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

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Request accessible transcript

Transcript (if available)

Content
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ELEMENTS OF EFFECTIVE CLASSROOM
INSTRUCTION: LESSONS FROM HIGH PERFORMING, HIGH POVERTY
URBAN SCHOOLS

by

Jose Manuel Rodriguez

__________________________________________________________________

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

December 2008

Copyright 2008 Jose Manuel Rodriguez
ii
DEDICATION
This dissertation is dedicated to my wife Elsy, daughter Elise and mother
Virginia. My wife is and continues to be a blessing, fully supporting my decisions
and inspiring me to be a great human being. I could not have done this without my
wife’s support. Elise has turned our world upside down but has been a source of joy
for all of us. I could not fathom my life without my wife or daughter. Madre, eres
una mujer cariñosa, trabajadora, llena de esperanza. Me has inculcado valores que
me han ayudado en llegar y lograr esta meta. Te quiero y agradezco todo lo que has
hecho por nosotros.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This dissertation was created with the guidance of my dissertation chair, Dr.
Rousseau. Her expertise in the field and wealth of knowledge were a valuable
resource. A special thanks to my committee members Dr. Stowe and Dr. Marsh, for
their time and dedication.
In order for this dissertation to come to fruition, groups of individuals
facilitated my completion. These extended groups (family) supported and gave me
strength and encouragement to continue the work. My principal, Javier Miranda and
fellow assistant principal, Beatriz Ramos were instrumental in fostering a situation
that allowed to me complete my degree. My in-laws, Jose and Wilma who babysat
our daughter, made it possible for me to study and enjoy quality time with my wife
(once in a while). My father, Sebastian and sisters, Estela and Yadira who are proud
with all my endeavors. My thematic dissertation cohort members allowed me to vent
and share successes and challenges (we were each others rock).
To the students I serve, you are the reason and motivation I keep going.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION ……………………………………………………………….. ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS …………………………………………………… iii
LIST OF TABLES …………………………………………………………… v
LIST OF FIGURES …………………………………………………………. vii
ABSTRACT …………………………………………………………………. ix
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ……………………………………….. 1
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW ………………………………. 24
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY …………………………………... 72
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS …………………………………………….. 87
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, IMPLICATIONS OF FINDINGS ………. 151
REFERENCES …………………………………………………………….. 165
APPENDICES ……………………………………………………………... 172
v
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1: High Performing/High Poverty Schools-Report Findings ……………… 5

Table 1-2: 2005 Eighth Grade Mathematics Achievement Scores
(Scale 0-500) ……………………………………………………………………….12

Table 1-3: California Standards Test (2006) Results- Proficient/Advanced
(Language Arts) within UUSD ……………………………………………………. 14

Table 1-4: California Urban School Districts’ Results (2006)-Language Arts
(Proficient/Advanced) …………………………………………………………….. 15

Table 2-1: Out of Every 100 Kindergartners ……………………………………… 30

Table 2-2, Critical Race Theory Frameworks …………………………………….. 32

Table 2-3: High Performing/High Poverty Schools-Report Findings …………….. 39

Table 2-4: Multicultural Education’s Dimensions in the Form of Systems ………. 42

Table 2-5: The Eight Characteristics of the Multicultural School ………………... 43

Table 2-6: Culturally Relevant Teaching …………………………………………. 51

Table 2-7: Effective Instructional Practices for English Learners ………………... 53

Table 2-8: Reclassification Criteria ………………………………………………. 68

Table 3-1: Criteria for School Selection ………………………………………….. 76

Table 3-2: Pajaro Avenue School’s State API ……………………………………. 78

Table 3-3: Matrix of Interview Protocol to Research Questions …………………. 81

Table 3-4: Process of Data Analysis ……………………………………………... 84

Table 4-1: Percent of Proficient and Advanced (CST) …………………………… 94

Table 4-2: Special Programs ……………………………………………………… 95

Table 4-3: Student Enrollment in Percentages ……………………………………. 95

vi
Table 4-4: Teacher Ethnicity in Percentages …………………………………. 98

Table 4-5: 2005-2006 Pajaro School Staff Profile ……………………………. 99

Table 4-6: Culturally Relevant Teaching …………………………………….. 127
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1: Systems and Structures ……………………………………………. 6

Figure 1-2: Model of Continuous Improvement (MCI) ……………………….. 9

Figure 2-1: Systems and Structures …………………………………………… 40

Figure 2-2: School-Wide Culture, Policies and Practices …………………….. 56

Figure 2-3: Model of Continuous Improvement (MCI) ………………………. 59

Figure 3:1 Theoretical Framework for High Poverty/High Performing
Schools Study …………………………………………………………………. 80

Figure 4-1:School API Scores ………………………………………………… 89

Figure 4-2: Pajaro School’s Socioeconomic Disadvantage API ……………… 91

Figure 4-3: Pajaro School Latino Students’ API ……………………………… 91

Figure 4-4: Pajaro School English Learners’ API …………………………….. 92

Figure 4-5: Pajaro School Reclassification Rate ……………………………… 92

Figure 4-6: Pajaro School Student Attendance ……………………………….. 93

Figure 4-7: Pajaro School Suspension Rates …………………………………. 94

Figure 4-8: Student Enrollment at Pajaro School ……………………………. 96

Figure 4-9: Types of Certificated Assignments ……………………………… 98

Figure 4-10: Average Days Absent-Certificated ……………………………... 99

Figure 4-11: Teacher Credentials at Pajaro School ………………………….. 100

Figure 4-12: Certificated Positions ………………………………………….. 100

Figure 4-13: Model of Continuous Improvement (MCI) ……………………. 113

Figure 4-14: Systems and Structures ………………………………………... 141

viii
Figure 5.1: Theoretical Framework for High-Poverty/High-Performing
Schools Study …………………………………………………………….. 154

ix
ABSTRACT
The primary purpose of this study is to examine the role of systems and
structures in promoting high academic achievement among students of color in high
poverty schools. The study seeks to examine the effectiveness of a set of identified
systems working in concert under a set of structures.
Specifically, the study focused on identifying systems and structures that
increase reclassification rates among students of color who are English Learners due
to the strong correlation between reclassification and achievement levels. An
analysis of these effective systems allow for investigation into how certain schools
are able to best prepare their English Learners. This study examined a high-
performing, high-poverty school with a large concentration of English Learners
within a large, urban school district that has been successful in providing a high
quality education, with effective systems and structures in place that create this
condition. The criteria for a high performing school included schools that
maintained or improved their API growth in a three to five year period. High poverty
was defined as schools with 75 percent or more of their students on free or reduced
lunch and identified as Title I. Urban was defined as an area with a high population
density and a high concentration of students of color. High concentration is defined
as a minimum of 60 percent of students of color at a school site.
The research questions for this study were developed by the thematic
dissertation group using the theoretical framework as a guide that is grounded in
socio-cultural theories of learning. The framework captures three critical elements
x
that affect high student performance: 1) historical, societal, and educational
influences, 2) contemporary societal and educational influences, 3) school site
systemic and structural influences.
The following major findings emerged from this study: 1) Students of color
are capable of performing at higher levels under appropriate conditions. 2) A
culture of high expectations, was evident and reflected an organization operating
under a belief system that students have the capacity to perform at high levels. 3) A
concentrated effort on instruction and learning was observed within the systems and
structures of the school. 4) Tenets of Culturally Relevant Teaching were observed
in classrooms. 5) Elements and characteristics of Multicultural Education were
evident at the school site.
This study describes how systems and structures can work in concert to meet
the needs of students of color from a low socioeconomic background and foster high
academic achievement.
1
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Introduction
Historically, high poverty urban schools with large concentrations of students
of color have been associated with low student achievement. The struggle for equity
and access to a quality education has been and continues to be crucial for the lives of
involuntary immigrant groups, in particular African-Americans and Mexican-
Americans.
Our public schools, both structurally and systemically have denied equal
opportunities or access to educational opportunities that would ensure equity in terms
of academic achievement to people of color in comparison to white middle class
students. As a result, people of color have been denied economic, political and
employment access that would improve their quality of life and consequently of our
multicultural society as a whole. The inaccessibility of equitable opportunities for
academic achievement results in a corresponding inequity in terms of economic and
political access, thus affecting the quality of life (Menchaca, 1996).
The initial ideology for a public school system put forth by Thomas Jefferson
continues to be applicable to our high poverty urban schools to this day. In 1779,
Thomas Jefferson’s proposal for public schooling was only intended for white
citizens (Spring, 2000). The belief and idea of educating particular groups to sustain
social classes has been the core of the struggle for under-represented groups.
Throughout the past century students of color were trained instead of being educated
in public schools, tracking them into limited career options.
2
Although non-white citizens have made strides in political and legal arenas,
an achievement and opportunity gap between whites and citizens of color continues
to exist as access to a quality education continues to be denied to students of color
who attend high poverty schools. Some of the barriers that have prevented this
access come in the form of limited instructional resources, inferior teacher quality
and high transient rates amongst teachers. The notion that some groups are intended
to be the dominant forces (holders of power) while others are expected to remain as
the subordinate class, has been deeply ingrained in our culture and is evident in
policy-making (Menchaca, 1996). Political power has remained with a select group
of individuals, traditionally white, and access to this power has been denied to those
who have been historically disadvantaged. This in turn has allowed for the social
reproduction of classes (Monkman, Ronald, & Théraméne, 2005), determining a
person’s position in society, specifically its economic structure, largely based on
constructs of, and perceptions about, race.
Inequalities continue to persist at every income level between African-
Americans, Latinos, Native Americans and Whites (Straveteig & Wigton, 2000).
These three groups of people of color are three times more likely to live in poverty
than their white counterparts (Straveteig & Wigton, 2000). Correspondingly, the
research from the field shows that students living in poverty are three times more
likely to drop out of school than students who live in homes with financial stability
(Garcia, 2002). Structurally and systemically our schools have indeed been a means
of continuing to produce varying degrees of achievement for different student
3
groups, and this inequity has been prevalent among students of color as compared to
their white counterparts (Garcia, 2002).
Effective Structural and Systemic Practices
Despite a historical trend of an overrepresentation of students of color in
urban schools underperforming academically in comparison to white students,
research has identified schools that are fostering high academic achievement with
students of color in high poverty urban schools (Edmonds, 1979a, Reeves, 2000, &
Izumi, 2002). This research showcases exemplary structural and systemic practices
that contribute to high student performance. By implementing systems and
structures that support effective research-based instructional practices and other
factors that contribute to high achievement, some high poverty schools with
concentrations of students of color have mapped a direction with the potential of
improving the quality of education that students of color receive in underperforming
schools.
Systems are those coordinated and coherent use of resources such as frequent
assessments and professional development at the school site which ensure that a
school’s vision, mission, and goals are met. Structures are institutional mechanisms,
policies, and procedures, put in place by federal, state, or district policy and
legislation. At a school site, common structures are faculty, banked time, and grade
level meetings, instructional time, district adopted curriculums, and instructional
calendars. Successful urban schools generate systems to work within set structures,
fostering high academic performance.
4
Identifying high-performing, high-poverty schools with large concentrations
of students of color presents the possibility that all schools with similar
demographics have the potential for high performance. The reports authored by
Izumi (2002), Reeves, (2000) and Edmonds (1979a) illuminate the potential for
schools to achieve at effective levels and equip educational leaders with a roadmap
that would enable them to set a course for their school organizations. Schools
featured in the reports are not confined to one geographical area or ethnic group;
therefore having greater relevance for schools across the country. Factors identified
from the reports (Izumi, 2002, Reeves, 2000, and Edmonds, 1979a) indicate the
following commonalities: strong focus on academic achievement (high
expectations), curriculum choices (pedagogy/standards) and frequent assessment
(knowing students’ abilities/informs practice) [Table 1-1]. Although achievement
levels are defined differently in each report, the overall conclusion remains that these
schools have defied the odds that typically, negatively, impact students in high
poverty schools where students of color are generally concentrated. These
conditions created by the systems and structures in schools that produce high
academic achievement typically exist under the guidance and direction from the
school’s instructional leaders. Leadership plays a critical role since it has the
potential of influencing every factor mentioned. A school’s effectiveness depends
on the course set by the institutional leaders and that are well articulated through a
clear mission and goals statement (Bamburg & Andrews, 1990).
5
Table 1-1: High Performing/High Poverty Schools-Report Findings

Edmonds Reeves Izumi
• Leadership
• Expectations
• Atmosphere
• Instructional
Emphasis
• A focus of academic
achievement
• Clear curriculum choices
• Frequent assessment of
student progress and multiple
opportunities for
improvement
• An emphasis on nonfiction
writing
• Collaborative scoring of
student work
• Comprehensive Use
of Standards
• Research-Based
Curricula/Teaching
Methods
• Frequent Assessment
• Standards-Based
Professional
Development
• Teacher Quality
• Strong Discipline
Policies
Source: Edmonds (1979a), Reeves (2000), and Izumi (2002).

In addition to these reports, educational researchers have identified other
components that contribute to the academic achievement of students of color in
urban schools. Factors that contribute to the success of students of color come in the
form of a school’s culture and the relationships they form and are able to sustain
between the school and home (Ladson-Billings, 1989, Banks, 1999, Gay, 2000).
Marzano’s (2003) research has also identified school level factors that directly
influence student outcomes:
1. Guaranteed and Viable Curriculum
2. Challenging Goals and Effective Feedback
3. Parent and Community Involvement
4. Safe and Orderly Environment
5. Collegiality and Professionalism

Marzano’s work on identifying research on effective schooling has had a profound
influence in the field, and these factors parallel those found among the other
6
researchers as well cited above. The identified systems and structures associated
with high student achievement among students of color are illustrated in Figure 1-1.

Figure 1-1: Systems and Structures

Systems Structures

*Model of Continuous *Federal Policies
Improvement High (ex. No Child Left Behind Act)
*Instructional Leadership Student *State and District Policies
*Frequent Assessment/Data Achievement *Class Size
*Multicultural Education *Instructional Time
*Culturally Relevant Teaching *Funding
*Implementing Standards-Based
Curriculum

Multicultural Education’s Theoretical Framework
In public schools, a systems mismatch between students of color with regards
to curriculum, teaching pedagogy, and expectations has existed, ever since these
students have been allowed to participate in public schools, illustrating that the
problem is long enduring. The reports mentioned earlier by Reeves (2000), Izumi
(2002), and Edmonds (1979a) highlight systems in place within set structures that
have promoted students of color to be academically successful.
Banks’ (1999) socio-cultural perspective explains how multicultural
education creates a framework that addresses the relevance between cultural settings
7
and the other factors that impact the academic achievement for students of color. It
works to change systems and structures based in historical constructs of race that put
students of color at a major disadvantage in schooling. A major objective promoted
within multicultural education is to foster an educational setting where students are
equipped with the skills, attitudes, and knowledge required to adequately function
within their respective ethnic culture, the mainstream culture, and within and across
other ethnic cultures (Banks, 1999). Multicultural education functions on the basis
that, if schools restructure and embrace the tenets behind this theoretical framework,
students will acquire the knowledge, attitudes, and skills needed to function in an
ethnically and racially diverse nation and world (Banks, 1999).
Within multicultural education theory, Banks (1999) outlines dimensions and
school characteristics as a guide for public schools to restructure with the purpose of
educating all students. The dimensions of multicultural education on a systemic
level are as follows: content integration, a knowledge construction process, prejudice
reduction, an empowering school culture and social structure, and an equity
pedagogy. These five dimensions work together as a system, which is consistent
with research on “effective schools” and is imperative in providing the learning
experiences needed for students of color to achieve academic success.
Model of Continuous Improvement
Effective instructional leadership has the potential of creating and sustaining
systems that produce professional learning communities while maintaining a focus
on student achievement, specifically for students of color (Blasé & Blasé, 2004,
8
Banks, 1999). Schmoker’s (1996) Model of Continuous Improvement (MCI) aligns
four school systems that have been associated with improving classroom instruction
and complimenting those systems as discussed by Banks (1999). These four systems
data, learning, support & monitoring, and evidence allow for the school organization
to continuously improve the quality of education their students receive.
The system by which data is analyzed is where MCI begins, in order to
understand what areas of strength and concern exist in support of student
achievement. Addressing instructional concerns is where this system moves toward
the adult learning component, identifying what research tells us about effective
practices. Once effective practices are identified, the support and monitoring system
follows where resources are aligned to improve teacher practice and professional
development and these sessions are planned accordingly based on the needs of
students. Implementing practices presented during professional development
sessions is reflective in the fourth system, evidence. Teachers reflect on their
practice and implementation, while brainstorming the next steps needed to improve
classroom instruction. The leadership team works collaboratively with teachers in
discussing whether the instructional practices impact the area of need. Data then
becomes an integral piece again when assessing the successes and challenges; the
cycle is continuous (Figure 1-2). The Model for Continuous Improvement serves as a
vehicle for implementing the key factors found in the research cited in this chapter,
which have been found to be essential to high academic achievement, particularly for
students of color.
9
Figure 1-2: Model of Continuous Improvement (MCI). Source: Adapted from
Schmoker (1996)

Data
What does the data tell?

Evidence Adult Learning
What was successful/not successful? What does research say about
our areas of need?

Support & Monitoring
Professional Development/Coaching
How will teachers be supported with the new learning?

Practices Fostering English Proficiency
Consistent school-wide implementation of practices that support effective
instruction, in turn foster students’ effective progress through ELD levels and result
in higher levels of reclassification in high poverty urban schools with large
concentrations of English Learners (ELs). Effective instructional leaders create a
system that sustains a school environment conducive to student learning. Effective
leaders act from an awareness of the varying needs of their student populations.
Schools with large numbers of ELs are effective when guided by a range of
instructional leaders. This approach of distributed leadership increases the likelihood
of benefiting student learning since decisions about instruction are discussed
collectively among in-house experts, teachers and administrators (Elmore, 2000).
Leadership at various levels in the school is needed to implement effective systems
10
in support of student learning, ensuring students advance through the ELD levels
towards reclassification. According to Williams et al., (2007), the following systems
were identified in fostering high performance among English Learners:
1. Using assessment data.
2. Ensuring availability of instructional resources.
3. Implementing a coherent, standards-based curriculum and
instructional program.
4. Prioritizing student achievement.

The use of data to improve student achievement is an effective practice used
in better performing schools throughout the state of California (Williams et al.,
2007). These data are derived from multiple sources of assessments aligned to
standards and it is used to inform teacher practice and identify which students are
struggling. School leaders are able to identify which teacher practices are producing
higher achievement levels and in what areas teachers need assistance.
Once areas of need are identified through the use of data, schools in the study
that have demonstrated higher achievement levels with English Learners (ELs),
ensure that adequate tools and resources are provided to teachers (Williams et al.,
2007). Instructional materials aligned to current state standards and supplementary
instruction for struggling students were reported by principals as being imperative
with regard to adequately and appropriately equipping teachers in the classroom.
A coherent, standards-based curriculum promotes school-wide consistent
instructional goals by grade level (Williams et al., 2007; Marzano, 2003). This
guaranteed and viable curriculum provides grade-to-grade level expectations and
access to the content for all students. Teachers are provided with time to examine
11
the scope and sequence of curriculum topics and frequently meet to discuss student
progress.
A shared school culture that prioritizes student achievement, is able to use
and monitor measurable objectives to improve student achievement (Williams et al.,
2007). These schools have a clear sense of their goals and have a well-defined plan
for instructional improvement. Under NCLB, all subgroups are to make their AYP
growth targets and these schools in the William’s report have a clear understanding
as to what schoolwide instructional practices will achieve these results. A system of
continuously monitoring student achievement comes in the form of formative
assessments as explained in the Model of Continuous Improvement. In this system
teachers are constantly monitoring student achievement and refining practice
accordingly, advancing students towards the next level.
Effective school practices outlined in the Williams, et al., (2007) report are
all aligned with improving student achievement for all students and English Learners
in particular. These practices all function under well-monitored systems that are
continuously evaluating student progress and fostering a professional learning
community that has clear instructional goals for students (Schmoker, 2006).
Impact on Classroom Instruction
School organizational structures and systems contribute to high performance
in high poverty schools with large concentrations of students of color. A specific
factor that positively impacts classroom instruction in high performing urban schools
is instructional leadership. The critical role of leadership impacts all aspects of a
12
school’s organization especially what transpires in the classroom. The school’s
leadership sets the condition for producing coherent goals where school, teacher, and
student level factors work in unison (Marzano, 2003).
The Achievement Gap
Under the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Act (ESEA) best
known as the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), educational accountability has
been the focus. Within NCLB’s accountability system, schools as a whole, as well
as their respective subgroups, are expected to make comparable achievement gains.
As controversial as the components of NCLB are, the national spotlight caused by
NCLB has revealed the existing disparities between the achievement gaps inherent to
certain groups of students based on ethnicity, income, learning disabilities, and
language proficiency. Students of color in high poverty schools, tend to under-
perform as indicated in state tests across the country generally (NAEP, 2005). For
example, in 2005 eighth-grade whites outperform African-Americans, Hispanics, and
Native Americans in mathematics in all three geographical areas throughout the
United States: rural, suburban and urban (Table 1-2).

Table 1-2: 2005 Eighth Grade Mathematics Achievement Scores (Scale 0-500)

Suburban Urban Rural
White 290 291 284
Black 253 258 255
Hispanic 261 263 264
American Indian 268 271 260
Source: NAEP, 2005
13
Under NCLB, all states are required to administer annual standardized tests
that assess students’ proficiency in their language arts and math standards. In
California, the California Standards Test (CST) is the assessment tool utilized to
determine proficiency levels beginning in the second grade. These test results have
brought about a sense of urgency to schools to address those disparities that exist
since the measurement of their school performance is an overall assessment
including all subgroups. These accountability measures call for change in the current
systems in place at public schools, as the data reveals that schools systemically
continue to produce patterns of low academic achievement for certain sub-groups,
resulting in the social stratification of society, therefore preserving the existing status
quo (Kowalski & Reitzug, 1993).
With the recent passage of Proposition 227 in California, the issue of primary
language instruction has become increasingly politicized. English as the dominant
language in public schools has been in place since 1853, when Mexican-American
and Anglo students initially began attending public schools together, but political
forces favored a Eurocentric emphasis declaring any language other than English
subordinate (DelCastillo, 1979). Addressing and valuing a student’s primary
language continues to be a challenge for school institutions that serve large
concentrations of English Learners.
English Learners (ELs) are an identified subgroup under NCLB whose
performance levels are dismal in comparison to the performance of students who are
proficient in English. The following table (1-3) illustrates performance levels in the
14
area of language arts for ELs in comparison to other subgroups within the same
school district (Urban Unified School District).

Table 1-3: California Standards Test (2006) Results- Proficient/Advanced
(Language Arts) within UUSD

Language Group Elementary Secondary
English Only 45.0% 35.4%
Initial FEP 56.4% 47.0%
Reclassified 59.8% 33.7%
English Learners 13.8% 3.2%
Source: Salazar (2007)

It is evident that English Learners are performing far below their peers based
on the forms of assessment used, even in comparison to students from the same
ethnic group. Across California, school districts with large populations of English
Learners exhibit similar discrepancies in state test results in language arts between
ELs and English speaking students (Table 1-4). In 2005, 41.9% of all California
students scored Proficient/Advanced in the CST and 21.9% of ELs achieved this
benchmark score (CDE, DataQuest). English Learners as a sub-group under-perform
in language arts in comparison to their peers throughout various districts in the state.
This pattern of under-performance among ELs is most evident in California’s largest
school districts.

15
Table 1-4: California Urban School Districts’ Results (2006)- Language Arts
(Proficient/Advanced)

School District English Learners District-Wide
Santa Ana 20.1% 26.8%
San Francisco 40.6% 51%
San Diego 23.2% 47.3%
Long Beach 27.9% 43.5%
Source: CDE, DataQuest

The number of ELs grew from comprising 7.9% of all California students in
1981 to 24.88% in 2006 (Williams et al., 2007). Access to the core curriculum and
success in achieving English proficiency is dependent upon the systems and
structures in place at school sites that support their academic achievement through
access to a curriculum that is mainly offered in English.
Statement of the Problem
There is a deep disparity between the achievement levels of students based on
whether they attend schools in communities that are predominately of high or low
socio-economic levels. This achievement gap has been pervasive in our public
education system for as long as records have been kept. Those students who have
traditionally under-performed have primarily been students of color. This barrier of
accessing a core academic curriculum that students of color face, has been
accompanied by higher than average high school dropout rates as well as the under-
representation of students of color at colleges and universities (Garcia, 2002). No
16
surprisingly, attending schools where the quality of education is sub-par limits
students’ future academic opportunities.
Effective school organizations have used empirical research in producing
structural and systemic practices that have resulted in high performance levels with
students of color. Although enacting effective systems has resulted in some schools
moving forward with student achievement, these effective practices have not been
generally utilized throughout public schools, especially in high poverty schools, with
large concentrations of students of color where the problems of student achievement
are most acute. Specifically, research data shows that these successful systems have
not been utilized widely in relation to English learners. Barriers exist to
disseminating and implementing these effective practices in the form of leadership,
knowledge (not knowing how), as well as the pervasive political climate under which
our schools must operate (Schmoker, 2006). Policies intended to improve student
achievement are not always aligned to what research indicates would improve levels
with students of color.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to identify the characteristics that exist in
successful schools that are producing positive results in terms of student
achievement, with the intent of assisting those schools that are not as high
performing and are serving a student body with large concentrations of students of
color, with a specific emphasis on English Learners. An analysis of these effective
systems allows for investigation into how certain schools are able to best prepare
17
their English Learners and successfully reclassify them. This study examined a high-
performing, high-poverty school with a large concentration of English Learners
within a large, urban school district that has been successful in providing a high
quality education, with effective systems and structures in place that create this
condition. This study will contribute to the body of knowledge that exists on
successful systems and structures with students of color, grounded in socio-cultural
theory. The following research questions were developed to gain an understanding
on the constructs of race that exist within systems and structures at high-performing,
high-poverty schools.
Research Questions
The following research questions paramatized this study:
1) What are the trends and patterns of student performance among
students of color?
2). What are the organizational structures and systems that are perceived
contributions to high student performance in high-poverty urban schools with
large concentrations of students of color?
3). How are the organizational systems and structures implemented to
support school-wide effective classroom instruction that promotes student
learning?
4.) How is the construct of race reflected in the school’s structures and
systems?
18
Significance of the Study
This study is significant because of the achievement and opportunity gap that
continues to exist in this country. As indicated on state tests across the country
(NAEP, 2005), students of color in high-poverty schools tend to perform lower
academically when compared to middle-class, white students. As controversial as
the components of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) are, the national spotlight put on
student achievement has revealed the academic disparities between certain
subgroups, based on ethnicity, income, learning disabilities, and language
proficiency. A history of societal inequalities explains the origins of persisting
barriers to education for certain populations of students. Urban schools face the
challenge of meeting their API and AYP target scores; therefore school organizations
need to identify the organizational systems and structures high-performing urban
schools with large concentrations of students of color have put in place to contribute
to high academic performance. Specifically, educators need to understand how the
systems and structures are implemented to support school-wide effective classroom
instruction to bridge the historic achievement gap between students of color and their
White counterparts. The term “students of color” does not include Asian students in
this particular study.
The significance of the study lies in the dire consequences of failure to
educate students of color. This failure has implications for the major impacts that
would ensue, which include the demise of the American economy; the persistently
low socioeconomic status of people of color; and the quality of life for persons of
19
color. The study’s findings about effective school organizations may benefit those
engaged in closing existing achievement and opportunity gaps.
Limitations of Study
The following limitations obtained in this study:
The school was selected using a predetermined criteria that was established
by our thematic dissertation group. A school was determined using these criterion,
and the selection process has the potential of affecting the internal validity of this
study. Other factors that could affect the internal validity are:
• time frame allotted for research at the site
• limited amount of schools meeting the set criteria
• participation was voluntary
• ability to assess whether participants were truthful
The selection of the school was based upon academic performance over a
minimum of three years of consecutive growth in API. The criteria to select that
school were based on the 2006 Academic Performance Index (API) Growth Report,
which formula includes results from the California Standards Tests (CST). Test
results in language arts were utilized and performance indicators were defined as Far
Below Basic (FBB), Below Basic (BB), Basic (B), Proficient (P) and Advanced (P).
Generalizations may be a barrier due to the difference in definition of the previous
terms across the United States.
20
Delimitations of Study
The following delimitations obtained in this study:
Due to the focus on a single school, it is difficult to generalize findings onto
other institutions. The variations include the unique nature of the single elementary
school studied within a large, urban school district. Students of color, for the
purpose of this study, were limited to African-Americans, Latinos and Native-
Americans, three sub-groups which have endured a historical pattern of academic
underachievement in our schools as compared to their white and Asian counterparts.
Definitions
API – A number summarizing the performance of a group of students, a
school, or a district on California’s standardized tests. A school’s number (or API
score) is used to rank it among schools of the same type (elementary, middle, high,
or small) and among the 100 schools of the same type that are most similar in terms
of students served, teacher qualifications, and other factors.
AYP – Adequate Yearly Progress is a set of annual academic performance
benchmarks that states, school districts, schools, and subpopulations of students are
supposed to achieve if the state receives federal funding under Title I, Part A of the
federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). In California, the measures include: (1)
specified percentages of students scoring "Proficient" or "Advanced" on California
Standards Tests in English language arts and math; (2) participation of at least 95%
of students on those tests; (3) specified Academic Performance Index scores or
21
gains; and (4) for high schools, a specified graduation rate or improvement in the
rate.
California Standards Tests (CST) – criterion-referenced tests based on the
state’s academic content standards—what students are supposed to learn. The state
has set performance levels for student results. Test scores are described as: Far
Below Basic, Below Basic, Basic, Proficient, and Advanced.
English Language Development (ELD) – the primary goal of standards-
based ELD instruction is to ensure that English Learners, at all five levels of English
proficiency, learn to understand and use academic English as rapidly as possible
thereby ensuring access to grade-level content instruction in English within a
reasonable amount of time.
English Learners (ELs) – An EL is a student that lacks the English language
skills of listening, speaking, reading, and/or writing necessary to succeed in the
school's regular academic curriculum.
High Concentrations- Greater than 60% students of color.
High Performing
• School wide trajectory of API (if in California) and AYP growth over
three years (including all subgroups)
• Minimal movement of 2 deciles within 3-5 years
No Child Left Behind (NCLB) – The 2002 reauthorizaton of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act (ESEA).
22
Reclassified Fluent-English-Proficient (RFEP) Students – An RFEP
student is one whose primary language is not English and who was reclassified from
English Learner to Fluent-English-Proficient. The terms reclassification and re-
designation are used interchangeably to refer to students who have acquired the
English proficiency label of RFEP.
Students of Color- Historically disenfranchised students: those that do not
have access to learning opportunities in comparison to the dominant group (white,
middle class). The three historical groups who have been thus disenfranchised
include: African-Americans, Native Americans, and Latinos.
Structures- Institutional mechanisms, policies, and procedures put in place
by federal, state or district policy and legislation or widely accepted as the official
structure of schools; not subject to change at the local school site;
• Funding mechanisms (federal, state, district)
• Personnel policies (hiring, evaluation, credentialing, etc.)
• Use of instructional time
• Class size, etc.
• Program regulations, i.e., special education, bilingual education
Structured English Immersion – classroom instruction is in English with
curriculum and instruction designed for English learners.
Systems- Coordinated and coherent use of resources (time, personnel,
students, parents, funds, facilities, etc.) at the school site to ensure that school
visions, missions, and goals are met:
23
• Professional development
• Teacher collaboration
• Parent involvement
• Use of time
• School budgets
Urban- High population density and high concentration of students of color
24
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
Historically, high poverty urban schools with large concentrations of students
of color have been associated with low student achievement. The struggle for equity
and access to a quality education has been and continues to be crucial for the lives of
involuntary immigrant groups, in particular African-Americans and Mexican-
Americans (Ogbu, 1994). Structures and systems in public schools have denied
students of color achievement levels comparable to those of white, middle class
students. As a result, people of color have been denied economic, political and
academic access that would improve their quality of life and in turn, affect society as
a whole. To address these discrepancies, it is necessary to trace the historical roots of
African-Americans and Latinos. This country has been a land of immigrants both
with involuntary and voluntary groups (Ogbu, 1994). African-Americans were
forcibly brought to this country during the colonization era while Mexican-
Americans in the 1800’s transitioned from residing in what was once Mexico to the
newly formed United States as a result of the Treaty of Guadalupe (Del Castillo,
1979). Ogbu’s (1994) theory suggests that this country’s public school institutions
have responded both in a positive and negative manner to different immigrant
groups.
Historical Perspective
From the inception of public schooling in the United States, inequalities have
been pervasive. In 1779 when Thomas Jefferson proposed his meritocracy approach
25
to schooling, the intention was to provide free public schooling for non-slave
children (Spring, 2000). This hierarchical approach for educating students was to
provide an equal opportunity exclusively to white citizens who, due to their low
economic status, would have otherwise not had access to an education. Jefferson’s
plan aimed to only educate white citizens in order to sustain the privileges of social
class through the social structure. In Jefferson’s proposal to educate only a white
citizenry, other groups would be denied a basic right forcing nonwhites to remain at
the lower end of the economic and opportunity spectrum. Although under the
ideology of meritocracy the intent is to provide an equal opportunity for all to be
educated regardless of race and class, the function of meritocracy remains to train
and sort citizens from specific racial and economic populations (Spring, 2000).
Meritocracy still exists in public and private institutions, including universities
across this country, although, ostensibly, we have a democratic educational system.
The premise of being judged on ability, implies equal opportunity but has become a
sorting process for barring students of color and certain social classes from academic
access (Oakes, 1990). In his plan for public schooling, Jefferson demonstrated an
innate fear of a threat to the political stability that could occur (in his estimate) if
blacks and whites were to be integrated (Carpenter, 2004). As a result, Jefferson’s
intent for public schooling did not include non-whites. Native Americans,
inhabitants of this land before the establishment of the United States of America,
were also excluded from participating in public schooling (West, 1990).
26
While Thomas Jefferson advocated for the free three-year model in which
students would learn reading, writing and arithmetic, he did not believe all people
needed to be educated any further in order for them to become good citizens.
Jefferson believed in a “natural process” of reasoning that would suffice for certain
members of the citizenry and allow them to function without formal schooling in
society (once again implying an extant social hierarchy. Schools would also not be
intended to provide an arena where political and social conditions could be
discussed. Those in power welcomed this elitist perspective by one of this nation’s
founding fathers since Jefferson described it as a necessity in order to protect the
new republic (Carpenter, 2004). The foundations for schooling in America were
rooted in this hierarchical perspective.
Common schools had been created as a result of Jefferson’s ideas for public
schooling. These common schools began to serve white citizens at large, regardless
of economic background. Private schools attracted wealthier citizens while public
common schools saw an increase in poorer families attending (Baines, 2006).
Common schools by the early 1800’s had become decrepit public schools that
instructed large concentrations of poor students with untrained teachers (Baines,
2006). Poor families sent their students to common schools regardless of the
conditions since they perceived them as a way out of poverty.
Almost a century later, Horace Mann proposed an alternative purpose for
schooling. Horace Mann conceptualized common schools as an antidote to poverty,
crime, poor health, and ignorance (Baines, 2006). Across his state of Massachusetts,
27
he observed the mass disarray and disrepair that common schools were in, and
vowed to revamp them to be comparable in quality to the best private schools. Mann
envisioned a common school where children from different backgrounds attended
and exchanged ideas while receiving a common education (Spring, 2000) that
equipped them to challenge political views and debate the social issues of the day.
Social and economic classes were to vanish under this system, as students were
prepared with common guiding government principles (Spring, 2000). Identifying
common principles was the first challenge to Mann’s vision, and the integration of
children across racial and economic lines throughout this country has yet to be
accomplished. For the most part, students of color continue attending schools that
are underperforming. Providing a quality education for all students continues to be a
social justice issue. Students are segregated in schools based on where they reside.
Students of color are more likely to attend schools with fewer financial resources
than those that serve white students (Garcia, 2002).
Involuntary Immigrants
Differences in involuntary immigrants’ (Ogbu, 1994) views towards public
schooling and those of whites (of English and/or Anglo-Saxon descent) explains
some of the differences in attitudes towards academic attainment. African-
Americans were brought to this country as slaves unwillingly during colonization.
After the Treaty of Guadalupe of 1848, land once considered Mexican, became part
of the United States along with its residents (Valencia, 2005). Both of these groups
tend to perceive their chances of being successful in this country as “challenging”
28
due to their experiences with the dominant group. In addition, Ogbu & Simons
(1998) contend that this nation has demonstrated different views about immigrants,
treating some as “preferred immigrants” and others as “unpreferred immigrants.”
The difference in attitudes about immigrants of color has resulted in centuries of
segregation and discrimination. Over time, students from these groups who have
been denied education and the benefits of education have adopted “oppositional”
behavior. They see little benefit from the schools they attend; therefore many of
them are less cooperative or committed to them (Ogbu, 1994).
Segregation of Schools
Once the idea of public schooling was established, the systems designed and
implemented reflected the ideas of the individuals in power, who were almost
exclusively of European ancestry. The case of Plessy v. Ferguson (1895) legitimized
the philosophy of educating citizens under a “separate but equal” context. African-
Americans and Mexican-Americans continued to endure inequalities in the type of
education they received (Menchaca, 1996). Conditions and resources available for
schooling these two involuntary immigrant groups were sub-par in comparison to
those of whites (Spring, 2000). These barriers continue to exist in public schools
with high concentrations of students of color that harbinger generations of denial of
upward mobility in economic and academic attainment.
Since the beginning of the twentieth century, legal challenges have been
brought forth by African-American and Mexican-American groups in their attempts
to end segregation and bring about equality, particularly in relation to public
29
schooling (Valencia, 2005). Inequities with facilities, resources, and monetary
assistance plagued schools with high concentrations of students of color, resulting in
the denial of an education comparable to that provided to white students (Valencia,
2005). In 1946, the Mendez v. Westminster was successful in directing California
schools to provide equal educational rights for all students regardless of their race.
The Mendez v. Westminster case paved the way for the argument used in the legal
brief with Brown v. the Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas (1954) where the
“separate but equal” doctrine was found unconstitutional at the federal level. These
two groups, African-Americans and Mexican-Americans had the same goal of
equality; therefore in some cases they worked collaboratively to gain access to rights
that had been denied due to political and legal structures (Valencia, 2005). Thurgood
Marshall, a prominent African-American lawyer who later became Supreme Court
Justice, argued the Mendez case on behalf of Mexican-Americans (Valencia, 2005).
His work and that of others symbolized the cooperation between African-Americans
and Mexican-Americans in their quest for more equitable opportunities.
Achievement Gap
Schools have produced higher achievement levels with white students; whites
are more likely to attain credentials such as high school diplomas and degrees from
higher education institutions, in comparison to African-Americans and Mexican-
Americans (Ogbu, 1990). The structures, pedagogy, and curriculum favor white
students’ cultural orientations and social capital. Disparities among the groups
30
mentioned in the form of attainment of higher education degrees, are associated with
disparities in economic opportunities (Table 2-1).

Table 2-1: Out of Every 100 Kindergartners

Graduate from
High School
Some College At Least a
Bachelor’s
White 91 62 30
African-American 87 54 16
Latino 62 29 6
Source: US Bureau of Census, Current Population Reports, March 2000

There is a pattern of certain socio-economic levels that obtain with specific
groups based on race and ethnicity. According to Straveteig & Wigton (2000),
African-Americans, Latinos and Native-Americans are three times more likely to
live in poverty than whites and twice as likely as Asians. These data explain a
correlation between academic attainment and economic opportunities affecting the
overall well being of citizens across the country. Blacks, Hispanics and Native-
Americans have less access to quality healthcare, face food and housing hardships
and are less likely to meet basic needs for their children (Straveteig & Wigton,
2000). The social reproduction of schools has excluded people of color from
opportunities to learn and produced these conditions that limit people’s upward
mobility in terms of economics and quality of life.
Critical race theorists contend that race and racism in the schooling of
students of color are entrenched within American society (Solórzano, 1998). Court
31
decisions ended legal segregation, but systems and structures in schools based in
racist attitudes about the abilities, intelligence, and academic potential of African-
American students and Mexican-Americans have prevented them from achieving at
the same level as whites. Two conceptual frameworks by Saddler (2005) and
Valencia (2005) for Critical Race Theory (CRT) outline tenets that provide a lens for
analyzing current achievement levels based on race and ethnicity.
Saddler (2005) uses Delgado’s (1995) work to present a theoretical lens for
CRT by grouping the tenets into three themes. The first theme states that racism is a
normal part of American society and is ingrained in the systematic structures of
public schooling. Social justice efforts have unveiled racism at all levels and
variations. The second theme challenges the notion that White-European Americans
should be perceived as the norm. People of color should use their own voices to tell
their own stories in order to challenge the existing social construction of race. The
third theme addresses the legal system as a means for perpetuating progress towards
an equitable and just society.
Similarly, Valencia (2005) bases his framework on Solórzano’s (1998) work,
and frames CRT into five tenets. The first tenet is similar to Saddler’s (2005), in
explaining that race and racism are entrenched in society. The second tenet
challenges the educational system and describes the inequalities that it fosters. The
third tenet focuses on a commitment to social justice as a means of eliminating
racism in education, consequently eliminating subordination. The fourth tenet
stresses the role of experiential knowledge of people of color in understanding
32
racism in education. The fifth tenet is that race and racism can be best understood
from interdisciplinary perspectives.
These two CRT frameworks provide a lens for understanding the current state
of our public school system and the outcomes it is producing. The following, Table
2-2, outlines these two perspectives on Critical Race Theory:

Table 2-2, Critical Race Theory Frameworks

Saddler (2005) Valencia (2005)
1. Race and Racism a norm in Society
2. White-European Americans
perceived as the dominant norm
3. Legal system does not foster an
equitable and just society
1. Race and Racism a norm in Society
2. Challenges the educational system
3. Commitment to Social Justice
4. Value in Experiential Knowledge of
People of Color
5. Race and Racism can be best
Understood from Interdisciplinary
Perspective

Effects of Brown vs. the Board of Education
Historically, desegregating schools has been an institutional hurdle for the
United States of America. Attitudes about race and social class are deeply rooted
and evident in the manner in which students of color experience public education and
these attitudes endured even after the most sweeping court decision on record, the
Brown vs. the Board of Education. Saddler (2005) contends that historically,
African-American students have been “de-educated” since they have been
systemically excluded from the education system. This monumental decision paved
33
the way for integration but was received with resistance from predominately white
schools and communities. Initial efforts to desegregate schools were largely
unsuccessful since whites and blacks did not reside in the same communities and
children of color traveled long distances in an effort to attend predominately white
schools. Only a degree of desegregation was achieved by closing schools serving
African-American students and busing them to predominately white schools
(Saddler, 2005). In most cases, African-American students were simply grouped
into low-track, remedial and/or special education programs within so-called
“desegregated” schools (Oakes, 1989).
Integration efforts have encountered challenges in every decade. Little has
changed in most cities to create desegregated public schools. Public schools serve
students in their residential boundaries; therefore students are assigned to schools
based on where they live. In general, public schools have not been successful in
producing the same level of performance in high poverty areas as they have in
higher, socio economic neighborhoods. Access to higher performing schools has
been associated to higher socio-economic levels and a family’s ability to buy a home
within the established boundaries of a school’s serving community (Holmes, 2002).
Although legal efforts have integrated some schools based on race, the legal system
has not affected the thinking and core beliefs of those who govern (Saddler, 2005);
therefore, the effects of segregation endure even in today’s schools.
Economics play a critical role on the quality of education a student receives.
A student that lives in a lower socioeconomic area attends a school where peers face
34
the same educational challenges. The accompanying factor of prejudice with
segregation has perpetuated belief systems amongst those in power that have
impeded progress toward conditions for improving schools (Stephan, 1980).
Prejudice fueled by racist attitudes has resulted in inferior schooling and poor
academic outcomes for students of color (Valencia, 2005) and sustained social
reproduction. These schools tend to have fewer resources and serve proportionately
larger populations of students of color than their counterparts in higher
socioeconomic areas (Garcia, 2002). The historical denial of academic attainment
and financial upward mobility for people of color have excluded them from a
developing economy (Del Castillo, 1979). School segregation has been effective in
preventing children of color from escaping conditions of poverty but has been
successful in the social reproduction of inequality (Menchaca, 1996).
Mid-Century (20
th
) Immigration and Language
This country experienced huge immigration waves in the 60’s and 70’s where
English was not the predominate language spoken in households (Garcia, 2002).
Political and economic conditions pressed citizens from Asian and Latin American
countries to migrate to the United States in search of opportunity and seek
improvements in their quality of life. Due to instruction primarily conducted in
English within public schools, the children of these immigrants, English learners,
experienced a challenge in performing academically in an environment that did not
meet their language needs. Due to centuries of segregation, African-American
children still come to school with a language that has an English vocabulary, but the
35
syntax and rules are still based in West African languages (Smitherman, 1977). The
American Linguistic Society calls this a language in itself; therefore African-
American students need similar support in acquiring Academic English, but they do
not qualify under current legislations and policies.
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act (CRA) of 1964 paved the way for providing
assistance to students with English language acquisition since it prohibited
discrimination on the basis of language. Prior to the CRA, students of color who
entered school without mastery of the English language were denied full
participation in the classroom, tracking and placing them into less rigorous courses.
Language issues contribute to students of color’s disparate school performance.
Attitudes about race and immigration are reflected in set policies about language.
Language is a component of a student’s home culture and must be valued and
respected if the student is to succeed academically (Banks, 1999). A connection has
not existed between home languages other than English and the school’s culture of
academic English. Establishing this congruence is critical, but schools have
historically ignored the value of a student’s primary language, forcing the student to
adapt to environments that do not build on their primary language.
Foundation of English Language Acquisition Programs - Court Cases
A series of court cases challenged the structures and systems in place that
were designed to prevent non-English speakers from mastering key concepts and
skills in core subject areas, in a language they did not understand. School districts
were mandated to provide instructional programs that effectively allowed students to
36
have access to core academic content. In 1974, Lau v. Nichols addressed the issue of
full participation since classrooms were being conducted in English (Garcia, 2002).
Lau v. Nichols mandated primary language instruction to be accessible to students
who spoke a language other than English as their primary language. It was intended
to make the learning environment meaningful for English Learners and paved the
way for bilingual education.
Seven years later, Castañeda v. Pickard continued to challenge the manner in
which English learners (ELs) were instructed. The outcome of this 1981 case was a
three-prong test to evaluate an instructional program’s effectiveness. Sound
educational theory, full implementation and student achievement results were the
three areas that the case forced school districts to address.
Passage of Proposition 227
Second language instruction education became the most common
instructional method as a direct result of the previously mentioned court decisions.
Measuring student achievement under bilingual education was a political issue for
most of the 1980’s and early 1990’s. Although ELs were producing higher than
average standardized test results in their primary language, the English assessment
results did not demonstrate equal achievement levels. Results have been mixed,
especially under the new federal accountability program. The results under this new
formula, clearly displays underachievement levels for English Learners. California
has a large English Learner population and the effects of a large group not being
adequately educated, has direct implications to the future of our society.
37
English learners are one of the significant subgroups identified under NCLB
that are to perform at the same level as their English proficient peers. A notion that
has become transparent to all Americans under the NCLB accountability system is
that an achievement gap continues to exist between populations based on race and
social class, as well as language differences. Schools that are underperforming as
indicated by NCLB are for the most part those that serve high poverty students of
color. Language minority groups, which are often made up of high poverty students
of color are measured on their adaptability of English while being immersed and
fully instructed in a language they are not proficient in (August & Hakuta, 1998).
Because of a number of differentiating factors, Asian-Americans whose home
language differs from English have demonstrated patterns of positive academic
achievement in comparison to other students of color; therefore are not included in
this study.
Effective Structural and Systemic Practices
Reports of Effective Practices with Students of Color
Historical trends demonstrate that an overrepresentation of students of color
in urban schools academically under-perform in comparison to white students.
Despite this pattern, scholarly reports have identified schools that are fostering high
academic achievement with students of color in high poverty urban schools. The
premise of these reports is that exemplary structural and systemic practices
contribute to high student performance. By identifying effective research-based
instructional practices and understanding the systems and structures that contribute
38
to high achievement, a direction can be mapped with the potential of improving the
quality of education students of color receive in underperforming schools.
Systems are those coordinated and coherent use of resources such as frequent
assessment and implementing of a standards-based curriculum at the school site that
ensure a school’s vision, mission and goals are met. Structures are institutional
mechanisms, policies, and procedures put in place by federal, state or district policy
and legislation.
Identifying high-performing, high-poverty schools with large concentrations
of students of color resonates with the possibility that all schools have the potential
of high performance. The reports authored by Izumi (2002), Reeves (2000) and
Edmonds (1979a) illustrate this promise of schools advancing through levels of
effectiveness and organizations. Schools featured in the reports are not confined to
one geographical area or ethnic group, therefore they have large-scale relevance for
schools across the country. Factors from all reports indicate the following
commonalities: strong focus on academic achievement (high expectations),
curriculum (pedagogy/standards) and frequent assessment (refining teacher practice
based on students’ abilities) [Table 2-3]. Although achievement levels are defined
differently in each report, the conclusion remains that these schools have defied odds
in comparison to other schools that serve students of color. These conditions exist
under guidance and direction from the school’s instructional leader. Leadership
plays a critical role since it influences every factor mentioned. A school’s
effectiveness depends on the course the leader sets and articulates well through a
39
clear mission and goals and through effective systems and structures (Bamburg &
Andrews, 1990).

Table 2-3: High Performing/High Poverty Schools-Report Findings

Edmonds Reeves Izumi
• Leadership
• Expectations
• Atmosphere
• Instructional Emphasis
• A focus of academic
achievement
• Clear curriculum
choices
• Frequent assessment
of student progress
and multiple
opportunities for
improvement
• An emphasis on
nonfiction writing
• Collaborative scoring
of student work
• Comprehensive Use of
Standards
• Research-Based
Curricula/Teaching
Methods
• Frequent Assessment
• Standards-Based
Professional
Development
• Teacher Quality
• Strong Discipline
Policies
Source: Edmonds (1979a), Reeves (2000), and Izumi (2002).

In addition to these reports, educational researchers have identified other
components that contribute to the academic achievement of students of color in
urban schools. Factors that contribute to the success of students of color come in the
form of a school’s culture and the relationships it forms and sustains between the
school and home (Ladson-Billings, 1989, Banks, 1999, Gay, 2000). Marzano’s
(2003) work has also identified school level factors that directly influences student
outcomes and are the following:
40
1. Guaranteed and Viable Curriculum
2. Challenging Goals and Effective Feedback
3. Parent and Community Involvement
4. Safe and Orderly Environment
5. Collegiality and Professionalism

There are parallels to the factors mentioned in Marzano’s literature and that of the
authors mentioned in the reports. Marzano (2003) through his work created these
five categories based on research that exists on effective schooling inclusive of
Edmonds’ (1979a) ground-breaking report. The identified systems and structures
associated with high student achievement among students of color are illustrated in
Figure 2-1.

Figure 2-1: Systems and Structures

Systems Structures

*Model of Continuous *Federal Policies
Improvement High (ex. No Child Left Behind Act)
*Instructional Leadership Student *State and District Policies
*Frequent Assessment/Data Achievement *Class Size
*Multicultural Education *Instructional Time
*Culturally Relevant Teaching *Funding
*Implementing Standards-Based
Curriculum

41
Multicultural Education’s Theoretical Framework
In public schools, a systems mismatch for students of color in regards to
curriculum, teaching pedagogy, and expectations has existed since students of color
have been allowed to participate in these institutions. The reports mentioned earlier
by Reeves (2000), Izumi (2002), and Edmonds (1979a) highlight systems in place
within set structures that have promoted students of color to be academically
successful.
Banks’ (1999) socio-cultural perspective explains how multicultural
education theory creates a framework addressing the relevance between cultural
settings and the impact it has on academic achievement for students of color. It
works to change systems and structures based in historical constructs of race that put
students of color at a major disadvantage in schooling. A major objective promoted
within multicultural education is to foster an educational setting where students are
equipped with the skills, attitudes, and knowledge required to adequately function
within their respective ethnic culture, the mainstream culture, and within and across
other ethnic cultures (Banks, 1999). Multicultural education functions on the basis
that if schools restructure and embrace the tenets behind this theoretical framework,
students will acquire the knowledge, attitudes, and skills needed to function in an
ethnically and racially diverse nation and world (Banks, 1999).
Within multicultural education theory, Banks (1999) outlines dimensions and
school characteristics as a guide for public schools to restructure with the purpose of
educating all students. The dimensions of multicultural education as systems are as
42
follow: content integration, the knowledge construction process, prejudice reduction,
an empowering school culture and social structure, and an equity pedagogy. These
five dimensions serve as a system as described in Table 2-4 which is imperative in
providing the learning experiences needed for students of color to achieve academic
success. This system is also consistent with the recommendations of Edmonds,
Reeves and Izumi charted in Table 2-3.

Table 2-4: Multicultural Education’s Dimensions in the Form of Systems

System Description
Content Integration Extent to which teachers use content from a variety of
cultures to illustrate key concepts
Knowledge
Construction
Process
Extent to which teachers help students understand,
investigate and determine how the implicit cultural
assumptions, frames of references, perspectives, and biases
influence the ways in which knowledge is constructed
Prejudice Reduction Characteristics of students’ racial attitudes and how they
can be modified by teaching methods and materials
Empowering School
Culture and Social
Structure
Creating a school culture that empowers students from
diverse racial, ethnic, and cultural groups
Equity Pedagogy Teachers modify their teaching in ways that facilitate the
academic achievement of students from diverse racial,
cultural, and social-class groups
Source: Banks (1999)

A public school that exemplifies the dimensions mentioned in Table 2-4
where students from all social-class, racial, and cultural groups have an opportunity
to learn and experience cultural empowerment have eight school characteristics
(Table 2-5). Multicultural education theorists contend that if the eight characteristics
43
are evident a school’s systems and structures, students from diverse ethnic, cultural,
and language groups will attain higher levels of academic achievement (Banks,
1999).

Table 2-5: The Eight Characteristics of the Multicultural School

1 Teachers and school administrators have high expectations for all students and
positive attitudes towards them
2 Formulized curriculum reflects experiences, cultures, and perspectives of a
range of cultural and ethnic groups
3 Teaching styles match the learning, cultural, and motivational styles of
students
4 Teachers and administrators show respect for the students’ first languages and
dialects
5 Instructional materials show events, situations, and concepts from the
perspectives of a range of cultural, ethnic, and racial groups
6 Assessment procedures are culturally sensitive and result in students of color
being represented proportionately (Gifted, Special Education, etc.)
7 School culture and hidden curriculum reflect cultural and ethnic diversity
8 School counselors hold high expectations for students of color
Source: Banks (1999)

School Culture
A school’s culture positively impacts the academic course of a student and so
does the student’s home culture. A congruence and connection needs to link both
school and home cultures in order for a student to access the demands of a rigorous,
quality education (Gay, 2000). A positive school culture can have an impact when it
is able to validate a student’s home culture. When a school is able to design
curriculum and instruction by building on the social, intellectual and cultural capital
44
the student brings to school, it will be increasingly more effective than traditional
forms of schooling (Gillmore & Goldenberg, 2001).
In most schools in America, home and school are two different cultural
settings for students of color especially from involuntary immigrant groups (Ogbu &
Simons, 1998). Understanding how students perceive formal schooling and build on
home experiences and values, assists when educating them. When there is a strong
connection between home and school settings along with an “understanding” of both
cultural models, minority achievement levels increase. Building on the learning
styles and strengths derived from the cultures of students of color ensures they have
full access to the best learning opportunities (Irvine & Armento, 2001). Implications
for student learning and the effects on achievement in effective schools are the basis
for building on a student’s background knowledge (Marzano, 2003).
Students of color bring to school an extensive array of knowledge in the form
of language, experiences, values and norms. A Culturally Responsive Educator has a
profound impact on these students when he or she is able to validate this knowledge
and make a connection to the curriculum introduced in school (Irvine & Armento,
2001). This congruence creates the conditions where students see themselves in the
curriculum, and the connections produce profound student learning.
Parent and community involvement bridge both the home and school
cultures. Communication is an important component in creating a positive and
constructive relationship with parents and the community (Marzano, 2003). When
parents are informed of school activities, goals and programs, they tend to increase
45
their participation at the school site. Parent participation adds to the richness of the
school’s day-to-day operations, when parents are valued and their ideas welcomed
by the school staff (Marzano, 2003). They are able to provide information to the
school that can improve the education their students receive. Involvement can also
come in the form of school governance, as key advocates for students in decision-
making councils (Marzano, 2003). Parent involvement with councils provide a
forum for them to be heard and action to take place. The quality of education
students of color receive improves relationships where there is an advocate involved
in their academic experience. Also, parents are an entrance into the cultural
orientations, cognitive structures, and ways of learning established in the home and
community.
Teacher-to-Teacher Relationships
Reculturation (Fullan, 2000) is the process a school must undergo in order to
change its norms, behaviors, and expectations for how they service students. As a
collective effort, schools need to create the conditions where teachers collaborate on
a regular basis discussing how to improve their practice and interaction to implement
a rigorous curriculum that reflects high expectations for students.
This school level factor of collegiality and professionalism (Marzano, 2003)
influences how professional development impacts teachers’ delivery of instruction.
Four elements (Goldenberg & Sullivan, 1994) have been identified to create these
collaborative settings that assist with the change: goals, indicators, assistance and
leadership. These four elements have the “potential” of altering the school’s culture
46
especially as to how teachers think about their students and their behaviors towards
them and their parents. Belief systems about students of color need to be addressed
by teachers to get to the root of the expectations held for these students. Teachers’
and administrators’ expectations for students are a critical component of a
multicultural school where all students are held to high academic expectations and
the belief exists that all students can learn (Banks, 1999).
These practices create greater opportunities for learning (Marzano, 2003)
which have a stronger correlation with student achievement than any other factor.
The teacher-student and teacher-teacher interactions are essential elements in
creating opportunities to learn. Collegiality may come in the form of professional
learning communities (Schmoker, 2006), where teachers meet frequently to discuss a
common curriculum and means for improving their interaction with students.
School’s positive impact on the educational experiences of their students can
commence around instructional themes.
Teacher-to-Student Relationships
Student achievement levels in high-performing, high-poverty schools are
strongly influenced by how teachers interact with students. Systems in place that
support content integration and equity pedagogy (Banks, 1999) make for these
teacher-to-student relationships to be positive and constructive. Successful
relationships between teachers and students have a central theme of empowerment,
where educators understand how to develop a student’s ability, confidence, and
motivation to see the value of succeeding academically (Cummins, 1989). In their
47
daily classroom setting, teachers have the opportunity to influence this ability and
build on their students’ social capital. Both student and teacher must develop a
relationship where the academic investment will lead to benefits (Katz, 1999). By
understanding their students’ cultural capital, educators can improve the likelihood
of educational achievement, educational attainment, and psychosocial factors such as
self-concept (Dika & Singh, 2002). The admission of students’ cultural capital as a
basis for learning represents a major departure for historical patterns of deficit
thinking about students of color.
Schools contribute to a student’s empowerment to learn by involving
multiple aspects of their lives in their education. The following systemic and
structural elements contribute to the empowerment of minority students: cultural and
linguistic incorporation, community participation, pedagogy, and assessment
(Cummins, 1989). These structural elements compliment the systems Banks’ (1999)
discusses to promote a multicultural school setting. The relationship between
teachers and students is a keystone that allows other aspects of the school experience
to be a positive one for students (Wubbels et al., 1999). In addition, an intersect
created with teacher and student interaction has the potential for authentic learning in
the classroom a term coined by Gutiérrez (1995) as the Thirds Space.
Culturally Relevant and Responsive Pedagogy
Culturally Relevant and Responsive Pedagogy (CRRP) provides a direction
for school leaders and teachers on how to adjust instructional practices where
students’ experiences are validated and made relevant with the intended curriculum
48
(Gay, 2000). By understanding that students of color bring experiences to a school
setting that differ from middle class white norms and behaviors, educators can
identify the mismatch hence set a course comprised of high expectations and
pedagogy that promotes access to a rigorous curriculum for all students. Executing
equity pedagogy in the classroom, teachers facilitate academic achievement by using
a variety of techniques and teaching methods that cater to the learning styles of
diverse groups (Banks, 1999) and are at heart of Culturally Relevant Teaching
(Ladson-Billings, 1989).
High academic expectations for all students are a critical component within
CRRP (Darling-Hammond, 2000) since belief systems are linked to student
academic levels. Effective school leaders promote beliefs that students can achieve
at high academic levels with their staff and create conditions where teachers receive
support in their attempts to provide appropriate instruction. Academic goals set forth
by the school need to be challenging and attainable for all students (Marzano, 2003).
As leaders monitor instruction, effective feedback builds on the teachers’ attempt to
bridge home and school cultures as a foundation for enabling all students to meet the
academic goals identified by the school. This process gives students access to these
goals by providing ample opportunities to learn. A strong school leader also needs a
network of leaders to guarantee teachers the appropriate professional development,
time and support needed to plan effective instruction that enables students to meet
the standards.
49
Equitable access to core academic standards provides a guaranteed and viable
curriculum (Marzano, 2003). School leaders assist culturally responsive educators
with the goal of providing sufficient opportunities for each child to learn (Irvine &
Armento, 2001). Understanding that every student brings rich experiences to school,
teachers therefore need to be skilled in identifying, validating and respecting
students’ prior knowledge and experiences including their home language. By
identifying students’ abilities and skills, teachers can build on them and provide
scaffolds to assist students to achieve through higher academic levels. High student
achievement leads to access into tracked subject courses that are aligned to prepare
students towards higher education (Oakes, 1989).
Culturally Relevant Teaching
The interaction between the teacher and student is the most critical factor
associated with student achievement (Marzano, 2003). Educators that understand
and embrace this notion in their instruction and follow tenets of Culturally Relevant
and Responsive Pedagogy (CRRP), increase their achievement levels with students
of color. Ladson-Billings (1989) asserts that Culturally Relevant Teaching (CRT)
prepares students with the skills needed for success while strengthening their cultural
identity. Teaching using tenets of CRRP mentioned earlier (Gay, 2000), has
demonstrated success in educating the whole child while developing his or her
moral, ethical, and personal development along with their cognitive growth (Foster,
1995). Culturally relevant teaching is defined under three dimensions: conceptions
50
of self/other, conception of classroom social relations, and conceptions of
knowledge/content (Ladson-Billings, 1989).
Conceptions of Self/Other: Teachers value the interactions with their students
and learn from what students bring to the classroom. Expectations are high and
teachers believe all students can and will succeed. Students are perceived as coming
from a culture that is resilient and resourceful. By drawing upon the students’
culture prepares them for dominant society’s norms, ideals, and values without
compromising that of their own culture.
Conception of Classroom Social Relations: Relationships between students
and teachers are humanely equitable and teachers share their power with students in
the classroom. Teachers are still responsible for the classroom curriculum and
empower students to take ownership of their learning. An understanding of the
students’ culture allows for the teacher to know specific concerns and strengths
regarding that culture and enables the teacher not to see the student as victims.
Building relations with students, parents, and the community, minimizes the distance
that has been a barrier for this interaction to occur with students of color (Ladson-
Billings & Darling-Hammond, 2000).
Conceptions of Knowledge/Content: Teachers incorporate the lives and
experiences of students in the curricular content areas. They continuously listen to
students and parents in an effort to establish a real purpose for their learning.
Curriculum materials have traditionally excluded experiences of people of color;
51
therefore teachers have opportunities to supplement the learning with the students’
ideas and experiences.
These three dimensions of Culturally Relevant Teaching transpire in the
classroom in the form of instructional practices as illustrated in Table 2-6. Through
these practices, teachers focus on where their students are and where they need to be
while developing a critical perspective about their learning and experiences.
Vygotsky’s (1987) Zone of Proximal Development explains how learning is a social
interaction where a child’s cognitive development is guided by a skilled adult
embedded in a sociocultural context. Students of color benefit from CRT including
English learners, since they are assimilating to the school culture while
simultaneously developing skills to be proficient in academic English.

Table 2-6: Culturally Relevant Teaching

Dimension Example
Conceptions of Self/Other • Opportunities for students for self-
reflection/identification
• Value/celebrate students’ culture
• Help maintain/cultivate cultural experiences
• Reciprocal learning between teacher/student
Conceptions of Classroom
Social Relations
• Creates a community of learners
• Nurture cooperative, supportive classroom
arrangements align with home experience
• Opportunities to interact with students
in/outside the classroom (get to know them)
Conceptions of
Knowledge/Content
• Engage students in meaningful learning
• Supplement shortcomings in curriculum
• Establish a real purpose for learning anything
Source: Ladson-Billings (1989) and Ladson-Billings & Darling-Hammond (2000)
52
Instructional Practices for English Learners
The authors in the report, ”Effective Literacy and English Language
Instruction for English Learners in the Elementary Grades” (Gersten et al., 2007)
identified five instructional practices that are effective with all students inclusive of
students of color with an emphasis on English learners. These practices compliment
the findings and recommendations of the Williams’ et al. (2007) report and have
been associated with improving reading achievement levels.
Five practices identified are: conduct formative assessments, provide small
group intervention, ensure high quality vocabulary instruction, develop academic
English and a set block time dedicated to ELD. These practices are described in
Table 2-7 and teachers can maximize their potential by incorporating all dimensions
of CRT (Ladson-Billings, 1999). By establishing a real purpose and research-based
instruction for learning, teachers of English learners can equip students with the
skills to access the core curriculum while activating and validating their home
culture and language (Gay, 2000).
53
Table 2-7: Effective Instructional Practices for English Learners

Practice Explanation
Conduct Formative
Assessments
• Use data to address instructional needs
Small Group
Interventions
• Explicit direct instruction
• Focus on 5 core reading elements (phonological
awareness, phonics, reading fluency,
vocabulary, and comprehension)
High Quality Vocabulary
Instruction
• Essential content in depth
• Address the meaning of common words,
phrases, expressions
• Develop academic language across the
curriculum
Focus on the
Development of
Academic English
• Key instructional goal
• Provide curricula and supplemental materials
that support all content areas
Designated Block of
Time
• Minimum 90 minutes a week to focus on ELD
• Different ability grouping
• Structured Academic tasks
Source: Gersten et al., 2007

Access is also a derivative when learning outcomes are made meaningful and
relevant. Students of color need to be able to see themselves in the curriculum in
order to make connections to the big ideas presented by their teachers (Nieto, 2000).
This is an essential element of a viable curriculum. This match between a learner’s
prior knowledge and experiences and those of an educator’s high expectation belief
system fosters empowerment towards future academic success. Vygotsky’s Zones of
Proximal Development (1987) discusses how children learn as they interact with
adults in a social context. By understanding how students of color construct
meaning, educators can support this social engagement and facilitate learning
54
opportunities for students of color building on what they bring to the school from
home. Leadership comes into play since the role of the principal and other key
leaders either promote or hinder these relationships.
Integrating Culturally Relevant and Responsive Pedagogy into the inner
workings of a school system is critical with overall school-wide efforts that are
intended to foster high student performance. Elements of school reform efforts are
increasingly more effective when implemented in concert with one another. CRRP
must be webbed into all aspects of a school organization and be supported by the
school leadership if sustainable achievement levels are to be produced by students,
especially those who have historically underachieved. The Model of Continuous
Improvement (Schmoker, 1996) is designed to align school systems and structures,
and elements of CRRP need to be integrated if students of color are to achieve.
Impact on Classroom Instruction
Instructional Leadership
School leaders play a critical role in supporting and creating systems that
promote English language development. School-wide systems attributed to effective
programs serving English learners (August & Pease-Alvarez, 1996) are as follows:
school culture, policies and instructional practice (Figure, 2-2).
Instructional leaders promote a positive school culture by fostering a safe and
respectful environment (August & Pease-Alvarez, 1996). This environment created
by effective leaders, values and nurtures students’ native languages and cultures
while demonstrating high expectations for all students. The school community in a
55
positive school culture develops a shared vision and common goals for all students.
School-wide systems are designed to promote these goals and policies articulate and
coordinate academic services. These systems are created to support the needs of
students of color, inclusive of English learners. Systems by school leaders that
support partnerships between home, school, and community are imperative in better
serving students by providing a link. Erasing the distance that may exist between
these entities, create social relations that have the potential of increasing
communication and involving parents and the community with student learning
(Ladson-Billings & Darling-Hammond, 2000).
Curriculum aligned with rigorous content standards for all students is
supported by a system that is designed to accommodate a range of abilities,
knowledge, skills, language proficiencies, and learning styles inclusive of other
cultures and languages (August & Pease-Alvarez, 1996). School leaders coordinate
systems for student assessment, staff knowledge base, professional development, and
program evaluation that support a core curriculum for all students.
56
School-Wide
Policies
*Coordinate
instructional
programs
* Align instructional
support
Figure 2-2: School-Wide Culture, Policies and Practices

Source: August & Pease-Alvarez, 1996

The critical role of school leadership impacts all aspects of a school’s
organization, especially what transpires in the classroom. The school’s leadership
sets the condition for producing a coherent goal where school, teacher, and student
level factors work in unisons.
A strong connection between leadership and classroom instruction is evident
in high performing schools (Marzano, 2003). In order to provide opportunities to
learn within time allocated for teacher-student interactions, the school’s leadership
must be able to support and monitor effective practices. Supervision of instructional
School Culture
*High
Expectations
*Safe/Respectful
Environment
Curriculum
* Aligned to rigorous
standards
*Student Assessment
*Staff Knowledge Base
* Professional
Development
*Program Evaluation
Effective
Instructional
Leadership
Systems
57
practices is part of a system to coordinate and evaluate where to align resources
(Hallinger & Murphy, 1987). Within the system of supervision, leaders can then
adjust and realign resources to continue promoting effective instructional practices.
Accountability is conveyed to teachers as the principal and other school leaders visit
classrooms and monitor teacher practice. Instructional leaders understand and are
able to identify effective practices, providing high support when teachers require it.
Leaders impact classroom instruction when they have a deep understanding of the
relationship between teaching and learning (Blasé & Blasé, 2004). In the case of the
elementary schools illustrated within the Izumi Report (2002), principals had a
coherent comprehension of the schools’ language arts programs enabling them to
effectively monitor instruction. Kelso Elementary School within the Inglewood
Unified School District, partially credits their high achievement levels with their
high-poverty school to their principal’s ability to stay focused and maximize
instructional time for their diverse student population.
A strong instructional leader is equipped to identify effective practices
proven to work among different student populations such as those mentioned in
reports by Edmonds (1979a), Reeves (2000), Izumi (2002), Williams (2007), and
Gersten (2007). Historically, students of color have not benefited from traditional
forms of schooling that are based on white middle class culture; therefore the
implementation of Culturally Relevant and Responsive Pedagogy (CRRP) is
promising for these students. A multicultural school embraces CRRP since the basic
58
tenets complement all five systems (dimensions), creating the condition where all
students can learn, regardless of their racial, ethnic, or social-class (Banks, 1999).
Model of Continuous Improvement
Effective instructional leadership has the potential of creating and sustaining
professional learning communities while maintaining a focus on student
achievement, specifically those systems that are essential with students of color
(Blasé & Blasé, 2004, Banks, 1996). In Schmoker’s (1996) Model of Continuous
Improvement (MCI) Schmoker aligns four school systems that have been associated
with improving classroom instruction and compliment those systems discussed by
Banks (1996). These four systems data, learning, support & monitoring, and
evidence allow for the school organization to continuously improve the quality of the
education their students receive.
The system of analyzing data is where MCI begins, understanding what areas
of strength and concern exist in reference to student achievement levels. Addressing
instructional concerns is where this system moves toward the adult learning
component, identifying what research tells us about effective practices. Once
effective practices are identified, the support and monitoring system follows in
which resources are aligned to improve teacher practice and professional
development sessions are planned accordingly based on the needs of students.
Implementing practices presented during professional development sessions lead to
the fourth system, evidence. Teachers reflect on their practice and implementation
while brainstorming next steps to improve classroom instruction. The leadership
59
team works collaboratively with teachers in discussing whether the instructional
practices impacted the area of need. Data then becomes an integral piece again when
assessing the successes and challenges; the cycle continues (Figure 2-3).

Figure 2-3: Model of Continuous Improvement (MCI)

Data
What does the data tell?

Evidence Adult Learning
What was successful/not successful? What does research say about
our areas of need?

Support & Monitoring
Professional Development/Coaching
How will teachers be supported with the new learning?

Source: Adapted from Schmoker (1996)

A high-performing school characterized within the Izumi Report (2002),
Solano Avenue Elementary has a system in place that resembles that of the MCI.
The data are analyzed to determine which standards have been achieved by students,
and consequently areas of focus are then identified. Professional development is
dedicated to creating standards-aligned activities to meet the areas of need. This
process of aligning data to professional development has resulted in high-
60
standardized test scores with their students who are identified as being on 100
percent free or reduced lunch.
Classroom instruction is positively impacted when the school leadership is
able to create an environment where all students have access to a high quality
education. Due in part to a disconnect in values, norms, language and behaviors
between the home and school cultures, students of color historically have
underachieved. Culturally Relevant and Responsive Education provides a direction
for educators in moving towards eliminating the achievement gap amongst culturally
and linguistically diverse groups and their white counterparts. The Model of
Continuous Improvement is a system by which to implement culturally responsive
classroom instruction to prepare their students to advance through levels of
achievement towards proficiency. The role of the leader is critical to ensure that this
system is in place to improve the quality of classroom instruction; this is the most
influential factor in promoting high academic achievement.
Data
Data is a common characteristic identified throughout the field literature in
relation to effective school systems. Understanding where students are creates a
baseline from which educators may use to plan accordingly for the purpose of
advancing students to the next level. Schmoker (1996) identifies data as the pivotal
starting point for any work regarding student achievement. Before any plans are
formulated for professional development and the alignment of school resources are
61
discussed, analyzing data is the foundational piece since it identifies areas of needs
and strengths.
Frequent assessment allows educators to address instructional needs and
informs instruction (August 1996, Reeves 2000, Izumi 2002, Gersten et al. 2007, &
Williams et al. 2007). Data from formative and summative assessments allows for
the monitoring of student progress, which subsequently provides the school (teacher)
with the information required to address instructional needs. Planning instruction
based on strengths and needs, allows teachers to build on students’ existing
knowledge and aim instruction within a student’s Zone of Proximal Development
(Vygotsky, 1987).
School systems can best meet the needs of students by aligning resources and
curriculum provided they understand students based on multiple sources of data
(August 1996). In addition, collective school data will illustrate which groups of
students are performing at higher levels and which are underperforming. Data is
critical for all student groups since it can help identify where inequities exist.
Disaggregating data provides the insight required to improve instructional practices
and set policies to assist specific needs such as language (Johnson, 2002).
Language Reclassification
Incorporating a student’s language and culture into the school’s academic
program will yield student success. Bilingual education built on a student’s primary
language while systematically moving students towards English proficiency ensures
that English learners can access the curriculum. This approach provides an
62
opportunity for English Learners to academically perform in their primary language
while they transitioned successfully into English proficiency, once they are
reclassified (Linquanti, 2001).
Since the passage of Proposition 227 in California, English immersion
instructional models have been the norm when schooling English learners (ELs).
This model of immersion has educators utilizing English as the language to teach
English to students, but a respect for a students’ primary language is imperative in
creating a multicultural school (Banks, 1999), and the changes in policy due to
Proposition 227 do not reflect this tenet. Although the instructional pedagogy when
educating English learners has changed, the goal remains to reclassify all students
into English proficiency.
High-performing schools with high concentrations of ELs have systems and
structures that monitor English language developmental progress towards varying
gradations of attainment (Williams et al., 2007). According to Williams et al.
(2007), the following systems were identified in fostering high performance among
English Learners:
1. Using assessment data.
2. Ensuring availability of instructional resources.
3. Implementing a coherent, standards-based curriculum and
instructional program.
4. Prioritizing student achievement.

The use of data to improve student achievement is an effective practice used
in better performing schools throughout the state of California (Williams et al.,
2007). The data is derived from multiple sources of assessments aligned to standards
63
and it is used to inform teacher practice and identify which students are struggling.
School leaders are able to identify which teacher practices are producing higher
achievement levels and in what areas teachers need assistance.
Once areas of need are identified, schools that have demonstrated higher
achievement levels with English Learners (ELs) ensure adequate tools are provided
to teachers (Williams et al., 2007). Instructional materials aligned to current state
standards and supplementary instruction for struggling students were reported by
principals as being imperative with equipping teachers in the classroom. In a
culturally and linguistically appropriate curriculum, instructional materials that
reflect students’ cultures and ways of learning prevent students from becoming
struggling students (Banks, 1999).
A coherent, standards-based curriculum promotes school-wide consistent
instructional goals by grade level (Williams et al., 2007; Marzano, 2003). This
guaranteed and viable curriculum provides continuity and coherence in grade-to-
grade-level expectations and access to the content for all students. Teachers are
provided with time to examine the scope and sequence of curriculum topics and
frequently meet to discuss student progress. In a systemic approach, the school
provides professional development that enables teachers to mediate the standards-
based curriculum with culturally relevant and responsive pedagogy.
A shared culture where a school prioritizes student achievement and monitors
measurable objectives has a positive effect on student achievement (Williams et al.,
2007). These schools have a clear sense of their goals and have a well-defined plan
64
for instructional improvement. Under NCLB, all subgroups are to make their AYP
growth targets and these schools in the William’s report have a clear understanding
as to what school wide instructional practices will achieve these results. A system of
continuously monitoring student achievement comes in the form of formative
assessments as explained in the Model of Continuous Improvement. In this system
teachers are constantly monitoring student achievement levels and refining practice
accordingly, advancing students towards the next level.
Effective school practices outlined in the Williams et al. (2007) report are all
aligned to improving student achievement for all students in particular English
Learners. These practices all function under well monitored systems that are
continuously evaluating student progress and foster a professional learning
community that has clear instructional goals for students (Schmoker, 2006).
An indicator for such progress is the school’s reclassification rates for ELs,
especially for the rate of students who enter Kindergarten and are able to reclassify
before entering middle school. This reclassification rate is realistic since it is still
within the recommended frame of five to seven years for successful language
acquisition (Hakuta, Butler & Witt, 2000). The significance of reclassifying before
middle school is monumental since middle school students are tracked into language-
ability based classes. If a student enters middle school in most school districts as an
English Learner, her or his chances of becoming a high school dropout rate increases
(Salazar, 2007). One in six English Learners in the Los Angeles Unified School
District graduated from high school with the course requirements to enter a
65
California public university (UC/CSU) in comparison to over fifty percent of RFEP
students meeting this requirement.
Practices Fostering Reclassification Rates
Consistent school-wide implementation of effective instructional practices
enables students to progress through ELD levels resulting in higher levels of
reclassification in high poverty urban schools with large concentrations of English
Learners (ELs), particularly Latino students. Instructional leadership implementing
the Model of Continuous Improvement creates and sustains a school environment
that is conducive to student learning and demonstrates awareness of the varying
needs of its student population. Schools with large numbers of ELs are guided by
student data to determine the adult learning that needs to take place to improve
instruction. These schools then provide teacher support and monitoring to assist
teachers implementing these practices. The schools have in place systems of
collecting evidence resulting from the implementation. This model comprises a
system through which instructional leaders, ensure that students advance through the
ELD levels towards reclassification.
Schooling of English Learners
Since the California passage of Proposition 227, schooling of English
Learners has shifted from providing instruction in a bilingual setting to creating a
dramatic increase of ELs in English Immersion classrooms (Garcia, 2002). The
debate continues as to what approach is grounded in sound educational theory as
required by Castañeda v. Pickard, to produce higher levels of achievement for ELs.
66
With the recent authorization of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB),
accountability policies have added another layer of challenge, to establish
proficiency in the state content standards for all subgroups including ELs. All
students are held to the federal mandate of students achieving Proficient or Advance
in the areas of language arts and mathematics, defined by each state. Instructional
leaders have the added responsibility of monitoring and supporting ELs acquisition
of English proficiency skills, while ensuring attainment of grade level academic
content standards (Rumberger & Gandará, 2000).
Under NCLB, states independently created content specific grade level
standards for all core subject areas. In addition, California created the ELD
Standards as a blueprint for the state’s EL population in an attempt to provide a
cohesive way of monitoring and supporting the acquisition of English proficiency
with the goal of reclassification. The state adopted the California English Language
Development Test (CELDT) based on the ELD Standards to standardize ELD levels
with a common indicator. The CELDT score, which is administered annually, is a
component of the current criteria for reclassification. Instructional leaders use these
data to plan school-wide professional development accordingly to support the
advancement of ELs and decipher the connection between the state’s content
standards and those indicated as benchmarks within the ELD Standards.
The issue of reclassification is imperative as data indicates that students who
are not identified proficient in English, under-perform when compared to their
counterparts even within the same ethnic group (CDE). Instruction for ELs has a
67
large-scale socio-economic impact on the country and the state of California. The
EL population has increased by 169% and it is estimated at 9.9 million students in
the United States (Francis & Rivera, 2006). Public schools in California (2005-
2006) instruct 6.3 million students where 1.6 million are ELs (CDE, DataQuest).
Students who speak another language other than English at home represent 1 in 5
and 1 in 10 of students are born outside of the country (Garcia & Curry-Rodriguez,
2000). The state of California recently enacted a new requirement for high school
graduation with the administration of the California High School Exit Exam
(CHSEE). In 2006, 75% of RFEP students passed the exam making them eligible
for a high school diploma. Those students, who have not reclassified and were still
labeled as English Learners, had a passing rate of 35% (CDE, DataQuest). A high
school diploma is a critical factor in students’ advancement to higher education and
their economic attainment. Schools continue to create a stratification of social
classes and underrepresented groups such as ELs are limited to career choices after
high school.
System of Reclassification
Effective leadership supports teachers in assessing, collecting and analyzing
data and providing a system for professional development that equips them with
improving teacher practice (Elmore, 2002). The reclassification structure, set by
policy, has implications for how students are served, instructionally programmed,
and performance expectations are set. Thus, understanding the phenomenon of
reclassification is significant (Linquanti, 2001).
68
The goal for English Learners is to reclassify from the status of English
Learner to one of Redesignated Fluent English Proficiency (RFEP). The criteria
contain elements that are independent from one another creating a cumbersome
process for educators. In order to attain RFEP status, an EL must meet all the
components concurrently. Students’ attainment of English proficiency is indicated by
their CST, CELDT, and achievement scores indicated on students’ progress reports
(Table 2-8).

Table 2-8: Reclassification Criteria

CST CELDT Achievement Marks
Advance, Proficient,
Basic
Overall Score: 4 or 5
Minimum Score of 3 in each
area
3’s and 4’s
(Scale of 1 to 4)
Source: UUSD Master Plan

Elementary schools are designed to serve students for the recommended time
frame; therefore effective school-wide instructional systems have the potential of
reclassifying all ELs who enter Kindergarten before transitioning into middle school.
Having an understanding as to how much time is suggested for an EL to attain
proficiency, allows school leaders to closely monitor ELD progress within a time
frame. Oral English proficiency is acquired between three to five years while
academic proficiency takes four to seven years (Hakuta, Butler & Witt, 2000).

69
Instruction of English Learners
The intended curriculum for ELs is the California state content standards and
access to them becomes an issue of equity. The rigorous skills and concepts covered
under the state framework are systemic and build on one another, designed to ensure
academic attainment. A challenge to educators is in providing the connection
between what students bring to the school (home culture) and what the school
considers essential to master (school culture). Rethinking how ELs are instructed
since Proposition 227 has shown great promise with literature on Culturally Relevant
and Responsive Pedagogy (CRRP) and effective practices (Francis & Rivera, 2006).
Curriculum needs to build on students’ language and abilities (Krashen &
Biber, 1988) in order to provide a guaranteed and viable curriculum (Marzano,
2003). School districts have acquired and implemented state adopted language arts
programs aligned to the state standards. Schools are left with the challenge of
making these programs meaningful where English Learners have opportunities for
linguistic access and participation (DaSilva Iddings, 2005). CRRP presents a case
for educators to understand how to cover the material while building a foundation
where students make meaning and each child has the opportunity to learn (Gay,
2000). In high performing schools, instructional leaders guide their staff through
professional development that incorporates elements of CRRP into the curriculum.
Effective leaders are equipped to promote a school culture of high academic
expectations for all students and instill a personal belief that the work is to
70
continuously improve the quality of education all students receive daily in the
classroom (Banks, 1999).
The Model of Continuous Improvement (Schmoker, 1996) can be applied to
improving the instruction of English learners since it integrates various systems and
aligns them to a collective system of authentic continuous improvement. MCI’s
system of learning promotes the idea of continuously seeking current and proven
research with a specific focus, based on what data tells. The adult learning system is
followed by the support & monitoring, where the implementation issue is addressed.
Professional development is effective when supported by the school leadership and
aligned with school resources (Elmore, 2002). Disaggregating data illustrates a clear
picture of a specific issue giving direction as to where resources are aligned
(Johnson, 2002). A sense of urgency emerges as the result of a school’s ability to
pinpoint how large of an achievement gap exists with their students and which
groups are not succeeding. Political factors have altered the schooling of English
Learners in California, but there exists a plethora of research on effective ELD
instructional practices. The Center on Instruction (2006) published a report that
discusses research-based recommendations for improving EL instruction in the areas
of reading and mathematics and parallel those in the Williams et al., (2007) and
Gersten et al., (2007) reports. Proven practices have been identified to be effective
within systems and structures but the challenge is for them to manifest themselves
into schools serving large concentrations of students of color inclusive of those with
language acquisition needs.
71
Conclusion
An overrepresentation of students of color in urban schools academically
under-perform in comparison to white students. Despite this pattern, research reports
have identified schools that are fostering high academic achievement with students
of color in high poverty urban schools. The premise of these reports is that
exemplary structural and systemic practices contribute to high student performance.
By identifying effective research-based instructional practices and understanding
what causes high achievement, a direction can be mapped with the potential of
improving the quality of education students of color receive in underperforming
schools.
Identifying high-performing, high-poverty schools with large concentrations
of students of color, including English learners, resonates with the possibility that all
schools have the potential of high performance. This study identifies effective
systems and structures, which serve large concentrations of students of color.
Specifically, the area of focus was on identifying systems and structures that increase
reclassification rates among students of color who are English Learners due to the
strong correlation between reclassification and achievement levels. An analysis of
these effective systems allow for investigation into how certain schools are able to
best prepare their English Learners. This study examined a high-performing, high-
poverty school with a large concentration of English Learners within a large, urban
school district that has been successful in providing a high quality education, with
effective systems and structures in place that create this condition.
72
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Introduction
This chapter outlines the methodology that was used for this study and
includes an overview of the study, sampling and site selection, data collection
procedures, data analysis procedures, and ethical considerations. This study focused
on how the constructs of race are reflected within school systems and structures in
the United States and how they impact student achievement levels with students of
color. The intent of this study is to add to the body of knowledge that exists on
practices that improve student achievement outcomes in high poverty, urban schools
with large concentrations of students of color, including those with concentrations of
English learners.
Identifying these systems and structures that exist in schools that are
producing high levels of student performance, have the potential of assisting schools
that are not high performing and are serving large concentrations of students of
color. Systems are those coordinated and coherent use of resources such as frequent
assessments and implementing standards-based instruction at the school site that
ensure a school’s vision, mission, goals are met. Structures are institutional
mechanisms, policies, and procedures put in place by federal, state or district policy
and legislation. This study identifies effective systems and structures, which serve
large concentrations of students of color, specifically those that increase
reclassification rates amongst English Learners. As the field would indicate, a strong
correlation exists between reclassification and achievement levels. An analysis of
73
these effective systems allows for investigation into how certain schools are able to
best prepare their English Learners.
This study examined a high-performing, high-poverty school with a large
concentration of students of color who are English Learners within the Los Angeles
Unified School District that has been successful in providing a high quality
education, with effective systems and structures in place that create this result.
Research Questions
This dissertation sought to answer the following research questions:
1. What are the trends and patterns of student performance among
students of color?
2. What are the organizational structures and systems that are perceived
contributions to high student performance in high-poverty urban schools with
large concentrations of students of color?
3. How are the organizational systems and structures implemented to
support school-wide effective classroom instruction that promotes student
learning?
4. How is the construct of race reflected in the school’s structures and
systems?
Research Question 1
The theoretical framework used to develop this question is based on the
literature that high performing schools are a result of multiple factors working in
concert in the form of systems and structures (Edmonds, 1979a, Reeves, 2000, &
74
Izumi, 2002). This question was designed to review a variety of data in order to gain
an understanding as to how a school operates, resulting in higher achievement levels
for students of color.
Research Question 2
The theoretical framework for research question 2 is based on literature that
discusses organizational systems and structures in place that contribute to high
student performance in high poverty schools with large concentrations of students of
color. The intent is to identify school-level factors that are in place in a systemic
way producing high levels of achievement.
Research Question 3
This research question is grounded in socio-cultural theories of learning
where schools build on the intellectual and cultural capital of students’ home cultures
operating within the Zone of Proximal Development (Vygotsky, 1987). Research
question 3 is designed to identify culturally relevant and responsive pedagogy in a
school setting in conformity with socio-cultural theories of learning (Gay, 2000, and
Ladson-Billings & Darling-Hammond, 2000).
Research Question 4
Multicultural Education and Culturally Relevant and Responsive Pedagogy
are the two theoretical frameworks for question 4 (Banks, 1999, Gay, 2000, and
Ladson-Billings & Darling-Hammond, 2000 ). It is critical for school systems and
stakeholders to respect and value students’ cultural backgrounds, languages, values
and experiences and incorporate them into the learning process.
75
Methodology and Reason for Multi-Method Qualitative Approach
The methodology used for addressing the research questions included
interviews, observations, and the collection and examination of artifacts in order to
triangulate data and ensure validity and reliability. This study is a qualitative,
descriptive case study guided by a conceptual framework that integrates socio-
cultural, multicultural education and critical race theories through effective school
systems.
A qualitative case study approach was selected in order to identify the
organizational structures and systems that contribute to high academic performance
by students of color. Qualitative study involves a naturalistic, interpretive attitude
toward the subject matter requiring the use of multiple methods of investigation.
Patton (2002) explained that a naturalistic inquiry allows the investigator to gather
data in a real-world context with a focus on understanding what participants
experience. The case study approach was selected since it allowed for an in-depth
examination of a single case by means of a variety of data sources including
interviews, observations, and the collection of artifacts.
Sampling and Population
Sampling
The school selected for this study met the criteria under the parameters set for
a high poverty, high performing urban school serving a large concentration of
students of color. The criteria for selecting the site is presented below.
76
An additional indicator included in the criteria was the level of performance
of English Learners as a subgroup. Based on the established criteria, a school was
selected for this study within the Urban Unified School District, Local District 6.
This school, Pajaro Avenue School has recently received two distinguished honors,
the California Distinguished Award and the Title I Achievement Recognition.
Criteria for Sampling
Our thematic group set forth to find a high poverty, high performing, urban
school with a large concentration of students of color. Specific criteria were
identified to guide our search and selection process (Table 3-1). Discussion about
the criteria became challenging as schools were being identified to meet the set
criteria. For example, schools became more difficult to identify at the secondary
level. Once the criteria were selected, few schools met those elements within the set
parameters. Of the select few schools that were identified, Pajaro Avenue School
was selected due to its large English learner population and their achievement levels
with this population.

Table 3-1: Criteria for School Selection

Indicator Parameter
High Poverty 75% (+) free or reduced school lunch
High Performing
Three years of API & AYP growth (consistent
achievement across subgroups)
Urban Population Density/Diversity
Students of Color 60% (+) Latino/African-American
Student Population Elementary-400+

77
Overview of the District
The Urban Unified School District is the second largest public school district
in the United States. This district has the responsibility of educating over 700,000
students, where 59% are classified as English Learners and/or RFEP.
Reclassification as English proficient is critical in accessing courses that are geared
towards higher education preparation.
This large, urban institution is divided by eight local districts, with restrictive
geographical boundaries throughout the Los Angeles area each lead by a Local
District Superintendent. In Local District 6, schools are comprised primarily with
Latino students, with over seventy percent of students identified as English Learners.
The geographical boundaries of Local District 6 include the southeast cities of the
district at-large, Maywood, Cudahy, Huntington Park, South Gate, Vernon City, Bell
and two schools in the Los Angeles city limits. Since the authorization of NCLB,
two elementary schools within Local District 6 have successfully met their AYP and
API, receiving federal and state recognition for their efforts. Reclassification rates
are not part of any formula to deem a school as high performing, but it
reclassification is critical when students transition into middle school.
Overview of the School
Pajaro Avenue School is located in the city of South Gate, a blue-collar,
mostly Latino community in the Southeast Are of the Los Angeles metropolitan area.
The school has been on a year-round calendar for the past two decades due to
overcrowding and lack of new school construction in the community. The school
78
operates on a three-track year-round school calendar and has a teaching staff of 54
teachers.
The students at Pajaro are 98 percent Latino. This kindergarten to fifth grade
elementary school is within the Urban Unified School District’s Local District 6.
About 60% of the students are classified as English Learners and last year’s (2006-
2007) reclassification rate was over 10%.
Pajaro has produced positive academic achievement levels as indicated by the
state and federal accountability formulas, the Academic Performance Index (API)
and the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). They have made steady progress since the
inception of the API from 1999 to the present (Table 3-2). This school has also
accomplished the goal of surpassing their AYP, one of only two schools to do so in
Local District 6 (43 elementary schools in this Local District).

Table 3-2: Pajaro Avenue School’s State API

School Year API Score (1000 Possible)
1999 509
2000 547
2001 608
2002 650
2003 696
2004 734
2005 753
2006 765
Source: California Department of Education
79
Data Collection Procedures
Theoretical Framework
Two conceptual frameworks as articulated by Saddler (2005) and Valencia
(2005) for utilizing Critical Race Theory (CRT) outlined the tenets that provide a
lens for analyzing current achievement levels based on race and ethnicity. These two
CRT frameworks provide a lens for understanding the current state of our public
school system and the outcomes it is producing. In public schools, a systems
mismatch for students of color in regards to curriculum, teaching pedagogy, and
expectations has existed since these students have been allowed to participate in
these institutions. The reports mentioned earlier by Reeves (2000), Izumi (2002),
and Edmonds (1979a) highlight systems in place within set structures that have
promoted students of color to be academically successful. Banks’ (1999) socio-
cultural perspective explains how multicultural education theory creates a framework
addressing the relevance between cultural settings to the impact they have on the
academic achievement of students of color.
The research questions were developed by the thematic dissertation group
using the theoretical framework (Figure 3-1) as a guide that is grounded in socio-
cultural theories of learning. The framework captures three critical elements that
affect high student performance: 1) historical, societal, and educational influences, 2)
contemporary societal and educational influences, 3) school site systemic and
structural influences. In the section that follows, the researcher will describe the
connecting factors between the areas of research and the findings from my study.
80
Figure 3-1: Theoretical Framework for High Poverty/High Performing Schools
Study

Administration of Instruments
This case study involved three sources of data in order to construct validity:
interviews, observations, and the collection and examination of artifacts.
1. Interviews with principals, school level coordinators, and teachers were
conducted. Interviews were intended to provide a perspective from the school’s
leadership and educators. Interview questions were created using the research
questions and the matrix illustrates their correlation (Table 3-3). The thematic
dissertation group, to answer specific research questions which were aligned with the
theoretical framework, created the questions for the semi-structured interviews. This
81
ensured every interviewee received the same questions, in the same way and order.
The approach selected was in part to minimize variations of interviews, to focus, and
to facilitate the analysis process across studies. Interviews were conducted at the
school site in classrooms, offices, conference rooms and the library. A tape recorder
was used during the interview for an average length of 45 minutes each.

Table 3-3: Matrix of Interview Protocol to Research Questions

Interview
Questions
Research
Question #1
Research
Question #2
Research
Question #3
Research
Question #4
Question #1 X X
Question #2 X X
Question #3 X X
Question #4 X
Question #5 X
Question #6 X X X X
Question #7 X X X

Participants were selected from a wide range of perspectives and knowledge
regarding the school site. Twelve participants were selected to partake in formal
interviews. Stakeholders interviewed included the principal, certificated and
classified staff and parents recommended by the principal and on the “volunteer”
status of the participant.
Principal. The principal has been assigned for the past two years but had
formerly worked at the site as a teacher, assistant principal and coordinator. He
returned to this school site after being assistant principal at two other sites.
82
School Administrative Assistant- The SAA has been at the school site for
eleven years and is planning to retire this year. She has worked under three
administrations at the school site.
Plant Manager- The head custodian has been at the school site for five years
and has worked under two administrations at the school site. The purpose in
selecting him for an interview is to gain a different perspective from an employee
who is not directly involved with instructional issues. He assists the school in non-
instructional tasks that affect the school’s efficient operation, with minimal outside
distractions.
Classroom Teachers. The classroom teachers interviewed have a wide
spectrum of teaching experiences in grade levels and years at the site. Those
included in the interviews were the lead teacher, grade level representatives and
resource teachers.
Parents. The parents interviewed had students in school who were currently
attended or had formerly attended. They were involved with school site councils and
volunteered at the school. All of the parents had students enter school identified as
English Learners.
2. Classroom observations were conducted and were insightful in providing
information on instruction being provided by classroom teachers. An observation
protocol was collectively designed with specific characteristics used while recording,
in order to capture the essence of our school site. The observation guide developed is
83
aligned to the four research questions. The following is a list of those elements that
were recorded through the use of scripting:
• Physical Setting
• School Grounds
• Classroom Specifics
• School-wide Environment
• Classroom Climate
• Teacher/student interaction
• Instructional practices
• Student engagement
• Symbols
• Rigor

Observations allowed for the researcher to view the school setting with
specific pre-selected elements in mind. Through direct observation, the research
captures the context in which the research is taking place. With a protocol based on
Patton’s (2002) model, the researcher is able to see things that the subject at hand
might not disclose in the interview. The researcher will pay attention to elements
cited in the literature review for having a positive impact on student learning. In
addition, the researcher might observe things that were omitted during the interview
due to an unwilling element. This firsthand experience allows the researcher to draw
from his or her personal experience during the analysis phase.
3. School Artifacts were collected to understand how school’s function on
behalf of students’ growth and development and to address the research questions.
Artifacts such as standardized test data, professional development plan, master
calendars, sample student portfolios without student names, reports
(gifted/suspensions/special education) and progress reports (achievement scores)
84
were collected. Documents collected were imperative to triangulate information
gathered through interviews and observations.
Data Analysis Procedures
Data from the three sources (interviews, observations, documents) were used
to triangulate the validity of the findings. The process that was followed to analyze
the data is outlined by Cresswell (2002): in order to prepare the data, conduct
analyses, move deeper into understanding the data, represent the data, and make
interpretations. The following Table 3-4 outlines the process of data analysis:

Table 3-4: Process of Data Analysis

Step One:
Organize and
Prepare
• Sorting and arranging the data
• Transcribing interviews
Step Two:
General Sense
• Read through all data
• Reflect on the overall meaning
• Record general thoughts about data
Step Three:
Coding
• Create and label categories
• Organizing the material into “chunks”/categories
Step Four:
Description
• Generate a description of the
setting/people/categories/themes
• Detail rendering of information
• Generate small number of themes/categories
• Display multiple perspectives
Step Five:
Represented
• Narrative passage to convey the findings of the analysis
• Detail discussion of themes
• Discussion with interconnecting themes
• Present a process model (grounded in theory)
Step Six:
Interpretations
• Meaning of the data
• Lessons learned
• Researcher’s personal interpretation
• Meaning derived from comparison of the findings to
literature/theories
Source: Cresswell (2002)

85
The researcher analyzed the data, as the data was being collected
(Merriam,1998). During the analysis process, themes were derived from the data
that reflected the purpose of the data. By linking the themes derived from the
findings, inferences were made to generate theories that assisted in answering the
research questions (Merriam, 1998).
Ethical Considerations
Policy set forth by the University of Southern California Institutional Review
Board was followed. An ethical consideration was that the observer had professional
interactions with both school leadership teams prior to data collection. Due to the
nature of this study, participants’ views on race were maintained under the highest
degree of confidentiality. Anonymity on participants’ social constructs of race was
assured by the researcher and only used to explain the school’s belief systems,
expectations, and the phenomena of high student academic outcomes. Although the
researcher interacts professionally with the school’s leadership, participants in this
study are not discussed nor the participants’ individual responses from the
interviews.
Conclusions
The data collected was disaggregated into four categories having a direct
relevance to the research questions previously mentioned. The purpose of this case
study was to conduct action research attempting to solve a problem (Patton, 2002).
An in-depth and rich description of the problem was the goal: why are some high
performing, high poverty schools with high concentrations of students of color
86
succeeding while the majority of high poverty schools are not producing the same
academic results? The school was the unit of analysis and sampling was purposeful.
Samples were selected based on an agreed upon criterion generated by our thematic
dissertation group. This qualitative case study is an attempt to answer why and how
some high poverty schools are succeeding. The validity and confidence of the
findings are addressed with triangulation of the methods, interviews, observations
and artifacts (documents).
87
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to identify the characteristics of a high
performing, high poverty school that has produced high levels of student
achievement. The intent of providing these data is to assist schools that are not high
performing and enable them to better serve large concentrations of students of color,
with a specific emphasis on English Learners. An analysis of these effective systems
allows for investigation into how certain schools are able to prepare their English
Learners and successfully reclassify them.
The following research questions were developed to gain an understanding of
the constructs of race that exist within the aforementioned systems and structures at
high-performing, high-poverty schools. Research questions were also developed to
gain an understanding of how multiple factors benefit students of color who are also
English learners. This study will contribute to the existing body of knowledge about
successful systems and structures that are grounded in socio-cultural theory and are
working on behalf of students of color.
Research Questions
1. What are the trends and patterns of student performance among students of
color?
2. What are the organizational structures and systems that are perceived
contributions to high student performance in a high poverty urban school with large
concentrations of students of color?
88
3. How are the organizational structures and systems implemented to support
school- wide effective classroom instruction that promotes student learning?
4. How is the construct of race reflected in the school’s structures and
systems?
Pajaro School is located in the city of South Gate, a blue-collar mostly Latino
community in the Southeast Area of the Los Angeles metropolitan area. The school
has been on a year-round calendar for the past two decades due to overcrowding and
lack of new school construction in the community. The student population at Pajaro
is 99 percent Latino of whom 60% are classified as English Learners. Pajaro School
has produced positive academic achievement as indicated by the state and federal
accountability formulas, the Academic Performance Index (API) and the Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP). They have made steady progress since the inception of the
API rating process from 1999 to the present.
Pajaro School was examined using a qualitative case study approach.
Interviews, observations, and school artifacts were the means for investigating the
salient trends and patterns in student achievement and the systems in place designed
to support these patterns. The process of triangulation was used to increase the
validity of the data gathered.
89
Data Findings
RQ1. What are the trends and patterns of student performance among students of
color?
High poverty schools identified in reports by Edmonds (1979a), Reeves
(2000), and Izumi (2002) served large concentrations of students of color and were
also high performing. The trends and patterns of these effective schools break the
traditional outcomes of students of color who tend to under-perform academically
when compared to white, middle class students across the nation (NAEP, 2005).
Student achievement levels at Pajaro School have consistently increased as indicated
by the state of California’s Academic Performance Index (API). Subgroups within
the school have also met the Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) benchmarks as set forth
by federal policy.
Student Data
Figure 4-1: School API Scores

Source: California Department of Education
90
Pajaro School has produced positive gains as measured by the Academic
Performance Index (API). Since the inception of the API scorecard, Pajaro has
grown 257 points and has been consistent in growth year after year since 1999
(Figure 4-1). The school’s API is close to achieving the state’s goal of 800 points,
and it has been awarded the California Distinguished School honor and the Title I
Achievement Award as a result of the high test scores. The school experienced a
slight decrease of 1 point during the 2006-2007 school year. According to staff
rosters gathered at the school site, the school experienced a large change within the
school’s leadership team that year. New team members included the principal, an
assistant principal, a literacy coach, the magnet coordinators, and a categorical
program advisor.
A pattern of increase in API scores was evident for three subgroups within
the school: Latino, Socioeconomic Disadvantaged students and English Learners
(ELs) (Figures 4-2, 4-3, 4-4). API points for these three groups reflect steady,
consistent growth annually. The difference between the three subgroups and the
school as a whole are minimal, with the scores being single digits from each other.
91
Figure 4-2: Pajaro School’s Socioeconomic Disadvantage API

Source: California Department of Education

Figure 4-3: Pajaro School Latino Students’ API

Source: California Department of Education
92
Figure 4-4: Pajaro School English Learners’ API

Source: California Department of Education

Figure 4-5: Pajaro School Reclassification Rate

Source: Urban Unified School District

English Learners (ELs) are reclassifying at a higher rate at Pajaro School in
comparison to the district with the exception of the 2006-2007 school year (Figure 4-
5). Although there was a dip with the school’s reclassification rate, the school has
identified reclassification as a goal for all English Learners before entering middle
93
school. A series of professional development offerings at Pajaro School had been
conducted in the form of ELD Practicums, where the focus was on advancing
students through ELD levels toward the goal of reclassification. Reclassification
rates have improved throughout the years but lag when compared to a neighboring
school with a rate of 25.2%.

Figure 4-6: Pajaro School Student Attendance

Source: Los Angeles Unified School District

The student attendance at Pajaro School was within the average range in
comparison to elementary schools from the local district it corresponds to. The
average attendance rate was higher than the overall percentage for elementary
schools in the district as a whole (over 400 elementary schools). Attendance rates
have not increased annually (Figure 4-6), and as a result the school governance
council purchased additional Pupil Services and Attendance (PSA) days as reflected
in their school budget. As with student attendance, suspensions at Pajaro School
94
were within the average range when compared to other elementary schools within
the local district and the suspension rate was lower in comparison to the overall
district. There was a slight increase in the numbers of suspensions during the 2005-
2006 school year (Figure 4-7). The following year, the number of suspensions
dropped from 31 to 19.

Figure 4-7: Pajaro School Suspension Rates

Source: Urban Unified School District

Table 4-1: Percent of Proficient and Advanced (CST)

05-06 06-07
English Language Arts 37.0% 42.0%
Mathematics 62.0% 65.0%
Science 35.0% 37.0%
Source: Urban Unified School District
95

Table 4-2: Special Programs

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
English
Learners
65.9% 61.2% 55.3% 53.3% 58.1% 56.4% 54.7% 49.1% 48.5%
Free/Reduced
Lunch
N/A N/A 88.4% 88.7% 87.3% 85.9% 88.9% 83.6% 84.6%
CalWORKs2 N/A N/A 14.1% 9.6% 8.2% 7.4% N/A N/A N/A
Compensatory
Ed
N/A N/A 97.5% 98.6% 99.9% 99.4% 100% 100% 100%
Title I (School
Wide)
N/A N/A Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Source: Urban Unified School District

Table 4-3: Student Enrollment in Percentages

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
American Indian 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.2 0.3 0 0.2 0.3
Asian 0.2 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.7
Pacific Islander 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 0.1
Filipino 0.3 0.2 0.2 0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1
Hispanic 97.2 98.1 98.4 98.3 98.5 98.5 99 98.7 98.6
African American 0.2 0 0 0 0 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.2
White 1.9 1.6 1.4 1.3 1.2 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.9
No Response 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Source: Urban Unified School District
96
Figure 4-8: Student Enrollment at Pajaro School

Source: Urban Unified School District

Student enrollment at Pajaro School began to decrease slightly in 2005, when
the district office strictly enforced student attendance boundaries (Figure 4-8). Until
2005, students from a neighboring city outside of the district’s residential boundaries
would enroll through an intra-district permit or through a falsified residential
address. In an attempt to relieve overcrowding in the local district schools and begin
to provide enough classrooms to offer all students at the same time 180 days of
instruction, the district began to limit permits and cracked down on false residential
addresses. The district as a whole began to experience a decline of enrollment.
Although the school experienced a drop in enrollment, it continues operating on a
97
three-track, year round schedule offering 163 instructional days versus a traditional
single track with 180 days.
Pajaro School has met their Adequately Yearly Progress (AYP) for all
subgroups. The school surpassed Annual Measurable Outcomes (AMOs) set by the
federal government under the No Child Left Behind Act. This mostly Latino student
body has produced Proficient and Advanced test scores that will qualify them to
meet their AYP for the next two years, even without growth (Figure 4-7, Table 4-1).
As indicated earlier, ELs underperform in comparison to the overall student
population and the two other major subgroups. Due to the increase of students
reclassified at Pajaro School, the percent of ELs has decreased from 65.9% in 1999
to 48.5% in 2007.
Teacher Data
General education teachers at Pajaro School are assigned to one specific
grade level with his or her own self-contained classroom. The same teachers instruct
their students in all academic content areas in grades Kindergarten to five. The
school has a small Special Education population that generates two full-time teacher
positions. The small number of students in special education exempts this subgroup
from the state and federal accountability systems. Resource Specialist Teachers
(RST) deliver special education services in a traditional pullout program.
Teacher ethnicity at Pajaro School does not mirror the student population.
Latino teachers comprise the majority of the staff with 57.9% in 2007 with White
teachers making up 26.3% of the teaching staff. There is a representation of
98
American Indian (1.8%), Asian (5.3%), Filipino (5.3%), and African-American
(3.5%) groups in the staff, adding to the diversity students experience when
interacting with adults.

Figure 4-9: Types of Certificated Assignments

Source: Urban Unified School District

Table 4-4: Teacher Ethnicity in Percentages

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
American Indian 2 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8
Asian 3 3.2 3 3 3 3 3.2 3.3 5.3
Pacific Islander 0 1.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Filipino 5 4.8 3 3 1.5 3 3.2 5.0 5.3
Hispanic 59 60.3 61.2 67.2 67.2 65.2 65.1 63.3 57.9
African American 2 3.2 4.5 3 3 3 3.2 3.3 3.5
White 27 25.4 25.4 22.4 23.9 24.2 23.8 23.3 26.3
No Response 3 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 0 0
Source: Urban Unified School District
99
Table 4-5: 2005-2006 Pajaro School Staff Profile

Total Staff-Teachers 54
1 Year or Less 7
2-5 Years 15
6-10 Years 13
11 or more Years 19
Source: Urban Unified School District

Figure 4-10: Average Days Absent-Certificated

Source: Urban Unified School District

The certificated staff at Pajaro School is well experienced, with over half of
their staff having taught over six years. Nineteen of the fifty-four teachers have over
eleven years of teaching experience (Table 4-2). Teachers who are fully credentialed
at the school represent 93.2% of the teaching staff, an increase from 74% in 1999.
The school administration includes 1 principal and 2 assistant principals. Staff at
100
Pajaro School has a lower absentee rate in comparison to the local and the overall
district (Table 4-3).

Figure 4-11: Teacher Credentials at Pajaro School

Source: Urban Unified School District

Figure 4-12: Certificated Positions

Source: Urban Unified School District
101
Data collected at Pajaro School indicate that there is a positive trend in
regards to student performance. Student standardized test results have steadily
increased annually with the exception of a slight decrease in 2007. Attendance rates
for students and certificated staff continue to improve. The teaching staff at Pajaro is
stable and is over 93% fully credentialed.
RQ2. What are the organizational structures and systems that are perceived
contributions to high student performance in a high poverty urban school with large
concentrations of students of color?
At Pajaro School, evidence of factors that contribute to high academic
achievement for students from the three reports by Izumi (2002), Reeves (2000), and
Edmonds (1979a) were in place. A strong focus on academic achievement (high
expectations), curriculum (pedagogy/standards), and frequent assessments (refining
teacher practice based on students’ performance) were identified at Pajaro School.
In addition to the characteristics identified in Izumi’s, Reeves’ and Edmonds’
reports, Banks’ (1999) description of characteristics of a Multicultural School were
also integrated within the overall workings of the school. Discipline issues
minimally interfere with academic discourse as a result of a positive approach to
behavior. The involvement of parents played a critical role in the learning at Pajaro
School.
Culture of High Expectations
Walking through the campus, observers will note academic achievements are
acknowledged through bulletin boards and quotes within murals. Literacy was
102
celebrated and books were available in and out of classrooms. Some students were
observed walking the campus with a book under their arm. Upon entering the main
office, baskets of books are available for those who are waiting, students and adults
alike. In all classrooms that were visited, posted standards were evident in addition
to hundreds of books within their class libraries. Language arts and math standards
had designated bulletin boards with student work showcased along with comments
and scoring marks. The student work was celebrated with accolades on the
achievement of a standard and direction with concrete guidance from the teacher for
those who missed the mark.
A teacher stressed how the school focused on promoting the concept of
becoming life long learners with their students. The staff continually reflected on
how the material presented to students was preparing them for school and life,
according to several teachers. The principal mentioned that, professionally, the staff
has high standards and meets regularly by grade level to discuss how to push
students to the next level. The office manager and the plant manager stated how they
saw teachers arrive at school by 6:30 a.m. and sometimes leave at 7:00 p.m. The
lead teacher stated how the staff and the community wants students to be upwardly
mobile and believes it is the work of all stakeholder groups to make this happen.
Since the recognition as a California Distinguished School, the school
community has continued to push students to their full potential as mentioned by the
plant manager. He felt Pajaro School was a family that believed in the students, and
103
he was devoted to doing what he could to assist the school in receiving the state
recognition when the process commences in the next four years.
Frequent Assessments
As mentioned with the ELD Practicum, the use of the portfolio as a way to
monitor student progress was stressed highly by the presenters. An ELD Portfolio
contains all California ELD standards needed for mastery before a student is able to
advance to the next ELD level. This tool informs teachers as to what is required, and
instruction can be planned accordingly based on individual student needs. One
planning session a month was dedicated to ELD at Pajaro School. When this
component was discussed with the principal he added,
Our work is based on the needs of students. Once again, the on-going
progress of these students, [being monitored] through the portfolio system.
We need to get better at looking at the standards that are expected of these
students, making sure they meet them.

The principal stated that teacher assistants at Pajaro School are trained to work with
English Learners. Strategies that are presented to teachers and proven to be effective
with English Learners are taught and discussed with the teacher assistants. The
school uses data from ELD portfolios, progress reports and standardized assessments
(CST and CELDT) to identify those students that are not advancing through the ELD
levels towards reclassification for additional support from the teacher assistants.
Frequent formative assessments allow for the use of data to address instructional
needs (Gersten, 2007). During an interview, the principal mentioned,
104
We have a push-in program; that is we use teacher assistants to go into the
classroom. We identify students who are not making progress in ELD levels.
We have groups that receive ELD instruction, TAs are trained to target their
needs.

According to a coordinator, intervention programs are designed in the same
fashion with the use of data to identify instructional needs.
We’ve had high expectations for our students and teachers come up to those
high expectations. It never stops. As far as doing the work, we are always
trying to find new ways of reaching those kids. We have interventions for
those students that are not achieving.

During a school visit, intervention schedules were posted in the main office. A
comment was made by a teacher in regards to calling those students who did not
show up to class. She told the office clerk to obtain the phone numbers of those
students as she was going to call those students at home.
School Goals
Data are used to inform who is performing at grade level and who is falling
behind. Collectively, data are used to identify which groups of students are meeting
Proficient or Advanced levels and which students are not scoring at those expected
levels. Based on the data provided, the school is 99% Latino and the two largest
sub-groups are students who are proficient in the English language (EO, RFEP,
IFEP) and those who are identified as English learners (ELs). The school
experienced an increase of reclassification rates between 2003 and 2006 but a
decrease during 2007.
While discussing the progress of English Learners, the school principal stated
that his leadership team spent extensive time discussing the trends and patterns
105
among those students who have been reclassified and the scores of Proficient and
Advanced RFEP students tend to achieve with the California Standards Test (CST).
This information on reclassification led to the sense of urgency for assisting as many
EL students towards reclassification as possible to meet the goal of grade level
proficiency and preparation for middle school. The principal explained the urgency
by pointing out that EL students are tracked into a less rigorous academic path if they
enter middle school without being reclassified.
The school has embraced the goal of advancing EL students towards
reclassification. An observation at a school-sponsored ELD Practicum, showed first
grade teachers using all sources of their student data that were available to determine
the needs of individual students and what was required to advance them to the next
ELD level. The EL Coordinator addressed the grade level and stressed the
importance of reclassifying the students before they matriculate to the middle school.
She shared a statistic of how many of English learners drop out of high school if they
do not reclassify before matriculating into middle school. There is a large
percentage of students that have begun their academic careers at Pajaro School as
English Learners and have not yet been reclassified. During the three days that were
observed during the ELD Practicum first grade teachers planned for the academic
year toward the school goal of advancing EL students at least one ELD level per year
towards reclassification before they entered middle school.
The principal discussed this school goal during an interview and stressed that
resources are aligned to assist this subgroup of EL students. Teacher assistants have
106
been trained with ELD strategies and with best practices such as Read-Alouds,
Think-Alouds, and Think-Pair-Share and receive the same professional development
teachers experience in regards to English Learners. As I interviewed the EL
Coordinator, she reiterated the notion that the school promotes the concept of a
community of learners, and all staff members are involved to some degree with
meeting the school goals. Based on data, the coordinators identify which groups of
EL students who would benefit from a pull-out program taught by the Teacher
Assistants. Intervention programs after-school and during off-track time are offered
to students who are not making adequate progress. When the school is clear on its
goals, instructional programs can be coordinated and aligned to support set outcomes
(August, 1996).
In all classrooms observed, time was designated for instructional purposes.
Teachers were engaged with students either by a directed lesson or circulating
around the room and redirecting students towards a task or discussion. In a first
grade class, the teacher transitioned her whole class from the rug to their desks with
their Reading/Writing workbook out on the set page in under a minute and a half.
Students were ready for their next task without unnecessary wasted time during the
transition.
School Climate
Upon entering the main office, visitors of all ages are greeted at the counter
by one of the three office clerks. Visitors are either directed towards a sign-in binder
for the parent volunteers or assisted by a “May I help you?” In one instance, a
107
mother entered the office apparently upset over her son’s label as an EL student and
she wanted to know why. The office clerk assisting remained congenial and
professional regarding the matter and informed the EL Coordinator, who could best
assist her. Even though the office clerk did not know the answer to the question, she
knew who to direct the parent to. The parent seemed appreciative of her response
and being led efficiently to the individual best suited to answer her question
regarding her son’s EL status.
Greetings from school personnel were the interactive norm while walking the
school campus. Smiles accompanied a “Good Morning”, “Could I help you with
something?”, or a simple “Hello”. During the second visit to the campus, a
Thanksgiving luncheon was taking place in the staff dining room and several
individuals including teachers, campus aides and a parent volunteer invited the
researcher to this event. This friendly interaction was evident at all interviews
conducted. The plant manager added,
The staff here at Pajaro…we all work together as a team. That is our system.
I see [teachers] here late … preparing. The quality of the teachers and the
school personnel are what make the Pajaro, a California Distinguished
School.

Celebrations were evident throughout the school. At the entrance of the
school site, two large murals identifying the school as a Blue Ribbon and California
Distinguished school welcome all visitors. Plaques are placed in the main office
commemorating these two awards along with district, city and state recognitions.
Successes continue to be celebrated in hallways, offices, classrooms, and in
108
gathering areas such as the auditorium, multi-purpose room and outside walls.
Students who have reclassified as being English proficient were celebrated on a
bulletin board. A school goal of reclassifying English Learners was articulated
during interviews with the coordinators, teachers and parents.
Student Success Team Process
A system within the school designed to assist students as well as their
families is the Student Success Team (SST). Any staff member can recommend a
student to be discussed at an SST regarding behavioral concerns, academics, and/or
any overall issues of well-being. Before the meeting convenes, every accessible
piece of information is gathered and brought to the SST. A coordinator compared
this process to how a lawyer prepares for a case; all evidence is gathered and
discussed to make a plea or an argument.
A common theme among those who were interviewed was the staff’s
recognition that not all students are the same. During the SST meetings, those in
attendance typically include an administrator, coaches, teacher, parents, and the
student. The focus is on discussing strategies and resources at school and the home
that could best meet the individual needs of the student. Depending on the response
from the parent in attendance, services such as family counseling might be offered.
During an interview, a staff member mentioned the goal is to help the family as well
as the student if help is requested. These meetings are conducted from an asset
perspective according to a coordinator interviewed. An asset perspective focuses on
what students are capable of doing and discussing what needs to be adjusted from a
109
school’s standpoint on how to teach to the needs and experiences of students in
appropriate and effective ways (Gay, 2000). Understanding areas of needs and
strengths allows for the teacher to plan and deliver instruction aimed within a
student’s Zone of Proximal Development (Vygotsky, 1987).
Discipline
A school-wide system for responding to discipline problems was not in place.
In all interviews, members of the school community felt that discipline problems
were not an issue at Pajaro School. The principal added that having five recess and
five lunchtime slots allowed for the supervisory personnel to interact more closely
with students. The reason for the five different periods was to accommodate the
student body in a small play area. Since the addition of extra bungalows, the
playground area can only accommodate approximately a fifth of their student body.
In classrooms, rules, consequences and rewards were posted in visible areas
for students. All four classrooms seem to have essentially the same three rules: keep
your hands to yourself, follow directions, and listen when others are talking. When
interviewing a teacher, she shared that
I do talk a lot about how [students] feel and how to deal with situations, when
[they are] frustrated, and what are appropriate choices. I [expose them to]
strategies that [they] can use instead of acting out…If I show I respect others
and [their] things, they should respect my things and what I have in
return…[I] try to create an environment that conduces learning where people
can take risks.

During a parent meeting, the assistant principal discussed that she is
facilitating a committee that is currently developing a school-wide discipline plan.
110
According to the assistant principal, members of the committee included teachers,
parents, classified staff, and any stakeholder who wanted to participate. Positive
reinforcement and how to systematically support discipline school-wide was the
focus of this new discipline plan.
Student discipline is not an issue at Pajaro School but the leadership has
taken on the district’s push for the development of positive discipline plans as a
catalyst to create one at the site. The creation of the plan is another example of the
staff working alongside parents to create a system that operates within a structure set
by the district. The school was creating its own system for improving the school
climate and the academic experience of students at Pajaro. A safe and respectful
school environment comes as a result of a positive school culture (August, 1996).
Parent Involvement
Creating a community of learners included parents at Pajaro School. The
three parents interviewed expressed great contentment regarding the workshops
offered to them on various topics that assist with their children’s learning.
Instructional coaches and coordinators led parent trainings on a variety of topics
including home activities that could improve math and literacy skills. A book club
meeting, to which parents were invited to participate, was announced during a school
site council meeting. During an interview, a parent stated how she enjoyed the
discussion of their current book since it related to her interactions with her daughter.
The coordinator, who runs the book club sessions, shared that parents who are
participating talk about helping themselves understand certain topics that equip them
111
with skills to strengthen the relationship with their children. What began as a small
group, has now grown into a larger venue due to the word-of-mouth advertisement
from parents, stated the coordinator. The Four Agreements by Don Miguel Ruiz was
the book being read with the parent book club at the time of the interview. The book
conveys an ancient Toltec message of living with the following four principles: be
impeccable with your word, do not take anything personally, do not make
assumptions, and always do your best.
Literacy was promoted through different means that include a tradition of an
annual event at the local park. A family literacy night mentioned by the school
leadership and draws approximately 1,000 students and parents to the event. The
goal of the literacy night is to promote literacy at home with the expectation that
students will embrace becoming lifelong readers. In addition to hearing authors read
their books and storytellers perform during this event, students received a gift bag
with new books that have been donated by different organizations.
In a primary classroom, the home-school partnership was evident in the form
of a bulletin board. The teacher assigned a task to parents during Back-to-School
Night, where they wrote their child a letter. In the letter, parents explained how they
expected their child to behave and participate in the classroom. Those letters were
the basis for the classroom rules the teacher created along with her students. The
rules were posted next to the letters. Parents in this classroom were kept informed as
to how their child was behaving in addition to their academic progress. Two formal
parent conferences were held during the school year. Parents throughout the school
112
were encouraged to become active participants with their students’ academic
experience. Marzano (2003) identifies parent and community involvement as a
school level factor that directly influences student outcomes.
RQ3. How are the organizational structures and systems implemented to support
school- wide effective classroom instruction that promotes student learning?
Student learning at Pajaro School consists of effective classroom instruction
that is supported by organizational structures and systems. Effective instructional
leadership fosters school-wide practices from which students of color benefit in their
academic and social development (August, 1996). The following systems of
instructional leadership, frequent assessments/data, and the implementation of
standards-based curriculum were observed at the school site. Teacher collaboration
as a system operates effectively through banked-time and psychomotor meetings.
The school organization aligned four systems (Schmoker, 1996) associated with
improving classroom instruction (Model of Continuous Improvement) and
complemented those systems with those mentioned by Banks (1999): data, adult
learning, support & monitoring, and evidence (Figure 4-13).
113
Figure 4-13: Model of Continuous Improvement (MCI)

Data
What does the data tell?

Evidence Adult Learning
What was successful/not successful? What does research say about
our areas of need?

Support & Monitoring
Professional Development/Coaching
How will teachers be supported with the new learning?

Source: Adapted from Schmoker (1996)

Model of Continuous Improvement
During a meeting, the Leadership Team made reference to a poster entitled
Cycle of Continuous Improvement. The concept of the poster is aligned with the
Model of Continuous Improvement (Schmoker, 1996). In Schmoker’s model, four
systems are discussed that work in concert with one another: data, adult learning,
support & monitoring, and evidence. The poster was referred to as the team
discussed their current instructional effort, improving writing among all students.
Professional development had been designed based on student needs (data) and the
ability to strengthen instructional practices in order to teach writing (adult learning).
The team was attempting to determine how they were going to measure success
(evidence) as they planned to visit a neighboring school. This neighboring school
114
(Ohlone) was referenced by other principals as producing high achievement levels in
the area of writing. Ohlone the school they were going to visit, had implemented an
approach to writing using the Writer’s Workshop model.
The Cycle of Continuous Improvement poster, similar to Schmoker’s (1996),
was on the side accompanied by a master calendar along a wall in the room where
the team regularly meets. The poster for the cycle was broken down into nine steps
with identifying essential standards being the first step.
The Cycle of Continuous Improvement poster identified nine steps as
follows:
1. Identify Essential Standards
2. Curriculum Mapping
3. Rigorous Lessons
4. Analyze Student Work
5. Common Formative Assessments
6. SMART Goals
7. Intervention
8. Periodic Assessments

When asked about the cycle, the principal stated,
That cycle was rolled out to them [leadership team] several years ago…we
decided to use [it] more as a tool as a leadership team…the school was
informed … of the process…We are constantly tinkering with [the nine steps]
trying to figure out how they work for [us]

The conversation continued during the second leadership team meeting
around analyzing student work (evidence) component that was going to determine
the effectiveness for the professional development, both on-site and during the visit
to a neighboring school. The visit to Ohlone consisted of an overview by their
writing coaches on their approach to writing and two demonstration lessons by
115
Ohlone classroom teachers (one primary and one upper grade level). Although the
“Cycle of Continuous Improvement” poster was not explicitly referenced throughout
the discussion, the content of the remarks from the team members were closely
correlated to the essence of the model. The leadership team discussed the data as a
baseline as well as the metrics they were going to use as evidence of progress. The
professional development plans were based on conversations involving data.
Every time we discuss [the cycle and data] we always find something new
from it or we pick something out or something new comes alive … this staff,
they are always open to new ideas, new suggestions, always looking to take
the extra step, a little more critical, not be afraid to [express] something that
hasn’t been working … [they] look at things from different perspectives, not
… stuck on one thing.

The Cycle of Continuous Improvement poster was created using literature
from Schmoker, Marzano, DuFour &DuFour, and Ainsworth according to interviews
with the principal and coordinator. The nine steps identified in the school
leadership’s poster are closely aligned to the Model of Continuous Improvement.
Both models operate by continuously looking and analyzing student data and
determining next steps. Pajaro School has systems in place to ensure that the work
adults engage with is guided by student data.
Instructional Leadership
The principal at Pajaro School was supportive of the challenging work that
teachers face daily in the classroom according to the lead teacher. He added that the
principal ensures everything functions smoothly and promotes a community of
learners. During the first leadership team meeting that was observed as part of this
116
research study, the discussion by the team focused on visiting a school that had a
much lower API score than Pajaro, but they were aware of effective practices in the
area of writing. Since writing was an area of focus at Pajaro School, the school
leadership team discussed different ways to address the adult learning component
promoting best practices for teaching writing. Visiting the other school (Ohlone
Elementary) came as result of a discussion within the leadership team meeting.
Towards the end of the meeting, the principal was briefed on the idea of the
visit and felt it was a creative plan and thanked the assistant principal conducting the
meeting in his absence. He also deferred to her to continue the meeting until the end.
The principal was an active participant and allowed another member to facilitate the
work, thus cultivating leadership within the school.
During the interview, the principal shared that he attempts to involve as many
staff and community members as possible within school committees. He expressed
every member brings a different perspective to the discussion; he does not believe in
a top-down leadership model. A staff member explained how the teachers appreciate
the efforts by the principal to empower others with the work that needs to be done
with students. Another teacher stated:
The leadership here…empowers others. It’s never been like a top down
regime. The [school] leadership [is] kind of flat, distributed leadership. I
think that has really helped us here at Pajaro because any one person feels
that they can make a change or that they can take the spotlight. The staff
feels they can impact what is going on. It is not always coming from the
principal, or an assistant principal, or coach or coordinator. There is a lot of
collaboration. There is a lot of agreeing and a lot of disagreeing and the fact
that there is a lot of disagreeing, really allows [us] to come up with a better
117
solution to what is going on. Leadership is something that has made Pajaro
distinguished.

Leadership at Pajaro School encompasses the principal, his support team,
staff members (certificated and classified), and parents. Ideas to improve the school
come from different sources and the culture is one that includes all who have the
potential of improving student outcomes. A constant system that is strongly
supported by the leadership is the time and effort teachers dedicate in working with
one another, collectively collaborating to improve teacher practice.
Teacher Collaboration
Teachers are provided with the opportunity to meet on a regular basis at least
once a week. The instructional focus for each of the meetings is divided between
language arts, mathematics, and English Language Development (ELD). The fourth
weekly meeting time during any given month is left open for grade-level teacher
discretion and the rotation continues monthly.
Collaboration among grade levels was a practice that began during the
LEARN reform effort according to the teacher union representative:
[Collaboration] came from the teachers, what can we do? What are some
ideas? So we started ideas in our common planning time; we used to bank
time before the district started, we came up with it ourselves… it was
something we need to do because we found a need for it…to work together to
improve instruction for our students.

According to the information provided during the interviews by teachers and
the principal, grade-level planning is where data analysis is most commonly
practiced. Teachers used data from standardized tests (CST/CELDT) and from
118
common frequent assessments (SOAR/Math/Science) to plan accordingly. Grade
levels develop common lessons, identify common instructional goals, and discuss
concerns. Coaches attend the meetings for support and guidance, but teachers are in
control of the agendas. The work continues beyond those meetings into their lunch
break and outside of their contractual time.
The instructional planning time is collective effort among all grade levels that
focuses on the state core academic standards and best practices. The planned
instruction at Pajaro provides ample opportunities for students to advance towards
grade level expectations and beyond. A first grade teacher added,
Academic expectations, part of them are from standards and part of them are
pushing the kids to reach their potential. I have kids from different academic
levels. For example in writing, this particular student might perhaps be
working just on writing a complete sentence while I have another student that
has already mastered the skill. I am pushing them [to the next level]. I try to
go back to the standards and focus on the standards they still need to know.
How am I going to help guide them? You have to know where they are so
you know where to take them. I use data from assessments to know where
my students are at.

Frequent Assessment/Data
It was apparent from the interviews that the school as a whole used data to a
certain capacity. The principal along with the leadership team analyzed data to
determine school-wide instructional goals and to identify who is and not performing
at grade level. During a leadership team meeting, data were referenced when
discussing the school’s instructional focus on writing. There appeared to be a
discrepancy between how students performed with the SOAR assessments and the
CST in the previous years. On the districts’ formative assessments (SOAR), the
119
students scored Proficient and Advanced in writing but this was not the case when
they took the state’s summative assessment (CST). On average, fourth grade
students scored below Proficient and Advanced on the CST writing component in
comparison to the SOAR assessment. Student data were collectively analyzed by
teachers and the school leadership, identifying the improvement of teaching writing
as an area of focus. The conversation during the leadership team meeting was on
continuing the work of equipping teachers to promote writing with their students.
In addition to identifying school-wide instructional goals, a coordinator
discussed how data were used to determine who is and who is not performing at the
appropriate level. Assessments and monitoring tools such as student work samples
and portfolios are used during grade-level meetings to create action plans for
students. In the area of ELD, teachers identified what students need to do to advance
to the next level in pursuit of reclassification. All grade levels have been trained on
how to use data to create lessons based on their students ELD needs. The last grade
level the observer saw participate in this cycle was first grade. Their ELD practicum
occurred during a visit to the school.
Analyzing data was the foundation of the work during the three-day training.
It was stressed by the presenter that data are to be use to monitor student progress
and inform instruction. The use of data informs the school who is and is not meeting
set instructional goals, a critical practice if student needs are to be met (Johnson,
2002). The coordinator added that by looking at multiple sources of data, a clearer
picture of the students is created. A teacher could then see how students perform
120
throughout the curriculum using work samples from science, social studies, and
mathematics. With this in mind, she added that strategies used during the ELD block
of time should carry over into other curricular areas. During an interview a teacher
stated that data is used in all meetings and by understanding what the data are telling
her, she can better prepare lessons and modify instruction to best meet the needs of
students.
During the leadership team meeting, following a brief reference to the Cycle
of Continuous Improvement chart, data were used to assess how teachers and
students are doing and where resources need to be aligned, according to the
principal. The coordinator mentioned that it was a constant reminder that the work
done to set instructional goals and plan for professional development is based on
data. He also added,
Every time we refer back to the cycle, it is usually every time we have our
professional development, planning meeting. We always find something new
from it or we pick something out or something new comes alive. We get a
different understanding every time. That is what is interesting about our
staff; they are always open to new ideas, new suggestions, always looking to
take the extra step. We are a little more critical, try something new and look
at things from different perspectives.

The work at the school and the systems in place are constantly refined just like the
chart, explained the coordinator.
Implementing a Standards-Based Curriculum
Looking at standards and determining whether students are meeting them,
based on data, is a system in place that drives instruction at Pajaro School. The
121
administration and teachers discussed the constant review of standards and the
multiple assessment pieces that inform instruction. One teacher shared:
The first thing [I] do when [students] come through my door, I give them a
series of battery assessments to find out exactly where they are at and move
them from there.

This teacher used multiple assessments to identify a student’s strengths and needs.
This assessment baseline informed the teacher how to best meet the instructional
needs of a student.
Differentiated instruction was evident in the classroom observations. The
instruction provided in a kindergarten classroom of EL students in a Structured
English Immersion program, their instruction utilized a variety of strategies. The
teacher had examples of linguistic patterns on the board that were simple and
elaborate, encouraging students to use depending on their ELD level.
The grouping of students was evident in all classrooms where students from
different abilities worked on similar tasks. In addition, a first grade teacher was
observed pulling out several students for immediate intervention. During a blending
lesson where students practiced the sounds they were taught with a decodable book,
the teacher pulled out students while others were working on the application of the
acquired sound in their workbook. The individual interaction between the teacher
and the student was approximately one minute, but the reinforcement of the sound
allowed the student to work independently.
The importance of being able to connect the material presented to students
with previous knowledge and experiences was stated during an interview with a
122
teacher. The teacher explained that he had struggled through his earlier years of
teaching, but once he realized both the importance and the consequence of making
the material he was teaching meaningful for the student, he said that he too had felt
empowered and filled with a sense of purpose regarding his teaching. He challenged
his students but assessed students’ abilities to create a baseline as to where he needed
to take them. Planning instruction based on student strengths and needs allows for
teachers to work within a student’s Zone of Proximal Development (Vygotsky,
1987).
Teachers in all classrooms visited were directly involved with students. Time
was spent between direct instruction, small group intervention and individual
assistance. Desks were positioned for group work and during a classroom
observation, cooperative grouping was in effect in science.
Levels of questioning differed within the classroom. In a kindergarten class,
the teacher began with a simple recall question such as determining the weather
outside and then moved towards asking when they thought a change of weather
would take place and why. During the science lesson previously mentioned, the
teacher had the students determine whether the item was a rock or a mineral and had
them defend their answers. She kept pushing her students to convince the rest of the
group whenever disagreement took place. The observer watched one member who
identified the item as a rock, then work to convince the rest of the group who had
identified it as a mineral. The sole member of the group had the task of convincing
123
his group members that the item was a rock or change his mind based on the group
members’ conclusions.
Teachers embraced the idea of fostering a community of learners within their
classrooms. During class discussions, two teachers interjected the view that
everyone is a learner including themselves and learning takes place in an on-going
process throughout life. In one of those two classrooms, the teacher asked students
to share their writing pieces with the rest of the class, as a way for the group to make
everyone’s writing better. The class cheered and students competed to go first,
eagerly raising their hands. Concept/Question boards, an integral component of the
district-adopted language arts program were filled with student-generated ideas about
their unit of study and a plethora of questions as well. Implementing a coherent,
standards-based curriculum and instructional program has been identified as a
system that fosters high performance among English Learners (Williams, 2007).
Curriculum (Pedagogy/Standards)
The staff at Pajaro has received professional development in the area of
English Language Development (ELD) through a Practicum approach. The three-
day trainings by grade level, focused on the implementation of effective practices
consistent with the literature, collected by the researcher, that resulted in increased
student learning. During two school visits, the ELD Practicum for first grade was
observed at Pajaro School. The following are elements observed at the professional
development session.
124
The presenter explained the importance and rationale for this type of
professional development training. He discussed the educational equity issue by
foregrounding the achievement gap that exists with English Learners and the need to
close it. According to the presenter, ELs have underperformed in comparison to
other subgroups in high stake tests such as the California Standards Test and the
California High School Exit Exam.
Within the format of this training session, the presenter pointed out the
importance of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy and how it particularly pertains to
working effectively with English Learners. A conversation took place with the
participants about belief systems and the importance of a school placing emphasis on
students’ experiences, values, and home language. The presenter added,
These tenets [of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy] need to be in place along
with effective ELD strategies…They are imperative in closing the
achievement gap.

The district presenter stated the work the participants were about to
experience was based on research and provided a list of researchers and references to
the participants in an effort to disclose the conceptual frames utilized for this
practicum approach and its content.
Assessment was another key concept discussed on the first day of the ELD
Practicum as it pertained to ELD progress. According to the presenter, assessment
informs teacher practice and monitors progress towards English proficiency. On the
third day of the ELD Practicum, the school received over two hours of training on
the use of portfolios. On the final day of the professional development, the presenter
125
guided extensive dialogue around a common understanding of the various ELD
levels. English language acquisition was a district priority according to the district
presenter. He stated,
All students need access to the ELA block of time…the district’s adopted
core language arts program. Throughout the practicum, all of you will be
exposed to strategies that will enable you to differentiate instruction using
SDAIE and primary language support during Open Court…A connection will
be made to the district’s ELD curriculum Into English! and the Open Court
program.

The presenter went on to review the district’s required blocks of time for language
arts (two and half hours) and English Language Development (thirty minutes). This
alignment of language arts and ELD is imperative with curriculum if students are to
master the state’s rigorous standards (August, 1996).
During classroom visits at Pajaro School, evidence of the ELD practicum was
observed. In a third grade classroom, blue posters (a component provided during the
practicum) were posted along with lexical phrases and linguistic patterns (a strategy
presented during the practicum). A fourth grade teacher used the protocol of one of
the blue posters to use Think-Pair-Share to review the group activity.
While interviewing a coordinator about elements of the practicum and how
they translate to the classroom, she said,
We are incorporating a practicum strategy at [Pajaro] School…A process we
are trying for everyone to use [involves] the always having an objective for
the student. The student is always thinking that by the end of his [lesson], I
am going to master this…There is an objective and [identified] set of
strategies…that are carried out throughout the day.

126
A teacher also mentioned the importance of lessons being purposeful and rigorous,
aligned to state standards.
Teaching must be standards-based, very explicit, must be reflective on the
part of the teacher. We need to start with our students, where they are so we
need to assess them…That can be formal or informal, there is no one way to
do it. You have to encompass everything.

The ELD Practicum was a district-mandated initiative (structure) that has
changed the manner in which the school delivers instruction to English Learners.
Through observations of the Practicum, the researcher was able to determine the
development of systems designed to implement this structure to strengthen
instruction and monitoring for student ELD progress. This observation is consistent
with Schmoker’s (1996) explanation of how systems can be developed to strengthen
an instructional program.
RQ4. How is the construct of race reflected in the school’s structures and systems?
At Pajaro School, teachers used tenets of Culturally Relevant and Responsive
Pedagogy as they interacted with their students in the classroom. All classrooms
visited, demonstrated different elements of Culturally Relevant Teaching (CRT) as
defined by Ladson-Billings & Darling-Hammonds (2000). Three dimensions within
CRT are as follows: conceptions of self/other, conceptions of classroom social
relations, and conceptions of knowledge/content (Table 4-6). Along with CRT, high
expectations for students were observed in classrooms as referenced by Banks (1999)
in the characteristics of a Multicultural School.
127
Table 4-6: Culturally Relevant Teaching

Dimension Example
Conceptions of Self/Other • Opportunities for students for self-
reflection/identification
• Value/celebrate students’ culture
• Help maintain/cultivate cultural experiences
• Reciprocal learning between teacher/student
Conceptions of Classroom
Social Relations
• Creates a community of learners
• Nurture cooperative, supportive classroom
arrangements align with home experience
• Opportunities to interact with students
in/outside the classroom (get to know them)
Conceptions of
Knowledge/Content
• Engage students in meaningful learning
• Supplement shortcomings in curriculum
• Establish a real purpose for learning
anything
Adapted from: Ladson-Billings (1989) and Ladson-Billings & Darling-Hammond (2000)

Conceptions of Self/Other
Classrooms at Pajaro School celebrated and valued students and their work.
Every classroom had images of the students, pictures, drawings and posters that
reflected the students’ culture. Photographs of students adorned bulletin boards
accompanied by work samples. Samples of work included journal entries, small
moments in their lives, and activities students enjoy participating in. Feedback
written by the teacher to students included accolades and direction for improvement.
For example, a writing piece had the comment, Great sensory details-I could see the
barn you were visiting. Make sure next time you have a well-developed hook.
128
In a third grade classroom, a teacher was leading a class discussion on an
expository text they had just read. The discussion began with common responses as
to what the literature was about, how it applied to the unit of study and the format the
author chose to use. Once the students seemed to demonstrate a basic understanding
regarding the text, the teacher shared how she would change the text if she were the
author. Using a similar structure the author had used, the teacher rewrote the story
using her experiences and knowledge about animals she has interacted with
throughout her life. After the teacher’s rewrite, she invited students to critique her
writing with accolades and recommendations. The teacher welcomed the comments
from students and emphasized how much she was learning from them. After the
feedback from the students, she once again thanked them and informed them that
they too were going to rewrite the story using their experiences. She told the class,
You can tell a similar story, using your voice and imagination. Once you are
done writing, we will share out and help each other make it better.

Upon hearing this from the teacher, students cheered and demonstrated excitement
through clapping and other affirmative gestures. Reciprocal learning between
teachers and students was observed in all classrooms most commonly with the use of
think-alouds and read-alouds. Teacher and students co-constructed knowledge in
what Gutierrez (1995) refers to as the Third Space.
Students in classrooms had ample opportunities to express themselves. A
common scaffolding practice observed in two out of the four classrooms was the use
of Think-Pair-Share (TPS). In this third grade classroom, a teacher led the class
129
through the TPS protocol heavily stressed in the ELD Practicum. The teacher began
by posing the question to her students, “How would you change the title of this
story”? She then provided two minutes for the students to think. After the time
elapsed, students looked towards their partner and shared for another two minutes.
During the sharing out portion, students discussed what their partner would change
about the title. With this protocol, all students had an opportunity to participate and
learn from each other. The teacher partnered up with one student due to an odd
number of students that day. In the classroom, a blue poster highlights the Think-
Pair-Share protocol along with visuals.
In a Kindergarten classroom, students who did not speak English were
instructed using Spanish (primary language) as a means to scaffold the material and
content being presented. She was apprenticing the students into writing proficiency.
An apprenticeship approach provides appropriate situations for students by
increasingly challenging their skills and responsibilities towards mastery (Oakes,
1999). These students along with others who had minimal command of the English
language were encouraged to participate and questions were solicited using a variety
of SDAIE strategies such as the use of realia, total physical response and lots of
visuals. SDAIE strategies provide scaffolds to students who are English Learners.
This approach is consistent with language acquisition best practices that allow
teachers to build on what students bring into the class and provide a bridge needed
for access to material and concepts introduced. Terms of endearment typical in the
Latino culture (based on the class roster all students were Latino) were used in the
130
form of mijo and mija to facilitate responses from students. This Cuban-American
teacher involved all students through whole group, small group and individual
assistance.
The teacher’s levels of questioning probed her students to think at higher
levels. During the calendar session, a student pointed out that if he were the sun he
would be very upset. The teacher redirected him to tell the class why he would be
sad. He was asked to go up and discuss how for the first eight days in November,
every morning had begun as a foggy day and “Mr. Sun” had not had an opportunity
to begin the day. Throughout the classroom observation, the teacher probed her
students with why and could you explain your answer. Higher order thinking skills
as described through Bloom’s Taxonomy were promoted throughout the classrooms
observed, including Kindergarten. In this example of the calendar activity, the
teacher began with simple recall level of questioning and moved towards more
advanced levels.
Along with promoting critical thinking skills, the researcher found evidence
that a students’ culture is valued at Pajaro School. According to a teacher,
Everyone has an equal word and it is not one person being more valuable
than another. If you have an idea, you can feel safe sharing it out…. We
value the students and I know that, when we went through the California
Distinguished School process, we had teachers interviewed. I heard what
they shared and things that they said, were things that I felt…I thought
“Wow!” it’s not just me, it’s a lot of us that have the same feeling…that we
see ourselves in our students. I’m Latino obviously and the majority of our
staff is Latino. When we look at our kids, we see ourselves when we were
children and we think, what is it that I needed that I did not get? I want to
make sure these kids get it.

131
This interaction was observed when a teacher in a fourth grade class pulled a student
to the side and asked him if he understood the difference between a rock and a
mineral. She did not embarrass the student but wanted to ensure that he understood
the concept so he could fully participate in the group work. In all classrooms,
students and their work were celebrated. Student writing samples along with
constructive comments such as you did this part great but have you thought about
this. Artwork adorns the classrooms with images of the students along with writing
as to what makes them unique. Standards were posted next to student work in
classrooms and bulletin boards in hallways, auditorium, cafeteria, and offices.
Conceptions of Classroom Social Relations
Power sharing between teachers and students was common in the classroom
within set guidelines, classroom rules. Teachers had developed relationships with
students that carried over and beyond the classroom. While the researcher was
interviewing a fourth grade teacher after-school, the classroom housed three current
students that stayed to assist with clean up and/or additional support with class work.
Throughout our interview, the classroom door was closed and we were interrupted
several times from different former students who needed assistance with their work
and wanted to know if she needed anything. After the interview, she apologized for
the many interruptions and she explained how she becomes very involved with her
students, and these students, she said jokingly, do not want to leave her classroom.
132
Another teacher added,
We are here six hours and that obviously leaves an impression on [students]
and we realize that. You are not just their teacher, a lot of times you have to
be their friend. A lot of times their counselor, … there are so many different
hats Pajaro teachers wear and for the most part understanding is critical…
Teachers understand that their role is very important and we are supportive of
each other, ensuring that we do help students succeed.

Relationships are developed with parents and the community. As stated earlier, over
1,000 parents and students attend the literacy nigh event, creating another
opportunity for parental involvement. Books given at the event are in English and
Spanish, with varying reading levels.
A community of learners is promoted in classrooms and throughout the
school. In a fourth grade class, cooperative grouping was observed. All students
participated and worked towards the same task. They were respectful of one another,
holding other members accountable while staying focused on the assigned task. A
student was playing with a rock and another student told him he was holding up the
work. The student was redirected and the work continued. Outside of the classroom,
students had six supervisorial staff members, roaming throughout the yard ensuring
students were playing safely. Students appeared to interact socially where for the
most part all students had an opportunity to play in a game or activity. Baskets of
books were taken out to the yard for those that chose to read.
As mentioned, all stakeholders put themselves in the role of learners and the
idea that everyone is a learner is pervasive. In classrooms, students challenged
teachers on topics up for discussion and it is done in a safe environment. During a
133
leadership team meeting, the assistant principal was explaining the rationale for
visiting a school that had a much lower API than their school, but since Pajaro’s
instructional goal was writing, they were open to what they could learn from that
school about writing. The district leadership had stressed the importance of
developing and sustaining professional relationships with other schools and learning
from each other. This notion was shared when the principal was interviewed. He
stated he was part of a professional learning community with four other principals
who met on a regular basis.
A teacher shared how she assists students by creating a social atmosphere
where they can succeed. Other staff members added that their relationship with
students is to assist them reach their capacity by guiding and motivating them. The
teacher and student interactions are focused on the positive and attempt to
understand how the student feels. In a first grade classroom, a teacher said, “I like
the way you are following along” to the group and then redirected a student by
telling him, “It is important you follow along.” This positive interaction was also
observed in a third grade classroom where a teacher encouraged students to use their
imagination and their voices when expressing themselves during a discussion in the
middle of a lesson.
Modeling good behavior is how a first grade teacher managed to create an
environment where students feel safe and are equipped with ways of responding to
different situations. While interacting with her students, a first grade teacher used a
positive tone in redirecting a student who was playing with his box and not
134
practicing the skill just taught. Although the teacher appeared not to be pleased with
his behavior, she never raised her voice and caused minimal disruption to other
students during the exchange. She uses the Second Step curriculum, a character-
building program that provides situational activities as the means to present the
lesson objective. The teacher maintained a cooperative, nurturing classroom
environment closely aligned to a student’s home experience as referenced by
Ladson-Billings (1989).
The teachers observed are explicit with students on the lesson objective and
manner in which they are going to be assessed. Rubrics and criteria charts were
evident in all classrooms for different content areas along with additional comments.
A teacher stated,
I teach three and four year olds, I tell them … we are going to learn this for
this reason and I tell them why its important, and what is it that they are
going to learn.

In two classrooms, pictures of students where displayed with work samples
next to them. Their names identified the different curriculum accomplishments such
as a complete sentence, a number pattern, and a plant cycle artwork. Paper plates
were displayed at another classroom, where students painted their face and attempted
to answer, who they are. Welcome signs were attached to all doors, with caricatures
representing students of color and the teacher’s name in the middle.
Classroom social relations sustaining and nurturing a community of learners
were observed among teachers and students. Opportunities to engage with one
another were strongly promoted by the teacher and the students, constructing
135
knowledge through the interactions. These characteristics identified in the visited
classrooms are within those dimensions discussed by Ladson-Billings & Darling-
Hammond (2000).
Conceptions of Knowledge/Content
Teachers at Pajaro School incorporate the lives and experiences of students in
their academic learning. Building on students’ background knowledge was a
common practice observed from teachers while validating students’ culture,
language and experiences.
In all classrooms, Concept/Questions Boards (from the Open Court program)
were functional. On the Concept side, students had new learning in the form of
visuals and written notes posted. The Question portion of the board contained a
multitude of inquiries students possessed about their unit of study. In a third grade
classroom, the teacher had just returned from vacation (off-track). Within the first
few days of her return, the Concept/Question Board was posted and displayed. In
addition to student responses, focus questions and the unit’s big idea were displayed
to guide student learning. A fourth grade teacher during a classroom discussion
reminded students of the big idea and read aloud, “We will acquire skills developing
an idea into a realistic business plan.” This business development concept was the
big idea for their unit of study. The use of the Concept/Question Board engaged
students in meaningful learning. Student experiences and inquiry were at the center
of the language arts lessons observed. This engagement established a real purpose
for learning, an example of Culturally Relevant Teaching (Ladson-Billings, 1989).
136
Students at Pajaro are held to the state academic standards. The standards are
posted throughout the school accompanied with student work samples. Teachers
encourage students by explicitly discussing a purpose for learning a specific concept.
When the fourth grade teacher introduced the earth science lesson, she explained
how this knowledge is essential for those that want to be a geologist. After she
explained the profession of a geologist, the students’ eyes widened with interest, and
they had large grins on their faces.
In classrooms at Pajaro School, students were engaged in meaningful
learning opportunities. All teachers observed adopted explicit lesson objectives and
attempted to establish a purpose for the material taught.
High Expectations
High expectations of students are ingrained in the belief systems of the staff
at Pajaro School. According to the mission and vision statements of the school
within the Single School Plan document:
The vision of Pajaro School is to provide a quality education for all students,
one that fosters enjoyment of lifelong learning and promotes self-esteem.

The school Single School Plan document goes on to add in regards to their Mission
statement:
The dynamic community of learners housed on our campus holds itself up as
a paradigm of quality education. Academic success is offered to every one of
our students. We make no exceptions and offer no excuses… Each student
has a story that is recognized and validated by our faculty and staff; each
student has a past and a future that are inextricably entwined with the story of
our school.

137
A clearly identified mission from the Single School Plan was not articulated
from the school document by those interviewed, albeit all staff members interviewed
believed it to be that all children can learn. A common excuse for not being fully
aware of the Single School Plan was that since they have been doing well with test
scores, the district had not mandated them to revise it since it was created. The
school’s mission is understood by inference since no one recalled the actual
statement. High expectations within a school culture, fosters a safe and respectful
environment for students (August, 1996).
In addition to believing students can learn, a statement shared by teachers is
that students can reach and exceed the standard for their grade level. A teacher
explained that he felt it was his responsibility as the students’ teacher to ensure they
met the content of their grade level and if they did, work on introducing them to the
next level of the curriculum.
Staff members expressed their connection to the community since some had
attended Pajaro School. The principal stressed his belief that those who understand
the community know the pitfalls firsthand of not being successful at school.
According to the lead teacher, this personal connection is critical. She added,
I was valedictorian and I went to Berkeley. That is not the general and I
understand that. It is hard for me to wrap my mind around it because if I did
it, why couldn’t somebody else. The way I teach is that all kids can do it and
I think that it is a better way to teach than to think they are handicapped and
cannot do it…I am not different than my students.

138
Those who are not from the community are treated equally and immerse themselves
with the culture and seek opportunities to understand the community needs.
Teacher
Throughout the interviews for this research study, stakeholders described
effective teaching practices, and from those responses three major ideas emerged:
identifying with students, professional capacity, and belief systems (high
expectations). In addition, all interviewees stressed that teachers are the greatest
factor in student achievement.
Student engagement was a critical practice mentioned by those who were
interviewed. Parents in particular stressed that students were all different and
effective teachers need to be equipped with strategies to make content meaningful to
every student. Engaging students in meaningful exercises is an example of
Conceptions of Knowledge as referred to by Ladson-Billings (1989) in Culturally
Relevant Teaching. Motivating students and ensuring they did not fall behind was
evidenced throughout the school. Teachers and parents focused on students being
able to fix problems and try their best.
The professional capacity of the teacher was a reiterated theme among those
interviewed. Investing in developing a strong staff knowledge base is essential to
strengthening the teacher-student interaction (August, 1996). Administration and
teachers discussed the need for promoting critical thinking and problem solving
skills within an environment of continuous learning. The lead teacher added,
139
We are a very reflective staff and we really reflect on what our mission is
here as educators because it’s our profession. It’s not something that we’re
doing until we find something else to do.

In all classrooms observed, differentiated instruction and cooperative
groupings were a common instructional practice. A fourth grade teacher began her
lesson by explicitly discussing the lesson objective. The teacher explained the
standard and checked for understanding before allowing the class to proceed with the
group activity. As the work began, she monitored the work while asking probing and
additional questions of those who were not producing work at the same rate as the
others. She pulled some aside and reviewed the purpose using previously created
charts and realia. This type of immediate intervention allowed students to return to
their group and continue the exercise. During the interview this teacher mentioned
knowing student strengths and areas of need as an important aspect of her pedagogy
that informs her instruction and allows her to monitor progress. This type of
understanding informs her as to who will be targeted for additional support while
still moving the class forward with group work.
Believing in students’ worth and potential was highly stressed by parents and
mentioned by all staff members. As one parent stated,
A good teacher is one that worries about his students. If he sees that a child
is falling behind, he knows how to get them back on track. I have
experienced where teachers and I work together to help my children.

One of the parents mentioned how all three of her children have benefited
from teachers believing in them. Her second child was not advancing through the
ELD levels as her eldest had done in the past. When asked about her understanding
140
of ELD levels, she mentioned that these levels are often explained. During parent
school meetings and conferences, ELD levels are further explained and how the
levels relate to specific students. A parent explained how she observed a teacher
staying after school on his own time, and that is the dedication she sees within
effective teachers. In addition, parents stated that teachers who have constant
communication with them create a situation where they are working alongside the
teacher as partners for students’ academic achievement. The impression from
interviewing parents was that this type of constant communication was widespread
throughout the school.
Analysis and Discussion
Throughout the literature on effective schools, the systems and structures in
Figure 4-14 were identified as contributing to the success of students of color in high
poverty urban schools. All systems identified were present in varying degrees at
Pajaro School and complimented one another as they worked in concert, benefiting
students’ academic development. The following analysis addresses the trends and
patterns of students, various degrees of implementation of the identified systems and
structures and the school’s social constructs of race.
141
Figure 4-14: Systems and Structures

Systems Structures

*Model of Continuous *Federal Policies
Improvement High (ex. No Child Left Behind Act)
*Instructional Leadership Student *State and District Policies
*Frequent Assessment/Data Achievement *Class Size
*Multicultural Education *Instructional Time
*Culturally Relevant Teaching *Funding
*Implementing Standards-Based
Curriculum

Throughout the literature on effective schools, the systems and structures in
Figure 4-14 were identified as contributing to the success of students of color in high
poverty urban schools. These systems identified in Figure 4-14 were present at
Pajaro School and complemented one another as they worked in concert, benefiting
students’ academic development. The following analysis addresses the trends and
patterns of students, various degrees of implementation of the identified systems and
structures and the school’s social constructs of race.
Trends and Patterns
State and Federal Accountability (API/AYP)
Students at Pajaro School have produced positive API scores, year after year
for all subgroups with the exception of the 2006-2007 school year. The school’s
laser-like focus on data analysis and the alignment of resources for set goals has
142
fostered cohesiveness with the school’s instructional program. Direct instruction and
cooperative groupings were consistent instructional practices in all classrooms
visited, along with clear academic expectations.
The drop in API was one point and it was during the shift from one
administrative team to another. As previously mentioned, the leadership team was
comprised of five new members. The principal and the assistant principal were new
to Pajaro and each came from different schools. Although the school had a new
team, systems and structures in place at Pajaro that were developed under the
previous administration continued to operate.
Unlike the API formula that assigns different value to the different
performance bands, the AYP accountability systems measure progress based on
overall results and their respective subgroups. Pajaro has been successful at meeting
their AYP and continues to improve the number of students that score at Proficient
and Advanced. Similar to schools in the literature, Pajaro has been able to meet and
exceed federal Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs).
With the API dropping one point, one might infer that performance levels
dropped but the percentages of Proficient and Advanced on the CST indicate
continued growth. In Language Arts, students advanced from 37% to 42% and in
Mathematics from 62% to 65%. Science performance also increased from 35% to
37%. The drop in API does lead one to inquire as to what caused the sudden
stagnation of consistent growth. When API data was disaggregated, subgroups
143
within the school had a decline in scores and the gap between the subgroups and the
school widened.
EL Reclassification
Data on English Learners indicate a decrease from 1999 to the present
percentages in 2007. Reclassification rates increased between 2003 to 2006 but
dropped in 2007. A decrease in percentages with EL enrollment might be correlated
to the increase in reclassification rates and professional development in the area of
English Language Development. The individual that traditionally spearheads the
work with reclassification was new to the position during the 2006-2007 school year.
In an interview, the individual shared the sense of urgency for reclassifying students
and the commitment from the school to make this goal a priority.
Student Attendance/Suspension
The pattern of student attendance at Pajaro School was consistently
improving annually from 2003 to 2005. The school experienced a decrease in 2006
but improved in 2007. Perfect attendance parties, raffles and the purchase of
additional PSA time were implemented during the new administration. Suspensions
subsequently decreased during the same year attendance began to improve. This
trend was in large measure due to the new administration’s commitment to
promoting a positive school culture. At a school site meeting, the PSA and the
principal discussed the importance of making sure students come to school and to
look at situations holistically when students are considered for suspensions.
144
Teachers
The teaching staff does not mirror the student population in regards to
ethnicity but was comprised of 58% Latino teachers (99% of the students are
Latino). This is not to conclude that only Latino teachers are capable of teaching
Latino students. With an experienced teaching staff where 93.2% are fully
credentialed, collectively they understand the needs of their students and work to
build partnerships with the community.
Organizational Systems and Structures
In the literature, Schmoker (1996) discusses a Model of Continuous
Improvement where systems work in concert with the goal of improving student
results. At Pajaro School, this model was evident with the work the leadership team
conducted during the two observations.
When the leadership team meets, they keep in mind the Model of Continuous
Improvement’s four systems mentioned as essential: data, adult learning,
support/monitoring, and evidence. The team created a visual for their work that was
posted in the room where they typically meet to plan instructional goals for the
school. This visual has been broken down into nine segments but the essence of he
work being continuous and reflectively driven by data as the outlined in the
literature.
Analyzing data is the system that informs instructional goals at Pajaro
School. Writing instruction was the topic at hand during an observation, where data
from their language arts program was not consistent with how students were
145
performing on the CST. Data was used to identify a baseline before the work started
on this instructional focus. By using data to inform instructional goals, Pajaro has
been able to articulate high expectations for all students. This characteristic of a
multicultural school setting high expectations (Banks, 1999) provides a system that
holds all students (and subgroups) to the same standard.
Although the school continues to improve academically based on their API,
the principal shared they see the need for improvement through instruction. Many
students are achieving at Proficient and Advanced levels but some students are still
lagging behind. Conversations occur amongst staff members about what
information is required in order to assist with identified problems. During an
interview with a coordinator, she discussed the need of English Learners as a
subgroup for additional support in accessing the core curriculum. The high
expectations are present, but the challenge, according to the coordinator, is to build
on the language, experiences and values students bring to school. Bridging the two
has been the focus of the ELD Practicums the school has hosted for all grade levels.
Professional literature is embedded within the system of adult learning at
Pajaro School. Effective instructional practices published by educational experts are
discussed with different stakeholder groups. Teacher assistants were being trained
on ELD strategies that have been scientifically tested and correlated with higher
levels of achievement with English Learners. Pajaro school aligns resources in
order to support and monitor professional development such as coaching,
instructional materials, and continuous feedback. With their effort with writing, the
146
school was able to create a professional development action plan based on identified
best practices. Grade level meetings were set aside as well as banked time sessions,
to continuously discuss the implementation of the created plan.
Constantly looking at what is and not working is another system in place at
Pajaro School, thus focusing the school’s instructional efforts on verifiable evidence.
This system is constantly revised and strengthened at the site. An example is the use
of their periodic assessments in the area of language arts. The district mandates all
schools to administer the SOAR assessment as a common formative assessment
every six weeks. Pajaro schoolteachers expressed the need for more frequent
assessments to inform their instruction and monitor student progress. Assessments
are frequently discussed and planned for during grade level meetings. Teachers
constantly discuss what to do when students “get it” and what to do for those that do
not. The improvement systems (Model of Continuous Improvement) observed at
Pajaro School are cyclical and interconnected, guided by student data, where the
evidence becomes the data and school systems to support one another.
Structures are created and put in place with the intent to assist public schools.
Although the intention is to meet the needs of students, set structures may hinder the
school’s overarching mission if systems are not generated. Pajaro is an example of a
school that has been successful creating systems that allow for the organization to
advance students’ towards proficiency. Structures tend to be crafted as a result of
decisions made away from the school site. The key is to understand the purpose of
147
the structures and their applicability to the unique student needs of the school site;
systems are those coordinated use of resources that work within structures.
Constructs of Race
Pajaro School has the characteristic traits of a multicultural school as
discussed by Banks (1999) that are associated with higher achievement levels with
students of color. Teaching styles are constantly revisited and challenged to improve
their professional capacity. The staff at Pajaro School believes that their students
can learn and master the state’s rigorous standards and are reaffirmed in this belief
with their test results (API/AYP). The school focuses on creating a community of
life long learners and readers. Applying Vygotsky’s (1987) Zone of Proximal
Development is evident as the teachers give importance to building on the assets
students bring to school. The school community embraces this idea, and it is
reflected in the staff’s attitudes towards students, instructional practices and overall
goals for students of color.
The school culture respects and embraces the richness of the students’
backgrounds where the norm is perceived that all students can learn, regardless of
racial, ethnic or social-class groups (Banks, 1999). Attitudes and perceptions about
students of color at Pajaro include high expectations and the belief that all students
are capable of learning at higher cognitive levels (Banks, 1999). Systems within the
set structures are organized to promote a school environment where all students have
an equal opportunity for success.
148
Teachers at Pajaro express a strong reflective practice where they constantly
monitor whether students are meeting their set objectives. Instructional materials do
not always reflect the culture of the students it serves but teachers at Pajaro attempt
to make connections to the concepts and ideas introduced and presented.
Ongoing professional development based on student and staff needs, is
evident within the overall structure at Pajaro School. Teachers have opportunities to
plan common grade level lessons and are supported in their efforts by the leadership
and instructional coaches. The fact that instructional coaches provide cognitive
coaching, demonstration lessons, and opportunities for teachers to observe other
classrooms improves teacher practice, and subsequently student achievement.
During the interviews, a common theme of teaching to the individual student
resonated in relation to their individual needs and how these needs are to be met.
This line of thinking addresses the individual needs of students on a regular basis,
allowing teachers to plan and instruct accordingly.
Interviewing different stakeholder members allowed for the collection of
various perspectives on the perception of students at Pajaro School. The literature
regarding Critical Race Theory brings about an awareness that racism and racist
institutional practices have produced levels of student achievement that have been
sub-par for students of color when compared to white students. While interviewing
the principal, he highlighted that the staff at Pajaro School knows first-hand the
pitfalls of not being successful academically and the ramifications of not being well
equipped for higher education opportunities. The staff and community of Pajaro
149
discussed their awareness of the academic pattern students of color have historically
produced. The staff in general shared their strong affirmation that it is within their
capacity to challenge and change the system and what it produces.
Student accomplishments are celebrated and they are at the center of adult
conversations. Importance is given to students when they reclassify, and achieve
their goals through bulletin boards and celebration parties.
Summary
This chapter presented the data analysis of the case study at Pajaro School.
The findings were consistent with systems identified within the literature correlated
with fostering high student performance levels but with different degrees of
implementation. Systems such as the Model of Continuous Improvement,
Instructional Leadership, Frequent Assessment, and the Implementation of a
Standards-Based Curriculum were consistently in evidence and being utilized as
ratified by the observations at Pajaro School. The school appeared to work within
the structures set by federal, state and district policies. Banked-time sessions are part
of the structures that have allowed systems to be effective at the school site.
The systems that were not fully developed at the site were Multicultural
Education and Culturally Relevant Teaching. Some characteristics of a Multicultural
School were evident but not all. Building on the experiences, languages, and values
of the students was a consistent practice throughout the school site. Teachers
worked diligently to understand the needs of their students and connect the school
experience with the home.
150
The school successfully created systems that fostered high academic
achievement levels with students of color under set structures. Public schools
throughout this country operate under structures set by the legislature and their
respective districts. At Pajaro, the school organized itself to operate and produce
high academic results. This organization embraced socio-cultural theories of
learning and kept the instructional focus on the needs of students of color. Lessons
offered from the success at Pajaro to other public schools is primarily the affirmation
that high results can be achieved at high poverty, urban schools and the power of
building on students’ values, experiences, and knowledge.
Chapter five will present the summary of the study, the implications of the
study and recommendations for further research.
151
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, IMPLICATIONS OF FINDINGS
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to identify the characteristics of high
performing, high poverty schools that have produced high levels of student
performance with large concentrations of students of color. Identifying the systems
and structures in these schools has the potential of assisting schools that are not high
performing and are serving large concentrations of students of color. This study puts
a specific emphasis on English Learners who are students of color in high poverty
schools with high concentrations of students of color. Extensive research literature
on high performing schools identifies a body of similar organizational systems and
structures that is effective when they work in concert with one another. This study
conducted an analysis of one school’s systems and structures to gain insights on how
schools can better prepare students of color, including their English learners.
The case study examined systems and structures in a high-performing, high-
poverty school within a large urban school district with a large concentration of
English Learners. The study contributes to the body of knowledge about successful
systems and structures grounded in socio-cultural theory that are working on behalf
of students of color, with an emphasis on English learners.
Research Questions
The research questions were developed to gain an understanding of how
multiple factors, operating in well-constructed systems and structures, benefit
students of color, who are also English learners. The following research questions
152
were also developed to gain an understanding of the constructs of race that exist
within systems and structures at high performing, high poverty schools.
1) What are the trends and patterns of performance among students of color?
2) What are the organizational structures and systems that are perceived
contributions to high student performance in high-poverty urban schools with
large concentrations of students of color?
3) How are the organizational systems and structures implemented to support
school-wide effective classroom instruction that promotes student learning?
4) How is the construct of race reflected in the school’s structures and systems?
Significance of the Study
The study is significant because of the achievement and opportunity gap that
continues to exist in this country. As indicated on state tests across the country
(NAEP, 2005), students of color in high-poverty schools tend to perform lower
academically when compared to middle-class, white students. As controversial as
the components of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) are, the national spotlight put on
student achievement has revealed the academic disparities between certain
subgroups, based on ethnicity, income, learning disabilities, and language
proficiency. A history of societal inequalities explains the origins of persisting
barriers to education for certain populations of students. Urban schools face the
challenge of meeting their API and AYP target scores; therefore school organizations
need to identify the organizational systems and structures high-performing urban
schools with large concentrations of students of color have put in place to contribute
153
to high academic performance. Specifically, educators need to understand how the
systems and structures are implemented to support school-wide effective classroom
instruction to bridge the historic achievement gap between students of color and their
White counterparts. The term “students of color” does not include Asian students in
this particular study.
The significance of the study lies in the dire consequences of failure to
educate students of color. This failure has implications for major impacts that
include the demise of the American economy; the persistently low socioeconomic
status of people of color; and the quality of life for persons of color. The study’s
findings about effective school organizations may benefit those engaged in closing
existing achievement and opportunity gaps.
Connection to Prior Research (Analysis)
The literature review in chapter two examined research on systems and
structures in place within high-performing, high-poverty schools. The research
questions were developed by the thematic dissertation group using the theoretical
framework (Figure 5-1) as a guide grounded in socio-cultural theories of learning.
The framework captures three critical elements that affect high student performance:
1) historical, societal, and educational influences, 2) contemporary societal and
educational influences, 3) school site systemic and structural influences. In the
section that follows, the researcher will describe the connecting factors between the
areas of research and the findings from the study.

154
Figure 5.1: Theoretical Framework for High-Poverty/High-Performing Schools
Study.

Major Findings for Research Question 1: What are the trends and patterns of
performance among students of color?
Findings at Pajaro School are aligned with the notion from other reports that
students of color are capable of performing at higher levels under appropriate
conditions. The school has established a trend of continuous growth since the
inception of the state (API) and federal (AYP) accountability systems. All
subgroups have demonstrated steady growth consistent with the school’s
performance. The steady growth is significant as the school has been able to
improve the academic performance of their Latino, low socioeconomic, and English
155
Learner groups. These three groups tend to under-perform nationally. Pajaro has
been able to address the needs of these groups and increase the number of students
scoring at Proficient and Advanced levels, thus leading to a better preparation of
future schooling.
The school operates within a local district where Pajaro’s results are not the
norm. The school’s student population makeup is highly similar to the neighboring
schools, but the surrounding schools tend to produce lower academic results. Pajaro
has been able to successfully coordinate systems that work within the set structures
to produce results that have earned them a Title I honors awards and the California
Distinguished School recognition.
Pajaro School has been successful with advancing the levels of achievements
of Latino, socio-economically disadvantaged, and English Learner students. A
subgroup seldom mentioned during the interviews was Special Education. During
visits to the school, concerns were raised by a special education teacher regarding the
lack of attention from the school community in addressing the needs of this
subgroup. The artifacts collected showed special education as a subgroup comprised
of seventy students, a number below the one hundred required for the federal
government to consider it a significant subgroup.
High standardized test results, along with a steady increase in reclassification
rates, high student attendance, low suspension rates, and high teacher stability
indicate Pajaro has found a formula that is working in educating their students. The
156
structures and systems at Pajaro were identified and observed to determine how they
operate while building on what students bring to school from home.
Major Findings for Research Question 2: What are the organizational structures and
systems that are perceived contributions to high student performance in high-poverty
urban schools with large concentrations of students of color?
A culture of high expectations was evident and reflected an organization
operating under a belief system that assumes students have the capacity to perform at
high levels. The school has a track record of improving student achievement
outcomes as measured by both the state (API) and federal (AYP) accountability
systems. Through the study, effective operating systems within set structures were
observed at the school site. The observation is significant in understanding how an
urban, year-round public school fosters high achievement levels with students of
color.
As a whole, the school was organized to prepare students towards the next
level of performance. Evidence of Vygotsky’s (1987) theory on the Zone of
Proximal Development was observed in classrooms through teacher and student
interactions. The idea of understanding students’ current abilities and needs was also
evident at the organizational level, with built in systems for frequently conducting
and analyzing assessments.
The school adopted a goal of reclassifying all English Learners before middle
school as an essential means of guaranteeing this set of students the opportunity to
attend a higher education institution. The school used data to show that the odds for
157
ELs dropping out of high school are overwhelming, against them in terms of
receiving a high school diploma and even less for matriculating into a college or
university. The researcher observed that not all English Learners at Pajaro School
reclassified before entering middle school. As previously stated, English Learners
must meet a set of criteria simultaneously in order to reclassify. Passage of the
California English Development Test (CELDT) is part of the criteria and offered at
the beginning of the school year. Information from this system can assist the school
in reclassifying EL elementary students before they matriculate to the middle school.
Major Findings for Research Question 3: How are the organizational systems and
structures implemented to support school-wide effective classroom instruction that
promotes student learning?
The Model of Continuous Improvement (Schmoker, 1999) was used as a
frame of reference by the researcher to gain an understanding on how the school is
organized to focus on student outcomes. The research found that all four systems
within the MCI have reflective and continuous systems that allow the school
organization to use evidence (data) to identify what is and what is not working with
students. The Cycle of Continuous Improvement strengthens the fashion in which the
school best meets the needs of their students.
A concentrated effort on instruction and learning was observed within the
systems and structures of Pajaro School. The school’s leadership commits to twice-
a-week set meetings for the faculty, to discuss ways to improve the delivery of
instruction and its results in the form of data as the constant conservation piece. In
158
addition, professional development was designed and implemented for teacher
assistants in order to equip them with language acquisition methodology. Training
teacher assistants was a system dedicated to further aligning the English Language
Arts and English Language Development curriculum at Pajaro School.
The leadership team has such a strong commitment for collaborative work,
that they have designated the same format of analyzing student work and discussing
the best possible instructional practices within grade level meetings. Common
instructional practices were observed in classrooms such as differentiated instruction,
cooperative groupings, and the use of scaffolds.
Students’ results were used to determine next steps and future adult learning
within the school’s set structures of faculty and banked time meetings. The school’s
staff, through interviews, expressed their expectations of working towards making all
students successful. Success was described as moving a student from his or her
current performance level and advancing the student to the next level, while
implementing the school’s Guaranteed and Viable Curriculum (Marzano, 2003) and
building upon a student’s culture, home language, and experiences.
Although this explanation for the school’s success was mentioned, the
researcher did not observe all elements of Culturally Relevant Teaching in
classrooms. Certain aspects from the three dimensions described by Ladson-Billings
(1989) were observed such as engaging students in meaningful learning and creating
a community of learners. Other elements within the three dimensions like
opportunities for student self-reflection, supplementing shortcomings in the
159
curriculum, and teachers aligning the classroom experience with that of the home,
were not observed within a classroom or school wide.
Major Findings for Research Question 4: How is the construct of race reflected in
the school’s structures and systems?
Interviewing different stakeholders allowed for the collection of various
perspectives on the perception of students at Pajaro School. The literature regarding
Critical Race Theory brings about an awareness that racism and racist institutional
practices have produced sub-standard levels of student achievement for students of
color when compared to white students. In an interview, the principal stressed that
the staff at Pajaro School knows first-hand the pitfalls of not being successful
academically and the ramifications of students not being well equipped for higher
education opportunities. The staff and community of Pajaro discussed their
awareness of the academic patterns students of color have historically produced. The
staff in general shared their strong affirmation that it is within their capacity to
challenge and change the system and what it produces.
Studies on effective schools that serve large concentrations of students of
color such as Izumi (2002), Reeves (2000), and Edmonds (1979a) were used to
determine a common framework for this study. This study was grounded in socio-
cultural theories of learning supported by systemic approaches to create the context
for learning; therefore, the researcher used Banks’ (1999) work on Multicultural
Education (ME) and Darling-Hammonds’ & Ladson-Billings’ (2000) concept of
Culturally Relevant Teaching (CRT) to describe the constructs of race at the school
160
site studied. This added dimension of ME and CRT assists in identifying why a
school has been successful in fostering high achievement levels with students of
color. The failure to fully implement practices associated with these two theories
might also explain some of the remaining gaps in students’ performance.
As mentioned in Chapter 4, certain elements of what Banks describes as
characteristics and dimensions of Multicultural Education were observed at Pajaro
School. The school as an organization exhibited traits of high expectations through
artifacts, observations and interviews. Respect for a student’s culture, inclusive of
the home language, was also identified in the case study. Conversely, several
characteristics of a Multicultural School described by Banks (1999) were not
observed. The observations did not reveal a curriculum reflecting the students’
culture nor instructional materials that showed events, situations, and concepts from
the perspective of a range of cultural, ethnic, and racial groups. Other dimensions of
Multicultural Education (Banks, 1999) not fully developed were content integration
(content from a variety of cultures to illustrate key concepts) and equity pedagogy
(teachers intentionally modifying their teaching in ways that facilitate academic
achievement of a range of student needs).
Similar to Multicultural Education Theory, Culturally Relevant Theory was
identified through interviews and artifacts during classroom visits. The label of
Culturally Relevant teaching was never explicitly articulated but elements did exist
in all three dimensions mentioned by Ladson-Billings & Darling-Hammond (2000).
The three dimensions are conceptions of self and others, conceptions of classroom
161
social relations, and conceptions of knowledge or content. Elements within the three
dimensions not observed consistently throughout the classrooms were reciprocal
learning between teacher and students, opportunities for students to interact with
other students in and outside of the classroom (building relationships), and
establishing a real purpose for learning. Embedding the tenets and dimensions of
Multicultural Education and Culturally Relevant teaching in all steps of the planning
and implementation processes can assist practitioners to create and maintain those
conditions that help increase student learning.
Recommendations for the School Site
The following recommendations are derived from the researcher’s major
findings at Pajaro School that have the potential of assisting the school:
• the researcher recommends that the needs of special education students be
included within the school’s overall goals.
• an articulation plan be created between Pajaro and the feeder middle school
to address the needs of those students who did not reclassify.
• the school develops, implements, and sustains professional development on
Culturally Relevant Teaching.
• the school develops, implements, and sustains professional development on
the characteristics and dimensions of Multicultural Education.
Implications (Policies/Educators)
Social Constructs of Race: School organizations need to address the role of
race in the development of policies. An intersect where constructs of race are
162
addressed and supported throughout the school’s systems and structures needs to be
implemented. Incorporating elements of socio-cultural theories of learning has the
potential of addressing the achievement gaps that exist with students of color and
their white peers across the state and country. Multicultural Education theory offers
a framework that addresses the relevance between cultural settings and the impact on
academic achievement. Culturally Relevant teaching prepares students with the
skills needed for success mainly by strengthening their cultural identity and their
identity as learners. Multicultural Education and Culturally Relevant Teaching can
serve as blueprints for addressing the needs of students of color.
Effective School Systems: School districts need to create a system of
identifying schools that exemplify effective systems for high academic achievement
with students of color. Urban school districts have the potential of utilizing their in-
house experts (high-performing schools) as a resource to other schools within the
district.
Recommendations for Future Research
Thematic Group: This case study was conducted in a similar manner at
different school sites that met the set criteria created by a thematic dissertation
group. The criteria for selecting a high-performing, high-poverty, urban school
included ones that served a large concentration of students of color. Synthesizing the
case studies produced by the thematic dissertation group has the potential of adding
to the body of research from a variety of perspectives in meeting the needs of
students of color to close the achievement gaps.
163
Role of the District: A school district has the potential of fostering or
hindering the success of a school site. Future research can add to the body of
knowledge by studying effective school districts and state structures that either foster
successful school site systems or make it more difficult for schools to establish
effective systems. Districts have the responsibility of creating infrastructures to be
coherent with the state.
Articulation: Urban school districts typically educate students in three
traditional organizational models: elementary, middle, and high school. Vertical
articulation can assist students with the transition from one organization to the other.
Future studies of successful articulation systems have the potential of benefiting
students of color as they progress from one level to the next. Levels of performance
tend to decrease as students of color advance from elementary, to middle, to high
school. This decline in achievement as students make transitions in the educational
system is particularly harmful to students of color and English Learners.
Limitations
The case study was conducted at one school site over the course of twelve
school site visits. The researcher was limited to observing four classrooms and
interviewing twelve staff members. Successful school systems and structures were
identified but the researcher would have benefited from a larger sampling, especially
with classroom observations. This study sought to observe social constructs of race;
therefore, additional time observing teacher-student interaction would have
strengthen the findings in this area.
164
Conclusion
The case study describes how systems and structures can work in concert to
meet the needs of students of color from a low socioeconomic background and foster
high academic achievement levels. The school studied by the researcher had
developed many of the systems consistent with reports on effective schools;
however, characteristics of Multicultural Education and Culturally Relevant
Teaching were not fully developed throughout the school organization. When
analyzing what policies and initiatives get promoted from the state and local level,
Multicultural Education and Culturally Relevant Pedagogy have not received the
same attention and dedication as other systems commonly mentioned.
Understanding the power and implications of Multicultural Education and Culturally
Relevant Teaching, holds the potential of promoting high levels of performance for
students of color throughout the nation and thus improving society as a whole.
165
REFERENCES
August, D. & Hakuta, K. (1998). Educating language-minority children.
Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

August, D. & Pease-Alvarez, L. (1996). Attributes of effective programs and
classrooms serving English language learners. Santa Cruz, CA: National
Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning.

Baines, L. (2006). Does Horace Mann still matter? Educational Horizons, Volume
84, Fall 2005-Summer 2006.

Bamburg, J. & Andrews, R. (1990). School goals, principals and achievement.
School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 2, 175-191.

Banks, J. (1999). An introduction to multicultural education. Needham Heights,
MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Blasé, J. & Blasé, J. (2004). Handbook of Instructional Leadership: How successful
principals promote teaching and learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin
Press.

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483, at 494 (1954).

CDE, DataQuest. California Department of Education, dq.cde.ca.gov

Carpenter, J. (2004). Jefferson’s view on education: Implications for today’s social
studies. The Social Studies, Volume 95, Number 4.

Cresswell, J. (2002). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Cummins, J. (1989). Empowering minority students. Sacramento, CA: California
Association for Bilingual Education.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of
state policy evidence. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1), 1-50.

DaSilva Iddings, A. (2005). Linguistic access and participation: English language
learners in an English-dominant community of practice. Bilingual Research
Journal, 29: 1 Spring 2005.

166
DeWitt, K. “The nation’s schools learn a 4
th
r: Resegregation.” New York Tome (19
January 1992): E5.

Del Castillo, R. (1979). The L.A. barrio. Los Angeles, CA: University of California
Press.

Delgado, R. (1995). Critical race theory: The cutting edge. Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania: Temple University Press.

Dika, S. L. & Singh, K. (2002). Applications of social capital in educational
literature: A critical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 72 (1), 31-
60.

Edmonds, R. R. (1979a). A discussion of the literature and issues related to effective
schooling. Cambridge, MA: Center for Urban Studies, Harvard Graduate
School of Education.

Elmore, R. (2000). Building a new structure for school leadership. Washington, D.C.
The Albert Shanker Institute.

Elmore, R. (2002). Bridging the gap between standards and achievement: The
imperative for professional development. Washington, D.C. The Albert
Shanker Institute.

Foster, M. (1995). African American teachers and culturally relevant pedagogy. In
J.A. Banks, & C.M. Banks (Eds.) Handbook of Research on Multicultural
Education. New York: McMillan.

Francis, D. & Rivera, M. (2006). Practical guidelines for the education of English
language learners: Research-based recommendations for instruction and
academic interventions. Houston, TX: Texas Institute for Measurement,
Evaluation, and Statistics, University of Houston for the Center on
Instruction.

Fullan, M. (2000). The three stories of education reform. Phi Delta Kappan, v81 n8
p581-84 Apr 2000.

Garcia, G. E. (2002). Chapter 1 (Introduction). In Student Cultural Diversity:
Understanding and Meeting the Challenge (3
rd
ed.), (pp. 3-39). Boston, MA:
Houghton Mifflin).

167
Garcia, E., & Curry-Rodriguez, J. E. (2000). The education of limited English
proficient students in California schools: As assessment of the influence of
proposition 227 in selected districts and schools. Bilingual Research
Journal, 24, (1 & 2).

Gay, G. (2000). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, & practice. New
York, NY: Teachers College Press, Columbia University.

Gersten, R., Baker, S.K., Shanahan, T., Linan-Thompson, S., Collins, P., &
Scarcella, R. (2007). Effective literacy and English language instruction for
English learners in the elementary grades: A practice guide. Washington,
D.C.: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance,
Institute of Educational Sciences, U.S. Department.

Gillmore, R. & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and setting to
connect minority achievement and school improvement research.
Educational Psychologist, 36, 45-56.

Goldenberg, C. & Sullivan, J. (1994). Making change happen in a language minority
school: A search for coherence. Educational Practice Report: 13.
Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics.

Gutiérrez, K. (1995). Script, counter script and underlie in the urban classroom:
Constructing a Third Space. The Fourth International Literacy and Education
Research Conference of Learning, Townsville, Australia, June.

Hakuta, K., Butler, Y. G., & Witt, D. (2000). How long does it take English learners
to attain proficiency? Santa Barbara, CA: The University of California
Linguistic Minority Research Institute.

Hallinger, P., & Murphy, J. F. (1987). Assessing and developing instructional
leadership. Educational Leadership, 45(1), 54-61.

Holmes, J. J. (2002). Buying homes, buying schools: School choice and the social
deconstruction of school quality. Harvard Educational Review, 72(2), 177-
205.

Irvine, J. & Armento, B. (2001). Culturally responsive teaching: Lessons planning
for elementary and middle grades. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Izumi, L. (2002). The have overcome: High-poverty, high-performing schools in
California. San Francisco, CA: Pacific Research Institute.

168
Johnson, R.S. (2002). Using data to close the achievement gap: How to measure
equity in our schools. California: Corwin Press.

Katz, S. R. (1999). Teaching in tensions: Latino immigrant youth, their teachers, and
the structures of schooling. Teachers College Record, 100(4), 809-840.

Kowalski, T. & Reitzug, U. (1993). Contemporary school administration: An
Introduction. White Plains, NY: Longman.

Krashen, S. & Biber, D. (1988). On course: Bilingual education’s success in
California. Ontario, CA: California Association for Bilingual Education.

Ladson-Billings, G. (1989). A tale of two teachers: Exemplars of successful
pedagogy for Black students. Paper presented at the Educational Equality
Project Colloquim, New York.

Ladson-Billings, G. (1999). “Just what is critical race theory, and what’s it doing in a
nice field like education?” In Race Is… Race Isn’t, Boulder, CO: Westview
Press.

Ladson-Billings, G. & Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). The validity of national board
for professional teaching standards/interstate new teacher assessments and
support consortium assessments for effective urban teachers: Findings and
implications for assessments. Washington, D.C.: National Partnership for
Excellence and Accountability in Teaching.

Linquanti, R. (2001). The redesignation dilemma: Challenges and choices in
fostering meaningful accountability for English learners. Santa Barbara, CA:
The University of California Linguistic Minority Research Institute.

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

Menchaca, M. (1996). The Mexican outsiders: A community of marginalization and
discrimination. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Meier, K, Stewart, J, & England, R. (1989). Race, class, and education: The politics
of second-generation discrimination. Madison: University of Wisconsin
Press, 1989.

Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education.
Revised and expanded from "Case study research in education." San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
169
Monkman, K., Ronald, M. & Théraméne, F. Social and cultural capital in an urban
latino school community. Urban Education, Vol. 40, No. 1, January 2005, 4-
33.

NAEP (2005), National Assessment of Educational Progress. nces.ed.gov

Nieto, S. (2000). Placing equity front and center. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol,
51, No. 3, 180-187 (2000).

Oakes, J. (1989). Detracking schools: Early lessons from the field. Phi Delta
Kappan, 73, 448-454.

Oakes, J. (1990). Multiplying inequities: The effects of race, social class, and
tracking opportunities to learn mathematics and science. Santa Monica, CA:
Rand Corporation.

Oakes, J. & Lipton, M. (1999) Teaching to change the world. Boston, MA:
McGraw-Hill College.

Ogbu, J. (1994). Racial stratification and education in the United States: Why
inequality persists. Teachers College Record, Volume 96, Number 2, 1994, p.
264-298
.
Ogbu, J. & Simons, H. (1998). Voluntary and involuntary minorities: A cultural-
ecological theory of school performance. Anthropology and Education
Quarterly, Volume 29, Number 2, pp. 155-188.

Ogbu, J. (1990). Literacy and schooling in subordinate cultures: The case of Black
Americans. In Going to school: The African American experience, Albany,
NY: State University of New York Press.

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

Reeves, D. (2000). Chapter 19 (The 90/90/90 schools: A case study). Accountability
in action. Englewood, CO. Advanced Learning System.

Rumberger, R. W., & Gándara, P. (2000). The schooling of English learners. Santa
Barbara, CA: The University of California Linguistic Minority Research
Institute.

Saddler, C. (2005). The impact of Brown on African American students: A critical
race theoretical perspective. Educational Studies, Volume 37, Number 1.
170
Salazar, J. (2007). Master plan evaluation report for English learner programs. Los
Angeles, CA: Program, Evaluation and Research Branch, Los Angeles
Unified School District.

Schmoker, M. (1996). Results: The key to continuous improvement. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Schmoker, M. (2006). Results now: How can we achieve unprecedented
performance. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.

Smitherman, G. (1977). Talkin and testifyin: The language of Black America.
Detroit, MI: Wayne University Press.

Solorzano, D. (1998). Critical race theory, race and gender microaggressions, and the
experience of chicana and chicano scholars. International Journal of
Qualitative Studies in Education, Volume 11, Number 1, pp. 121-136(16).

Spring, J. (2000). American Education. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill Higher
Education.

Straveteig, S. & Wigton, A. (2000). Racial and ethnic disparities: Key findings from
the national survey of America’s families. Washington, D. C.: Urban Institute

Stephan, W. G. (1980). “ A Brief Overview of School Desegregation.” In W. G.
Stephan, and J. R. Feagin. (Eds.), School Desegregation. (pp.3-23.) New
York, NY: Pleum Press.

US Bureau of Census, Current Population Reports, March 2000.

Valencia, R. (2005). The Mexican American struggle for equal educational
opportunity in Mendez v. Westminster: Helping to pave the way for Brown v.
Board. Teachers College Record, Volume 107, Number 3.

Vygotsky, L.S. (1987). The collected work of L.S. Vygotsky, Vol. 1: Problems of
general psychology, tr. by Norris Minnik. New York: Plenum.

Wagoner, J. (1993). That knowledge most useful to us: Thomas Jefferson’s concept
of “Utility” in the education of republican citizens. Paper presented at the
Conference on Thomas Jefferson and the Education of a Citizen in the
American Republic: Washington, D.C.

171
West, P. (1990). Interior department sets 4 objectives for Indian education: Tribal
leaders asked to help shape goals. Education Week (1, 22).

Williams, T., Hakuta, K., Haerte,, E., et al. (2007). Similar English learner students,
different results: Why do some schools do better? A follow-up analysis, based
on a large-scale survey of California elementary schools serving low-income
and EL students. Mountain View, CA: EdSource.

Wubbels, T., Brekelmans, M., van Tartwijk, J., & Admiral, W. (1999). Interpersonal
relationships between teachers and students in the classroom. In H. C.
Waxman & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), New directions for teaching practice and
research (pp. 151-170). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
172
APPENDIX A: ADMINISTRATOR INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
School Name: _______________________________ Date: ________________

Name of Person Interviewed: _________________________________________

Position: ___________________________________________________________

Researcher: ________________________________________________________

Time Started: __________ Time Ended: ___________ Total Time: ______

Introduction:
Thank you for agreeing to meet with me. I am currently working with the University
of Southern California’s Rossier School of Education and am studying systems and
structures in high achieving, high poverty urban schools with students of color.
Through the nomination process, your school was identified as a high-achieving
urban school. The purpose of this interview is to learn more about how you achieve
high levels of student performance at your school.

The information garnered from this research will be used to spread new knowledge
and innovation about achieving high levels of student achievement and to inspire
educators to improve school performance.

The interview should take about 45 minutes. Do you have any questions for me
before we begin?

Interview Questions

1. Describe the practices and policies at your school site that you believe
contribute to your students’ high student performance.
a. Which are the three most effective things you have done over the last
3-5 years to improve student performance?

2. How do you create and maintain a climate in the school that engages all
students and respects cultural diversity?

3. Describe how expectations for meeting academic achievement goals are
made clear for teachers/students/parents?
a. How do you monitor student progress?
b. What assessment tools do you use?

173
4. How are the needs of students of color addressed in the School-wide Plan?

5. How would you describe effective teaching at your site?
a. In what ways do teachers differentiate instruction in order to meet the
needs of all students?
b. What is your role in helping teachers provide effective instruction?

6. Describe how your school uses data to guide instruction.
a. What evidence do you look for, besides assessment scores, that
demonstrate high student performance?
b. What is your role as a school leader in guiding the use of data to
improve the school climate and classroom instruction?

7. Describe your school wide discipline policy and how it impacts students of
color?
a. Does your discipline policy help students adopt behavior that
contributes to their learning?
b. Please give an example.
174
APPENDIX B: TEACHER INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
School Name: _______________________________ Date: ________________

Name of Person Interviewed: _________________________________________

Position: ___________________________________________________________

Researcher: ________________________________________________________

Time Started: __________ Time Ended: ___________ Total Time: _______

Introduction:
Thank you for agreeing to meet with me. I am currently working with the University
of Southern California’s Rossier School of Education and am studying systems and
structures in high achieving, high poverty urban schools with students of color.
Through the nomination process, your school was identified as a high-achieving
urban school. The purpose of this interview is to learn more about how you achieve
high levels of student performance at your school.

The information garnered from this research will be used to spread new knowledge
and innovation about achieving high levels of student achievement and to inspire
educators to improve school performance.

The interview should take about 45 minutes. Do you have any questions for me
before we begin?

Interview Questions

1. Describe the practices and policies at your school site that you believe
contribute to your high student performance.
• (Probe) Has your school encountered any obstacles in maintaining
these practices and policies? If so, how did the school overcome them
or maintain them?
• Which are the three most effective things you have done over the last
3-5 years to improve student performance

2. What role do teachers play in maintaining a climate in the school that
engages all students and respects cultural diversity?
175

3. Describe how expectations for meeting academic achievement goals are
made clear for teachers.
a. For students?
b. Parents
i. How do you monitor student progress?
ii. What assessment tools do you use?

4. How familiar are you with the School Plan?
a. How are the needs of students of color addressed in the School-Wide
Plan?
b. How have you modified your instructional practices to reflect the
school-wide plan for students of color?

5. How would you describe effective teaching at your site?
a. In what ways do teachers differentiate instruction in order to meet the
needs of all students including students of color?

6. Describe how your school uses data to guide instruction.
a. What evidence do you look for, besides assessment scores, that
demonstrate high student performance?

7. Describe your school wide discipline policy and how it impacts students?
176
APPENDIX C: CLASSIFIED INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
School Name: _______________________________ Date: ________________

Name of Person Interviewed: _________________________________________

Position: ___________________________________________________________

Researcher: ________________________________________________________

Time Started: __________ Time Ended: ___________ Total Time: _______

Introduction:
Thank you for agreeing to meet with me. I am currently working with the University
of Southern California’s Rossier School of Education and am studying systems and
structures in high achieving, high poverty urban schools with students of color.
Through the nomination process, your school was identified as a high-achieving
urban school. The purpose of this interview is to learn more about how you achieve
high levels of student performance at your school.

The information garnered from this research will be used to spread new knowledge
and innovation about achieving high levels of student achievement and to inspire
educators to improve school performance.

The interview should take about 45 minutes. Do you have any questions for me
before we begin?

Interview Questions

1. Describe the practices and policies at your school site that you believe
contribute to the high student performance.
• Has your school encountered any obstacles in maintaining these
practices and policies? If so, how did the school overcome them or
maintain them?
• Which are the three most effective things the school has done over the
last 3-5 years to improve student performance?

2. How would you describe the school climate here?
a. In what ways does the school engage/involve all students and respect
cultural diversity.
b. What do you think your role is in contributing to the school climate?

177
3. What are the expectations for meeting academic achievement goals here?
a. Do you know how the students here are doing academically?
b. What indicators let you know how they are doing?

4. How are the needs of students of color being met at your school?
a. What is in place to support these students?
b. What is in place to support the staff?

5. How would you describe an effective teacher at your site?

6. How do you know when a teacher is doing a good job?

7. How do you see teachers and administrators using data?
a. Do you know when testing will occur?
b. How do the students react to testing?
c. How do teachers react?
d. Is it known throughout the school what is done with the data?
e. How is it made known?

8. Describe your school wide discipline policy and how it impact students?
a. What happens when a student breaks a rule or makes a bad choice?
178
APPENDIX D: PARENT INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
School Name: ______________________________ Date: __________________

Name of Person Interviewed: __________________________________________

Position: ___________________________________________________________

Researcher: ________________________________________________________

Time Started: __________ Time Ended: ___________ Total Time: _______

Introduction:
Thank you for agreeing to meet with me. I am currently working with the University
of Southern California’s Rossier School of Education and am studying systems and
structures in high achieving, high poverty urban schools with students of color.
Through the nomination process, your school was identified as a high-achieving
urban school. The purpose of this interview is to learn more about how you achieve
high levels of student performance at your school.

The information garnered from this research will be used to spread new knowledge
and innovation about achieving high levels of student achievement and to inspire
educators to improve school performance.

The interview should take about 45 minutes. Do you have any questions for me
before we begin?

Interview Questions

1. What is the school doing to help all students succeed?

2. How would you describe the atmosphere at the school?

3. How do you know what your child needs to learn?
a. How does the school communicate that?

4. How does the school address the needs of (ethnic sub-group) students?

5. How do you describe a good or effective teacher?

6. What are some of the ways the school lets you know how your child is
doing?
179

7. Describe the school’s discipline policy.
a. How does it support the learning of all students?
b. Do you consider the discipline policies fair for all children?
c. Can you give an example of its fairness?
180
APPENDIX E: OBSERVATION GUIDE - LEADERSHIP MEETING
Leadership Team Meeting
Questions for Reflections

To what extent was the meeting focused on the implementation of the school plan?

Does the leadership team analyze student achievement data in order to take informed
actions?

Did (or does) the leadership team discuss and plan for diversity-sensitive (culturally
relevant and responsive) learning environments?

How are the roles/work distributed among members of the leadership team?

Structure: Is the meeting for information or systems planning?

Is the meeting operational- or instructional-focused?
181
APPENDIX F: OBSERVATION GUIDE - CLASSROOM
Research Question # 1, 2, 3, and 4: Is there a range or variety of instructional
practices /strategies used? Are they appropriate for the content and students?
Examples of instructional practices/strategies?
• Cooperative grouping
• Use of time
• Differentiated instruction
• Feedback to students
• Culturally relevant and responsive

Research Question #2: What visuals, symbols and other items are posted in the
classroom?
Examples of items:
• School wide discipline policy
• Images of people of color
• Classroom library
• School vision

Research Question # 2: Physical Class Environment
Example of things to observe:
• Seating arrangement
• Teacher student interaction student
o Discipline
• Student work posted
o Feedback/rubric
o Standard based
• Student Engagement
182
APPENDIX G: OBSERVATION GUIDE - PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Research Question # 1, 2, 3, and 4:
Professional Development Observation Guiding Questions

• Does collaboration occur during and after professional development?

• Is there engagement among the staff?

• What types of data are being used? How is data used?

• Is professional development is aligned to the vision?

• How are students discussed among teachers and other staff?

• Is the professional development geared toward teaching to standards mastery
or performance?

• Is the professional development practical and adaptable?

• Are the expectations clear for implementation of the professional
development?

• How are teachers held accountable for the professional development
provided?

• Is an evaluation tool used for the professional development?
183
APPENDIX H: OBSERVATION GUIDE - PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
Physical Setting: To allow readers to visualize the setting, the researcher will record
the following observations during each visit:

School grounds
• Wall postings
• Samples of students’ work
• School calendar for academic year
• Visual of school goals / mission / vision
• Symbolic representations (drug free zone, anti-violence, college
paraphernalia, culturally relevant items)
• Cleanliness (trashy, odor, graffiti, insects)

Classroom specific
• Wall postings
• Samples of students’ work
• Classroom calendar
• Classroom schedule
• Classroom rules or expectations
• Culturally relevant items
• Location of classroom (bungalow, main building, isolated, included)
• Cleanliness (trashy, odor, graffiti, insects)
• Classroom spacing (proximity of students’ desks to one another and teacher)

Social Climate/Environment: During each visit, the researcher will record elements
of human interactions.

School-wide environment
• Adult-Adult and Adult-student interactions (use of greetings, use of names,
friendliness, smiles, affect)
• Group dynamics (how students organize themselves; by gender, ethnicity,
age)

Classroom climate
• Structure, order, rigidity of classroom environment; is teacher in control of
class, students out of their seats, loud talking, on task
• Group dynamics (how students organize themselves; by gender, ethnicity,
age, or teacher assignment)

Asset Metadata

Creator Rodriguez, Jose M. (author)

Core Title Implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from high performing, high poverty ubran schools

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 08/26/2008

Defense Date 05/19/2008

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

Tag high-achieving,high-poverty,OAI-PMH Harvest,sociocultural,structures,students of color,systems,Urban

Place Name California (states), educational facilities: Pajaro Avenue School (geographic subject)

Language English

Advisor Rousseau, Sylvia G. (committee chair), Marsh, David D. (committee member), Stowe, Kathy Huisong (committee member)

Creator Email jmr7481@lausd.net,josemrod@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m1580

Unique identifier UC1308754

Identifier etd-Rodriguez-2157 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-109549 (legacy record id),usctheses-m1580 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Rodriguez-2157.pdf

Dmrecord 109549

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Rodriguez, Jose M.

Type texts

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

Repository Name Libraries, University of Southern California

Repository Location Los Angeles, California

Repository Email uscdl@usc.edu

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The primary purpose of this study is to examine the role of systems and structures in promoting high academic achievement among students of color in high poverty schools. The study seeks to examine the effectiveness of a set of identified systems working in concert under a set of structures.