an outcome based on the needed knowledge and motivation for the teachers to
successfully implement flexible furniture within their classrooms. The teacher circle is
contained within the organization circle representing one of the stakeholder groups under the
influence of the organization. The key knowledge and motivation factors needed by the teachers
are listed within the teacher circle which also falls within the influence of the organization. The
large circle of the figure represents the key organizational influences that shape the teachers’
ability to meet the requirements of the stakeholder goal as well as the organization’s global goal.
Two arrows point from the organization circle to the teacher circle to represent how the
organizational influences directly impact the teachers’ ability to successfully implement flexible
furniture within their classrooms. Two additional arrows point from the teacher circle to the
stakeholder goal to demonstrate how the teachers’ knowledge and motivational lead to the goal
being fulfilled.
METHODS
Data Collection and Instrumentation
Interviews and observations were the research methods that I used for my data collection.
The use of these two methods allowed me to utilize triangulation as I looked for patterns within
the data.
Interviews
Interviews allowed me to gain firsthand information related to the research questions
concerning the teachers’ knowledge and motivation needed to implement flexible learning
environments. Interview questions also allowed me to explore whether and how the
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

39
organizational influences shaped teachers’ ability to implement the pilot program successfully, as
well as the interaction between organizational culture and context and teacher knowledge and
motivation.
One interview session was conducted separately with each of the four sampled teachers
in their classrooms after school, while there were no students present. This allowed the
interviews to be free from distractions while also allowing the teachers to provide visual
references within the actual classroom space when needed. The goal of the interviews was to
capture how the interviewees viewed their world, discover a shared understanding of
terminology and judgements, and understand their perceptions and experiences (Patton, 2002).
The interview questions were semi-structured and open-ended to allow the flexibility to follow
up with probing questions when they were needed. The stem questions focused on teacher
knowledge and motivation regarding flexible furniture and flexible learning spaces within the
classroom and how that related to the Common Core State Standards and 21st century learning
application skills. Questions also inquired about the support they had and/or continually
received from district and school professional development. The interview protocol consisted of
an initial set of 31 questions. Follow-up and probing questions followed the stem questions
when needed. Data from the interview process was audio recorded and transcribed at a later
time. Separate signed permission forms to audio record the interviews were obtained from the
participants and transcripts of the interview were made available for participant verification. The
time allotment for each interview was one hour and the option of reconvening at a later time for
possible follow up questions was agreed to by all four participants prior to starting the
interviews. The actual interview time varied amongst the four participants, but each was
completed within the one-hour time allotment. The interview times ranged from a low of
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

40
seventeen minutes to a high of forty-nine minutes amongst the participants. Although each
participant had variations in the length and depth of their answers, the interview process resulted
in the culmination of a little more than two hours of total combined interview data. Considering
that all four of the interviews were conducted after the school day, discrepancy in the interview
length between the participants could be the result of exhaustion or cognitive overload from the
full day of instruction prior to the interview. One participant in particular shared that she would
not be able to devote a full hour to the interview as she had an appointment scheduled within 45
minutes of the beginning of the interview. All four participants openly expressed the excitement
of being involved in the study and the desire to read the results when available. There was no
need to reconvene at a later time with any of the participants for follow up questions or
clarifications.
Observations
I also selected to included classroom observations to document the variety, number, and
corresponding learning tasks of different classroom furniture arrangements utilized in a typical
instructional day. The information obtained from the observations served as evidence of whether
the teachers understood and regularly utilized flexible learning environments throughout the day
while also providing corroboration with the interview data. Observations provided data related
to the CCUSD goal of effectively utilizing two to three flexible learning environments during
classroom instruction, thus providing insight into whether the teachers had the procedural
knowledge represented in the conceptual framework.
Full school day observations were conducted in the four elementary classrooms
corresponding to the four teachers selected for the interview process. One day observations in
each of the teachers’ classrooms were conducted on different days. Classroom furniture
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

41
arrangement data and learning task requirements were collected every five minutes during
classroom instruction time. Considering that the nature of my study involved the actual physical
space and its manipulation in the classroom, full day observations were needed to observe how
the teachers set up and manipulated their classroom space. Observations allow researchers to
notice things that may be routine to the participants (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), which may not
surface during the interview process. Observational data gathered recorded the type of student
desk arrangements utilized throughout the day as well as the variety of learning tasks required of
the students. Observational notes were taken every five minutes to record the learning task and
the physical design of the classroom, as well as documenting whether the students were
participating in individual, partner, small group, or whole group activities. The written account
of what I saw, heard, experienced, and thought were recorded and reflected on while developing
field notes after the observation. According to Bogdan and Biklen (2007), field notes consist of
ideas, strategies, reflections, hunches, and emerging patterns synthesized after an observation.
The information obtained during the full day observations provided evidence about whether the
teachers understand and regularly utilize a variety of physical learning environments throughout
the day based on specific applications for learning. As such, data was recorded every five
minutes documenting the classroom physical arrangement and the specific learning task that was
required at that time. Five-minute time-stamped data recorded the furniture arrangement and
corresponding learning task during the classroom observations in each of the four participating
teachers’ classrooms equaling 19 hours and 36 minutes of total observation time.
Data Analysis
Immediately following each interview, the audio recordings were transcribed and verified
for accuracy. Responses were separated and coded in relation to which research question they
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

42
addressed. Common themes resulting from the individual responses were labeled and
synthesized as support or contradiction to the research questions and conceptual framework. The
same process was followed with the observational fieldnotes. Thus, data obtained from the
interviews and observations were coded thematically, as I looked for the concepts described in
the conceptual framework related to the knowledge, motivation, and organizational resources
needed to effectively utilize flexible furniture for student learning. The coded themes that
emerged were triangulated across all the data sources as I looked for both corroboration and
anomalies among the participants. This study was specifically looking for the knowledge that
the teachers felt they had in utilizing the flexible furniture to better support the students in
collaboration, communication, critical thinking, and creativity. Information was sought in
regards to the teachers’ knowledge and motivation, as well as organizational support for the
implementation of flexible furniture within the classrooms, which were then the focus of the
analysis.
RESULTS AND FINDINGS

The purpose of this project was to explore the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences that played a role in the degree to which CCUSD was meeting its goal that students in
the “Innovative Classroom Environment” pilot will experience and effectively utilize important
21
st
century learning skills embedded within the Common Core State Standards by using flexible
furniture during daily instruction. The analysis focused on teachers’ knowledge and motivation
as well as the organizational influences related to achieving this stakeholder goal.
The following questions guided this study:
1. What is the teacher knowledge and motivation related to achieving the goal that
100% CCUSD students in the “Innovative Classroom Environment” pilot program
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

43
will be exposed to daily experiences that effectively utilize flexible furniture during
classroom instruction?
2. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and teacher
knowledge and motivation to achieve the goal that 100% CCUSD students in the
“Innovative Classroom Environment” pilot program will be exposed to daily
experiences that effectively utilize flexible furniture during classroom instruction?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources to achieve the goal that 100% CCUSD
students in the “Innovative Classroom Environment” pilot program will be exposed to
daily experiences that effectively utilize flexible furniture during classroom
instruction?
Data collected from the interviews and classroom observations were triangulated in an
effort to look for both corroboration and anomalies among the participants. To adhere to their
confidentiality, the participating teachers were given the following pseudonyms:
• Kate – 1
st
grade teacher from Hilltop Elementary School
• Larry – 5
th
grade teacher from Hilltop Elementary School
• Mary – 3
rd
grade teacher from Valley Elementary School
• Paul – 2
nd
grade teacher from Valley Elementary School
Findings
This section presents the findings from this study organized around the following three
themes that emerged from the thorough KMO gap analysis:
1. The amount of student exposure to daily experiences that effectively utilize flexible
furniture during classroom instruction was dependent on the knowledge and
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

44
motivation of the classroom teacher to provide flexible environments to enhance
student learning.
2. The site administrators did not demonstrate instructional leadership when it came to
purchasing and/or using the new furniture in the classrooms.
3. Organizational practices did not provide the direct support that the teachers needed to
provide students with daily experiences that effectively utilize flexible furniture
during classroom instruction.
The following assertions and the corresponding analysis will focus on the three themes and the
interaction of the KMO influences within those themes.
Theme 1: The amount of student exposure to daily experiences that effectively utilize
flexible furniture during classroom instruction was dependent on the knowledge and
motivation of the classroom teacher to provide flexible environments to enhance student
learning.
Data from the interviews and observations of all four participants demonstrated that the
individual teachers’ self-reported level of understanding and motivation to implement flexible
furniture increases or decreases their ability to effectively utilize them into daily instruction.
Making the connection between the physical design of the classroom and how it affects
learning seemed important to all four participants. They all had at least a basic understanding
about how the new flexible furniture can influence the learning in their classrooms. Mary
explained the impact she perceived of the flexible furniture in her classroom:
I feel like having flexible furniture, in some cases, calms students more than others. Ones
that are very fidgety, I feel like flexible furniture helps the ones that have a hard time
focusing.
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

45
Her explanation addresses how the actual furniture supports students by allowing them to spin,
stand, roll, and rock at their desks. She did not identify how different learning tasks can be
enhanced by reorganizing the student furniture into appropriate groupings that directly support
the lesson objective and learning task. She seemed disconnected from understanding that the
furniture could be used to create individual, pair, triads, and collaborative group learning
situations reflective of the assigned task. Her understanding of flexible furniture was in
reference to how the furniture could move with the students in their current area, not the ability
to move the furniture and student to a new place.
Larry provided the following understanding of how moveable furniture can influence the
classroom setting:
Ideally, being able to get the furniture out of the way to actually have more creative
learning spaces, which I would maybe get to this ... It doesn't quite work in theory, or I
haven't figured it out with the present furniture that I picked, but maybe that will come up
later.
By connecting the movability of the furniture to creative learning spaces, Larry had a base
understanding of how flexible furniture could influence the learning in his classroom. He
admittedly had not been able to transfer this base knowledge into application, which is evidence
when he said “It doesn’t quite work” and “I haven’t figured it out.” However, he seemed to be
suggesting it is a work in progress when he said “Maybe that will come up later.”
Kate was able to share her understanding of how the flexible furniture could be used to
regroup students:
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

46
There's different times students will work with each other, different places in the
classroom they would work with each other. There's opportunity for students to be
partners or groups.
In this statement, Kate demonstrated her understanding of the connection between the moveable
furniture and the ability to arrange the students within the classroom. She clearly articulated that
her students experience different learner groupings during the day when she said “there’s
opportunity for students to be partners or groups.” A flexible physical classroom environment is
the only viable approach to accommodate multiple configurations needed as students move from
listening to the teacher to working in groups to independent work (Roskos & Neuman, 2011).
Paul’s understanding of the relationship between the flexible furniture and learning
showed how he completely supported the flexibility function of the furniture to change the
learning dynamics in his classrooms:
I think just being able to move at any moment because wherever the lesson is taking
you… Sometimes you're teaching the standard, teaching the lesson and there's an aha
moment that you really could grab on to and the kids are really into it but you need to
move to a different part of the classroom and I feel with the flexible furniture, you're able
to, "Let's pivot this way and let's go over here.” Now the lesson has taken shape
differently. It's moved a different direction. I feel with the furniture, you're able to do
that.
His thoughts about how flexible classroom furniture can extend classroom lessons beyond how
the lesson was initially designed showed his understanding and motivation about when to utilize
flexible environments. In this case, as the lesson developed, the need to change the environment
evolved, and the flexible furniture facilitated these changes in the lessons.
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

47
Even though all four participants had a basic understanding about how flexible furniture
can influence the learning in their classrooms, the actual knowledge and motivation needed to
utilize flexible environments to enhance instructional tasks appeared shallow for Larry and
Mary. Larry’s definition of a flexible learning environment exhibited a limited understanding:
A flexible physical design of a classroom would be to have furniture that can move,
theoretically, and to have kids in cooperative groups where they're at least near each other
to be able to discuss and work together on certain projects to be able to basically
cooperatively learn and/or practice things in closer proximity to each other.
Even though Larry was able to identify furniture movement as an important quality in the
physical design of a classroom, he did not make any connection to the ability to form a variety of
student groupings. His response focused only on cooperative groups and did not address how
learning tasks could be enhanced by changing the furniture arrangement. According to Roskos
and Neuman (2011), a fundamental of effective classroom design is to link environment to
purpose, to create spaces capable of quick reconfiguration to support immediate learning tasks.
Likewise, Mary’s understanding of how to effectively use flexible furniture to enhance
the learning tasks during classroom instruction was equally limited as she defined an effective
flexible physical design of the classroom:
Easily moved different partners, different parts of the room being used, back,

front, side. Instruction is within the group, instead of all in one place.

Mary appeared to have the background knowledge about how to utilize the entire classroom to
spread the student groups out, allowing the teacher to travel from group to group. However, she
did not seem to make a connection to the practice of splitting up those groups based on the
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

48
specifically assigned learning task. Student desks were grouped throughout the room, but there
was limited adjustments made when the assigned learning task was changed.
All participants identified the ability to move the classroom furniture as a component, but
only Kate and Paul made the connection to the ability to adjust or change the arrangement based
on the learning task. This connection is supported by Cornell (2002), stating that the physical
environment needs to be flexible, promote interaction and community, support formal and
informal learning, and convey a sense of energy. Kate explained in more detail:
Well, when they're working with partners in the partner groups, so if they're at their
groups and they have just a partner, they're able to actually physically move their desks
away from the group so they have a place to work with their partners. Or, if they want to
work by themselves and have privacy, they can move to the back table as well. So they
have space if they need it. But then it's also conducive, if they're doing a group project,
where I can put a big piece of paper down and they can be creative in that space.
Flexible? It's not stuck to one thing. Whatever works for your lesson, that's how you
would arrange your seating.
This response demonstrated that Kate had a deeper understanding about how the lesson or
specific learning situation influences the appropriate physical design. Her knowledge to utilize
flexible learning environments in her classroom was more advanced as she was able to explain
the relationship between the physical movement of the desks and the type of assigned learning
task.
Another perspective was shared by Paul:
They're gonna learn, but if you're able to move the classroom and be dynamic within that
classroom, it really provides more opportunities for them to really almost interact with
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

49
the classroom and not just be another piece of furniture in there. They're not just in one
place. They're not just looking at one thing. It creates that energy in the classroom and
they're able to move around … why not add another component that allows that
flexibility for them. They like that. "Okay, guys. We're going to our pinwheel." "Okay.".
They all get up and they want to do that and they know the expectation in that setting, in
that group.
The deeper understanding that he presented was reflective on how he was able to provide a
variety of classroom arrangements or settings directly aligned to the specific task required. He
also detailed how this variety created energy and excitement in the classroom as they interacted
with the content and each other. As he stated, his students had a complete understanding about
the connection between the learning expectation and the furniture arrangement.
The motivation influence driving this study stated that the teachers needed to believe they
were capable of effectively implementing flexible furniture in their classrooms. Paul explained
his motivation this way:
You know what, when I heard the furniture was coming to my classroom, I'm like, "Oh,
this is really cool," but then after a day goes by, I'm like, "Wait a second. That means I
have to figure this out what am I going to do." I don't want them to just be a desk there. I
want to be able to utilize them. I'm part of this pilot program. I want to make sure that I
use them and I don't just sit there in one spot. One day it was a little bit of a challenge just
thinking about, "I'm responsible for this. I'm gonna have to be really thinking extra about
how to make this work in my classroom."
It appeared that Paul was able to do some deep reflection on his capabilities to successfully
incorporate the new flexible furniture into his daily classroom routines. He took on this
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

50
responsibility and became highly motivated to use the furniture to have a positive impact his
classroom and students. Larry, on the other hand, reported a different level of motivation when
asked if he thought he had the capability of effectively incorporating flexible learning
environments:
I think if they were more movable, I don’t see myself being able to move it that much
because of time restraints and physical environment, the size of the classroom, and the
number of kids. I would like to just be able to move it all and have floor space just to do
stuff, but then you would redesign your classroom, and the hours of the day needed for
that . . . But not just because it’s cool, it’s got to be efficient.
Larry’s response showed that he didn’t really feel capable of effectively utilizing flexible
furniture in his classroom based on a lack of motivation to work around obstacles that were a
part of the situational reality in his classroom. He made the choice to accept those challenges as
roadblocks and something that he believed that he could not overcome. Kate had a different
perspective on her motivation and capabilities in providing flexible learning environments for
her students:
I feel comfortable with what I am doing with flexible classroom seating, but I am sure
there’s a lot more that I could be doing. I keep thinking there’s opportunities for students
to be partners or groups. Flexible. It’s not stuck to one thing. Whatever works for your
lesson, that’s how you should arrange your seating.
Kate’s progress with implementing flexible furniture has been influenced by her belief that the
classroom arrangement can and should be aligned with the learning tasks within each particular
lesson. Her response showed her motivation to design effective lessons for student learning by
aligning the seating with the tasks.
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

51
Kate’s and Paul’s commitment to creating a “dynamic” classroom were evident during
the full day observations; as their students shifted between different desk configurations
throughout the day.
Table 5 below shows each learning environment arrangement and the amount of time in
that arrangement that each participating teacher utilized during the day.
Table 5
Learning Environment Arrangement
Kate Larry Mary Paul
Home Group
10 mins.
Home Group
250 mins.
Home Group
60 mins
Home Group
7 mins.
Carpet (Individual
Squares)
17 mins.
Free Selection
140 mins
Carpet (Individual
Squares)
6 mins.
Home
23 mins.
Home Group
135 mins.
Home Group
87 mins.
Home (reading group
rotation to teacher
table)
60 mins.
Buffet
17 mins
Home
10 mins.
Pin Wheel
93 mins.
Carpet (Individual
Squares)
36 mins.
Home Group
2 mins.
Partner/Free
Selection
40 mins.
Carpet (Individual
Squares)
14 mins.
Home (Elbow
Partners)
10 mins.
Home Group
70 mins.
Carpet (Individual
Squares)
30 mins.
Carpet (Individual
Squares)
25 mins.
Home (Partners)
20 mins.
Free Selection
15 mins.
Carpet (Perimeter)
10 mins.

CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

52
As displayed in the table, Kate and Paul utilized multiple arrangements (seven and six
respectively) throughout the day. This evidence supports their understanding of the need to
adjust the physical environment to meet the learning demands of different tasks throughout the
day. Observational notes indicated that the students in Kate’s class experienced a new learning
arrangement approximately every 30 minutes throughout the day. She accessed the colored
square carpet area for most of her direct instruction and utilized the moveable student desks for
partner, group, and individual work throughout the day. Her students experienced eleven
arrangement changes in the six hours of class time that I observed.
Paul also transitioned his students from the six different arrangements in his classroom
every 30 to 40 minutes during the day. I observed ten different arrangement changes during the
day of the observation. His colored square carpet area in his classroom was also used for whole
group learning, while the student desks were repositioned regularly by the students based on the
designed instructional plan by the teacher. Home (clusters of four), Pin Wheel (clusters of
three), and Buffet (rows of five side-by-side) were three desk arrangements used to reposition
students within the classroom.
In contrast, Larry did not adjust the physical learning environment at all during the
observation. The student desks remained in the nine home groups of two to four desks the entire
day. Even though the students were free to move to a different group or partner for some of the
activities, the moveable desks remained in the original positions. The organization and flow of
the classroom could have been more efficient if the desks and chairs would have been moved
along with the students during these regrouping activities. There was a sense of chaos and
disorganization from my perspective as students were moving about the classroom. Clear and
explicit furniture arrangements aligned to the assigned learner groupings and tasks would have
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

53
allowed for a smoother flow, clear expectations, and needed variety in the classroom
environment. Similarly, Mary’s classroom desk arrangement was centered on five home groups
of four to six students. Mary transitioned between two different arrangements one time
throughout the full day of instruction. Direct instruction and individual student work were
completed while the students were in their home groups. Students moved only themselves or
their chairs to the “Free Selection” arrangement as they transitioned to work with their selected
partner on the assigned partner project. This observational data is reflective of the difference in
knowledge and motivation reported by the four participants.
When asked to reflect on their progress in designing and implementing flexible learning
environments, the responses from the participants demonstrated a varied level of comfort with
and commitment to full implementation. Larry said the following regarding his progress with
designing a flexible learning environment:
A flexible learning environment, I would have to at least see that there is such a thing,
first of all, and then try it out in my classroom, which I’m presently doing to some point.
The physical space, I think is nice because it doesn't hinder them and/or the specific
furniture we got, I do like. I like being closer to them. They're high, so I take that for
granted now, but just being able to walk around and see what they're doing, have them
being eye-to-eye with me, having them to be able to move on their chairs back and forth.
They don't really abuse it anymore. They don't go up and down, and they can, I don't
care. It doesn't bother me, but the up and down doesn't really matter but just them being
able to wiggle a little bit in their chairs. I would like it to be much more movable.
Larry identified how the physical space of the classroom was nicer with the functionality of the
higher desks and chairs. His comment about how he would have to see if there was such a thing
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

54
as a flexible learning environment showed that he was not totally convinced that it was possible
to progress in designing such a space. Mary had a similar desire to gain some background
knowledge about flexible learning environments as she reflected on her progress by saying, “I
guess, I feel I could probably use some training on it. I don’t feel like I really have any
experience, I’m just going by whatever I notice.” Even without efficient background knowledge
in flexible learning environments, Mary remained reflective about how positive or negative the
various furniture arrangements were in her classroom when she said:
I can say that I realize ways that I don’t like, now that I’ve done it. Ways that I have put
it, I’m like, “Oh, I don’t really like it so much.” These long ones, I don’t really like as
much as I thought I might. I like them more where there’s five around, so I can get in the
middle, so I can talk to students easily, if I need to.
Again, Mary seemed to be focused on the functionality of the physical furniture itself and
appeared to believe that she could not progress in establishing a flexible learning environment
without adequate training. Paul had a different belief about his progress in establishing a flexible
learning environment when he said, “I feel comfortable in being able to use these desks and
furniture in a way that supports my lessons and support the different ways students learn.” Even
though both Mary and Paul had not experienced any training prior to the implementation of the
new furniture in their classrooms, they had been able to successfully progress by reflecting on
how to use the furniture to support student learning.
Kate demonstrated how she was constantly reflective about her progress:
I think it helps you just reflect on why we're doing it. For me, because I think about that
often. "They have these wheels. But should I be moving them more? Because I'm not
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

55
moving them very often. But do I need to? Because I can meet this doing something else
without moving the furniture." So I think it helps us reflect on what we're currently doing.
This shows how Kate is continually challenging her thinking and actions related to the movable
furniture and why it should be moved. Her level of reflection showed how she was at a deeper
level of implementation as she made the connection between function and purpose of the
furniture. It was evident that she would only move the furniture if the movement was
specifically aligned and beneficial to the learning task.
As presented, all of the participants were able to make the connection that the furniture
can be moved, but not necessarily on why or how varied furniture arrangements influence
student learning. The inability to connect the flexible furniture with the specific learning task
was evident when Larry said, “I guess the honest truth is that it’s just become furniture.” All of
the teachers reported that the newness and student comfort with the furniture were the bonuses of
their participation in the pilot program. Each participant was at a different level of
implementation dependent on their own knowledge and motivation to provide flexible
environments to enhance student learning. It appeared that each of the participating teachers
were left on their own to gain the required background knowledge needed to successfully make
the connection about how the new furniture can be arranged and rearranged to enhance the
various learning tasks required in the classroom. A higher level of implementation and success
was seen from the teachers that believed that they were capable of utilizing the flexible furniture
to establish flexible learning environments in their classrooms and continually reflected on their
progress in providing said environments.

CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

56
Theme 2: The site administrators did not demonstrate instructional leadership when it
came to purchasing and/or using the new furniture in the classrooms.
In an attempt to understand the administrative support needed for the teachers to be able
to utilize flexible learning environments, this study explicitly analyzed the involvement of the
site administration in the implementation of innovative flexible learning environments. The two
principals of the schools involved in this study seemed supportive and gave the participants their
autonomy, but they could have had a stronger role in instructional leadership. Interview data
showed a minimal degree of influence from the site administration. As reported by the
participants, the site administration involvement was limited specifically to identifying teacher
participants and furniture selection. Mary shared her site administrator’s role in the
implementation of the pilot program in this way:
All I can say is I went with my site administrator to pick the furniture. And, she let
another teacher and I just kind of choose what we wanted, what we thought would be best
in our classrooms. But, other than that ... I would have liked more time to pick the actual
furniture, instead of just, "Here you go. You have about an hour to decide." I would have
liked more time to have some research, maybe look and see.
Mary was given complete autonomy to select the particular furniture for her classroom with little
influence from her principal. She quickly made the selection within the allotted time limit based
on “what she thought would best fit with her students and the classroom space”. As she
mentioned, her principal was simply there to support her selection and provided no input or
clarification into the connection between the furniture and flexible learning environments. Her
principal supported her with the selection of the actual furniture, but provided no instructional
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

57
leadership support needed to help her make the selection based on how the furniture can be used
to positively affect classroom instruction.
Kate was also left on her own to gain the knowledge and motivation needed to provide
flexible learning experiences for her students. Unlike Mary, she was not involved in selecting
the type of furniture for her classroom and did not receive any direction from her principal in
regard to how the furniture could enhance and improve instruction. She reported what her
administrator’s role was in the process by simply saying, “He gave me the furniture and I said,
‘Thank you’.” This principal offered his support to Kate by outfitting her with brand new
furniture to replace the previous dilapidated furniture. Kate appreciated the support, thanked
him, and began the process of using the furniture to revitalize her classroom. However, she was
on her own to gain the important knowledge and motivation about how to best utilize this
flexible furniture within her classroom. Kate and her principal never had a conversation about
how the new furniture could be used to support the variety of learning tasks that students are
required to complete throughout a day of instruction. In fact, as discovered through the
interview process, Kate was completely unaware of how the new furniture was explicitly
designed and selected to offer the teachers the flexibility to rearrange the classroom when needed
throughout the day. His decision to outfit Kate’s classroom with brand new furniture was based
on a plant management need and he failed to express the connection between the new furniture
and the positive impact it could have on instructional practices.
Paul explained how his principal gave complete autonomy to the teachers to explore the
possibilities of the furniture on their own. He defined the role of his principal in the flexible
furniture pilot program as follows:
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

58
I think she's given a lot of power to us, the teacher to make it work within our classroom
and I think that's been beneficial in the sense that she didn't try and mandate, "You have
to use it this way. This is what it's gonna look like." She took an approach of, "Well, let
me just sit back and see how - what you guys can do with it and then I'm gonna go and
see and you show me what you've discovered in the classroom?" She hasn't given a lot of
this is exactly what I want but she also let us be flexible in how we use it.
As Paul reported, his principal wanted the teachers to build their knowledge and motivation in
utilizing flexible furniture in the classroom entirely on their own. She wanted the teachers to
“play” with the furniture on their own. Her actions showed that she supported the teachers with
the implementation of the flexible furniture, but her hands-off approach regarding instructional
strategies left the teachers to learn in isolation. Although she supported the use of flexible
furniture in the classroom, it appears that she did not have the essential background knowledge
needed to provide the instructional guidance needed to guide the teachers through
implementation. McCombs (1997) states that for teachers to successfully implement innovations
that improve student learning, they must have an administrator that supports a change, have an
opportunity to see models of the innovative approach, and be provided with instructional
guidance.
As reported by the teachers, the site administration’s involvement in how to use the
flexible furniture to enhance student learning has been limited in both of the schools in this
study. The teachers have been left on their own to incorporate the furniture by themselves in
isolation of site administration. When asked about any conversations that demonstrated the site
administrator providing support in implementing flexible learning environments, Larry replied,
“He’s a very open-minded principal that trusts his teachers unless you give him a reason not to.
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

59
So he could care less what I do with the room.” Kate responded that there had not been any
conversations that she had with the same principal that demonstrated support in implementing
flexible learning environments. These responses demonstrated that the flexible furniture support
provided by their site level administrator was limited to plant management and not instructional
leadership. All participants reported that their principal supported them by providing the new
furniture for their classrooms. None of the participants shared any information that showed
instructional leadership support in how to choose and utilize the furniture for best instruction in
the classroom.
Mary reported a similar lack of conversation with her administrator that demonstrated
support for utilizing the furniture to implement flexible learning environments in the classroom.
Mary said:
I did not have any [conversations] ... I guess, she just made sure that we had rules. That
we setup rules whenever we brought the furniture in, that students knew what was
acceptable behavior with the furniture, and what was not.
Again, Mary’s principal provided support to the teachers via her role as a manager of the school.
She focused more on how to take care of the furniture without addressing how the furniture can
positively impact instruction. As a manager, she made it clear that specific rules and
expectations needed to be established in anticipation of how the newness of the flexible furniture
would impact the already established expectations in the classroom.
Both administrators were highly involved with selecting the teachers to participate in the
pilot program and the selection of the furniture for the classrooms. No one shared about any
conversations with their administrator related to the impact that the flexible furniture has on
instructional design for student access to the skills embedded in the CCSS. All four participants
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

60
agreed that the site administration granted them full freedom to utilize the new furniture to
arrange their classrooms however they wanted. This “hands-off” approach by the site
administration forced the teachers to experiment on their own. Each participant was at a
different level of implementation as they were thrown into a self-monitored action research
environment. The site administration has provided the teachers with the “what” (furniture) for
flexible learning environments, but the teachers have been left to discover the “how” and “why”
on their own. All four of the study participants would have benefited from learning and sharing
of ideas from other pilot participants. There was an overwhelming desire expressed by them to
have had more opportunities to learn, observe, reflect, and plan together with other pilot
participants. Although the study participants were at varied levels of implementation, they all
reported that they would have felt more capable of utilizing flexible learning environments if
they had been able to see models of other flexible learning environments in action.
The findings from the interviews and observations demonstrate how the teacher assumed
knowledge and motivation to implement flexible learning environments were dependent on the
individual effort each teacher exerted, with little to no input from the site administration. As
mentioned in the previous section, all four teachers had a base knowledge about how the new
furniture would enhance the physical environment of the classroom. However, each teacher was
at a different level of implementation dependent on their self-determined acquisition of the
needed knowledge and motivation. Kate shared about how much effort she individually put in to
designing her classroom:
I've probably changed this room around 30 different times to find the right spaces of
where they need. So there's a space for where they can do their math games, a space for
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

61
independent reading, a space where they can go back. And I'm still changing things
around. A lot of effort has gone in.
The organizational support was focused mainly on providing the physical furniture for the
classrooms and allowing the teachers the autonomy to use the furniture however they saw fit.
Nothing in the findings demonstrated the instructional leadership support needed to help the
teachers build the required knowledge and motivation to align instructional practices with
flexible learning environments. Paul described the expectation from his principal as follows:
"Okay. I gave it to you guys to use or I signed you up for this pilot program because I
have faith in your ability to really use it and utilize it and now let's see what you guys can
come up with and do."
Even though Paul was supported by his site administration to utilize the flexible furniture in any
way he could come up with, his ability to do so successfully was all on him. The administrator
saying, “I have faith in your ability,” reflects that she assumed that Paul already had the required
knowledge and motivation needed to be a successful participant in the pilot program. The
participants expressed the sense that the administrators believed that they could successfully
utilize the new furniture in their classrooms., but never had any conversations regarding the how
to establish a flexible learning environment. How effectively each of the participants in this
study were able to implement flexible learning environments in their classrooms was only
influenced by their personal ability and individually acquired knowledge and motivation to do
so.
The two principals of the schools involved in this study were supportive and gave the
participants their autonomy to utilize the new classroom furniture in the best way they could.
The type of support that they provided appeared to be strictly focused on the selection of the
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

62
teachers for the pilot with no evidence of instructional leadership support. The teachers were on
their own to explore the possibilities of the new furniture and how the physical environment of
the classroom could enhance instruction. The lack of instructional leadership by the two
principals was evident as none of the participants stated that they had conversations with or
directions from their administrator about utilizing the furniture to create a flexible learning
environment to better align the physical attributes of the classroom to instructional tasks.
Theme 3: Organizational practices did not provide the direct support that the teachers
needed to provide students with daily experiences that effectively utilize flexible learning
environments during classroom instruction.
CCUSD established a flexible classroom furniture pilot program to provide 80 teachers in
the district the flexible classroom furniture and professional development training needed to
provide a variety of learning environments for the students. The district expectation was that
these teachers explore and implement flexible learning environments within their daily
instructional practices. It has been a common cultural practice in the district, as with many
districts, to “fast-track” innovative initiatives in an effort to quickly turn ideas into actions. The
classroom furniture pilot followed the “fast-track” process. The district’s decision to go forward
with outfitting 80 classrooms across the district moved immediately from idea to teacher
selection to purchasing furniture. Site administrators were charged with making a quick decision
to identify the two to four teachers to be involved in the program. Mary shared how she was
selected:
So we were told that one teacher from each grade level would be given this furniture.
And, so, as a third grade team, we picked a name out of a hat. And, I happened to be the
lucky one.
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

63
Although Mary and the rest of her team made the decision to throw their names in the hat, they
had little knowledge about the pilot program other than the fact that they would be getting brand
new furniture. It appears that the site level administration did not provide the participating
teachers any background knowledge regarding how the flexible furniture could be used to
support critical CCSS application skills. It appears that the teachers were randomly selected with
little frontloading regarding the effective use of the furniture. Specific information about how
the use of flexible furniture could enhance instruction in the classrooms was never shared with
prospective teacher participants.
Kate’s selection was based on a completely different set of circumstances. Given a lack
of proper furniture, she was chosen to be a pilot participating teacher. As she recounted,
I arrived to this school in October, and like I said, the students brought in their desks. It
was not a good situation because I couldn’t really put the desks together because they
were all different sizes. So my principal told me that I’d be receiving new furniture.
In this example, the selection was based on a need and not necessarily based on what the teacher
thought would be the best to faithfully implement the design of the program. It does not appear
that the organization set explicit criteria for the teachers as they selected the most appropriate
furniture to spearhead the innovative classroom environment pilot program. The participating
teachers in this study were selected for varied reasons and did not appear to have a high level of
understanding regarding the goals of the pilot. Larry could only come up with the fact that he
received new furniture for his classroom as a strength of the pilot program. He said the
following regarding the strengths;
The pilot itself or the actual furniture because I think that they have had no follow
through, and there's been nothing. It means nothing. There is no program. So you say the
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

64
pilot program, from my perspective I know nothing of the pilot program because they
have given the furniture and never said anything else.
Here, Larry alluded to the fact that just providing the material (in this case the furniture) is
insufficient in the construction of a cohesive program. He said “they have had no follow
through… there is no program.” As such, this teacher communicated needing something more
than just being given the furniture.
Each participant shared that there was no additional planning or training from the time
they selected the furniture until it finally arrived in their classroom. As far as they were
concerned, the emphasis of the pilot program was to simple outfit classrooms with brand new
furniture. District guided professional development or training on effectively utilizing flexible
learning environments in the classroom had not been provided. Paul shared about the
professional development he was involved in related to designing flexible learning
environments:
There might have been along the way so I really hate to say, we haven't done much
because maybe I go to so many different trainings that it might have been covered at one
point but it might have gotten lost somewhere. I might have attended something at one
point but it doesn't stick out as something that I've been able to do.
While Paul doubted whether he had been to a professional development opportunity related to
the pilot program, the fact that he said “it doesn’t stick out as something that I’ve been able to
do” suggests that it wasn’t a prominent or effective enough training to have been memorable and
thus affect his instruction.
Kate, Larry, and Mary’s experiences with professional development were similar as they
responded with, “Oh, I haven’t been to any professional development with regards to the pilot,”
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

65
“I haven’t participated in any,” and “None” respectively. The teachers were not provided with
the training and support needed to help them gain knowledge and understanding on the “how”
and “why” of using the flexible furniture in their classrooms. As pointed out in the previous
section, their current understandings and practices were at varied levels depending on their
individual desire to implement a flexible learning environment in their own classrooms. All four
participants reported that there had been no follow-up questions, comments, sharing, or trainings
from neither the district nor site administration about the utilization of flexible furniture in their
classrooms. Ironically, it wasn’t until they became involved with this study that they realized
that the furniture had a strategic purpose in classroom instruction. Kate shared what could have
been provided through professional development:
Perhaps knowing the why we have the furniture, so the research that backs it up and best
practices and real strategies of when it would be appropriate to have them move the
furniture. Just explaining the purpose and how it best serves kids.
Considering that Kate had been able to gain her own knowledge about how to effectively
implement flexible learning environments, she had some background understanding of what kind
of professional development would have been helpful to the pilot teachers. Her comment
reflects that the organization did not provide the needed frontloading of information to the
teachers prior to and during the implementation of the flexible learning environment pilot
program.
Mary also offered suggestions for how to make the professional development more robust
in order to position the teachers to be more knowledgeable about the use of the furniture for
instructional purposes:
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

66
I would have provided professional development on research-based ways that the
furniture has been used, and has been successful. I think we should probably watch a
class in different ways that they use the furniture. I think that would be helpful if people
could show us different designs to put the furniture in that has been successful. I would
like to see it used in a classroom.
Again, Mary identified the lack of professional development designed to build the prior
knowledge of the teachers as an area that should have been addressed by the organization. She
identified the need for pre-teaching of how to use the furniture as an important aspect to build
her own knowledge about how the new furniture could enhance the instruction within her own
classroom. Her suggestion also highlights what we know about good professional development:
there needs to be modeling of the new learning before we can expect teachers to implement in
their own contexts. Effective professional development must provide tools, techniques, and
laboratory-like settings to allow the teachers to align themselves to the new way (Moran &
Brightman, 2000).
All the participants felt like they were on their own to figure out how to organize their
classroom furniture in a manner that best served the students by creating a conducive learning
environment. It was evident that they would have liked to have had the opportunity to
participate in training to gain a better understanding of how and why classroom furniture designs
support students. The varied levels of knowledge the participants had, then, was not surprising,
because they were 1) chosen by their principals without much thought and 2) were not provided
support in the way of either instructional support from site level administration or district level
support in the way of district sponsored, effective professional development. All four
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

67
participants continued to work with their flexible furniture in isolation without any designated
support system and professional guidance.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Knowledge Recommendations
This study focused on two knowledge influences that were established based on what
initial knowledge and skills the teachers needed to effectively establish and support flexible
learning environments for the students. The procedural knowledge influence for this study stated
that teachers needed to know how to utilize flexible furniture within the classroom to design
appropriate physical learning spaces based on the type of learning application
required. Additionally, the metacognitive knowledge influence stated that teachers needed to
know how to reflect on their practices and progress with flexible learning environment
implementation. Exploring these two influences provided information about how the teachers
were implementing the use of flexible furniture in their classrooms and how they reflected on
that process.
Procedural knowledge solutions. Teachers needed to know how to utilize the flexible
furniture within the classroom to design appropriate physical learning spaces that allowed the
students to experience a variety of student-centered learning experiences. Procedural knowledge
is knowing how to do something through inquiry, algorithms, techniques, and/or methods
(Krathwohl, 2002). Procedural knowledge also includes the criteria one uses to know when to
use this knowledge type (Anderson, 2005). A focus on training as the guiding principle would
have allowed the teachers to acquire the needed knowledge required to successfully utilize
flexible furniture within the classrooms. The study found that the use of the furniture was varied
across the four participants, demonstrating varied knowledge of different ways of using the
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

68
furniture in the classroom. Unfortunately, this study did not collect robust enough data to
demonstrate HOW the furniture was being used for learning purposes.
The varied use of furniture and the lack of knowledge related to its relationship to
learning are not surprising. All of the participants included in this study reported that they had
not received any professional development regarding how to utilize the flexible furniture to
match instruction in the classroom. Training opportunities prior to furniture selection and on-
going after the furniture was placed in the classroom would have helped provide the teachers
with the procedural knowledge necessary to better implement the furniture during instruction.
Training individuals with the “how to” knowledge and providing guided practice and feedback
helps individuals achieve their goal (Clark & Estes, 2002). According to Scott and Palincsar
(2006), targeting training and instruction between the individual’s independent performance
level and their level of assisted performance promotes optimal learning.
To enhance their pedagogical repertoire, teachers need to arrange classroom spaces in
response to the need for students to regroup for individual, group, and whole class learning
opportunities (Blackmore, Bateman, Loughlin, O'Mara, & Aranda, 2011). Specific training
focused on new strategies would have provided essential knowledge, skills, practice, and
correctives to help the teachers successfully establish flexible learning environments within the
classroom. This training should be accompanied by enhanced professional development in
effective pedagogy focused on the critical 21
st
century learning skills that emphasize critical
thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity embedded into the CCSS. Quality
teaching and learning of the standards needs to remain the top priority no matter what tools,
resources, and programs are utilized in the classroom. Each of the study participants reported
that they were left on their own to decide how to use the furniture and develop their own
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

69
strategies in the isolation of their own classroom. When asked about the professional
development and trainings that they had accumulated since being selected for the pilot, all four
participants responded that they had not been offered or participated in any. Scott and Palinscar
(2006) recommend that training should provide sufficient scaffolding and tools to facilitate
learning and performance, then gradually withdraw scaffolds as learning progresses and
performance improves. Instructional leadership support should have been utilized to provide
accurate on-going feedback from site-level administration to help identify the skills or
knowledge the teacher lacked, while communicating that these skills and knowledge could and
should be learned, and followed up with the strategic teaching of these skills and knowledge
(Anderman & Anderman, 2006). The lack of instructional leadership support was evident as
each of the participants was working in isolation and reported that they had not received any
feedback from their administration regarding the use of flexible learning environments in their
classrooms. Site administrators would benefit from strategic professional development focused
on instructional leadership support to the teachers as they explore the use of flexible furniture in
their classrooms.
Metacognitive knowledge solutions. Teachers needed to self-reflect on their progress in
designing and implementing a flexible learning environment within their classroom. Each
teacher in this study was at a different application level in designing and utilizing flexible
learning environments dependent on their own understanding of the purpose. It appeared that
the participants that acquired more metacognitive awareness about how to use flexible furniture
were more successfully in application. As individuals increase their metacognitive awareness
they become self-regulated learners and increase their ability to determine what strategies work
for them and when it is appropriate to use these strategies (Mayer, 2011). Teacher journaling or
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

70
“Flexible Learning Environment” implementation portfolios could have been used to document
the relationship between prior understanding and learning through the teachers’ progression with
the integration of new approaches. This process would have been useful in recording the
teachers’ individual growth and awareness in the use of flexible furniture within their
classrooms.
Journal-sharing about application and implementation progress would have allowed all
teachers the opportunity to collectively enhance their progress with flexible learning
environments by providing them with opportunities as learners to check their progress and adjust
their learning strategies as needed (Denler, Wolters, & Benzon, 2014). Feedback from
colleagues would have helped stress the nature of learning, the importance of effort, strategies,
and potential self-control need for learning (Pintrich, 2003). Collaboration amongst all of the
pilot participants would have given the group more opportunities to learn and grow from each
other. Social interaction, cooperative learning, and cognitive apprenticeships (such as reciprocal
teaching) facilitate construction of new knowledge and build supportive and caring personal
relationship in the community of learners (Pintrich, 2003).
Motivation Recommendations
The following focused on the motivational-related influence that was pertinent to
teachers for successful implementation of flexible learning environments within their classrooms
during daily instruction. The identified motivational construct has the potential to decrease gaps
between performance and goals. When considering the theoretical research on motivational
influences, this study focused on the self-efficacy theory to help identify motivational issues that
impact teacher goal attainment. The self-efficacy influence stated that teachers needed to believe
they were capable of effectively implementing flexible learning classrooms environments. Each
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

71
participant reported that he/she believed that he/she could successfully implement flexible
learning environments in their classroom if given clear direction about what that entailed. Even
though all of the study participants reported that they provide opportunities for collaboration,
communication, critical thinking, and creativity, they all stated that they do not always purposely
move the furniture to enhance these opportunities. Focusing on this influence provided
information about how motivation affected the teachers’ ability to implement the use of flexible
furniture in their classrooms.
Self-efficacy solutions. Teachers needed to believe they were capable of effectively
implementing flexible learning classrooms environments. Self-efficacy beliefs help determine
how much effort people will devote to an activity, how long they will persevere with it, and how
resilient they will be when faced with adversity (Pajares, 2006). Pajares (2006) recommends
goal-directed practice coupled with frequent, accurate, credible, targeted and private feedback on
progress in learning and opportunities to observe a credible, similar model engaging in behavior
that has functional value as key strategies to increase teacher efficacy. A recommendation would
be to provide support to the teachers as they develop specific goals related to how they could
effectively implement flexible learning environments. Feedback from administration
observations as well as coaching needed to focus on their progress toward the achievement of the
established goal of utilizing flexible learning environments to access Common Core State
Standards. Teachers should have also been provided with opportunities to observe “master”
teachers in the district that had successfully implemented flexible learning environments in their
classrooms.
Teachers’ efficacy is the primary motivator in teachers’ work, therefore, contributes
positively to teachers' change in level of motivation (Canrinus, Helms-Lorenz, Beijaard, Buitink,
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

72
& Hofman, 2012). Teachers with strong self-efficacy demonstrate greater levels of planning and
organization, are comfortable being early adopters, and are more apt to experiment with new
methods (Tschannen-Moran, & Hoy, 2001). Efficacy affects the effort that teachers invest in
teaching, the goals they establish, and their level of aspirations (Tschannen-Moran, & Hoy,
2001). From a theoretical perspective then, it follows that when teachers are provided
opportunities to observe and reflect on the desired strategies employed by positive models and
receive specific feedback on their own implementation, they become more self-efficacies.
Organization Recommendations
The following focuses on the organizational-related influences that were pertinent to
teachers for successful incorporation of flexible learning environments within their classrooms
during daily instruction. This study focused on two assumed organizational factors: (a)
consistent and supported professional development opportunities needed to be implemented and
aligned for innovative classroom practices, including the use of flexible learning environments to
support student learning (Cultural Setting), and (b) teachers needed to be provided the autonomy
to rearrange the classroom so that the students have the opportunity for total involvement in the
assigned learning tasks (Cultural Model). Strategically focusing on these two influences
provided information about the organizational resources needed to support the teachers in the
implementation of flexible furniture in their classrooms.
Cultural Setting. The organization needed to provide professional development at both
district and site level to support the effective design and implementation of innovative flexible
learning environments. The organization needed to create a safe environment for teachers to
openly communicate their professional development needs while also providing opportunities for
professional dialogue centered around current research and practices in designing innovative
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

73
flexible learning environments. All of the study participants reported that they had not been
involved in any professional development or trainings focused on the effective use of flexible
furniture in the classroom. A thoroughly developed professional learning plan would have
supported the teachers in not only understanding the importance of creating a variety of learning
settings for the students, but also would have provided the structure and support systems needed
to implement flexible learning environments. CCUSD needed to develop a plan that would have
provided initial training for site level administration and classroom teachers that would have
created an equal understanding and critical knowledge on the use of flexible learning
environments in the classrooms. As it was, the pilot teachers’ classrooms were outfitted with
new flexible furniture without any guidance and support regarding how to best use the new
furniture to enhance instruction. Professional development opportunities were strictly dependent
on each individual teacher’s choice as no districtwide trainings were developed or offered to the
participants. The school district needs to establish a professional development plan at both the
district and site level that supports the site administration and teachers in effective use of
innovative classroom designs for instruction.
CCUSD needs to establish a professional development plan that is designed to provide
the participating teachers with the skills and knowledge needed to effectively implement flexible
learning environments in their classrooms. All participating teachers should be provided with
the critical background knowledge needed to make the connection between the “new” furniture
and what effective implementation would entail. Teachers would benefit from observing model
classrooms that have successfully incorporated flexible classroom furniture within the daily
instruction of the classroom. Regular meetings and opportunities to share successes and
concerns among the 80 teacher pilot program cohort of teachers would establish a professional
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

74
community focused on the successful implementation of the program. Site administrators would
also benefit from ongoing instructional leader professional development in order to better
support the teachers specifically in the implementation of flexible learning environments.
Cultural Model. The organization needed to support the teachers by providing them the
autonomy to rearrange the classroom so that the students could have had the opportunity for total
involvement in the assigned learning tasks. “Organizations with high levels of cultural trust tend
to produce high quality products and services at less cost because they can recruit and retain
highly motivated employees. These employees are more likely to enjoy their work, take the time
to do their jobs correctly; make their own decisions; take risks; innovate; embrace the
organization’s vision, mission, and values; and display organizational citizenship behavior”
(Colquitt, Scott & LePine, 2007). It is recommended that the school policies and practices
should demonstrate the commitment to supporting trustworthy behavior on the part of teachers
and other staff, thereby creating decision-making structures and granting discretion in
instructional decisions that rely on teachers’ expertise and commitment to students (Tschannen-
Moran, 2009). The organization needs to establish and/or connect all programs, policies, and
practices to incorporate teacher expertise and involvement as a critical component while
explicitly advising the teachers that they are allowed full freedom within the constraints of good
practice to design the classroom space however they decide best according to the learning
task. Both of the site administrators from the schools involved in the study demonstrated that
they supported the teachers’ engagement in experimenting with the new flexible furniture, but
did not critique or comment on the teachers’ progress with implementing the furniture to support
student access to the requirements established in the Common Core State Standards. As all of
the participants reported, the site administrators granted them the total freedom to use the
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

75
furniture however they wanted and never questioned the classroom arrangements. The site
administrators need to focus more on providing instructional leadership support designed to
support the teachers as they enhance their instructional practices by designing and aligning them
with the use flexible learning environments within the classroom. CCUSD administrators need
to be trained in how to provide focused feedback to the teachers with an emphasis on the critical
skills or knowledge that are required to support the students with collaboration, communication,
critical thinking, and creativity, how they can be learned, and how the furniture arrangement in
the classroom could support the acquisition of these skills. It is recommended that frequent
observational feedback focused on the importance of effort and strategies for student learning be
given to the teachers. Teachers need to be explicitly reminded that their ability to exercise
reasonable choice and control in the classroom allows them the flexibility to adjust the learning
environment based on 21
st
Century learning pedagogy and student needs.
Future Research
This study explored the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences needed for
teachers to effectively implement flexible furniture within the classrooms to design appropriate
physical learning spaces that provide students with a variety of student-centered learning
experiences while accessing the Common Core State Standards. While this study demonstrated
that the teacher knowledge and motivation was dependent on each individual teacher’s self-
acquisition of the skills, desire, and understand about how to provide flexible environments to
enhance student learning, it is unknown if other teachers follow suit.
Future research could include interviews and observations with a larger sample of
CCUSD teachers to provide clarity about the relationship between organizational support and the
required knowledge and motivation needed by the teachers. This larger sample would either
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

76
confirm or rebuff the findings that the organizational support was limited to the selection of the
teachers and furniture with a lack of involvement in the connection between the furniture and
instruction.
A second avenue for future research would include a study into which type of furniture
arrangements are proven to be better aligned to positive student outcomes on specific learning
tasks. This research would hopefully provide data showing direct relationships between
furniture grouping and student performance.
Lastly, research extending from this study could explore whether there is an alignment
between instruction utilizing flexible furniture to create varied learning environments within the
classroom and positive student outcomes. This study would attempt to draw comparisons in
academic performance between students from highly flexible learning environment classrooms
versus students from “traditional” classrooms. This research would be dependent on the teachers
first receiving ample professional development in how to effectively use flexible furniture in the
classroom.
Conclusion
At the time of this study, the mission of College and Career Unified School District
(CCUSD) was to develop the skills, knowledge, and motivation that students need to succeed as
citizens in the global community. All students were hoped to have equal access to learning
provided by a staff that will work with families in a caring and collaborative learning
environment (CCUSD Website, 2016). CCUSD’s organizational goal was that 100% of all
CCUSD “Innovative Classroom Environment” participating teachers would utilize at least two
flexible learning environments within their classrooms during daily instruction as measured by
classroom observations. The focus for this study addressed the district identified strategy of
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

77
providing a 21
st
century learning environment for students and teachers by promoting and
investing in the use of flexible learning environments to deliver a rigorous and relevant
curriculum aligned to the core content standards, taught through 21
st
Century Learning Skills
(CCUSD Website, 2016). The study examined how the teacher’s knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences play a role in the degree to which CCUSD is meeting its goal that
students in the “Innovative Classroom Environment” pilot will experience and effectively utilize
important 21
st
century learning skills embedded within the Common Core State Standards by
using flexible learning environments during daily instruction. The first, necessary step towards
that end would be the teachers’ use of flexible learning environments in their classrooms.
Findings from the study were synthesized into three distinct themes:
1. The amount of student exposure to daily experiences that effectively utilize flexible
furniture during classroom instruction was dependent on the knowledge and
motivation of the classroom teacher in providing flexible environments.
2. The site administrators didn’t demonstrate instructional leadership when it came to
purchasing and/or using the new furniture in the classrooms.
3. Organizational practices do not provide the direct support that the teachers need to
provide students with daily experiences that effectively utilize flexible furniture
during classroom instruction.
Proposed recommendations have been offered to decrease the examined gaps in teacher
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences, thereby increasing the probability of
attaining the goal that students in the “Innovative Classroom Environment” pilot will experience
and effectively utilize important 21
st
century learning skills embedded within the Common Core
State Standards by using flexible learning environments during daily instruction.
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

78
References
Anderman, E., & Anderman, L. (2006). Attributions. Retrieved from:
http://www.education.com/reference/article/attribution-theory/.
Anderson, L. W. (2005). Objectives, evaluation, and the improvement of education. Studies in

educational evaluation, 31(2), 102-113.

Bandura, A. (2006). Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

Barbash, S. (2012). Clear teaching. With direct instruction, Siegfried Engelmann discovered a

better way of teaching. Arlington, VA: Education Consumers Foundation.
Blackmore, J., Bateman, D., Loughlin, J., O'Mara, J., & Aranda, G. (2011). Research into the

connection between built learning spaces and student outcomes.

Boettcher, J. V. (2007). Ten core principles for designing effective learning environments:

Insights from brain research and pedagogical theory. Innovate: Journal of Online

Education, 3(3), 2.

Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Ing, M., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2011). The influence of

school administrators on teacher retention decisions. American Educational Research

Journal, 48(2), 303-333.

Canrinus, E. T., Helms-Lorenz, M., Beijaard, D., Buitink, J., & Hofman, A. (2012). Self-

efficacy, job satisfaction, motivation and commitment: exploring the relationships

between indicators of teachers’ professional identity. European Journal of Psychology of

Education, 27(1), 115-132.

Carrington, S., Deppeler, J., & Moss, J. (2010). Cultivating teachers' knowledge and skills for

leading change in schools. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 35(1), 1-13.

Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2002). Turning research into results. Atlanta, GA: CEP Press.

CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

79
Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity:
a meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance.
Journal of applied psychology, 92(4), 909.
Cornell, P. (2002). The impact of changes in teaching and learning on furniture and the learning

environment. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 92(92), 33-42.

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods

approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Denler, H., Wolters, C., & Benzon, M. (2014). Social cognitive theory. Retreived from:

http://www.education.com/reference/article/social-cognitive-theory/.

Donovan, L., Green, T. D., & Mason, C. (2014). Examining the 21st century classroom:

Developing an innovation configuration map. Journal of Educational Computing

Research, 50(2), 161-178.

Duncanson, E. (2014). Lasting effects of creating classroom space: A study of teacher

behavior. The Journal of the International Society for Educational Planning, 21(3), 29-

40.

Higgins, S., Hall, E., Wall, K., Woolner, P., & McCaughey, C. (2005). The impact of school

environments: A literature review. London: Design Council.

Kaufmann, D., Johnson, S. M., Kardos, S. M., Liu, E., & Peske, H. G. (2002). " Lost at Sea":
New Teachers' Experiences with Curriculum and Assessment. Teachers College Record,
104(2), 273-300.
Kendall, J. S. (2011). Understanding common core state standards. Denver, CO: Association

for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into

CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

80
practice, 41(4), 212-218.

Kuuskorpi, M., & González, N. C. (2011). The future of the physical learning environment.

Lam, S. F., Cheng, R. W. Y., & Ma, W. Y. (2009). Teacher and student intrinsic motivation in

project-based learning. Instructional Science, 37(6), 565.

Louis, K. S. (2007). Trust and improvement in schools. Journal of educational change, 8(1), 1
24.
Marzano, R. J., Marzano, J. S., & Pickering, D. (2003). Classroom management that works:

Research-based strategies for every teacher. ASCD.

Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
McCombs, B. L. (1997). Self-assessment and reflection: Tools for promoting teacher changes

toward learner-centered practices. Nassp Bulletin, 81(587), 1-14.

McKinney, G. (2013). Building common knowledge. Journal of Staff Development, 34(4),

42-54.

Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Moran, J. W., & Brightman, B. K. (2000). Leading organizational change. Journal of
Workplace Learning: Employee Counseling Today, 12(2), 66-74.
Morrissey, M. S. (2000). Professional learning communities: An ongoing exploration.
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. Retrieve from:

http://www.education.com/reference/article/self-efficacy-theory/.

Partnership for 21
st
Century Skills (2013). P21 Common Core toolkit: A guide to aligning

CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

81
the Common Core State Standards with the framework for 21
st
century skills.

Washington, DC: P21.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Chapter 7: Qualitative Interviewing. In Qualitative research & evaluation
methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Pearson, L. C., & Moomaw, W. (2006). Continuing validation of the teaching autonomy

scale. The Journal of Educational Research, 100(1), 44-51.

Pedder, D., James, M., & MacBeath, J. (2005). How teachers value and practise professional
learning. Research papers in Education, 20(3), 209-243.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667–686.
Porter, A., McMaken, J., Hwang, J., & Yang, R. (2011). Common core standards the new US

intended curriculum. Educational Researcher, 40(3), 103-116.

Roskos, K., & Neuman, S. (2011). The classroom environment. The Reading Teacher, 65(2),

110-114.

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, S., & Palincsar, A. (2013). Sociocultural theory. Education. com.
Scribner, J. P. (1999). Professional development: Untangling the influence of work context on
teacher learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35(2), 238-266.
Soulé, H., & Warrick, T. (2015). Defining 21st century readiness for all students: What we know

and how to get there. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9(2), 178.

Stajkovic, A. D., & Luthans, F. (1979). Social Cognitive Theory and Self. efficacy: Implications

CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

82
for Motivation Theory and Practice.

Suleman, Q., & Hussain, I. (2014). Effects of classroom physical environment on the academic

achievement scores of secondary school students in kohat division, Pakistan.

International Journal of Learning and Development, 4(1), 71-82.

Tschannen-Moran, M. (2009). Fostering teacher professionalism in schools: The role of
leadership orientation and trust. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45(2), 217-247.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive

construct. Teaching and teacher education, 17(7), 783-805.

CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

83
Appendix A: Participating Stakeholders with Sampling Criteria
for Interview and Observation

Participating Stakeholders
Teachers were selected as the key stakeholder group because they were directly
responsible for implementing flexible learning spaces within their classrooms as the practitioners
for the “Innovative Classroom Environment” pilot program in CCUSD. The teachers that agreed
to participate in this pilot agreed to attend the required district level professional development
and trainings on flexible learning environments for California Common Core State Standards
instruction. Admittedly, those who agreed to participate in the pilot were selected for a variety
of different reasons and a willingness to try something new. Of this group, the participants for
this study were selected based on years of service, grade level assignment, and commitment to
the study. Since all elementary, middle, and high schools in the district had at least two teachers
participating in the pilot program, the established criteria for selection resulted in a purposeful
sample.
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Criterion 1. Teachers who participated in the district’s Innovative Classroom
Environment pilot. This study focused on those teachers who had been provided with the
flexible classroom furniture necessary to design flexible learning spaces. As such, interviewing
the participating teachers allowed me to determine if they had the procedural knowledge required
to design physical learning spaces that were flexible to the learning task as well as to gauge what
motivational and organizational factors either facilitated or inhibited their ability to meet the
stakeholder performance goal.
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

84
Criterion 2. Teachers that had a self-contained general education classroom at the
elementary level. This selection was based on the fact that these grades are typically assigned to
a self-contained, one classroom setting throughout the school day. Interviewing these teachers
allowed me to determine how many different flexible learning spaces were utilized in one
classroom throughout a day of instruction.
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
The sampling strategy that was used to select the participants in the study was purposeful
in that only teachers participating in the innovative classroom pilot were recruited to participate.
Participants also needed to demonstrate willingness to participate. There were approximately 80
pilot program teachers. I solicited participation from all 80 teachers, depending on who
responded, I then asked the volunteers a series of screening questions that helped me select the
participants. Four elementary teachers were selected to be interviewed and observed for the
study; two from each of two different schools. The schools were selected from a list of all the
elementary schools in the district. Using a purposeful sampling guaranteed that the participants
met the specific characteristics important to the study (Johnson & Christensen, 2014).
Observation Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Criterion 1. The classrooms and instruction of the participating teachers selected for the
interview sample above. The intention of these observations was to qualify the thoughts and
ideas uncovered during the interview process. Data was gathered related to the variety of
learning tasks required of the students, the number of different classroom furniture
configurations utilized throughout the instructional day, and how the arrangements related to the
assigned learning task.
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

85
Observation Sampling (Access) Strategy and Rationale
Observations were conducted in four elementary classrooms at two different schools in
CCUSD. Considering that the nature of my study involved the actual physical space and its
manipulation in the classroom, full day observations were needed to explore what the teachers
actually did and how they set up their classes. As such, classroom instruction was sampled for
observation.

CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

86
Appendix B: Protocols
Interview Protocol
Introduction
First, I want to thank you for agreeing to participate in this study. I really appreciate the time
that you have set aside to answer my questions. Secondly, I have every intention to take no more
than an hour of your time for this process. If we feel more time is needed, we will reschedule for
another day to complete the interview or a possible follow-up interview if I need something
clarified from our time together today.

As we get started, I want to provide you with an overview of my study and answer any questions
you might have about participating in this interview. I am currently enrolled as a doctoral student
at USC and I am conducting a study to address the knowledge and skills, motivation, and
organization influences needed for CCUSD teachers to implement flexible learning
environments in their classrooms. I am interviewing a total of four elementary teachers that are
involved in the flexible classroom environment pilot program and follow up with full day
observations in their corresponding classrooms later.

I assure you that I am here today strictly as a researcher, therefore, the nature of my questions is
not evaluative. This interview is confidential, your name will not be shared with anyone, and the
perspectives you provide will be coded and reported in an anonymous nature. Data from this
study will not be shared directly with other teachers, your site administration, and district
officials.

Any data from this study will be used solely within my dissertation and while I may use some of
what you say as direct quotes, none of the data will be directly attributed to you. I will use a
pseudonym or appropriate coding to protect your confidentiality and will try my best to de-
identify any of the data I gather from you. A copy of my findings will be provided to you for an
accuracy check prior to my final submission.

Do you have any questions about the study or the interview process prior to us beginning?

If you don’t have any questions, may I have your permission to begin the interview. I have
brought an audio recording device with me today so that I can accurately capture what you share
with me. The recording will be solely for my purpose to best capture your perspectives and I
will not share it with anyone else. May I have your permission to record this conversation?

Let me begin by asking you some questions about your teaching career and your school.

1. How long have you been a classroom teacher?
2. What grades have you taught during your time as a classroom teacher?
3. How long have you been at this school?
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

87
4. How long have you been in your current classroom?
I am going to ask you some questions about the Common Core State Standards.

5. Describe a typical day of instruction in your classroom prior to the adoption of the
Common Core State Standards.

6. How is a typical day of instruction different in your classroom since the adoption of the
Common Core State Standards?

Now I would like to focus my questions on the physical design of classroom spaces.

7. Describe what you consider as a “traditional” physical design of a classroom.
8. How would you describe a “nontraditional” physical design of a classroom?
9. How do you prefer to organize the classroom furniture in your classroom?
10. In what ways, if any, do you adjust the physical environment to support the students in
the following:
• Collaboration
• Communication
• Creativity
• Critical Thinking
11. Share with me the effort that you put into designing appropriate physical learning
environments for the students to experience collaboration, communication, creativity, and
critical thinking?

a. How do you think your effort relates to student performance on group learning
tasks?

12. Some people say providing a variety of physical environment settings for your students
isn’t necessary, that learning can happen in any setting. What would you say to that?

13. How comfortable do you feel implementing flexible learning classroom environments?

a. Tell me about a time when you thought to yourself, “I know how to organize the
physical environment in my classroom.”
b. Tell me about a time when you thought to yourself, “I know I can be better at
organizing the physical environment in my classroom.”
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

88

Let’s now focus more on the innovative classroom furniture pilot program.

14. Tell me about your involvement in the innovative classroom furniture pilot program.
15. Share with me your first reactions as a selected participant in the pilot program.
16. What, if any, are the strengths of the pilot program?
17. If you were to redesign the pilot, what are some things you would include to support the
pilot teachers in the implementation?

18. How has your participation in this pilot influenced you and your teaching, if at all?
19. Explain to me the reasons that influenced your decision to participate in the pilot?
20. Participating in any new program can be both rewarding and challenging. Explain your
experience so far with any challenges you have faced.
a. How have you overcome them? What specific strategies did you use? What
resources did you seek out?
b. How does this challenge continue to be a barrier to full implementation? What
would need to happen to overcome this challenge?

I would like to know more about the support that has been provided to you for your
involvement in this program.

21. Tell me about your site administrator’s role in the implementation of the program.
22. Tell me about a conversation that demonstrates your site administrator providing support
to you on the implementation of this program.

23. Share with me how much freedom you are granted by administration to arrange the
classroom furniture how you see fit?

24. Share with me a situation when administration has questioned or challenged a particular
classroom arrangement you had designed.

25. Tell me about the professional development that you have participated in related to
designing your classroom learning spaces.

26. Share with me what you would identify as the strengths of the professional development
for this pilot that you have attended.

27. Share with me what you would identify as the weaknesses of the professional
development for this pilot that you attended.

CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

89
28. Walk me through the improvement strategies that you would provide for the professional
development for this pilot that you attended.

29. If you were to design the next phase of professional development specifically based on
your need or desire, describe what would it look like?

30. Let’s assume you are the Superintendent, talk to me about the next steps in the
continuous growth process for implementing flexible learning environments?

Closing

Thank you for your participation in this interview. Is there anything that you would add to our
conversation today that I may not have covered?

I really appreciate your time and willingness to share all your insights with me today.
Everything that you have shared will serve as important insight for my study. May I contact you
at a later time if I find a need for follow-up questions or further clarification about our time
together today? If so, what is the best way for me to contact you? Again, thank you for your
time and openness today.

Observation Protocol
Observe and record the three interaction choices for students; teacher-to-student, student-
to-student, and student-to-resources within individual, small group, and large group activities.
Document the variation of furniture arrangements utilized throughout the day and the learning
task associated with the chosen arrangement. Time-stamping will be completed every five
minutes to document the frequency of the three interaction choices for students; teacher-to-
student, student-to-student, and student-to-resources within individual, rows, clusters, semi-
circles, circles, and large group arrangements.

CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

90
Appendix C: Credibility and Trustworthiness

Credibility and Trustworthiness
In this study, I ensured that the research process was trustworthy and the reported
findings were credible. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) explain that the research process is
trustworthy when the study is rigorous in both application of methods and interpretation of the
data. My observations were rigorous by devoting a whole day to observe in each of the
participating classrooms as well as incorporating an interview protocol that was rigorously
intensive in order to collect “rich” data. As Maxwell (2013) states, “rich” data is detailed and
varied while providing a full and revealing image of what is happening.
As I gathered data, I understood how my positionality could have an impact on what was
gathered and how the data was interpreted. As Merriam and Tisdell (2016) explain, reactivity is
how the researcher either affects or is affecting the study. In an effort to recognize how
reflexivity could have affected this study, I confronted any biases, experiences, or assumptions
that may have had an influence on the study and its conclusions. Knowing this, the reader may
have a better understanding about why some interpretations were made from the data collected.
While participating in data collection, I understood that reactivity was a natural threat to the
process, that as the researcher, I may have had an influence on the individuals being studied.
Eliminating this threat was impossible. Rather, the goal was to understand it and use it
productively (Maxwell, 2013).
To address the credibility of the findings from my study, I purposefully established a
design that incorporated triangulation, which allowed me to check what someone shares in an
interview against what is observed on site relative to the phenomenon of interest (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). By using interviews and observations, information was obtained from a variety
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

91
of settings, using a variety of methods (Maxwell, 2013). Observations conducted after the
interview process allowed me to cross-check and verify the self-reported information obtained
from the teachers. Additionally, member checking was used as another credibility strategy.
Participants were presented with the preliminary data and findings from the observations and
interviews once the field notes were completed to allow them the opportunity to offer feedback
and clarification. The final report of the data and information was shared with each participant
prior to reporting the final findings. As stated in Merriam and Tisdell (2016), this process ruled
out the possibility of misinterpreting the meaning of what was said and done, while also giving
the participants an opportunity to identify any misunderstandings of what was observed.

CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

92
Appendix D: Ethics

Ethics
As this study involved observations and interviews with human participants, the study
was explained and an informational sheet was shared with all the study participants. As per
Glesne’s (2011) suggestion, all participants were made aware (1) that participation was
voluntary, (2) of any aspects of the study that might affect their well-being, and (3) that they
could choose to stop their participation at any point during the study. The commitment to
confidentiality and importance of data security and storage was shared with all participants prior
to any observation and/or interview. According to Glesne (2011), participants have the right to
expect that the researcher will protect their confidences and preserve their confidentiality to the
best of his ability.
Since this study happened within my organization, it was extremely important to
maintain the ethical responsibilities that I had as a researcher. As Rubin and Rubin (2012) state,
this means there is no deceit or pressure involved, that participants are treated respectfully from
the first contact to the last, and a guarantee that all promises made are kept. The key stakeholder
group in my study was the teachers that were involved in the flexible learning environment pilot
program. As a principal in the same district, I was straightforward with all prospective
participants that I was assuming the role of researcher, not a school principal from a different
school in the district during our time together and continually reassured them of the commitment
to the confidentiality required within the study. My study maintained ethics by testing the
validity of my conclusions in relation to me as a researcher during the data collection process. I
understood that I would have to account for assumptions and biases that I may have had as a
school administrator when I entered the classrooms of the participating teachers. As I engaged in
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

93
data collection, analysis, and reporting activities, I knew that I had the responsibility to remove
my administrator hat and totally immerse myself in the role of investigative researcher. The
participants in a study were no worse off for agreeing to and participating in the observations and
interviews, therefore, information gained from the study was not revealed if it was deemed as
embarrassing or jeopardized the participants’ job and/or income (Rubin & Rubin, 2012).
As Glense (2011) reports, the mission of social science research is enabling the
community to prosper, and the purpose and methods reflective of involvement for the benefit of
all. The selection of schools for the study was done in an ethical manner by involving the
Assistant Superintendent of Educational Services in providing a categorized list of all the schools
involved in the pilot and distinguishing the measure of site level administrative support they
received and progression in implementation. The final two schools for this study were chosen
from the categorized list of all the schools provided by the assistant superintendent.

CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

94
Appendix E: Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations and Delimitations
While conducting research, certain happenings in the field could have an impact on the
designed plan of study. Limitations to the study were items or events that were beyond my
control, while delimitations can be controlled and served as a way to intentionally bound the
study.
Limitations
1. Size of sample: A thorough study would have involved interviewing and observing
more of the 80 teachers participating in the pilot program. Due to time constraints of
this study, only four of the pilot teachers served as a sample of the 80 pilot teachers.
2. One day observations: A thorough study would have included more than one full day
observation in the participating classrooms. Due to time constraints of this study,
only one day of observations was completed for each of the participating teachers.
The information obtained from these observations is reflective of the particular day of
said observation. As well, the observational data was not robust in its explanation of
HOW the teachers implemented flexible learning environments using furniture.
Rather, the one day of observation only enabled me to note what the various physical
arrangements were corresponding to the learning activities.
3. Personal experiences: Personal experiences of each of the teachers provided
limitations to this study as the only predetermined criteria for participant selection
was their involvement in the pilot furniture program and their own willingness to
participate. Each of the participants were selected to participate in the pilot by their
principal based on obtuse criteria. Previous knowledge in the effective use of flexible
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT FOR THE COMMON CORE

95
classroom furniture to match learning objectives was not an established criterion for
selection.

Delimitations
1. Participant selection: An effort was made to control the selection of the participants
in this study. The selection of elementary teachers participating in the pilot program
allowed for the collection of relative data within a classroom of the same teacher and
students throughout a complete school day.
2. Conceptual framework: The KMO conceptual framework assisted the study by
identifying, examining, and addressing any gaps in the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational work processes and material resources to determine whether the
teachers achieved the established performance goals.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Equitable schooling for African American students: an evaluation study

PDF

An evaluation study of... What do teachers know about gifted students?

PDF

Learning the language of math: supporting students who are learning English in acquiring math proficiency through language development

PDF

Administrators' role in supporting teachers through feedback

PDF

Answering the call for shared leadership - the missing conditions for successful implementation of English language teacher leadership: an evaluation study

PDF

Effective coaching of teachers to support learning for English language learners

PDF

Implementing standards-based grading in the era of common standards: an evaluation study

PDF

Instructional differentiation and accommodations to support student achievement in SLD and ADHD secondary school populations: an evaluation study

PDF

Professional development at an international school

PDF

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

PDF

Teacher perception on positive behavior interventions and supports’ (PBIS) cultivation for positive teacher-student relationships in high schools: an evaluation study

PDF

Trending upward: an evaluation study of teacher practices in serving special needs students in a public high school

PDF

Teacher role in reducing the achievement gap: an evaluation study

PDF

The issue of remediation as it relates to high attrition rates among Latino students in higher education: an evaluation study

PDF

Line staff and their influence on youth in expanded learning programs: an evaluation model

PDF

The transference of continuous intergroup dialogue skills to the classroom by participating faculty: an evaluation study

PDF

Characteristics that create a quality early learning center: An evaluation study

PDF

E-TECH professional development: a Mountain View University initiative

PDF

Application of professional learning outcomes into the classroom: an evaluation study

PDF

Quality literacy instruction in juvenile court schools: an evaluation study

Asset Metadata

Creator Borgen, Dan L. (author)

Core Title Classroom environment for Common Core

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 01/30/2019

Defense Date 12/18/2018

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

Tag classroom environment,classroom furniture,flexible furniture arrangements,flexible seating,OAI-PMH Harvest,student seating arrangements

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Samkian, Artineh (committee chair)

Creator Email borgen@usc.edu,dan.lqns@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-115204

Unique identifier UC11675441

Identifier etd-BorgenDanL-7030.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-115204 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-BorgenDanL-7030.pdf

Dmrecord 115204

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Borgen, Dan L.

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