University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Perceived factors for narrowing the achievement gap for minority students in urban schools: cultural norms, practices and programs

(USC Thesis Other)

Perceived factors for narrowing the achievement gap for minority students in urban schools: cultural norms, practices and programs

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

PERCEIVED FACTORS FOR NARROWING THE ACHIEVEMENT GAP FOR
MINORITY STUDENTS IN URBAN SCHOOLS:
CULTURAL NORMS, PRACTICES AND PROGRAMS

by

Young Shin Daily

____________________________________________________________

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

May 2010

Copyright 2010 Young Shin Daily
ii
DEDICATION
This dissertation is dedicated to:
The memory of my father who inspired me with academic curiosity and
challenge;
My mother, who models as an epitome of resilience and has been a lifelong
learner;
My sister, Eun Young, who helped me go through the academic journey in
the early years of my life;
And my husband, Chris, who provided me with unconditional love and
support during the turbulent time of my journey.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to extend my gratitude to my dissertation chair Dr. Gothold and
committee members and advisors, Dr, Hocevar, Dr. Love, Dr. Kathy Stowe and Dr.
Fischer. Your guidance, wisdom and support provided throughout this journey is
deeply appreciated.
I also appreciate my colleagues in the thematic group who went on this
exciting journey, encouraging us all to be at this point with each other. To all –
Arleen, Don, Kimberly, Mike, Ron, Rosalinda, Sandra and Theo, I will cherish the
moments that we shared together indefinitely.
To my friends and family members who encouraged me from near and far
across the Pacific Ocean, I am forever in debt for your encouragement and support.
To my husband Chris, I owe it all to you. Your timeless support and advice
for my journey is very much appreciated.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication………………………………………………………………………… ...ii
Acknowledgments……………………………………………………………….. ...iii
List of Tables………………………………………………………………………...v
List of Figures……………………………………………………………………. ...vi
Abstract………………………………………………………………………….. ...vii
Chapter One: Introduction…………………………………………………… ...1
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature…………………………………….. ...20
Chapter Three: Methodology………………………………………………… ...48
Chapter Four: Findings………………………………………………………...73
Chapter Five: Recommendations, Implications and Conclusion………….. ...126
References……………………………………………………………………… ...137
Appendices
Appendix A: Instrumentation…………………………………………….. ...145
Appendix B: Document Review Master List, Categorized………………. ...147
Appendix C: School Observation Guide…………………………………. ...150
Appendix D: Observation Log……………………………………………. ...153
Appendix E: Survey Questions…………………………………………... ...154
Appendix F: Interview Questions………………………………………... ...158
Appendix G: Survey Results With Multiple Answers 2………..…………...161
v
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Enrollment Trends, 1999-2009, Dragon Middle School…………….....59
Table 2: Dragon Middle School API Growth by Student Group –Three……......60
Year Comparison

Table 3: CST Results Comparison, DMS, District and State: Percentage……. ...61
of Students Scoring at Proficient or Advanced Levels

Table 4: Survey Results with Multiple Answers 1……………………………. ...84
Table 5: Survey Results with Comments……………………………………... ...95
Table 6: Grid on Framework and Research Questions………………………....106
Table 7: Student Demographics in AVID Program…………………………. ...113
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Clark & Estes Gap Analysis Process Model………………………… ...52
Figure 2: Conceptual Framework: Achievement Gap Process Model………... ...54
Figure 3: School Enrollment Data by Ethnicity, 1999-2008…………………... ...58
Figure 4: DMS vs. State Comparison, CST Results, 2008…………………….. ...61
Figure 5: ELA 9th Grade CST Results Comparison, DMS vs. State………….. ...62
vii
ABSTRACT
This study specifically examines factors that contributed to the achievement
of minority students in urban schools. The practices and programs that are
successful in enhancing student performance were explored in addition to the
sustainability of such student success. An analysis of the qualitative case study
findings, from a Title 1 urban middle school, which was the subject of this study,
suggests that instructional strategies, school culture and leadership can influence the
performance of students positively. Among those factors, the relationship between
leadership and student learning was further investigated to identify how such a
dynamic contributes to the achievement of minority students. The study findings
also provide probable evidence of school leadership as a critical factor in student
learning, in high performing urban schools which have a high minority population.

1
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
The Nation’s Report Card, a document which has been utilized to inform the
general public about the academic performance of K-12 students in the United States,
recently presented the achievement of students from the early 1970’s to 2008 (US
Department of Education, 2008). Specifically, the report communicates the test
results of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) for students,
ages 9, 13 and 17 in public schools. The report indicates that although there have
been improvements in overall student performance since the 1970’s, a relatively
wide achievement gap still exists between White and ethnic-minority students in low
income urban schools in the United States; this fact holds particularly true for
Hispanic and African American students.
In California, the disparity in achievement between Whites and these two
ethnic groups is also evident (NCES, 2006). Among the general student population,
46.7% of California’s students are Hispanic and 7.7% are African American. The
report indicates that in the state of California specifically, there has been a marginal
reduction in the student achievement gap in reading for Hispanic and African
American students over the last 10 years. The NAEP performance gap between
White and Hispanic students of all ages combined was 30 points in reading in 1998
and 26 points in 2007. Similarly, the gap between African American and White
students in reading was 30 points in 1998 and 29 points in 2007. Thus, given the
large population of students of color in California, the extant achievement gap
2
between student populations, is even more problematic for public schools in
California, and poses a greater urgency in finding solutions to the problem. As the
data reveals, these gaps have existed for over a century in the public school system.
Even as early as 1860’s when public schools came in to existence, urban schools
with high numbers of minority students were observed to have lower levels of
knowledge and skills than White students (Lee, 2002).
Achievement gaps have economic consequences. The April 23, 2008 report
of the National Education Association (NEA) proposes that a lack of knowledge and
skills in students who enter the job market might further aggravate the current
economic crisis. The report clearly indicates that poorly prepared candidates
entering the job market, is not just a matter of individual concern, but that the nation
itself loses potential earning due to unskilled workers, consequently lowering our
global competitiveness in the job market. The report further suggests that if the
achievement gaps between wealthy White students and poor African American and
Hispanic students in urban schools can be closed upon high school graduation, then
there is a potential for an additional national revenue of three to five billion dollars
per day.
Although the performance data on urban schools in general might be
disparaging, some urban schools have soared in their academic performance, despite
a high percentage of ethnic-minority students. Such examples, cause us to examine
what contributes to the success of these schools in narrowing the achievement gap
between the various student populations. Might the cultural norms, practices and
3
programs initiated by these schools contribute to their success? That is precisely the
intention of the researcher of this study: to identify those factors which have enabled
effective schools to narrow the achievement gap in urban schools, especially for
minority-ethnic students. Once found, perhaps these factors could be successfully
applied to similar schools, thereby contributing to a better prepared work force and
in turn a more economically competitive nation in a global market.
Background of the Problem
Throughout the history of American public education, the federal government
has continuously engaged in implementing policies and programs to improve student
performance for those students who are historically underperforming, particularly
African American and Hispanic students (Cross, 2004). According to Cross, the
educational policies which have been particularly relevant to this effort include the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), Title IX of the Civil Rights Act,
Minimum competency tests, Goals 2000 and the NCLB Act of 2001.
In the 1960’s, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) made a
sustained effort to improve student performance in public schools. President
Johnson initiated Title 1 of ESEA to help poor children in public schools to enhance
their academic performance. In the 1970s, the federal government focused on the
improvement of learning for students with disabilities, limited English students and
Title IX of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits sex discrimination in funding at all
levels of education (Wirt & Kirst, 2005). Under this act, tracking female students
into sex-stereotyped educations programs was prohibited, consequently, female
4
students were provided with more opportunities to explore disciplinary areas that had
been hitherto considered non-traditional. ESEA also focused on children with
disabilities and language learners and established the right of such children to have
an appropriate free education in public schools. Nonetheless, a great disparity in the
achievement gap for poor and minority students in urban schools exists and remains
problematic in the K-12 education system (Lee, 2002; Cross, 2004; NCES, 2006).
Along with ESEA programs from the federal government, many state
governments also created their own categorical aids aimed at further helping poor
and neglected students. Minimum competency tests adopted in the 1980’s stressed
the basics movement and students were required to pass minimum competency
testing (Haertel & Herman, 2005). However, Catterall (1989) explains that the
proficiency levels were lowered so that students would not fail the competency tests,
as research had shown, that those who failed the tests were more likely to drop out of
school. According to the National Dropout Prevention Center report in 2004, 75% of
high school dropouts end up in state prisons in America. Due to the prevailing risk
factors in urban school settings, students in these areas may face an even higher
chance of dropping out which obviously leads to further deterioration of the
student’s ability to learn (McKinney, Flenner, Frazier & Abrams, 2006). Therefore,
it is important for schools to find programs and practices that work in urban schools
for promoting the learning of all students.
From the late 1980’s to the 1990’s, curriculum and assessment standards
were a focal point for the ways in which student performance could be enhanced.
5
Goals 2000 initiated funding of the states to develop academic content and
assessment standards (Hartel & Herman, 2005). Goals 2000 required state defined
annual progress of students under Title 1 and bilingual education categorical
programs. However, Hartel and Herman posit that assessment was viewed as
narrowing students’ critical thinking due to basic multiple choice tests given to
students for assessment.
The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 expanded the federal
government’s power, which now oversees the adherence of local school districts to
NCLB. One of the critical mandates of NCLB is that if districts fail to meet required
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), financial sanctions will follow for the failing
schools with two year improvement plans to be adopted by the school (Cross, 2004).
NCLB focuses on underperforming subgroup students more rigorously in
comparison with Goals 2000, by requiring rigorous academic standards with multiple
measures of assessment adopted by the state. Although, numerous education
programs have been created to reduce the achievement gap, performance levels of
minority students in urban schools in the K-12 public education system still remain
relatively low (Lee, 2002).
In addition to the NAEP results as shown above, California’s standardized
test scores also reveal achievement gaps between minority students in urban schools
and their White counterparts (Lee, 2002). For example, 2006 API base scores reflect
a gap of 166 points for African American students and 145 points for Hispanic
students in comparison to White students (CDE, 2007). Out of a total student
6
population of 6,275,000 who were enrolled in the 2007-2008 school year in public
schools in California, 21% of African-American students and 28% of Hispanic
students dropped out at some point during their tenure in grades 9
th
through 12
th
, as
compared to a 10% drop out rate for White students. The high school graduation
rates of Los Angeles and Long Beach school districts which serve two of the nations’
50 largest cities were 44.4% and 64% respectively in 2005 (EPE Research Center,
2009).
Despite these performance gaps, some schools excel in their performance
within urban school settings and have sustained their success in narrowing the
achievement gap for minority students. What constitutes an urban school and
minority students? The thematic dissertation group defined the term “urban” school
as one that was located in an area with a population of at least 50,000 and with at
least 40% of their students on free and reduced lunch programs. The school must
also have a population consisting of at least 15% subgroup minority students, and
further, a population that causes a school to have to adjust operationally to
accommodate certain risk factors. Students in an urban setting may experience
higher crime, poverty and limited English language skills, all of which can be
considered to be risk factors within the learning environment when compared to the
daily realities of suburban schools (Brooks-Gunn & Duncan, 1997). Risk factors
such as a high neighborhood concentration of low-income families, crime,
unemployment and feelings of hopelessness due to neighboring conditions further
7
exacerbate students’ performance at urban schools (Haberman, 2005; Olson & Jerald,
1998).
According to Haberman, poverty further influences students’ perceptions and
interactions with others in urban schools. Haberman stipulates that the impact of
violence at home and in the neighborhood inhibits academic performance and social
development of students in urban school settings. Due to students’ exposure to
violence, many of them often display hostility and frustration at school and engage in
disruptive behavior among themselves or with others resulting in a difficulty of
staying focused on their learning at school (Haberman, 2005; Craig, 1992).
Furthermore, many urban schools are short of qualified teachers who have a deep
understanding of content areas that they teach (Kincheloe, 2004). Students at urban
schools with high numbers of minority students may face less support at home due to
their parents’ economic situation, due to the high number of single parent families,
and also from cultural differences as they may obtain in terms of parental
expectations (Goldenberg, Gallimore & Reese, 2001). However, some urban schools
out perform other schools with similar environments, and further, are able to sustain
their success in narrowing the achievement gap for minority students.
Statement of the Problem
There is a persistent disparity in academic achievement between White and
Asian students and ethnic minorities, ELL and low-income students in urban schools,
which has been documented by the field research; this disparity continues to be a
critical problem for the K-12 public education system (Lee, 2002; Cross, 2004;
8
NCES, 2006). Lee states that the achievement gap primarily references low-income
and minority students, including African American and Hispanic students. He
further explains that African American and Hispanic students are at the 8
th
grade
level in reading and mathematics skills at the end of high school. Considering a
dropout rate of nearly 50% during the 9-12
th
grades in large urban cities in California,
the remedy to provide student success for minority students in urban schools must be
urgently addressed (EPE Research Center, 2009). However, unlike scholarly
reviews of successful suburban schools in the field literature, the factors contributing
to a narrowing of the achievement gap for minority students in urban schools remain
an incomplete part of educational research.
The extant literature indicates that the perceived factors affecting student
performance include home and school cultures and instructional strategies (Marzano,
2002; Conchas, 2001; Reese, 2002; McKinney, Flenner, Frazier & Abrams, 2006;
Darling-Hammond, 1997). A leading researcher for successful schools, Marzano
(2000) categorizes the factors contributing to student success into three groups:
student level, teacher level and school level. Marzano (2007) and Cartledge and Lo
(2006) note that adopting curriculum, as well as instructional and classroom
management strategies that are relevant to students’ backgrounds and learning styles
positively affect student learning. The authors indicate that classroom instruction is
among the most powerful tools enhancing the achievement of students.
Darling-Hammond (1999), Johnson (2002) and Lee and Smith (1993) also
explain that instructional practices can have a greater effect on student outcomes
9
than student backgrounds. Furthermore, Johnson (2002) and Elmore (2002) support
the contention that rigorous standards, high expectations, instructional practices and
assessments may yield greater success in reducing the achievement gap for minority
students. Cartledge and Lo (2006) and Elmore (2002) posit that teachers at urban
schools are likely to expect less from students, which in turn leads to lower
performance. However, Darling-Hammond (1999) and Ferguson (1997) stipulate
that rigor and high expectations along with various teaching strategies, which
incorporate the cultural specificities of students’ backgrounds, are powerful tools to
prevent low student performance at urban schools.
Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001), Goldenberg, Gallimore and Reese (2001),
Okagaki (2001) and Ogbu (1992) also believe that the unique aspects of a student’s
culture may affect their learning at school. Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) and
Gallimore and Reese (2001) agree that the difference in culture between home and
school may also affect performance in minority students due to the fact that they may
experience the cultural setting of the schools as unfamiliar terrain. Okagaki (2001)
further posits that the differences in beliefs and value systems at home may influence
the performance of students at school. As examples, Okagaki points to the focus on
moral education in Hispanic families and the importance of getting good grades for
Asian families, as generalizable cultural differences and beliefs in education.
Along with instructional strategies, Seashore and Marks (1998) stipulate that
the impact of the school professional community may also greatly affect student
performance. Seashore and Marks explain that professional interactions among
10
teachers support the achievement of students through the development of assessment
and instructional strategies. Seashore and Marks explain that assessments which are
based on application of students’ knowledge and skills enhance students’ learning
beyond the mere classroom context. Additionally, in terms of collaboration in the
professional learning community, Fullan and Hargreavers (1996) posit that
collaborative collegiality fosters students learning, though they also point out that
this is mostly prevalent in the elementary level.
In regards to the relationship between school leaders (and correspondingly
leadership), with student performance, recent research by Copland (2008) suggests
that leadership is perceived as one of the contributing factors for improving teachers’
instructional strategies to support the learning of all students. Copland further states
that decision making based on students’ needs is prioritized within successful
leadership structures, as well as involving teachers in decision making. Another
perceived component of how leadership may positively contribute to student success
has been identified as utilizing data driven decision making, along with a sense of
shared vision and goals with all staff members at the school.
Although numerous factors have been identified in the field literature as
positively contributing to enhanced student achievement, there is still much to learn
about specific leadership roles in relation to student achievement at urban schools.
The data repeatedly shows, that similar programs, such as the mandates of NCLB, in
various urban schools yields different results: some schools soar while others fail.
The findings of a leadership study by Copland (2008) suggest that school leadership
11
can provide coherence, which in turn can bring about sustainable school reforms. In
that case, how does leadership affect student achievement in urban schools with low-
income and high levels of minority and ELL students? How does leadership affect
the practices and programs that are successful for student achievement? A critical
examination of the programs and practices at urban schools that have been successful
in narrowing the student achievement gap, may provide valuable clues for improving
student achievement. Furthermore, a study of the role of leadership in relation to
successful practices at urban schools, may also provide indispensable clues as to how
other urban schools can improve the achievement gap within minority student
populations; particularly for Hispanic and African American students.
Purpose of the Study
To understand how and why some urban schools succeed, the salient factors
contributing to student success in urban school settings have yet to be explored. This
particular study specifically focuses on the programs and practices of an urban
school which has successfully fostered enhanced student achievement for minority
students. A focus on leadership factors which may have contributed to student
achievement and sustainability of that success is the primary purpose of the study.
Further, it is the aims of this study to examine the cultural norms, programs
and practices in a successful urban school that has sustained success over the last
three years. This study focuses specifically on the programs and practices that the
school has adopted to narrow the gap between minority students and their White and
Asian counterparts in an urban school. The study also examines how leadership
12
relates to the school programs and practices that are successful in an urban school in
closing the achievement gap for minority students. Although all the aims of the
study are equal, the specific understanding of leadership—that ‘what’ and the ‘how--
is connected with success of the school, is of particular interest, as it may offer
interventions to other urban schools in closing the achievement gap for minority
students and to sustain positive student outcomes.
To conduct a scholarly investigation of these factors, this study will use a
single school site as its case. Under such conditions, the researcher can describe,
evaluate and bring meaning to the phenomenon of the study with thick and rich
information (Gall & Borg, 2003). This study employs a qualitative methodology
which includes case study document reviews, observations, surveys and interviews.
The case study school was chosen based on the criteria that the dissertation group set
forth for the study. Surveys and interviews were conducted with teachers and
administrators to gather information regarding the following research questions,
which guided this study:
1. What are the cultural norms that have been employed by the school that
have allowed it to narrow the achievement gap and sustain success?
2. What are the practices that have been employed by the school that have
allowed it to narrow the achievement gap and sustain success?
3. What are the programs that have been employed by the school that have
allowed it to narrow the achievement gap and sustain success?
13
By focusing on one school of choice, the researcher can study with depth and
detail the phenomenon at the chosen school site relating to successful programs and
practices which have led to enhanced academic achievement for minority students.
The first research question addresses the cultural norms that are prevalent at the
school site which have helped minority students to be successful in narrowing the
achievement gap. Observations, surveys and interviews allow the researcher to
triangulate the data collected to identify the school practices as well. The second and
third research questions seek to identify the programs and practices that have been
helpful for minority students, enabling them to positively affect their academic
performance at school. The possible connection with leadership practices, which
may affect student achievement at the school, is another category on which the
researcher wishes to gather relevant information through the three research
questions.
The four frames of leadership as developed by Bolman and Deal (2003) will
be utilized as a lens to collect the data from the school site. Bolman and Deal (2002)
depict organizational practices as falling into four categories which include: the
political, structural, symbolic and human resource. By focusing on these four frames,
the researcher wishes to learn what practices and programs, and how they are
implemented, allow a narrowing of the achievement gap for minority students in an
urban school. Consequently, the researcher utilized Bolman and Deal’s four
categories as a way to organize the data collection. The data collection process for
the chosen school included observations, surveys and interviews of the staff and
14
administrators. These instruments allowed the researcher to gather information on
the school practices and programs that have proven to be successful in narrowing the
achievement gap for minority students at the urban school which was the research
site for this study. It was hoped, that by utilizing the data collected from the
teachers and administrators would enable a greater understanding of how specific
programs and practices led to the narrowing of the achievement gap for minority
students in an urban school and how the school leadership practices contributed to
that success.
Importance of the Study
The results of the findings of the study may lead other similar urban schools
to adopt successful practices and programs which have proven to contribute to
enhanced academic achievement for minority students in urban school settings. The
in-depth and descriptive qualitative research method for the study also allows the
researcher to provide the context of practices and programs and identity those
specific actions that enable successful programs. Through a close examination of
the phenomenon at the chosen school site, it was hoped the researcher would be able
to provide meaningful answers to the three research questions.
Each member of the nine member thematic dissertation group studied the
programs and practices that had been adopted at the school site, specifically for the
achievement of minority students. The compiled study should provide a deeper
understanding of the phenomenon of the 9 schools. As the thematic group conducted
their research, it was important for them to be able to use a variety of data sources to
15
triangulate the findings. Triangulation provided validity and transferability once the
study was completed (Patton, 2003).
Limitations
Limitations refer to aspects of the study which are beyond the control of the
researcher and generally address issues of internal validity (Patton, 2002). The
limitations of this study include the duration of the research, the people and
resources utilized, and those influences that were beyond the scope of the researcher.
The researcher had no control over the time period and the people who
participated in the research. The assigned time-frame for the study—the fall
semester-- limited the researcher’s ability to have an overview of practices
throughout the school year. The people who participated in the observation may
have been affected by the context of the research study itself, and consequently
behaved differently than normal. The people who participated in the research may
have also expressed biased opinions towards certain programs or practices based on
their preferences, which was also beyond the control of the researcher.
The readiness of the document review may have been another limitation of
the study. The researcher only had the option of reviewing existing documents
which may have been limited in terms of the information provided, and the scope of
that information may have been further affected by the person who prepared the data.
A final limitation of the study included resources of time, money and personnel. The
collection of data was completed by one researcher with limited time and resources.
16
Delimitations and Assumptions
Based on Patton (2002), delimitations refer to the generalizability of the
study and issues of external validity which can include the time period, situation and
selectivity of the people during the research. The researcher decided the days and
time of day to visit the school based on the time period available to the researcher
which is one of the delimitations of the study. The situations that the researcher was
able to observe were also predetermined in advance.
One of the assumptions made during the course of the study was that study
participant shared truthful information. An additional assumption was that the
selected teachers who participated in the study were representative of the faculty at
the school. Finally, the researcher assumes that all the data provided for the
document review was complete and accurate.
Definitions
Academic Performance Index (API): A scale that measures student
performance in schools, based on mandated statewide tests. These results produce
school wide scores, ranging from 200 to 1000, and rank the schools within the state
against each other (California Department of Education (CDE), 2006).
Accountability Progress Reporting (APR): A system, which provides
information on schools reaching benchmark student assessment targets and creates
an opportunity and incentives for schools to increase performance (CDE, 2006).
Charter School: Public schools that are usually operated by persons outside
of the traditional school districts (Charter Schools Development Center (CSDS),
17
2006). These schools are generally exempt from most laws pertaining to other
public school entities.
ESEA: Elementary and Secondary Education Act which was initiated by
President Johnson in 1965 to help public K-12 schools improve student learning.
President George Bush signed the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) in 2002 which
reauthorized and amended federal education programs established under (ESEA) of
1965. The major focus of No Child Left Behind 2001 (also known as ESEA) is to
provide all children with a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high-
quality education (Department of Education, 2006).
Title 1 Program: According to the U.S. Department of Education, Title 1
program is the federally funded educational program which goes to schools with at
least 56% of the enrolled students eligible to receive a free or reduced lunch on the
100
th
day of school. Title 1 provides supplemental funds to assist schools to meet
school educational goals.
Four Frames: An organizational structure articulated by Bolman and Deal,
comprised of four frames of leadership as follows: the Structural, Political, Symbolic
and Human Resource; their theory contends, that an organization can be viewed
through these four lenses (Bolman & Deal, 2003).
High Performing: Schools which have received at least a 5 or above on their
API ranking, with 10 being the highest (CDE, 2006).
18
NAEP: National Assessment of Educational Progress, a continuing and
nationally representative measure of achievement in various subjects over time (U.S.
Department of Education, 2008).
NCEE: The National Commission on Excellence in Education. The
Commission which sets forth standards for the formation and use of advisory
committees. The Commission advises and makes recommendations to the nation
and to the Secretary of Education (Department of Education, A Nation At Risk
Report, April 1983).
NCES: National Center for Educati9399on Statistics. The center’s primary
goal is for collecting and analyzing data related to education (Department of
Education, 2009).
No Child Left Behind (NCLB): A federal mandate holding all public schools
accountable for students achieving at an established proficiency level by 2014 in
math and reading, as determined through mandated testing. Schools must aggregate
achievement data by subgroups including ethnicity, race, English Language
proficiency, disability status, gender and low income level (US, Department of
Education, 2006).
Similar School Rank: A position in the California API statewide ranking and
compared only to 100 other schools (again, this makes no sense: of similar
opportunities and challenges that schools have in common.) Each school is given a
rank from 1 to 10, with 10 being the highest (CDE, 2007).
19
Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR): Administered in the spring
each year to determine how well students in California public schools are achieving
state mandated content standards. The test targets English language arts and math in
grades 2
nd
through 11
th
. The tests in science and social science are given in specific
grades (CDE, 2006).
Title IX of the Civil Rights Act: Prohibits sex discrimination in funding at all
levels of education.
Urban Schools: Schools located in mid-city locations with a population of at
least 50,000, with a diverse population and where population density and crime
levels are typically high with the poverty level above 40% (Lippman, Burnes and
McCarther, 1996).
Organization of Study
This study is organized into five chapters. Chapter One provided an
overview of the study, with a review of specific factors affecting student
achievement and sustainability. Chapter Two provides an overview of the extant
field literature and briefly describes the scope of the present study. Chapter Three
discuses the methodology used in the study. Chapter Four reviews the findings of
the study. Finally, Chapter Five provides the summary, conclusions and implications
of the study.
20
CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Introduction
Public schools in the United States consist of student populations which are
ethnically diverse. Given this diversity, it is not surprising that a wide variety of
achievement levels exist, and that an achievement gap persists for minority and low-
income students (Haycock, 2001). Although it has been 50 years since the Brown vs.
Board of Education decision, which addressed inequity in the public education
system, the gap in student achievement for low-income minority students continues
(Lee, 2002; US Department of Education, 2008); this is particularly true for African-
American and Hispanic students (Ferguson, 2001; Lee, 2002; Zigler & Fin-
Stevenson, 2007; Berliner & Briddle, 1995). According to Lee (2002) the gap for
minority students compared to White students starts as early as kindergarten and is
widest at the high school level.
This literature review begins by investigating the historical perspectives of
the policies and major education reforms in public schools. Then, the review
examines factors contributing to the achievement gap among minority students.
Within the field literature, one of the factors that has been thought to contribute
positively to enhanced student outcomes has been the salient leadership practices at
schools (Copland, 2008). However, the extant research on leadership has yet to
provide the alignment between school wide leadership practices and their specific
relevance to urban schools which have been successful in narrowing the achievement
21
gap. This literature review also provides insights into why some schools are
struggling with improving student achievement among minority students in urban
schools, while others in similar circumstances continue to struggle.
Historical Perspectives on Education and Public Policy
This section presents the historical perspectives on education and public
policy reform efforts in the K-12 public education system. Although the federal
government has expended continuous effort towards improving student performance
in the public education system, criticism over equal opportunity in public education
and the outcome of student performance has lingered for decades (Tyack & Tobin,
1994; Marzano, 2003). The review of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
(ESEA) starting from the 1950’s to the present will provide an understanding of the
relationship between education policies and students’ achievement, specifically the
disparity between White and minority students in K-12 public schools. A historical
review of the ESEA should better enable us to understand the achievement gap and
trends among minority students generally in the U.S.
ESEA programs aimed at increasing student performance within public
education came about as a result of the Brown vs. Board of Education Supreme
Court decision in 1954, which drew attention to the ongoing racial segregation in
public schools (Cross, 2004). The court declared that the opportunity for an
equitable education is the responsibility of the states by ensuring that students of all
races have equal access to materials and physical facilities at public schools (Ravitch,
1983). The court ruling further explained that segregation solely based on race, even
_________
_________
22
with equitable facilities and educational materials, still deprives minority children of
the right to an equal educational opportunity. Cross (2004) posits that the
significance of the Brown vs. Board of Education decision of 1954 brought about the
first ESEA program in 1965. This program serves to reduce unequal educational
opportunities that may be tolerated by state and local policymakers.
In 1957, the public questioned the quality of U.S. schools after witnessing the
successful launch of the Russian satellite, Sputnik (Malen, 2003). Sputnik drew
attention to the potential inadequacies of Math and science curricula in the United
States, and to the rigor and viability of our school system generally, due to the fear
that the U.S., as a nation, would fall behind the Russians (Marzano, 2003). One of
the initiatives that came from this scrutiny was the National Defense Education Act
(NDEA) in 1958 which focused on the federal government’s aid to public schools,
K-12 and higher, particularly stressing the areas of science, math and foreign
languages (Cross, 2004).
Title 1 under ESEA was enacted in 1965 after President Johnson’s election as
president, and the promise of the Johnson Administration’s War on poverty
campaign which focused on providing equal education for poor children. The goals
of the ESEA was aimed at improving equal opportunity for students of low income
families by providing federal funds to state education agencies. The aid authorized
by the ESEA, which continues to this day, focused on low-income and low-
achieving students nationwide. The ESEA’s effort to improve academic
performance of poor and educationally under-developed minority students, included
23
providing schools and educators with materials, equipment and techniques to be used
to meet the challenge of such students (Cross, 2004). During President Johnson’s
tenure, the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare was commissioned to
assess equal educational opportunities for children linked to race, color, religion and
national origin in view of the response to the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The study was
led by James Coleman which later became the Coleman report when the study results
were issued in 1966 (Marzano, 2003). The Coleman study is also known as the
Equality of Educational Opportunity Study (EEOS), which focused on racial and
ethnic disparities in academic achievement (Cross, 2004). The Coleman report
suggested that there was not much that schools could have done to improve learning
of minority students including African American children.
The Coleman study contended that schools have minimal effect on student
achievement, and concluded that student achievement was primarily the result of the
student’s home life and background (Marzano, 2003). The study was expected to
demonstrate the difference in achievement among minority students and its
disparities in educational resources. Contrary to the suggestions of the Coleman
report, which has been widely criticized by education scholars, Marzano (2003)
argues that student performance is greatly affected by the schools and that their
practices can produce positive learning results, especially for racial and ethnic
minorities. Much of the contemporary scholarship would suggest, that the effects of
school practices on student achievement are a viable tool to overcome any
24
deficiencies inherent to a student’s home background, and can successfully lead to
narrowing the achievement gap between minority and White students.
ESEA continuously made an effort to improve student performance with
programs in the 1970s for students with disabilities, minority-language students,
limited English proficient students as well as Title IX of the Civil Rights Act, which
prohibits sex discrimination in funding at all levels of education (Wirt & Kirst,
2005). ESEA expanded the programs helping not only minority and poor students
but also included children with disabilities and English language learners,
establishing the right of such children to have appropriate free education in public
schools. Under Title IX of the Civil Rights Act, schools were asked to stop tracking
female students into sex-stereotyped training, such as to become secretaries and
nurses, which had historically prevented women from having the opportunity to learn
in other disciplinary areas. Along with ESEA programs from the federal government,
many state governments also created their own categorical aids helping poor and
neglected students.
California’s Proposition 13 of 1978, for example, a state measure to cut local
property taxes, moved school power to the state capital and dramatically increased
in-state education agencies (SEAs) and thus intervened in local school affairs,
although the public perception of public school education still remained negative
during the 1980’s (Dow,1991; Berliner & Biddle, 1995). According to the Office of
Technology Assessment (1992), which scrutinized public education, claimed that
students were passed on from grade to grade without grade-level learning taking
25
place, thus making a high school diploma meaningless for all intensive purposes.
The criticism from the public on students’ lack of knowledge and skills after high
school graduation made policymakers shift their attention to outcomes instead of
inputs such as better curriculum, new teaching methods and better resources (Cohen
& Haney, 1980). The outcome driven approach of the 1970’s drew the attention to
the “back to the basics” movement and students were required to pass minimum
competency testing (Haertel & Herman, 2005). Research also revealed that students
who failed the minimum competency test were more likely to drop out of school
(Catterall, 1989). Even to this day, research data from the CDE in 2008 indicates
that the dropout rates in public high schools reveal a wide gap between African-
American and Hispanic students when compared with White students in public
schools, and that students who fail the minimum competency tests require much
more attention and preventive intervention so that they stay in school (Catterall,
1989).
By 1980, minimum competency testing was implemented as well as
standardized. Due to scrutiny by the public that students were not performing
compared to other countries, the testing results on student achievement were
provided to the public (Haertel & Herman, 2005). The gap in student performance
between White and minority students based on different student backgrounds in the
U.S. was further documented in the Nation at Risk report from 1983 (Berliner &
Briddle, 1995; Zigler & Fin-Stevenson, 2007). The report captured the academic
disparities among significant numbers of poor and middle-class students and called
26
for rigorous and measurable standards and higher expectations for academic
performance for all students (NCEE, 1983; Zigler & Fin-Stevenson, 2007). The
National Commission on Excellence in Education (NCEE) in 1983 postulated that
adopting standards and assessments are ways to solve the problem of public
education producing mediocre students. Thus, education policy focus shifted to
standards and assessments in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s and instigated a major
focus on the alignment of curriculum and assessments which engendered the current
emphasis on accountability under the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) act of 2001
(Kohlmoos, 2006).
In 1989, President Bush initiated a summit with 50 governors in an effort to
increase students’ performance in public schools. The summit led to a task force
headed by Bill Clinton, then Arkansas governor, to create national educational goals
named Goals 2000 focusing on education of all children (Cross, 2004). Under
President Clinton, Goals 2000 established an initial framework and funding to
support state and national entities which required states to develop challenging
academic content standards, develop assessment strategies for student progress and
to be accountable for students’ performance (Hartel & Herman, 2005). According to
Hartel and Herman (2005), Goals 2000 required state defined annual progress of
students under Title 1 and bilingual education categorical programs. Further, the
focus of Goals 2000 was on school accountability for performance outputs of all
students, although such an emphasis on assessment was viewed as narrowing
27
students’ critical thinking, by assessing basic skills through multiple choice testing
(Hartel & Herman, 2005).
In 1998, during President Clinton’s second term, class-size reduction (CSR)
and school construction provided general aid for education to reduce the
achievement gap in student performance (Kiger, 2002; Wirt & Kirst, 2005).
However, CSR under Goals 2000 did not move forward according to the plans as
they had been set forth initially, and eventually, the intended efforts of this program
faded away under President Bush whose political popularity heavily rested upon his
education initiatives which led to the NCLB Act of 2001 (Wirt & Kirst, 2005).
Accountability—NCLB Act of 2001
The NCLB Act of 2001, brought increased accountability for student
achievement by ethnicity, language status, poverty and disability status (Hartel &
Herman, 2005). Similar to Clinton’s ESEA programs, President Bush’s NCLB Act
of 2001 expanded the federal government’s power in overseeing education, by
mandating that local school districts adhere to NCLB as financial support was
contingent on NCLB policies being followed, and sanctions were given out for non-
compliant schools. Under NCLB, Schools must show Adequate Yearly Progress
(AYP) in academic performance and increase in graduation rates to receive NCLB
funds. However, the state government has the flexibility of choosing assessment
tools to show student progress in all subgroup students. Schools with low income
and low performance, based on the state’s standardized testing such as California
Standard Tests (CSTs) and California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE), receive
28
funds from the federal government with a condition of accountability that schools
will work to improve student performance within a given time frame. NCLB
mandates that if districts fail to meet required Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP),
financial sanctions will be implemented for the failing schools (Cross, 2004).
Although, NCLB requires rigorous academic standards with multiple measures of
assessments, predominant use of multiple choice tests has again raised concerns over
the emphasis in public education which places students’ critical thinking and
problem solving skills in jeopardy (Haertel & Herman, 2005).
Nonetheless, NCLB continues to establish improvement targets for schools
by providing both sanctions and incentives to the schools. To improve student
performance, Haertel and Herman (2005) indicate that the importance of student
assessment and instruction that is aligned with standards, plays a critical role in
improving student achievement. The authors posit that ongoing regular assessment
of student learning and feedback to guide instruction benefit students who need such
accessibility and teacher interaction (Haertel & Harman, 2005). The NCLB Act of
2001 requires all classroom teachers to be highly qualified with appropriate
credential certificates to promote students’ learning in class, especially for minority
students in urban schools (Goldhaber & Brewer, 2000). The act also supports
students in failing schools to choose either public or private schools and to receive
free tutoring. Although the NCLB Act of 2001 targets improvement for specific
subgroups students, Olson and Hoff (2005) argue that the Act disregards students’
29
prior performance levels and imposes a one size fits all approach towards reaching
the targeted proficiency level by 2014.
In summary, Brown vs. Board of Education in 1954 brought attention to
providing equal access to learning for minority students while the Civil Rights Act of
1964 brought ESEA under President Johnson, and was aimed at providing extra help
for poor and under-privileged students. ESEA expanded further to include minority
and English language learners and provide programs preventing sex discrimination
against female students in the 1970’s. The purpose of the 1980’s and 1990’s
revamping of curriculum and standards was to provide rigorous standards for
positive learning outcomes for all students. The recent NCLB Act of 2001, with
outcome driven accountability, calls for all students to reach a proficient level by
2014 including subgroups of minority students. Although sanctions and financial
rewards are issued by the federal government for schools based on their AYP and
API scores, the gap persists in achievement between racial and minority and White
students. In the following section, the definition of the achievement gap will be
explained which is prevalent in the U.S., especially between minority students
compared to White students.
Definition of Achievement Gap
The continually changing environment, in which racial and cultural diversity
in our schools is ever increasing, schools in the U.S. are particularly challenged to
educate all student groups equally (Lee, 2002). The National Governors’
Association report in 2005 also corroborates the situation of the schools and notes
30
that the achievement gap among various student populations is one of the most
pressing issues and challenges in education that states currently face in the United
States. The achievement gap in schools has been viewed as an indicator of lifetime
consequences, limiting opportunities for minority students for college as well as
consequences for their future employment and earnings (Murnane & Levy, 1996;
Carnervale, 1999). Therefore, diagnosing why and how the gap exists is an
important issue that was utilized to navigate through the various aspects of this study.
In 1983, the achievement gap was defined in the Nation at Risk report as
academic disparities among significant subgroups of children in the U.S., anywhere
from poor and middle class students, as well as between White and minority students
(Zigler & Fin-Stevenson, 2007). Based on the National Governors’ Association
report in 2005, the achievement gap was defined as “a matter of race and class across
the U.S., a gap in academic achievement persists between minority and
disadvantaged students and their white counterparts”. Similarly, Bali and Alvarez
(2004) defined the achievement gap as a race gap between White and minority
students in terms of student achievement test scores.
Under the NCLB act of 2001, the achievement gap is defined as a gap in
achievement between low-income and minority students and their peers (The
Education Trust, 2003). The achievement gap is defined under NCLB for all
subgroups of students which include racial and ethnic minorities, who are not
performing at a proficient level (Haertel & Herman, 2005). NCLB requires schools
to prove AYP based on improvement of students’ scores on the standardized tests
31
from year to year and to reach a proficient level by 2014. The achievement gap is
also defined by the high school graduation and dropout rates, percentage of students
who take honors and Advanced Placement (AP) courses, college enrollment rates
and A through G completion in high schools (Lee, 2002; Ferguson, 2004; Ladson-
Billings, 2006). The achievement gap for this study was defined by the thematic
dissertation group as a disparity between the academic achievement of certain
subgroup populations that can include ethnicity, SES, and race based upon
standardized assessment results such as API, AYP, CAHSEE, CST, CAT-6 and
graduation rates.
Who is affected by the achievement gap, as defined by the literature?
The achievement gap is associated with low-income and minority students
including African-American and Hispanic students (Lee, 2002). Based on the
National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) report over the last three
decades, the racial and ethnic achievement gap trends in the 1970’s and 1980’s
showed substantial academic improvement for Black and Hispanic students which
narrowed the achievement gap between African American, Hispanic and White
students (Lee, 2002). Through the NAEP test which is administered nationally
through voluntary school districts in grades 4, 8 and 12, Lee explains that the 1990’s
test results reversed the pattern by widening the gap of such subgroups of students
against their White counterparts. The report in the late 1980’s and 1990’s indicated
that the Black-White achievement gap was apparent for all age groups in
mathematics and in reading. Lee (2002) further examined SAT scores of these two
32
groups of students in comparison with White students and revealed that SAT score
gaps narrowed in the 1980’s in verbal and mathematics with the Black-White
achievement gap narrower than the Hispanic-White achievement gap. Similar to
NAEP results, the gap between these two groups compared to White students has
widened in both groups since the 1990’s.
Furthermore, the College Board’s National Task Force on Minority
Achievement report in 1999 demonstrated the persistent gaps between African
American, Hispanic and Native American students and their White and Asian
counterparts which begin in elementary school and continue through to
postsecondary levels of education. The report indicated that only 1 in 10 students of
African American, Hispanic and Native American student groups scored at a
proficient level in the 1996 NAEP math and science tests even though they
represented about one third of the population who took the test. The National Center
for Education Statistics in 2001 revealed that the math performance gap for 13 year
old African Americans was at its narrowest in 1990 while the gap for Hispanic
students narrowed in 1992, and then widened thereafter compared to their White
counterparts. In terms of math performance by the end of high school in 1999, only
about 1 in 100 African Americans and about 1 in 30 Hispanic students could perform
multi-step problem solving and algebra at the elementary level compared to about 1
in 10 White students (College Board, 1999). In reading, 1 in 100 African Americans
and 1 in 50 Hispanic 17 year old students can read and obtain information from the
science section in a newspaper compared to 1 in 12 White students. The report also
33
noted that African American and Hispanic students by the end of high school had
skills in both mathematics and in reading that were at the same level as those of
White students in 8
th
grade.
What are the factors that have created the achievement gap?
Efforts to narrow the achievement gap between low-income and minority
students in the U.S. public education system is a daunting task for schools, especially
given the NCLB mandate that all students meet a proficiency level by 2014 (Lee,
2002). The achievement gaps in African-American and Hispanic students compared
to White students are prevalent in numerous data findings including NAEP results in
math and reading, CAHSEE results and high school drop-out rates over the last three
decades. The existence of the gap among these students has been studied since the
Coleman report came out in 1966, which blamed the gap in minority students on
students’ home and family backgrounds. Recent studies completed by Gallimore
and Goldenberg (2001), Goldenberg, Gallimore and Reese (2001) and Okagaki
(2001) further examined the relationship between students’ home backgrounds and
cultures and the gap in student learning. The authors found that differences in
perceived cultures are likely to play a role in student performance in schools,
however, they further explain that teachers’ adaptation of, and accounting for,
various cultures in the classroom lessons would augment the learning of minority
students in classrooms.
Ladson-Billings (2006) explains that the achievement disparity in the U.S.
between White and minority students is due to differences in educational equity,
34
funding differences, earnings of parents and education level of parents. Ladson-
Billings (2006) asserts that schools during the 1960’s owe students of color and
minorities an educational debt, as their approaches caused the educational disparity
between Whites and minorities. For instance, during that time period, African
American students used cast-off text books and only had four months of schooling
due to labor requirements in the South. American Indians’ native language was not
allowed in schools. Ladson-Billings contend that such approaches to the education of
minority students were xenophobic and racist in nature, and were responsible for
creating the achievement gap.
Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) posit that the cultural models and settings
are two of the factors that cause the low performance of some minority students. To
address problems of Hispanic children’s underachievement, Gallimore and
Glodenberg (2001) attempted to understand these students’ home influences in
relation to their learning at school. The participants were 121 Hispanic girls and
boys entering Kindergarten in two school districts in Southern California. The study
was conducted by a mixed-method approach throughout which has produced
quantitative and qualitative data on home influences on learning and teaching. From
the study, Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) concluded that Hispanic parents place
priority on children’s moral development and consider that as the responsibility of
parents. Hispanic parents address the moral development of their children as one of
the most important factors in educating their children (Gallimore & Goldenberg,
2001).
35
As an extension of this previous study, Goldenberg, Gallimore, Reese and
Garnier, (2001) conducted a longitudinal study of immigrant Hispanic parents’
aspirations and expectations, and their children’s performance at school illustrates
the relationship between Hispanic students’ performance at school and parent
expectations during elementary school. The study explored a random sample of 81
Hispanic families and their children, mostly U.S. born, from Kindergarten to middle
school. The sample group was recruited in the fall of 1989 which included 121
kindergarten students with 66 boys and 55 girls and they were the subjects of the
study until 1995. Goldenberg et al (2001) focused on the relationship of parent
expectation and child performance at school and the study found that parents’
expectations do influence student performance at school.
The study also found that the higher the education level of parents, the higher
their expectations for their children at school. This expectation affects students’
performance at the beginning of 2
nd
grade, and significantly increases in 4
th
and 5
th

grades (Goldenberg et al, 2001). If their child does not perform well at school, the
expectations of parents declined based on the student’s school performance. In the
elementary school level, parents’ expectations and a child’s grades were closely
linked. Although the fluctuations in parental expectations were based upon a child’s
performance at school, parents expect high levels of formal schooling for their
children throughout their children’s school years. Therefore, the findings seem to
suggest that understanding and acceptance of parental expectations and differences
therein, may play an important role for educators to help minority children succeed
36
at school (Goldenberg et al, 2001). Although the research findings were at the
elementary level, further research in this area in secondary schools may answer what
practices and how some urban schools succeed and sustain their success with high
levels of minority students.
Goldenberg, Gallimore, Reese and Garnier (2001), and Okagaki (2001) posit
that cultural norms and beliefs are one of the factors that affect achievement of
adolescent minority students at school. The study of Okagaki (2001) is based on a
triarchic model in relation to student achievement, focusing on the form and
perceived function of school, the family’s norms and beliefs about education and the
development and characteristics specific to the child. The results of the study
purport that the cultural values of some minority groups elevate the value of
education at school by attenuating resistance to schooling which may differ from
their home culture.
Okagaki (2001) postulates that a family’s norms and belief system contribute
to a student’s performance at school. In Asian culture, performance at school
strongly ties with issues of honor within the family and success in life, while parents
see themselves as the primary teachers at home. Hispanic parents consider moral
education of their child as the most important aspect of education at home, while
they feel that their children’s content learning of subject areas is the responsibility of
teachers at school (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001; Okagaki, 2001). Furthermore,
Okagaki (2001) asserts that the characteristic of the child can be influenced by the
threat of stereotyping, which is perceived as one of the factors negatively affecting
37
motivation towards minority student achievement. However, Okagaki (2001) notes
that the thread of stereotyping may also inhibit minority students over time,
subsequently decreasing their motivation for learning in schools. Okagaki (2001)
suggests that by adopting culturally friendly practices such as connecting students’
prior knowledge and cultural backgrounds into the new content that they experience
in classrooms, schools can reduce children’s resistance to school.
It should be noted, that the perceived function of student attitude to student
achievement, as presented by Okagaki, (2001) is somewhat different from the study
conducted by Ogbu (1992) also on the relationship between a student’s attitude and
performance. Ogbu (1992) argued that minority students must adopt two sets of
cultures, home culture and school culture. Furthermore, the adaptation of the two
cultures is necessary for minority students to be successful and to be motivated to
succeed at school due to the differences between school and home cultures (Ogbu,
1992). Nonetheless, recent scholarship has also found that academic orientation was
positively correlated with adolescent students’ feelings of alienation with their peers
and the inhibition of peers’ knowledge of their academic success (Arroyo & Zigler,
1995). Thus, the study seemed to suggest that minority students may not perform at
their best or are less likely to study harder due to the fear of alienation from their low
performing peers.
A synthesis of the findings from these studies suggests that the understanding
of cultural beliefs and parent’s expectations may play an important role for educators
helping students succeed at school, especially for minority students. For example,
38
Hispanic parents’ expectations of their children are based upon their children’s
performance at school (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Some parents may view
their children’s learning negatively with low expectations due to their children’s low
performance at school. Therefore, educational practices in school may play a critical
role in bringing hope to some minority students in terms of their potential to learn.
Further, studies on school practices which incorporate the culture and backgrounds
of students into the curriculum may enable students to learn and consequently
improve student performance; this has been found to be especially true for minority
students. In the following section, successful school improvement case studies will
be examined in order to examine what works at school to improve minority students’
performance and what sustains such success.
Practices in Reducing the Achievement Gap in Urban Schools
The Coleman Report of 1966 suggested that student background can have a
great impact on student performance at school, especially for minority students.
Student background and the differences in cultural models and settings appear as part
of the consequential factors affecting students’ learning at schools as indicated by
various studies (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001; Goldenberg, Gallimore & Reese,
2001; Okagaki, 2001, Marzano, 2003). Nonetheless, school characteristics such as
instructional practices can have a greater effect on student outcomes than would be
expected (Lee, Bryk & Smith, 1993; Darling-Hammond, 1999). Practices that focus
on rigorous standards, high expectations, instructional practices and assessment may
yield success in reducing the gap in minority students as found in the literature
39
(Marzano, 2003; Johnson, 2002, Elmore, 2002). In order to unlock the mystery of
successful urban schools with high numbers of minority students, case studies of
successful school practices will be examined in this section which include the study
of new and unconventional Washington state high schools studied by the Bill and
Melinda Gates Foundation (2005), the impact of the school professional community
on the quality of student performance and on authentic pedagogy and social support
for achievement in classrooms by Seashore and Marks (1998), teacher behaviors and
practices by Darling-Hammond (1999) and the leadership role with Copland (2008).
A recent study on evaluation of new and conventional Washington state high
schools by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (2005) revealed that there is proof
from the classrooms in the study that low-income, historically underserved students
can rise to the challenge of highly rigorous and relevant assignments. The study data
was collected from 10
th
grade English language arts classes in eight large
Washington state high schools in the 2002-2003 school year and 12 new high
schools and 4 additional comprehensive high schools in school year 2003-2004. All
schools during the time of the study period were in the process of redesigning their
schools into small learning communities. Teachers’ assessments of the quality of
students’ work were based on students’ demonstration of the construction of
knowledge, deep conceptual understanding of important content, accurate use of
language and mathematics conventions and reasoning and problem solving ability.
The findings suggest that rigor and relevance are perceived to influence
students’ learning which leads to higher-quality in student work in English language
40
arts classes. However, in mathematics, relevance does not produce higher-quality in
student work while rigor does. The study further suggests that schools serving low
performing students might need supplementary academic support such as academic
coaching during the day and after hours homework support. Providing structured
mathematics classes is also suggested instead of relying primarily on mathematics
learning through unstructured projects. Although students’ backgrounds and SES are
commonly touted as some of the factors influencing students’ performance at school
(Coleman, 1990; Coleman, 1968; Coleman et al, 1966; Payne, 2005), teachers’ high
expectations of such students are perceived to be more influential in student learning
than the cultural or familial backgrounds of minority students (Elmore, 2002;
Darling-Hammond, 1999).
Darling-Hammond (1999) found a strong relationship between teacher
qualification and classroom instructional practices with student performances. The
study data was collected from a 50 state survey of policies, state case study analyses,
Schools and Staffing Surveys (SASS) and the NAEP analyses in 1993-1994. The
study findings particularly point out that teachers who have more professional
training were more likely to incorporate various methods of instructional practices
that yield higher student reading achievement on the NAEP tests. In addition to
adaptability of instructional strategies, the study also supports the link between
teachers’ professional learning with variability of lesson approaches, task-oriented
behavior, teacher clarity, enthusiasm and positive student performance.
41
Darling Hammond (1999) stipulates that teachers with a broad repertoire of
instructional approaches including direct and indirect instruction, experience and
skill based approaches, a mixture of teacher centered and student centered activities
with the combination of lecture and small group activities are all found to support
student learning. Teachers’ qualifications to teach the subject matter and teachers’
education level beyond the credential program are also perceived to be strongly
related to the performance of the students. The study further indicates that teachers’
qualifications are important, as well as continuous professional development to
improve instructional strategies to meet the challenges of diverse student
backgrounds. Phelps (1994) corroborates that the teacher’s qualifications and
instructional strategies are important factors for improving student performance and
postulates that students with teachers with certification and master’s degrees will be
less likely to drop out of school. Considering the high dropout rates of minority
students as compared with White students, these studies indicate that the high quality
of teachers with the incorporation of various instructional strategies seem to hold
some answers to improve the achievement gap in minority students in urban schools.
Seashore and Marks (1998) examined the impact of the school professional
community on the quality of student performance and on authentic pedagogy and
social support for achievement in classrooms. The study employed quantitative and
qualitative analytic methods with 24 nationally selected, restructured elementary,
middle and high school professional communities. The study findings suggest that
the teachers’ work that promotes the sense of a viable, professional community has a
42
positive relationship with the academic performance of students through authentic
pedagogy. The study defines authentic pedagogy as instruction and assessment
which reflects construction of meaning, disciplined inquiry and value beyond
classroom learning (Newmann et al. 1996).
The findings from Seashore and Marks (1998) imply that teachers’
interactions within the professional community proved to be associated with
authentic pedagogy and social support for achievement of students. Students
achieved at high levels while social support for achievement among students is also
boosted with schools which had organized professional communities of teachers.
The study also indicates that the presence of professional communities appeared to
be most prevalent in the elementary school level and least evident in high schools.
The findings further suggest that developing policies which support both schools and
teachers in building professional organizations that promote student learning,
through authentic pedagogy, is of the utmost importance in our attempts to increase
learning for all students.
Copland (2008) conducted a study of schools throughout the San Francisco
Bay Area on efforts that support whole school change. The research findings
indicate that school leadership can provide coherence, which can correspondingly
bring sustainability of school reforms. The study of a five-year reform effort, Bay
Area School Reform Collaborative (BASRC), started in 1995 which involved 16
leadership schools with 4 high schools, 11 elementary and 1 K-8 schools. Sixty
43
three principals and 27 teachers participated from 18 diverse BASRC leadership and
membership schools.
The findings of the BASRC Leadership Schools study (Copland, 2008)
suggests that leadership for improving teaching and learning is rooted in continual
inquiry at the school, while decisions at the school are made collectively by focusing
on improving the learning of all students. The survey study findings indicate that
sustainability of the school reform was strongly correlated with the teachers’
perception about the school having a vision for reform (r=.60, p<.01) and having the
reform progress examined (r=.60, p<.01) continuously. These findings also
correlated strongly with principal responses to a question about the level of teachers’
engagement in analyzing student data. Leadership capacity at schools was explained
by the variables of teachers’ perceptions of having a school wide vision by 36%
(r=.60, p<.01), making changes based on student needs by 39% (r=.63, p<.05), use of
data in decision-making by 29% (r=.54, p<.05) and examining the reform progress
by 36% (r=.60, p<.01). The BASRC Leadership Schools study (2008) further
suggests that the school leadership can enable the school community to bind together
to meet the challenges associated with school reform and sustainability of the
success by distributing its leadership to teacher leaders. Thus, looking at the school
site leadership through further research, in relation to student performance within
minority student populations, may suggest the means for sustainable success in urban
schools.
44
In summary, the four studies indicate that rigor and relevance in teaching,
teacher quality, various instructional strategies, collaboration in the professional
learning community and leadership are perceived to influence student performance.
The study of Washington state high schools suggests that schools with low-income,
underserved students can improve their performance by providing highly rigorous
and relevant assignments in class with various instructional strategies to meet the
needs of the students (Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, 2005). Similar to the
Washington case studies, Darling-Hammond (1999) postulates that teachers’
professional training produces better instructional strategies in classrooms and yield
higher student achievement by supporting them with various lesson approaches, task-
oriented behavior and teacher clarity and through feedback for student performance.
Furthermore, Seashore and Marks (1998) imply that the importance of collaboration
for teachers through professional learning communities also enhances students’
learning, which is evidenced particularly at the primary level. The Copland (2008)
study findings corroborate that school leadership can affect school success by having
a clear school wide vision, making changes based on student needs and data driven
decision making.
Often, low performing students in low-income, high minority schools are
provided with less qualified teachers, resources, and support from home than high
performing suburban schools with less minority students (Jacob, 2007). But how do
some urban schools with high levels of minority students succeed and sustain their
45
success against all odds? Further research in this area of the high performing urban
schools with high levels of minority students will possibly answer the question.
Sustainable and Replicable Practice
Recent research has implied that the policies and practices which schools
implement, has an enormous affect on student performance, especially influential are
instructional practices in classrooms (National Center for Education Statistics, 2001;
Ferguson, 1998; Sanders, & Rivers, 1996). Ucelli and Paez (2007) and Moffett
(2000) argue that the support infrastructure should be in place in an organization to
sustain instructional practices at public schools to improve student achievement.
Although recent studies on professional learning communities support the
positive relationship of instructional practices and student performance (Marzano,
2003; Dufour R., Eaker & Many, 2006; Liberman, 1999), Fullan and Hargreaves
(1996) suggest that the professional learning community should be developed on the
basis of collaboration which promotes trust and genuine reflection on students’
learning. Thus, collaboration does not account for spending time on committees and
in meetings if the meetings are not focused on deeper issues related to teaching and
learning. Nonetheless, the low participant rates in professional communities at the
high school level, revealed in the study of Seashore and Marks (1998), warrants
further study to investigate secondary urban schools to see if there is any relationship
between student performance and professional communities, especially for minority
students. Copland (2008) posits that leadership appears to be one of the factors
which might relate to the success and sustainability of the school. The study by the
46
thematic group focused on the successes and sustainability of urban schools with
high levels of minority students. Thus, the relation between leadership and student
learning would seem to be important for further study. Also important is the
applicability of practices used in other parts of the U.S. versus California to see if
schools in California with high levels of minority student backgrounds can replicate
similar practices that have been successful in other parts of the nation.
Summary and Discussion
According to Lee (2002), the achievement gap of minority students compared
to White and Asian students starts early from Kindergarten and 1
st
grade and is
widest in high school. The report from the National Commission on Teaching and
America’s Future in 2004, revealed that California public schools have 61% of
children of color and 25% Limited English Proficient students who are considered
minority groups. Although policies and reforms such as ESEA, Goals 2000 and the
NCLB Act of 2001 initiated programs to reduce the gaps in student achievement,
especially among African American and Hispanic students, the problem of an
achievement gap remains in the U.S. public education system.
One of the common factors which have been perceived to affect student
achievement includes students’ home backgrounds (National Center for Education
Statistics, 2001; Ferguson, 1998; Sanders & Horn, 1995). In addition to the student’s
cultural and familial background, recent research on school factors such as teacher
quality, instructional practices which include high standards, rigorous and relevant
curriculum with high expectations for students, have been shown to produce higher
47
student achievement than an assessment based solely on children’s home
backgrounds (Elmore, 2002; Darling-Hammond, 1999). Furthermore, recent studies
suggest that leadership can influence instructional practices and professional learning
communities at schools. Thus, the relationship between leadership and student
learning may further suggest the ties that are still unclear in the existing research,
especially when it applies to urban schools in California. The area of leadership thus
calls for further research, and for us to ask questions of how and what perceived
factors in this area contribute to student learning in high performing and high
minority population urban schools in California. Further investigation in this area
will answer the mystery as to why some urban schools succeed, and the context for
such success in terms of student learning. The chapter following outlines the
methodology utilized for this study.
48
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
Introduction
The purpose of the study was to examine cultural norms, programs and
practices in successful urban schools that have sustained success over the last three
years. This study focused specifically on the programs and practices a school had
adopted to narrow the gap between minority students and their White counterparts in
an urban school. Observations of the school site and classroom instructions, surveys
and interviews of the teachers and data analysis were all conducted to identify
successful practices by the school. The participation of the school and staff in this
study lasted four months.
As stated above, urban schools with high levels of minority students face
challenges including higher drop-out rates, lower graduation rates and a wider gap of
achievement between minority and white students. This study examined how the
concept of leadership relates to the school programs and practices which were
successful at the urban school, in narrowing the achievement gap between minority
and White students. The understanding of what the leadership practices were, and
how they connected with success at the school, may offer intervention strategies for
other urban schools in closing the achievement gap.
The research was organized and viewed through the lens of the four
organizational frames as articulated by Bolman and Deal (2003) which include the
political, structural, symbolic and human resource. This chapter is arranged as
49
follows: a presentation of the research questions, the process of selecting the criteria
for the sample population, instrumentation, data collection and analysis.
Research Questions
Based on the discussion of the 9 member thematic dissertation group, three
questions were developed for the research study. The thematic group was formed
after the dissertation seminar during the summer of 2008. Group members had an
interest in the topic of closing the achievement gap of minority students in urban
schools, and were led by Dr. Stuart Gothold at the Rossier School of Education, at
the University of Southern California. Each member of the group had their own
areas of interest to focus on, within the larger concept guiding the group study being
the programs and practices that led to success in closing the achievement gap for
minority students. The dissertation group meetings started in October 2008, and
therein we discussed what constitutes the definition of “urban schools” and “minority
students”. Starting in December 2008, our group met once a month with Dr. Gothold,
while small group discussions occurred in an ongoing basis with group members, to
review and to collaborate on the data collection process. The research questions
addressed in the group were tied to minority students’ success in urban schools and
the factors contributing to sustainability of that success over the last three years. The
three research questions formulated by the group to guide the study were as follows:
1. What are the cultural norms that have allowed the school to narrow the
achievement gap and sustain success for minority-ethnic students?
50
2. What are the practices that have been employed by the school that have
allowed them to narrow the achievement gap and sustain success?
3. What are the programs that have been employed by the school that have
allowed them to narrow the achievement gap and sustain success?
The dissertation group adopted a qualitative method case study for the
research to be conducted. Patton (2003) posits that the rich, detailed and concrete
descriptions of phenomenon in the case study allow people to understand the content
studied and let people draw their own interpretations about meanings and
significance of the study. Gall, Gall and Borg (2003) also posit that rich and thick
information that can be obtained through a case study approach, allows the
researcher to describe, evaluate and bring meaning to the phenomenon of the study.
Through the case study, the dissertation group was able to formulate the research
questions that answer how and why minority students are succeeding in some urban
schools. Furthermore, thick description of the study findings may be transferred to
those who need to use the findings in their own settings for improved achievement of
minority students to occur (Patton, 2002).
The case study data for this study included document review, observations,
surveys and interviews to increase the validity of the study (Patton, 2002). Through
the multiple layers of the data collection process, the researcher was able to provide
depth and detail for the phenomenon of the practices and programs of the chosen
school. The multiple sources of data collection from document reviews,
observations of the campus, classrooms, surveys and interviews with the staff who
51
are involved in student achievement, all facilitated the researcher to triangulate the
findings for the study. Patton postulates that triangulation not only increases the
validity of the study but it also reduces systematic bias and distortion during data
analysis.
However, one of the disadvantages of conducting a case study is the potential
for researcher bias which inhibits the generalization of the case study to other
settings or situations. To eliminate the researcher bias for the case study, the
dissertation group defined the selection criteria for the school to be studied. After
careful research of the schools which met the established criteria, the researcher was
able to locate a school to be studied and obtained permission by the school and the
district office. The nine member dissertation group conducted case studies in
different schools based on the selection criteria and the group was able to compare
and cross-examine each other’s findings. Through triangulation of the data findings
of the 9 case studies, the dissertation group was able to establish the validity of the
study findings that may be transferable to similar schools in urban settings, to
increase the achievement of minority students.
To answer the three research questions addressed by the dissertation group,
the group focused on data needs in the areas of school leadership, curriculum,
instructional strategies, interventions and staff development including professional
learning communities. In order to provide a systematic process for the study, the
framework of the Process Model was adopted from Clark and Estes (2002).
52
Figure 1: Clark & Estes Gap Analysis Process Model

The model includes 6 steps of the identification process to meet the goals set
for the organization. The 6 step process includes identifying business goals,
performance goals, performance gaps, analyzing gaps, identifying knowledge and
skills along with motivation and organizational culture followed by evaluations of
the results.
The thematic dissertation group adapted the process model to make it fit the
case studies for the individual dissertation group members. This researcher
specifically focused on the success of the school programs and practices. Therefore,
the gap analysis of the organization was changed to identify successful programs and
practices of the organization which had narrowed the achievement gap for minority
53
students in urban schools (Figure 2). The achievement gap process model the
dissertation group adapted, include six steps: Identifying high achieving schools,
subgroup performance, API performance, factors contributing to growth in
achievement in minority students, identifying cultural norms, programs and practices
followed by analyzing the results. The model provides a step by step process of how
the thematic dissertation members each went through identification of programs or
practices that were successful for achievement of minority students, and why and
how the programs or practices work in some organizations. The model also provided
results and feedback of the study that culminated through each member’s study
findings that helped the group triangulate the evolving themes of the study findings.
The thematic dissertation group modified the framework so that it fit into the
research questions articulated by the group, and the process for the collection of data
and subsequent analysis. The conceptual framework provided an illustration of how
the study was approached using the research questions and data collection tools.
54
Figure 2: Conceptual Framework: Achievement Gap Process Model

The first step of the process was the document review to identify a high
performing urban school (Figure 2). A similar school review through the California
Department of Education data was utilized to find the schools that outperformed
their similar school counterparts. Identification of subgroups and their three year
API scores were a part of steps two and three in the process model. Then, the
subgroup student performance on API scores was measured over the last three years
to compare with the overall school wide student performance. Once a school was
chosen by each member based on the selection criteria set by the dissertation group,
further data sources for the school were also pursued. The identification of factors
contributing to subgroup minority student growth through document review,
observations, surveys and interviews of the staff and administrators were addressed
in step four. Cultural norms, programs and practices which had contributed to the
55
successful narrowing of the achievement gap for minority students were identified.
In step six, the data collected through the multiple sources of the instruments were
analyzed and synthesized to indicate successful school practices and programs. The
following sections address the process and criteria for selection of sample,
population, instrumentation, data collection and analysis.
Process for Selection of Sample
The thematic dissertation group discussed the selection of schools that were
successful in closing the achievement gap between White and minority students in
urban schools. These discussions were based on the research questions developed,
and definitions identified by, the group members. The first group discussion started
in October 2008 and the members defined what constitutes the achievement gap,
minority students and urban schools. These definitions were used to set the criteria
for the selection of sample for the study. The members focused on investigating
programs and practices which were successful in narrowing the achievement gap in
urban schools. The group decided to adopt a qualitative method which would
provide in-depth and detailed information of the school studied. Through the data
from the California Department of Education, the district and the target school to be
studied were selected for the research. Then the members analyzed the school data
to see if the selected school met the criteria that the group had set forth for the
research.
56
Criteria for Selection of Sample
The thematic dissertation group defined what constitutes an urban school and
“minority” students to determine the criteria for the study sample. The selection
criteria included schools with 15% subgroup minority students, 40% students on free
and reduced lunch programs, and a substantial gain of API scores of minority
students compared with school-wide API performance over the last two years. The
group also decided that the population of minority students, of the selected urban
school, had to be at least 15% of the total school population. An urban school was
defined as a school with a population that causes a school to modify programs to
accommodate the risk factors that would come with the population in the school with
ELL and low SES students. The low SES schools were defined as schools that are
either Title 1 or having at least 40% of students on free and reduced lunch programs.
Once the criteria for selection of sample were defined, each member of our
group searched for a school to research, and to come up with the school of choice
that matched each member’s area of focus within the larger study.
Sample and Population
In order to thoroughly understand how and why some urban schools have
successfully closed the achievement gap among minority students, purposeful
sampling was utilized for the study through information-rich and in depth interviews,
surveys and observations (Patton, 2002). Patton posits that researchers can obtain a
great deal of information from purposeful sampling which relates the central concern
to the purpose of the inquiry. Patton argues that in a qualitative study, the sample
57
size should be decided based on the purpose and rationale of the study and must be
judged within the context of the study. The thematic dissertation group decided that
observation should take place first to provide knowledge of the school and culture,
particularly through campus and classroom observations. Sample size for the survey
included 16 teachers to measure programs and practices at the school, and the
researcher would be able to collect the data to triangulate with interview contents
later on. Similarly, the thematic group purposefully decided that at least 6 in-depth
interviews would be conducted for the study. Once the permission letter to conduct
the research at a chosen school site was received from their district office, further
preliminary data collection processes for the school took place.
The dissertation group suggested that an existing document review would be
a good first step in data collection which included school population, attendance and
API scores. The school selected for this research study had a student population of
745 for the 2008-2009 school year for grades 7 and 8. The school is one of 70
schools in the Dragon Unified School District in the city of Dragon. The district is
located South of Los Angeles and serves 47 elementary, 10 middle, 7 high and 2
continuation schools. Over the last ten years, the enrollment for the district has
increased from 48,031 to 48,468 for the 2008-2009 school year.
58
Figure 3: School Enrollment Data by Ethnicity, 1999-2008

(Source: Ed Data, CDE, 2009)

Although there was little change in total population, subgroup populations to
reveal a shift in the district. Asian and Hispanic populations grew in the district
while the White population decreased. In 1999, the major subgroup populations of
the district were 28% Asian, 47.5% Hispanic and 21% White. In the 2008-2009
school year, the population of two expanding subgroups were 31% Asian, 53.4%
Hispanic while Whites decreased to 12.5%.
The selected school enrollment data also showed a shift in population (Table
1). In 1999, the school had 58.6% Asian, 16.8% Hispanic and 21.2% Whites out of
529 students enrolled. In the 2008-2009 school year, there were 74.7% Asian,
59
17.4% Hispanic and 6.5% Whites. The biggest gain in population over the last 10
years was the Asian population while the White student population decreased to
about half of its size from 1999 (Figure 3). Overall, there has been a 42% increase
in student population, from 529 to 751 students, for the last 10 years. The school
population consisted of 25.9% English learners which also included 20.7% Spanish,
and 75.5% Vietnamese student backgrounds for the 2009-2010 school year. The
school also had 65% of students who were participating in the free and reduced
lunch program for the school year. For the 2009-2010 school year, about 75% of the
student population at DMS are Asian and out of that population, 94% have
Vietnamese backgrounds.

Table 1: Enrollment Trends, 1999-2009, Dragon Middle School

1999-2000 529
2000-2001 620 (+17.2%)
2001-2002 652 (+5.2%)
2002-2003 637 (-2.3%)
2003-2004 637 (0%)
2004-2005 670 (+5.2%)
2005-2006 675 (+0.7%)
2006-2007 693 (+2.7%)
2007-2008 725 (+4.6%)
2008-2009 751 (+3.6%)
(Source: Ed Data, CDE, 2009)
60
Based on API data from the CDE, Dragon Middle School have improved
school wide API scores by 63 points over the last three years (Table 2). Hispanic
subgroups gained 76 points for the three year period, while socio-economically
disadvantaged groups and English learner groups each improved 70 points and 67
points respectively. The school was ranked 10th in similar school rank and state
rank in California school performance for the last two years. In the 2005-2006
school year, the school was ranked 9 among similar schools.

Table 2: Dragon Middle School API Growth by Student Group –Three Year
Comparison

Actual API Change
Group 05-06 06-07 07-08
2007-08
Growth
API Score
3 year API
growth
by subgroups
All students at the school 26 10 27 897 63
Asian 26 8 24 928 58
Hispanic or Latino 23 16 37 772 76
Socioeconomically
Disadvantaged
23 11 36 879 70
English Learners 78 10 - 21 841 67
(Source: Ed-data, CDE, 2009)

Based on the California Standards Tests (CSTs), students at DMS performed
at over 70% proficiency in the 2007-2008 school year for English Language Arts,
Mathematics, Science and history-social science (Table 3). The highest performance
area for CSTs was science at 86% for the school as indicated below.
61
Table 3: CST Results Comparison, DMS, District and State: Percentage of Students
Scoring at Proficient or Advanced Levels

DMS District California
Year Tested 05-06 06-07 07-08 05-06 06-07 07-08 05-06 06-07 07-08
ELA 64% 72% 72% 43% 45% 48% 42% 43% 46%
Mathematics 70% 66% 71% 49% 47% 47% 40% 40% 43%
Science 72% 79% 86% 41% 46% 52% 35% 38% 46%
History 58% 66% 76% 43% 46% 47% 33% 33% 36%
(Source: Ed-data, CDE, 2009)

The comparison below (Figure 4) indicates that DMS outperformed the state of
California in the areas of ELA, math, Science and History CST results for 2008.

Figure 4: DMS vs. State Comparison, CST Results, 2008

(Source: Ed-data, CDE, 2009)
62
Although some of the subgroup CST results were lower than the school wide
average in CST scores at DMS, the results for the English language learners at DMS
for 9
th
grade ELA was at a 32% proficiency level compared with the state wide ELA
performance of 8% (Figure 5). The lowest performance in a subgroup for ELA was
indicated as 24% for students with disabilities. Nevertheless, this performance is
still higher than the 11% California state average for the same group of students.

Figure 5: ELA 9th Grade CST Results Comparison, DMS vs. State

(Source: Ed-data, CDE, 2009)
63
DMS Hispanic subgroup performance for 2008 ELA was 50% proficiency
level compared with 34% proficiency level for the state (Figure 5). As indicated
above, students at DMS outperformed the state of California average CST in ELA in
all student subgroups for the 2007-2008 school year.
Once the sample population was identified and decided upon for the study,
the researcher contacted the principal of the school for the study. With permission
granted to conduct the study at the site, the researcher also contacted the district
personnel to address any further processes for obtaining permission. As the
researcher picked up the permission slip from the school site, the initial observation
of the school took place.
The research was designed based on the purposeful sampling for the study.
When conducting purposeful sampling, Patton (2002) has stated that situations, time
periods and selectivity inherent to the process, may also raise the corresponding
limitations of the study. For this study, the field research period was given to the
researcher, and was to be limited by one semester. Thus, there was little flexibility
for the researcher to add more time and resources to do more than one semester of
research for the study. However, through purposeful sampling, the researcher
obtained thick and rich information with detailed description of the programs and
practices that the researched school adopted. The researcher gained insights and in-
depth knowledge of the school studied and was able to apply the sample population
into the general population of the school, based on triangulation of the multiple data
sources in the study.
64
Instrumentation
The instruments for the study were developed by the thematic dissertation
group for addressing successful programs and practices of the school studied. The
members developed instruments based on the research questions that we had
developed. The members decided to include data review, observation, survey and
interviews in our instruments (Appendix A). Each member took responsibility for
developing an assigned instrument based on their expertise in the area. Then the
discussion took place during our meetings to revise each instrument tool to align
with the data needs and to connect to the research questions. With numerous
revisions and reviews of the final instruments for the survey, interview and
observation template were adopted.
The document review process (Appendix B) guided the researcher in coming
to an understanding of the school, students and staff as well as the programs and
practices at the school site before any other instrument tools were utilized. The
document review process allowed the researcher to focus on the findings from the
available documents, that were to be further cross-examined through other means of
instrumentation (Patton 2002). The three research questions also guided the
researcher to look for specific information that was tied with the programs and
practices at the school. Observation (Appendix C & D) of the school campus before
school started, during recess, lunch time and after school allowed the researcher to
get a sense of the community and culture of the school which were helpful in
sustaining the success for minority students in narrowing the achievement gap. The
65
interactions of students with students, students with teachers, and teachers with
administrators, all provided the researcher with relevant scenes and data, that could
have been missed by just doing document reviews. The observation of classroom
instruction also provided the researcher with the opportunity to see the interactions
between teachers and students during their learning process. Classroom management
by the teachers and students’ interactions with other students also gave some hints as
to what was going on in the classroom.
The survey included an introduction which explained the purpose of the
survey and the content questions (Appendix E). The content questions included
collaboration opportunities, school leadership, intervention and classroom instruction
which were aligned with the three research questions.
Survey questions 1 to 6 addressed research question one, focusing on cultural
norms that were employed by the school in narrowing the achievement gap and
sustaining its success. The culture in the organization reflects the success of
pursuing organizational goals as posited by Clark and Estes (2002). Thus,
examining culture in the selected school that pursues organizational goals was
included as one of the factors in the process model which may have contributed to
successful student outcomes. Survey questions 7 to 16 and 19 to 24 addressed the
practices of the school that has narrowed the achievement gap for minority students.
Questions on areas such as communication, data analysis, curriculum adoption and
support for students and teachers were addressed to find the school practices that
were successful for student achievement. Survey questions 17 to 18 and 25 to 32
66
addressed the programs of the school which contributed to the performance of
minority students. These questions addressed the areas of interventions and data
analysis to provide answers to research questions two and three. The researcher was
able to collect data on how successful urban schools produced high achievement for
minority students by asking survey questions which are closely correlated to the
research questions.
Open ended questions were provided at the end for the surveys to gather
further information of the programs and practices at the school. Patton (2002) argues
that surveys may not reflect any deeper understanding or feeling of the people in an
organization unless there are some open ended questions relating to any program
evaluation. Thus, under each category of survey questions, our group added an
open-ended answer section so that the survey participants could go more in-depth in
their responses. This open-ended questioning led to the understanding of what
teachers thought about the programs and practices at the school. Overall, the survey
of the teachers focused on gaining the standardized results which facilitated the
researcher in analyzing those results easily during the data analysis phase.
The interview questions were addressed based on the research questions and
the data needs (Appendix F). The thematic group carefully organized the questions
so that the questions which might appear in other parts of the research instruments,
would still add value to the research. The interview contents included questions
relating to collaboration opportunities, school leadership, intervention and classroom
instruction which were aligned with the three research questions. Patton explains
67
that multiple sources of data collection enables the researcher to triangulate the study
findings ( 2002). While survey questions guided the researcher to have an overall
understanding of the programs and practices at the school, the interview questions
allowed the researcher to find out in greater detail the participants’ feelings,
knowledge and skills regarding and related to, the schools norms, programs and
practices in closing the achievement gap for minority students (Patton, 2002).
Data Collection
Qualitative data were collected through classroom and school observations,
teacher surveys and interviews. In order to organize the data, the four frames of
Bolman and Deal (2003) were employed during the data collection process. The
researcher organized the data into the four frames which included: the symbolic,
political, structural and human resource. The four frames guided the data collection
process providing structure and organization for the observations, surveys,
interviews and the data review process which were aligned with the research
questions.
The structural framework for the study emphasized collecting data which
identified the programs and practices at the school that led to the success in
achievement for minority students. The human resource framework allowed the
researcher to focus on people at the school studied. The interaction between teachers,
students and administrators provided the understanding of the relationship among
students and staff, which led to understanding of the school culture and norms. The
political framework allowed the researcher to focus on the school’s ability in
68
obtaining scarce resources for the organization. This framework also provided data
about school leaders’ negotiation strategies in dealing with conflicts that may exist
externally. The symbolic framework permitted the researcher to focus on the vision
and inspiration of the organization as well as the commitment of the people to the
mission of the organization. Observations of the student assembly, staff meetings
and parent meetings reflected the four frames of Bolman and Deal throughout the
data collection process.
Direct observation was the initial data collection process, and provided the
researcher with some sense of the school atmosphere, culture, programs or practices.
Patton explains the value of direct observation before any survey or interview has
been conducted, as a way to gain program experience which enables the researcher
to understand the context in which people interact. Another advantage of direct
observation, Patton posits, is that the researcher may see things that would otherwise
be neglected through personal interviews alone. During interviews, people may not
express things that are happening in the program unless it is perceived to the
interviewee as an important phenomenon in the program. The researcher can also
get personal knowledge from direct observation and gain an opportunity to move
beyond the data or interviewee’s perceptions, especially in analyzing the data
collected (Patton, 2003). Observation of the campus, student and teacher
interactions, during lunch, and after school activities all provided the researcher with
the benefits of understanding the background of the school before the survey and the
interview took place.
69
The survey was conducted after the direct observation was completed. In
order to provide consistency of the findings, survey questions were aligned with the
research questions and data needs for the study. Teachers involved in the survey all
voluntarily participated to give about 10 minutes of their time to complete the survey.
The open-ended structured interview then followed after the survey was
administered. According to Patton (2002), one of the characteristics of collecting
qualitative data through the standardized open-ended interview is that the interview
questions and sequence are determined in advance. All interviewees thus were asked
the questions in the same order. Patton postulates that one of the strengths of the
structured interview is to provide the interviewer with increased comparability of
responses to the questions addressed in the interview. Also this process permits the
researcher to review and inspect the instrumentation during the analysis stage, which
further facilitates the organization and analysis of the data. On the other hand,
Patton argues that the structured interview lacks flexibility in relating to participants’
circumstances and situations which may constrain the naturalness of the questions
and answers.
In order to increase the validity of the study, classroom observations and
document reviews took place before the survey. Then a 16 teacher survey was
conducted, followed by open-ended interviews of 11 teachers. Patton (2002)
postulates that triangulation in qualitative research increases the validity of, and
confidence in, the findings through combining interviews, surveys and observations
for the study. Patton also indicates that information-rich data can increase face
70
validity and credibility of the study. While long responses which may not be
standardized or systematic in content in a qualitative study, the depth of teachers’
open-ended responses as expressed in the teachers’ own words in the study were a
reflection of the school’s culture and norms. If not for the open-ended questions, the
detailed information about teachers’ perceptions and feelings towards the school’s
programs or practices may not have been exposed in the study. Patton posits that
the open-ended responses allow researchers to understand the perceptions,
experiences and what is happening in the setting studied through the eyes of the
respondents. Open ended interviews conducted at the school site provided in-depth
knowledge of the people in the study and the researcher was able to understand the
programs and practices the school had adopted in close proximity. The collection of
multiple sources of data in the study allowed the researcher to examine the cultural
norms, programs and practices. As Patton asserts, triangulation of the multiple
sources of data also increased the validity and accuracy of the research findings.
Data Analysis
The data analysis process involved reviewing, categorizing, coding, and
interpreting the organized data (Creswell, 2003). The study adopted the six steps of
data analysis by Creswell to provide a step by step analysis of the collected data.
Creswell posits that deeper understanding and frequent reflection of the findings are
necessary to organize and present accurate findings.
The first step of the data analysis was to organize and prepare the data for
analysis. This process allowed the researcher to transcribe interviews, surveys and
71
observations and type up observations of the school, students, teachers and
classrooms. Sorting and organizing data into similar categories were also included in
this stage.
The second stage for the analysis included reading through all the data to
ensure the data collected made sense and was meaningful to the researcher. The
researcher understood what the participants were saying including the implied
meaning of open-ended interview questions. The researcher started taking notes
while going through the data, to clarify thoughts during this stage.
The third step was to begin detailed analysis with a coding process, which
included organizing the data into smaller chunks and to connect the various pieces in
meaningful ways. This process included categorizing sentences or paragraphs and
coding them based on the participants’ actual language.
The fourth stage was to use the coding process to generate a description of
the setting or people. The coding process involved detailed information about events,
people, places, or settings which is useful for detailing in a qualitative study. This
stage identified themes as well as building additional layers of complex analysis by
interconnecting themes into narratives. Description and theme identification was
further developed into stable thematic connections.
The fifth step allowed the researcher to advance how the description and
themes would be represented in the qualitative narrative. The description and themes
are represented in the qualitative narratives which are the most popular approach in a
qualitative study. This included narrating events chronologically, and multiple
72
perspectives from individuals and quotations. Visuals, tables and figures were also
used at this stage to interconnect the frequently occurring themes.
The final step included making meaning from, or interpreting the data as part
of the analytic process. The researcher interpreted the findings based on her own
culture, history and experiences. The researcher also interpreted the meaning of the
data through the findings and information obtained from the literature or existing
theories. The research raised issues in terms of advocacy or support for the study, as
well as suggesting further venues of inquiry. The qualitative study provided rich
information from a variety of sources which provided the researcher with the
opportunity to triangulate the data findings (Creswell, 2002). Creswell posits that
the strengths of qualitative research lie in the validity of the research. Similar
findings from various data were triangulated in this study to increase the validity of
the study (Patton, 2003). Different data sources of information from data review,
direct observations, surveys and interviews increased support for the credibility of
the study findings, while increasing the validity of the research.
In the chapter following, the findings of the practices and programs of the
selected school are provided. The chapter explores what the successful urban school
did (and how), to narrow the achievement gap in minority students and to sustain its
success. Multiple approaches were taken to gather the data for this study, including
observations, surveys and interviews, to increase the validity and credibility of the
study.
73
CHAPTER FOUR
FINDINGS
The purpose of this study was to identify the factors affecting student
achievement and sustainability of students’ success, especially for minority students,
at one urban school which was selected for this study. Each of the 9 thematic
dissertation group members, who comprised this research cohort, selected school
sites for their independent studies, which represent schools that demonstrated
sustained academic success over the last two years. Based on the selection criteria
set forth by the thematic dissertation group, the researcher chose Dragon Middle
School (DMS) in the Dragon Unified School District (DUSD) for the collection of
data. The data collection included document reviews, school and classroom
observations and staff surveys and interviews. The data collection addressed the
intention to answer the following research questions:
1. What are the perceived cultural norms at urban K-12 schools which
allowed the schools to narrow the achievement gap and sustain success
for minority students?
2. What are the perceived practices that have been employed by the school
that has allowed it to narrow the achievement gap and sustain success?
3. What are the perceived programs that have been employed by the school
that has allowed it to narrow the achievement gap and sustain success?
The findings for this study are presented by the research questions; and an
examination of the school culture, programs and practices. Emergent themes from
74
the data findings appear at the end of each research question. This study utilized
Bolman and Deal’s (2003) four frames of organizational construct—the structural,
symbolic, political and human resource—as a lens by which to analyze the data
findings. Additionally, the four frame model serves as a template that can explain the
phenomenon at the research school site and to examine the factors affecting positive
student performance.
This inquiry further sought to investigate how cultural norms, practices and
programs support student achievement and sustain student success. Darling
Hammond (1999) posits that professional training produces higher student
achievement, while Seashore and Marks (1998) indicate that it is not just
professional training but the importance of teacher collaboration throughout the
professional learning community. In terms of student achievement, Copland (2008)
and Elmore (2002) suggest that school leadership is strongly associated with student
achievement. Within each research question, there are three critical factors related to
positive student performance which emerged in this study: belief and collaboration
expressed as cultural norms; instruction and leadership expressed as practices; and
interventions and professional development expressed as programs.
Participants
The researcher conducted interviews and surveys at DMS from June 2009 to
the end of October 2009. The interview participants were 11 staff members,
comprised of 9 teachers, 1 administrator and 1 office staff member. The response
time for the interviews averaged around 45 minutes per each individual.
75
Additionally, out of 26 teachers, 15 teachers and 1 staff member responded to the
staff survey. The survey was available on line as well as in paper copies. The
researcher visited the school site, also starting from late June 2009 to the end of
October 2009 for the interviews, surveys and observations for a total of 60 hours.
Observations included 13 classroom visits and three and a half days of staff
development training which occurred at the school and the district level sites.
The information on the 11 interview participants is as follows:
Emily is a veteran teacher who teaches 8
th
grade language arts. She has over
18 years of experience in teaching. Nancy teaches 7
th
grade language arts as well as
an English Language Development course. She has four years of teaching
experience at DMS but previously taught at another school district. Liz is a math
teacher and has about 20 years of teaching experience. She has been at DMS for the
last 10 years and teaches algebra and geometry courses. Megan has been teaching
math for three years at DMS. She has energy and enthusiasm in her teaching and
enjoys participating in numerous workshops to develop her math teaching strategies.
Tom and Olina teach social studies and both enjoy working at the school and the
atmosphere that the school has. Tom is currently an AVID coordinator for the
school. Olina has been at the school for about 4 years. Before coming to the district
about 10 years ago, Olina taught for another school district for over 10 years. During
that time period, she was indecisive about remaining in the teaching profession due
to high stress mainly from a lack of school and administrative support for her
classroom teaching. After a year of teaching at DMS, she fell in love with the school
76
and decided to stay on as a teacher; feeling committed, once again, to the profession.
Jackie and Tracy teach science. Jackie has over 14 years of experience while Tracy
has been teaching for over 5 years. Tracy teaches 8
th
grade physical science and
Jackie teaches life science. Jackie is an early bird and likes to come to school around
7am to get ready and to help students. David works as a special education
coordinator and a teacher and has 10 years of teaching experience at DMS; he served
as an AVID coordinator the previous year. June is an office staff member and has
been at DMS for 10 years and has knowledge of the history at DMS; she has worked
under 3 principals over the last 10 years. Julie is an assistant principal who took a
position at DMS five years ago; she worked for another school district for over 15
years before coming to DMS.
Research Question One: Cultural Norms
There are two critical factors that emerged under cultural norms related to
student success at DMS: beliefs and collaboration. The data on beliefs at the school,
administrators, teachers, staff members and students were collected and reviewed
based on classroom observations, staff interviews, document reviews and surveys.
Bolman and Deal (2003) posit that an organization that is understood on a symbolic
level by the people who belong to it, will be more likely to have an unified sense of
direction, consequently leading to success within the organization. The thematic
dissertation group determined that the cultural norms which prevail at the school,
could be identified through data results from examining factors at the school such as:
collaboration, curriculum, behavioral expectations, leadership, and data driven
77
decision making at the school site. This inquiry sought to explore the perceived
cultural norms at an urban K-12 school which allowed the school to narrow the
achievement gap and sustain success for minority students. There were two
predominant themes which emerged from the data at DMS; beliefs of teachers,
parents and students, and collaboration among teachers.
Beliefs
One of the critical factors that emerged during the data collection process
included the beliefs of teachers, parents and students at DMS. The high expectations
and beliefs of people at DMS for their students and children were depicted through
teacher interviews, classroom and campus observations and document reviews.
According to Bolman and Deal (2003), the concept of beliefs is imparted and defined
through symbols, and how these symbols enable people to interpret things and
provide direction and structure within the daily life in an organization. The authors
assert that structural framework in an organization emphasizes logic, facts,
rationality and structures are designed to accomplish the job, while the symbolic
framework focuses on beliefs and faith in people through ceremonies, rituals and
team work to create a positive environment and consequently productivity in an
organization. The positivity in the work place then transforms into a belief that
people can accomplish their goals through the empowerment of employees
(Northouse, 2002). The sense of belief at DMS is based on the teachers at the
school whose motivation is derived from structural and symbolic frameworks as well
as the transformational leadership style at DMS. The beliefs of parents and students
78
about the importance of learning are also identified as emerging themes at DMS.
The focal points of beliefs at DMS are thus divided into three categories of analysis:
first, teachers’ high expectations for students; second, parents’ belief in education;
third, students’ beliefs in the importance of education.
The first factor related to belief at DMS is the teachers’ high expectations for
student performance; this is similar to Darling-Hammond’s contentions for student
success (1999). The author suggests that teachers’ beliefs in student performance
and high expectations are a key element that influences and enables student
achievement regardless of the individual backgrounds of students. At DMS, all
teachers from the survey (Table 3) indicated that teachers have high expectations for
their students regardless of their backgrounds and performance. This factor was also
corroborated by teachers who participated in the interviews. Here are some
excerpted interview comments from Olina and Liz:
We are in a Title I school. We have 64% of students who receive free and
reduced lunch here. Just because they are from low income families, it does
not mean that we have low expectations for them. We have high
expectations for all of them and we believe that they can do well.

We have expectations for all kids to do well. That’s the way it is supposed to
be at DMS. Even at district meetings that we go to, teachers from other
schools say that ‘oh, you are at DMS, your school is different.’ We know we
have high expectations for all students. We want our students to be fun
learners, be ready for the next step, have expectations of going to college.
We want all students to score at a proficient level at CSTs.

Due to the high expectations from teachers, Olina mentioned that some students who
were transferred in the middle of the school year often faced difficulty in the
79
beginning, adopting to the culture of high expectations and learning at DMS. Olina
said:
We don’t have a lot of behavior problems… kids from other schools who are
transferred know right away that the school has that high expectation. They
often say that ‘I feel so much pressure in this school because everybody
studies so hard.’ However, kids soon find that that’s the way it is supposed
to be at Dragon.

The high expectations of teachers towards student success were well displayed
through school artifacts as well. For example, the bulletin board in front of the AP’s
office displayed artifacts that can be easily seen by students such as high school
letters from DMS graduates, high school schedules and A through G requirements
poster. A letter from DMS graduates, for example, talked about the rigor in high
school and how important it is to be organized and to be focused to maintain a heavy
load of classes and studies at the high school level. One particular student mentioned
in their letter that studies at the high school level required a seriousness of purpose
and dedication. Students who come to the office, for various reasons, face the
bulletin board as they enter. Students who are waiting for the AP for discipline
reasons, automatically face the bulletin board, which reminds them of the importance
of high expectations for learning and achievement every day. The results of this high
expectation which is prevalent at the school, were indicated through banners and
posters in the office, which were on prominent display. The researcher noticed on her
first day at DMS, that the “Distinguished Blue Ribbon School for 2009” banner was
displayed in front of the school for anyone who either steps into or drives by the
80
school to see. The Blue Ribbon award indicates that DMS staff is continuously
striving for student success with high expectations.
The second factor regarding a culture of belief at the school, is the high
expectation of parents and their working relationship with the school. The literature
review on parent expectations and belief in terms of student performance at the
school is supported by the scholarly work of Goldenberg, Gallimore, Reese and
Garnier (2001) and Okagaki (2001). The authors assert that the high expectation of
parents in education for their child is strongly connected to the performance of
students at school, especially for students from Asian backgrounds, where the child’s
success is viewed as a matter of honor for the family. The significance of the
findings related to school culture at DMS is that the parents, who are over 70%
Vietnamese, believe that education is the number one goal for their children.
Students are strongly reinforced at home for their academic success and positive
behavior from their parents. Over 85% of survey respondents mentioned the high
expectation of parents as one of the factors for the success of their children at school.
Interview respondents also corroborated that parents at DMS have high expectations
of their child to perform well at school and that makes a difference in student
performance. Interview participants Emily and Olina supported the high expectation
of the parents at DMS and commented as follows:
Students are telling me that their parents work so hard for their education and
I believe that it is a huge driving force for the Vietnamese kids to do well
here. They want to do well because they are constantly reminded from their
parents that being successful at school means being successful in life. 25 out
81
of 30 students in my class said that ‘I want to be smart because smart people
make money.’

We have about 70% Vietnamese students here. Students here work hard
because their parents want them to be successful at school. Students want to
get all A’s in their grades. Parents will talk to teachers about when their child
receives a B. I believe it is from Confucianism for some of that belief that
education is the most important matter for parents here. I wonder why
parents are pushing them so hard… very cultural of working hard
academically.

The belief in student success from parents was also extended to their working
relationship with the school. The cooperation between the school and parents was
again evident at DMS through the artifacts that can be found at the school. In front
of the school, an electronic bulletin board indicated that the school had an upcoming
parent information night. The school and the district also work closely to promote
parent involvement in their child’s learning. For example, the school in conjunction
with the district’s help, provides a ten commandment workshop for parents so that
they can obtain information regarding high school and college as well as tips to help
their children at home. The willingness of parents who want to participate was
supported by the school providing interpretation services in Spanish and Vietnamese
as well.
The third factor affecting positive students outcomes, is belief in students by
the students themselves. Not only teachers and parents, but the students themselves
think that they need to work hard to be successful academically and socially. Over
95% of the interview participants indicated that students at DMS demonstrate their
academic and social behavior positively. Among interview participants, Jackie and
82
David commented that students’ behavior problems are very minimal at DMS by
noting the following:
Students turn in their homework and assignments on time. I had all students
turn in their homework in the beginning of the semester except for 5 students
out of 6 classes that I teach. That tells a lot how hard students are working at
DMS. Failure is not accepted here and students know that.

Special education students also follow the same routine as general education
students do in terms of learning and success. Students know what they need
to do once they are in class and they follow the strategies we teach them.
They know that they may be different than others in terms of learning but
they do their best to complete their assignments.

The high expectation for appropriate student behavior was also observed by the
researcher as well. On one particular day, the researcher walked around the campus
looking for a specific room number and was able to ask students for help, who
readily complied. At the parking lot, while the researcher was carrying a box, a
student came over to help the researcher. On another day, after school visitation, a
boy offered assistance in moving a traffic cone which was blocking the entrance to
the teacher parking lot. Though commonplace, all of these are examples of the
civility and courtesy that prevails at the school.
The evidence from the research supports the contention that the beliefs of
teachers, parents and students serve as school norms at DMS. The most significant
finding in terms of beliefs at DMS is that of the high expectations that parents have
for the success of students. High expectations of parents and their strong belief in
education serve as important indicators for the culture of the school that drive student
success and sustainability as well as positive behavior for students at school. The
83
culture of the school depicts that students and teachers believe that they work for the
goal of student success academically and socially. The respect from students toward
school personnel was evident and students were willing to help others at DMS.
Beginning with the high expectations of parents, the driving force of daily learning
and teaching is rooted in the corresponding high expectation of teachers.
Collaboration
Staff collaboration was also identified as one of the school norms at DMS.
The field literature continues to indicate that teacher collaboration may influence
student learning positively (Seashore & Marks, 1998; Fullan,1996; Dufour, 2002;
Weglinsky, 2000). Fullan (1996) also posits that the professional collegiality among
staff can help increase student learning. The critical factors emerging from this
study also identified the importance of collaboration with teachers within their
respective departments, as well as across the curriculum and with district staff
members.
The first critical factor in regards to collaboration, of course includes
collaboration within one’s own department. Over 90% of participants from the
survey and interviews responded that teachers collaborate formally and informally to
guide positive student performance (Table 4 & Appendix G).
84
Table 4: Survey Results with Multiple Answers 1

Survey Questions
Strongly
Agree
Agree
1. The school supports collaboration among teachers. 69% 31%
2. The teachers at this school believe that students can
achieve at high levels.
88% 13%
7. School administration conducts classroom
observations frequently.
38% 44%
8. The school has a systematic process for identifying
and assisting struggling students.
50% 31%
17. School administration initiates programs that promote
student achievement.
38% 56%

Regarding the survey on the support of teacher collaboration, all teachers said
that they agree with the collaborative efforts at school. The objectives of the
collaboration are clear for teachers. The teacher leaders and administrative team
constantly remind teachers of the goals to be accomplished during collaboration
time. The respect and high expectation among teachers during collaboration time
were repeatedly reiterated by the interviews and the researcher observations at the
school site. About 82% of interview respondents stated that a positive working
relationship and collaboration with their colleagues is important. Here’s what
Megan stated regarding staff collaboration:
We all get along, we respect each other here. Maintain discipline, try to be
consistent in student behavior and consequences as well as high expectations
of students are things that we talk a lot about during collaboration.
Especially, high expectation is what we always talk about with teachers…we
want students to achieve, and we convey that to the students.

85
Liz also commented on the collaboration process at DMS:
I love it here because teachers work well with others. I respect the teachers
that I work with and everybody is very professional. We have a good
learning environment and students like school because we collaborate all the
time informally and formally. We have collaboration time before school and
after school. We meet more often informally than formally. I think teacher
collaboration is very helpful here.

Olina also said that the result of high respect and positive collaboration at DMS leads
to staff longevity. She said, “most teachers want to stay once they are here, so we
have a very low teacher turnover rate because we work well here.” The document
review data findings support that the average teacher longevity of the teaching staff
at Dragon is 14 years with the most senior teacher having 30 years of service.
Collaboration among teachers was also supported through dialogue between
teachers. From the interviews, 9 out of 11 staff members indicated that collaboration
among teachers is one of the strengths at DMS. For example, 100% of the survey
respondents replied that collaboration is led by teachers at DMS. Once a month,
teachers meet formally with their department chairs, but department teachers often
meet informally to discuss teaching strategies and student issues. Seven out of 9
teachers from the interviews commented that collaboration is a positive tool for
student performance.
Megan said:
We know the kids because teachers talk to other content teachers sharing
student information. We share student information with companion classes
that we have which uses an extra period of writing for struggling students. ..
We share ideas with other department teachers and across curricular areas to
talk about student performance and student behavior. We have a lot of
86
discussions with department teachers on particular strategies that may
enhance student learning.

The importance of the positive collaboration among DMS staff is well illustrated
from the interview results regarding student support. About 90% of respondents
depicted teacher collaboration as “this is the way we work here to increase student
performance” at DMS.
The second significant factor in terms of the collaborative structure at the
school, was perceived through cross grade level meetings and district support
personnel. Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID) and district Teacher
On Special Assignment (TOSA) are the examples of such support. For example,
AVID program teachers from DMS and a feeder high school meet regularly to
discuss the curriculum and student performance of the AVID program. On one of
the observation days, the two AVID coordinators from DMS and a high school
coordinator were discussing the curriculum plan and the goals to be accomplished
for the school year. Not only do the AVID teachers collaborate on student
performance for students who are in the program but classroom teachers indicated
that they also collaborate with AVID teachers as well. For example, over 80% of
interview respondents revealed that teachers collaborate with teachers on special
programs such as AVID and with the district to support student performance. The
interview comments indicate that 80% of the respondents agreed with the cultural
norm of collaboration between grade levels and special programs at DMS and with a
feeder high school.
87
Tom said:
I think collaboration with the high school is very critical for students’
learning. If we know what is missing in high school for DMS graduates then
we know what to focus students’ learning [on] for the next school year.
Without collaboration with the high school, we would not know if our
students mastered what they are supposed to master during middle school
years although we teach by standards. We want our students to be ready for
their high school learning. That’s why cross grade level collaboration is so
important and we focus on that.

The importance of collaboration among teachers at various departments at DMS was
triangulated through the staff survey as well. About 90% of teachers answered that
collaboration is one of the key factors helping student performance.
David said:
We share expertise within departments and across departments and vertical
with the high school. Collaboration allows the teachers here to spend some
time analyzing data to determine which standards students are meeting or
falling short of. Teachers collaborate to try to improve instructional
strategies/techniques to improve those standard scores that fall short.

Teachers also work closely with the district TOSAs in specific content areas
to support classroom instructional strategies to enhance student learning. Each
content area teacher is aligned with a TOSA specifically assigned to DMS. Tracy
commented on the working relationship with TOSAs as follows:
District TOSAs come out in the beginning of the school year to work with
me. The TOSA plays like a buddy teacher who can help me to enhance my
lessons and teaching strategies. I benefit a lot from TOSAs by asking
questions and receiving feedback from them. I collaborate with them a lot
and I work with them throughout the school year.

88
Nancy also commented on the benefits she receives from the TOSAs. They came to
her class in the beginning of the school year to inquire about her lessons and teaching
strategies. Nancy stated:
I feel comfortable working with TOSAs. They are the teachers who have
knowledge in the content area. They provide me with skills and strategies
that I need to use in my class. Not necessarily skills but also strategies that I
may have but apply them in different ways to my students. They don’t judge
my ability as a teacher but guide me to become a better teacher. Also
beneficial is that they come out early in the school semester so that I can
target my problem kids in their learning.

In summary, the teacher collaboration at DMS occurs through three different
stages: within the department, across departments and with the district. Not only do
teachers discuss the contents and instructional strategies within departments but also
the collaboration was extended to the discussion across departments including
AVID, special education and with coaches and support providers at DMS. Such a
level of collaboration at the school is made possible through the extra collaboration
time provided by the school administrative team. Moreover, the district support and
working relationship with teachers at DMS and district TOSAs was identified as one
of the factors affecting student performance. The comments from both surveys and
interviews triangulated that teachers at DMS feel comfortable collaborating with
teachers at the school and district levels to enhance the learning of the students. The
significance of the collaboration was that teachers at DMS collaborate with high
school teachers regularly for yearly planning as well as to meet objectives for the
year. The collaboration with high school teachers further indicated that the success
89
of student performance and learning at DMS is not limited to middle school only but
also enables continuing success in high school and college later on.
Findings Related to School Culture
The study findings on school culture at DMS suggest that beliefs and
collaboration are essential factors related to student achievement. The high
expectation of teachers, parents’ and students’ awareness of the importance of
learning played key roles in terms of commonly held beliefs at DMS.
The support of parents was once again evident through a near100%
attendance rate at DMS. Survey and interview results suggest that the strong belief
in education in parents, with over 70% of students with a Vietnamese background,
drives students to do well academically and socially at DMS. Also noticeable was
the parents’ belief that the academic success of students is expected and is a matter
of family honor. Along with parental belief in education, teachers at DMS also
believed that they are different from other schools and they do things differently to
enhance student performance. Staff members’ beliefs in terms of expectations for
their students, and supporting them to do better was also one of the significant
factors inducing collaboration among teachers. Once teachers have a clear mission
and belief and know what to do, the collaboration came easier for teachers at DMS.
Another significant aspect of the school culture identified through the study
findings, is the collaboration of teachers with staff and with the district TOSAs. The
findings suggest that collaboration of school staff within and across the department is
important, as well as with district TOSAs for classroom instructions. Another
90
important aspect of collaboration was revealed through the close working
relationship with high school teachers. While both are essential for achievement of
students, a clear vision and clear goals at DMS helped focus such collaboration. All
collaborative efforts were focused on the learning of all students and developing
instructional strategies in the classroom. Thus, the study findings related to school
culture identified beliefs of teachers, students and parents and staff collaboration as
critical to the success at DMS.
Research Question Two: Practice
Research question two sought to examine how practices of teachers and
administrators support student achievement and sustain student success at DMS.
The findings are organized using Bolman and Deal’s (2003) four frames as a lens to
depict organizational construct which includes the structural, human resource,
political and symbolic. The two predominate frames which emerged in this study are
the structural and human resource frames. The structural framework focuses on
procedures while the human resource frame focuses on people in an organization. At
DMS, there are two critical factors related to positive student performance which
emerged from this study: the structure of knowledge and skills in classroom
instruction and school leadership which focuses on providing necessary information
and nurturing with support, and feedback to teachers.
The Structure of Knowledge and Skills in Classroom Instruction
At DMS, the structure of knowledge and skills in teacher instructional
practices were identified as one of the critical factors affecting student performance.
91
Lee, Bryk and Smith (1993) and Darling-Hammond (1999) postulate that
instructional practices that focus on rigorous standards, high expectations and
meaningful assessment may yield success in student performance, especially in
reducing the gap among minority students. Marzano (2003), Johnson (2002) and
Elmore (2002) support the notion of rigor and high expectations in classroom
instruction as one of the successful tools to enhance student learning. In order to
guide instruction, Johnson (2002) asserts that data driven assessment results are
essential components of lesson planning. The thematic dissertation group members
looked into the areas of instruction, rigor and relevance, high expectations, data
driven assessments, standards and classroom management as a guideline for the field
research as a part of effective classroom instruction. The researcher sought to
observe the above components during research, and the four best strategies
supporting classroom instructions enhancing student learning at DMS were identified
as follows: utilization of rigor and direct instruction, pacing guide, analysis of
student assessment results and classroom management.
The first factor is identified as rigor and the standard assessment driven direct
instructional strategies. Over 90% of all interview respondents, including an
administrator, office staff and teachers commented that staff at DMS use high rigor
and standards for all students. Here are two examples of what teachers had to say:
Olina said,
We teach bell to bell. We have no silent reading time. Instead, we have an
extra 4 minutes added to each period which we can use as instructional time.
Students are not used to this kind of rigor at first. The culture here is that we
92
have high expectations. When we were doing our accreditation, a student
said to the visiting member, ‘teachers here won’t let us fail’.

Tom said,
To plan our lessons based on students’ needs, we as department teachers try
to discuss weaknesses of students. What are they not achieving and what are
the student outcomes that need to be addressed for improvement? These are
the kind[s] of questions we ask ourselves all the time to help our students and
to reflect in our lessons every day.

Another important feature of direct classroom instruction included the thinking map
and Cornell note-taking strategies which teach students how to organize their class
notes for better learning. A thinking map which resembles a graphic organizer to
depict different ways of organizing themes was utilized to build higher order
thinking skills in students. The researcher noticed that all the classrooms observed
displayed the thinking map graphic organizer for students to view. Out of 13
classroom visits, 9 teachers were either using the strategies or mentioning the
learning strategies in class. Here’s what Tom and Nancy stated:
We use the thinking map in almost all subject areas. By doing so, students
know automatically that they can use something that they are familiar with to
guide their learning. I can tell which student is struggling or not by looking
at their thinking maps or by looking at their notebooks.

Students ask questions any time in class. They don’t forget their questions
because they write the questions on the left side of the notebook and know
where to find them during class. This is helpful also when they are doing
their homework at home and have some questions. They know exactly where
to write their questions.

Cornell note-taking strategies were mentioned by 7 teachers, and students were
observed actually using it during class visits. For example, students used the right
side of the notebook to write down class lecture contents leaving the left side of the
93
notebook open to write down any questions or clarifications for later. These
strategies were used not only in regular classrooms but also used in special education
classrooms confirming that this is a school wide practice. A special education
teacher, David, commented on the importance of the practice common at DMS.
High success comes from students’ self efficacy. It is very big here. We give
students lots of responsibility. Using the Cornell notebook is an example.
The outcomes for positive student learning are to teach them how to take
notes and how to analyze their reading properly. We teach them how to take
notes and utilize the Cornell notebook [note] taking strategy for all students.
Formative assessments can be done based on what students wrote in their
notebooks. I re-teach when they don’t get the concept.

Megan also commented regarding classroom practice on learning strategies:
We teach students learning strategies. For example, the Cornell notebook
strategy is one. We get the district training on this strategy. Students use the
left side for their output while using the right side of their notebook for
teacher comments. Students organize their own learning by doing that. It is
important for students to know how to take important notes during class and
how to form questions properly.

The second important factor within the realm of teaching practice was the
department pacing guide. The classroom instruction and content learning was
stressed by teachers by following the pacing guide. For example, 100% of teachers
who were surveyed commented that they were using a pacing guide for classroom
instruction. The findings were corroborated by interview results as well. All
commented that the school uses a pacing guide to instruct students and that they
utilize assessment strategies based upon the pacing guide. Some examples of the
teacher comments depicting the practice of using a pacing guide, included Megan,
who said:
94
We use a pacing guide within each department. Most likely each teacher is a
day or two apart in terms of their pacing within the department. We also
share a syllabus in the same subject areas so that we know that we are at most
a couple days apart if it’s that much. The pacing is the same most of the
times regardless if a student moves to different classes in the middle of the
school year for any reason.

A pacing guide within each subject area is also provided by the district each year.
Speaking of this, Nancy said:
We assess our students using common assessments based on the instruction
followed by a pacing guide. The district provides quarterly tests to
benchmark all students. Other than that, teachers can work with common
assessments within subject areas to guide student learning.

Based on the pacing guide, teachers also receive quarterly assessments from the
district which can be used to benchmark what students are learning in classrooms.
Teachers collaborate to discuss the pacing and content activities so that assessments
can be administrated on time where students have met the learning in a timely
manner. The importance of using a pacing guide was strongly connected to the
assessment of student learning and to guide classroom instructions as stressed by the
interview participants.
The third important factor for student achievement was identified as the
analysis of student assessments. To guide instruction in classrooms, teachers share
data analysis results school wide. The school uses a Data Director program for
analysis of student test results. Survey results reveal that 94% of teachers who
participated in the survey responded that they use student data to identify the
instructional needs of their students (Table 5).
95
Table 5: Survey Results with Comments

Survey Questions Comments
19. Who leads the collaboration sessions? Teachers: 100%
20. What topics are discussed in the collaboration
sessions?
Intervention, instruction, data analysis:
95%
21. How does the school make collaboration
possible?
Minimum days: 63%
Staff meetings: 44%
22. What type of intervention practices are used for
struggling students?
After school tutoring: 88%
Homework assistance: 75%
Peer tutoring: 63%
23. Who organizes professional development
sessions related to intervention programs?
Administrators: 63%
Teachers: 44%
24. Rate instructional strategies you used to
enhance student learning.
1.Direct instruction: 73%
2.Guided practice: 57%
3.Scaffolding: 67%
25. What specific program does the school use to
promote collaboration?
Collaboration days
26. What intervention program(s) at your school
have contributed to closing the achievement
gap?
After school tutoring: 73%
(Academy, HSHH, Friday catch-up)
27. What instructional programs do you use in your
classroom that has helped close the achievement
gap?
Thinking Maps
28. Comments about the role of intervention in
closing the achievement gap at your school:
Improvement in class, CST scores & the
district benchmarks
29. Comments about the role of data analysis
which helped close achievement gap at your
school:
Use of data director to guide instruction &
intervention
30. Comments about the role of school leadership
which helped close the achievement gap at your
school:
Clear direction with instructional support
& training
31. Comments about the role of collaboration which
helped close the achievement gap at your
school:
Data analysis within and across
departments sharing expertise &
instructional support
32. Comments about the role of your classroom
instruction which helped close the achievement
gap at your school:
Guided by data & standards based
instruction with research based
instructional strategies
33. Your position at the school and the years of
service
Teachers: 81%
Other: 19%
Average years of service: 11
96
The comments from the surveys and interviews revealed the importance of data
analysis as a means to guide classroom instructions school-wide. Here are comments
from David and Tracy, regarding data analysis:
Data analysis is an important tool to guide instruction. We use data director
for analysis of student performance and it is used to help find the strengths
and weaknesses of the students and how to improve in classroom learning.
The Data Director allows us to retrieve ELL levels, CST scores, home
language, ethnic background, etc. to see which students may need more
support in certain areas for lessons.

Using student results through data analysis has helped us identify which
subgroups to focus on, whose achievement gap needs to be closed. Data
analysis allows us to target specific students for intervention during the day
and after school. We re-teach based on students’ lack of content learning
area based on the assessment results.

Data analysis results were also shared with students as often as possible. About 70%
of teacher participants in the interviews said that they use the assessment data most
of the time, meaning more often than quarterly, to guide student learning in class.
The transparency rule at school regarding data analysis on student assessment and
what the interpretation of data means was well discussed with the students. Students
know how to interpret their assessment results when the results are handed over to
them, thus taking responsibility for their learning.
The fourth factor affecting student learning was identified as classroom
management skills by teachers. Among classroom management skills, providing a
safe learning environment was a critical factor affecting student learning and
classroom lessons. For example, 8 out of 11 interview participants commented that
97
providing a safe learning environment was a critical learning enhancer for students
during classroom instruction. Megan and Tracy stated the following:
There are lots of students who can cause trouble during class. Maybe some
students do not understand and cause trouble or maybe the content is too
difficult for them. I need to know why some kids are not focused during
class. For that matter, I try to create a safe environment in class for all
students. That means mistakes are ok. Throughout the year, I train students.
That is something that I need to pay attention to as a teacher. I want them to
fix their mistakes and be able to share their ideas in class without fear of
making mistakes of their points. The environment enables students to be
involved more in the learning process by asking questions freely without
worrying about asking right or wrong questions. That means making sure
that the classroom is organized with a safe environment and routines are
down.

Providing a safe learning environment in class is really important. I
encourage students to ask questions. I try to provide environments for kids to
feel safe mentally and physically. I try to build their decision making
strategies in positive choices. Providing a safe environment means teaching
them how to interact with their peers. So, students are not afraid to ask
questions. They respect each other and everyone feels safe in the classroom.
It’s more important than forgetting to bring pencils to class. I can give those
to them.

The teacher comments depict the importance of a safe learning environment, while
students also feel comfortable to ask questions without being embarrassed. This
would suggest that teachers create a positive learning environment based on the
background of the students and their skills, to set the tone in terms of learning for all
students. The practice of classroom management which is consistent in classrooms
at DMS suggests that the school promotes student learning as well as the conduct of
behavior which are critical factors in student learning in each class. Students know
how to act in class and understand the consequences, and this level of understanding
is consistent school wide.
98
In conclusion, the structure of instruction at DMS was framed with rigor and
through the use of direct instruction, a pacing guide, rigorous analysis of student
assessment results and classroom management. While these are all important factors
which contribute to enhanced student performance, the study findings suggest that
the analysis of student assessment results is one of the most significant factors for
student learning at DMS which supersedes the use of the pacing guide, as well as
instructional strategies and classroom management (Table 5). The focus on student
assessment results leads to designing lessons that support student learning in
classrooms which include direct instruction and learning strategies such as Cornell
note-taking and thinking maps. Based on the assessments made, the pacing guide is
discussed between and across curricular areas. Classroom management skills follow
after the analysis of the student assessment results to provide a positive learning
environment for all students.
School Leadership
The practice of leadership at DMS was depicted as one of the key factors
affecting student success. Bolman and Deal (2003) posit that structured and people
focused leadership can guide the organization to positive growth. Leadership
responsibilities are shared at DMS, and a form of institutionalized structure exists
between the teachers and the administrative team. The practice of administrative and
teacher leadership at DMS is viewed as being accountable for positive student
performance, based on the interviews and survey results. Leadership is divided into
99
two factors at DMS: the instructional leadership by the principal and teacher
leadership from the staff members.
The first leadership factor at DMS was identified as instructional leadership
from the principal. The staff survey results further confirmed the evidence and
utility of instructional leadership at DMS. About 94% of the survey respondents
agreed that DMS has positive leadership. Respondents also said that it filters down
to the teachers and from the teachers on down to the students to create a positive
learning environment for all. The interview results also buttress the evidence of
positive instructional leadership at DMS. One hundred percent of the interview
participants commented that the instructional leadership of the principal at the school
affects how teachers perform. Here are two examples of commentary on leadership
at the school, from Olina and Nancy:
Administrators walk around the campus and classrooms often. They know
what teachers are doing in classrooms. Prior to this school in another school
district, I once had my principal observe me for 20 minutes for the entire year
for my evaluation. If I am a parent, I would want to know what’s going on in
my child’s class. Observation is a key to teachers to receive feedback and
support from the principal even for the experienced teachers. I think the
administration can support well when they understand what’s going on in
class. That’s the kind of support teachers can get from administrators.

I know I get support and feedback on my teaching from my principal. The
principal stops by my class any time and I know she will provide constructive
criticism which will help me grow as a better teacher. Any instructional
strategies that we use district wide, I can get guidance from the principal.

The school administrative support for teachers was demonstrated through the
principal’s knowledge of the instructional strategies. The principal attends the
professional development courses that are offered by the district to teachers. For
100
example, the researcher observed the district provided staff development workshops
on three different occasions. Each day of the observation, the principal attended
teacher workshops with her school teachers and completed a full day session. The
principal was aware of the instructional programs and new strategies provided by the
district thus acting as an instructional coach for the staff at DMS. These findings are
significant as a leader can contribute to the enhancement of the core culture of
learning at school (Elmore, 2002). The comments made by interviewees reiterate the
notion that instructional leadership at DMS is a significant phenomenon which
affects student learning. The survey results revealed that about 82% of respondents
commented that the school administration provides support for implementation of
new instructional practices most of the time. The interview results also bolster
instructional leadership as an important factor in positive student learning. The
interview respondents again affirmed that the DMS administrative team provides
positive instructional leadership. Here is a comment on leadership aspects from
Jackie:
I have been in this school many years and the administrators come by often to
see what is going on in the classroom and provide us feedback.
Administrators actually know what is going on in the classrooms and can
answer questions when we ask and be able to provide strategies that we need.
That is the kind of support we can get here.

Leadership and teacher productivity as critical aspects of the school culture, also
came up during the interviews and in the researcher’s own observations. The
relationship between leadership and teacher morale is identified as a result of
instructional leadership. About 70% of the interview respondents said that if
101
teachers are motivated by their administrators, they are motivated for students as
well. Reciprocally, teachers said that they are going to fulfill the motivational
challenges for their students because they themselves are motivated to do their best
for their leader and for the school. Commenting on this, Tracy said:
There is a strong relationship with leaders and student achievement. If the
administrator is hard working and provides feedback on my role in the
classroom, I know that the administrator will support me. Something tells me
that if I am not good at teaching strategies, I will get feedback from the
administrator so that I can work on it. I know my administrator will provide
strategies for quality lessons for the teachers allowing us to grow
professionally.

Instructional leadership at DMS was identified as a motivating factor for teachers
who commented that they can receive feedback and support on their instructional
strategies in the classrooms. By getting this feedback, teachers felt that they serve
the needs of their students more efficiently. Reciprocally, the support received by
the principal was reflected through student performance at DMS.
The second significant factor related to aspects of leadership at the school
was identified as teacher leadership which was shared among teachers at DMS.
Teachers at DMS take leadership roles in various forms. Teacher leadership includes
department chairs, Academy coaches, Strategy coaches and AVID coordinators.
Academy coaches focus on students who are at basic and below basic levels while
strategy coaches work with their department teachers to guide teaching strategies and
content standards. All teacher leaders work closely with their administrators by
participating in the decision making process. From the survey, 81% of respondents
said that leadership is shared among school personnel. Among respondents, a
102
teacher commented on leadership as, “we have a voice in decision making which
means that everyone is important at DMS…we feel that we have a say for decision
making.” Interview results also revealed that decision making and teacher
leadership are clearly evident to all at DMS. About 90% of interview respondents
revealed that teachers at DMS are in charge of making decisions together and play a
role as teacher leaders in many different ways.
Nancy said:
We make scheduling decisions. For example, all English teachers met,
sharing the best ways to change the program which was initiated by the
district this year. .. Strategy teams meet to plan together and to provide
meaningful ways to help teachers in their departments. We are all in charge
of something. For example, the media person is providing support for the
Aeries program today for teachers. The program is new for grading and
attendance.

Tracy also commented on the shared leadership at DMS. She said:
Leadership among teachers, department chairs and coaches all disseminate
information to other teachers. We all know what’s going on at school as fast
as the administrative team does. The decision making process is clear unless
the decision is made at the district level. We reflect our ideas and thoughts on
our school decision making process.

In summary, the important factors in practice affecting student performance
at DMS were identified as instructional leadership from the principal and shared
leadership of the teachers. Among these two, the instructional leadership of the
principal was identified as one of the critically important factors affecting positive
performance of the students. Teacher leaders, with the guidance of the principal,
plan and set the objectives for the school year together; discussions follow with
teachers afterwards to make any needed adjustments to those plans. The principal
103
has the core knowledge and skills which can be applied to teachers at DMS and
serves as a motivating factor for teachers to do well in classrooms. By providing
prompt feedback and support with regard to classroom instructional strategies, for
both experienced and new teachers, the principal’s role as an instructional leader
further enhances the learning of all students at DMS.
Findings of School Practices
There are two significant factors which emerged when the researcher
examined school practices in view of student success at DMS: the structure of the
instructional practice in classrooms and school leadership. The structure of the
instructional practice was identified as rigorous and with a clear focus on direct
instruction, which includes learning strategies for students. Appropriate pacing
within department by teachers, data analysis of student assessment results and
classroom management are also a part of the instructional practices at DMS.
Instructional leadership of the principal and shared leadership among teachers were
also identified as important factors. Among school practices, analysis of the student
assessment data and instructional leadership of the principal were also identified as
significant factors affecting student performance at DMS.
As a part of the direct instruction practices, a thinking map graphic organizer
was used in all content areas for students to organize their learning in a meaningful
way and to better understand the concept in each subject area enabling them to
master those skills. Direct instruction to students was prevalent during class visits
while students utilized their Cornell note-taking strategies during class. Pacing
104
within department by teachers provided additional guidance for teachers in making
their formative and summative assessments. The assessment results were analyzed
routinely through the Data Director program to guide classroom instructional
practices. Furthermore, teachers provided safe learning environments in classrooms
to induce student learning. Among these, analysis of the student assessment data
was identified as one of the significant factors affecting the design of the classroom
instructions, pacing guide and classroom management strategies to enhance student
learning.
From the findings related to instructional leadership and teacher leadership,
instructional leadership emerged as a significant factor, enabling student learning at
DMS. The principal is an instructional leader who has knowledge of teaching
strategies. Given the adaptation process for teaching strategies, the teachers at DMS
constantly receive support and prompt feedback from the principal in the process of
implementation of the new instructional strategies. The principal plays a key role in
supporting teachers who take leadership roles such as Academy Coach, AVID
coordinator, department chair and Strategy coach. The information is disseminated
through the administrative team and teacher leaders to all school staff for the
decision making process. Teachers have a clear voice on school issues such as
scheduling of classes and student assignments, and their opinions are well reflected
at DMS. Hence, the instructional leadership and the analysis of student assessments
were identified as two significant, emerging themes in terms of practice at DMS;
105
while classroom instruction, pacing, classroom management and shared leadership
play important roles as well in attempting to lead student performance at DMS.
Research Question Three: Program
Research question three sought to investigate how programs at DMS support
student learning especially for students who are in need of extra guidance for their
performance. There were two emergent themes under school programs for
enhancement of student learning: intervention programs for students and
intervention programs for teachers, such as professional development for them.
Bolman and Deal (2003) explain that the symbolic framework focuses on cultural
norms and beliefs while the structural framework focuses on goals and procedures in
an organization. Furthermore, within Bolman and Deal’s configuration, the political
framework focuses on obtaining and securing resources while the human resources
framework focuses on people and their skills in the work place to increase
productivity. The following four frameworks from Bolman and Deal (2003) depict
how the themes identified through the study findings, are aligned with the
frameworks and the three research questions.
106
Table 6: Grid on Framework and Research Questions

Framework/Research
Questions
Research Question 1:
Culture
Research Question
2: Practice
Research Question
3: Program
Symbolic:
culture (beliefs),
rituals, ceremonies,
stories, heroes
Teacher, parent &
students’ belief in
education
High expectation
driven to
classroom
instruction
School wide practice
Structural:
goals, specialized
roles, procedures
Teacher collaboration
Through department
meetings, cross
curricular, high
school teachers &
district TOSAs
Instructional
strategies, pacing
guide, analysis of
student assessment
results, classroom
management
Interventions:
Friday Catch-up,
Special Education,
Hispanic Students
Helping Hispanic
Student (HSHH),
Special Education,
AVID and Academy
Political:
negotiation,
compromise,
interests, resources
Parent workshops
(ten education
commandments)
Instructional
leadership, shared
leadership
Interventions,
Professional
development
Human Resource:
feelings, skills,
people oriented
Family like
atmosphere, people
focused – skills &
knowledge provided
Instructional
leadership, shared
leadership
Interventions,
Professional
development

Research question three focuses on programs which are relevant to
enhancement of student learning at DMS. The study findings suggest that the
structural framework (Bolman & Deal, 2003) provides the procedures for the
intervention programs, while the political framework secures the resources needed
for the programs at DMS. While the human resource framework is focused on
people and the development of skills needed for student learning. At DMS, the
intervention programs were structured based on the needs of the students which
107
included Friday Catch-up, Hispanic Students Helping Hispanic Student (HSHH),
Special Education, AVID and Academy. The professional development programs
for enhancement of knowledge of skills for teachers included “Super Week” which
was offered a week before school started and “Strategy Coaches” training which was
offered to the strategy coaches from each school; both programs were offered by the
district. The above mentioned intervention and professional development programs
were identified as factors supporting enhancement of student achievement, especially
for students below proficient levels at DMS.
Intervention Programs
Successful intervention programs which were identified from the study
findings included Friday Catch-up, Hispanic Students Helping Hispanic Student
(HSHH), Special Education, AVID and Academy. The structures of the intervention
programs were based on the needs of students and for students who are below
proficient levels in their performance. Each program plays a unique role and has a
specific purpose in providing support for students. In terms of student learning,
research revealed that relevant assignments and rigor in programs can enhance
students’ performance, especially in low-income and historically underserved
students (Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, 2005). At DMS, the intervention
programs were focused on students with below proficient level achievement in
school performance and standardized tests. The following section provides the
information on the various intervention programs and the feedback of the staff
members at DMS in relation to student learning.
108
Friday catch-up club.
The Friday Catch-up program was identified as one of the important
intervention programs for student support which affects the learning of students at
DMS. The Friday Catch-up program started out with at-risk students who had a
grade point average below 2.0. DMS added students to the program, who needed
the extra help, especially for their weekly homework assignments. The program
provides help for students who do not complete their homework assignments during
the week or fall behind learning the needed concepts in classes. The importance of
the program is that the collaboration of staff members and parents make the program
unique and particularly beneficial for the students.
The counselor, administrator and the student who is referred to the program,
work together and discuss the lack of progress in the student. Students then have to
sign a contract to participate in the program. Students with missing homework
assignments or low performance are referred to Friday Catch-up Club on Fridays
after school. Volunteer teachers, the assistant principal and teacher tutors spend
about an hour and a half helping students to complete their homework on Fridays.
The importance of the program was stressed by the interview participants. About
70% of the interview participants commented that the program is committed to
having students achieve. Speaking of the program, Julie commented as follows:
If students are invited to after school intervention, they are strongly
encouraged to attend. The office staff will call the parents to ensure that they
are aware of the benefits of the intervention. Friday Catch-Up started to help
students who are in need of extra help of content knowledge. However, we
109
added students who are falling behind with their homework assignments as
well.

Comments like Julie’s indicate the seriousness of the program and the involvement
of all stake holders in student achievement. By calling parents and keeping them
informed of a student’s present situation and the importance of the program,
everyone was aware of the benefits of the program. Hence, the Friday Catch up Club
at DMS serves two purposes: helping students who are behind with their
assignments, as well as encouraging them to catch up, receive support promptly, and
also learn to reflect on their own learning.
Hispanic students helping Hispanic student program (HSHH).
HSHP is a direct result of CST data analysis to address the needs of
struggling Hispanic students in Math and Language Arts Programs. In the program,
high achieving Hispanic students volunteer to serve as peer tutors. Based on the
document review of the 2009 Distinguished Middle School Application report, DMS
developed HSHP to focus on the learning deficit of Hispanic students. The HSHP
program was identified as one of the critical factors at DMS with two purposes in
mind: the program helps students who are falling behind and provides an
opportunity for volunteer students to reinforce their knowledge and skills into a
mastery level by teaching their colleagues.
The HSHP program’s success is well represented in the document reviews,
especially for those students who perform below proficient levels. For example,
based on the 2008-2009 report on the distinguished school application, last year’s
110
CST results were indicating that the Hispanic subgroup Math proficient level
exceeded the target percent of 37% with 39.8% while ELA passed the target of
35.2% with a 52.3% proficient level. This year, the school targets 47.5% in math
and 46% in ELA as the targeted proficient level for these students in the CSTs. The
strength of the HSHP program was also identified by interview respondents as one of
the most effective programs helping underachieving Hispanic students. Over 90% of
respondents mentioned the program as an intervention which enables specific student
groups to be successful. The comment included here is from Jackie:
Based on the gap analysis of our students, HSHP is one of the successful
programs for low performing Hispanic students to do better…students show
their improvements in their performances in their standardized tests. That
means the program works. Some students also like the program because they
stay together with similar background students.

Nancy commented that many students pride themselves as peer tutors and feel happy
that they can help students with similar backgrounds.
Special education.
The special education program was identified as one of the important factors
affecting student learning at DMS. During collaboration days, especially in the
beginning of the school year, teachers meet frequently to identify the placement of
the students based on students’ needs. The importance of collaboration and rigor are
the two particularly distinct features of the program.
The first distinct feature of the special education program is that teachers
collaborate within and across curricular areas in support of the program. There are
currently 63 students in the program and half of them are placed in general education
111
classes which require strong collaboration among teachers. From the interview
comments, about 82% of teachers said that the staff is very versatile and willing to
help to try and reach all students. The special education coordinator also commented
that students are taught many learning strategies and organizational skills so that they
can be successful in their learning in class. David said the following:
The majority of general education classes occur during 6
th
period as elective
classes. Students learn organization skills during that time. We make sure
that they are successful in class especially with time management skills so
that they can organize their study to meet high school A-G requirements.
Those are essential skills that they must have. We talk about these matters all
the time with teachers in general education classes and collaborate as much
as we can.

Monitoring grades for special education students is done half way through each
quarter. Teachers fill out students’ progress and constantly monitor their progress in
general education classes. To help students in need, teachers co-plan and co-teach
within and across subject areas.
The rigor of the special education class is also an important factor in student
learning at DMS. During the class observations, the researcher noticed that the
teacher in the special education class used Gradual Release Responsibility (GRR)
framework for classroom learning experiences for students. For example, students
were paired with one who understood the concept, and one who needed additional
help to understand. The GRR model was practiced school wide including special
education classes. Students in special education classes are trained to use the Cornell
note-taking strategies as well. David, the teacher in the class commented that
“Students here are not spoon fed because of their learning conditions. They need to
112
learn how to apply different strategies in their learning. It may take a longer time
than general education class students but eventually they get it. That’s the most
important thing.”
In summary, collaboration among teachers and rigor in the special education
program helps students in the program to apply various strategies to organize their
learning in class. Collaboration with general education teachers and special
education teachers was also an important factor for enhancement of student learning
at DMS. Teachers share student information with each other and know what needs
to be done when special circumstances arise while the special education students are
in general education classes. The special education coordinator also trains general
education teachers in strategies that better enable the students in the class. Given the
culture of collaboration and the rigor of the content, the special education program
was identified as one of the important factors enhancing student achievement at
DMS.
Advancement via individual determination (AVID).
AVID was also identified as one of the important factors for student
achievement at DMS. AVID is a self-regulated strategy support for students whose
grade point average is between 2.5 and 3.0. The program targets students from
grades 7 through 12 with the goal of entering a 4 year college. This section focuses
on the purpose of the program and the collaboration process aligned with it; the high
school AVID coordinators play an important role in increasing student performance
at DMS.
113
The following includes the student demographics of the AVID program
(Table 7).

Table 7: Student Demographics in AVID Program

Ethnic Background # of students % in the program
Asian 35 68.63%
Pacific Islander 1 1.96%
Hispanic or Latino 10 19.61%
African American 1 1.96%
White 4 7.84%
Total 51 100%

The purpose of the AVID program is to support students who have high
motivation but low academic performance, such as the fact that they score below
proficient level in the CSTs. Participating students in AVID are motivated to
achieve working at a higher level of learning. There are currently 27 students from
7
th
grade and 24 students from 8
th
grade in the AVID program at DMS (Table 7).
Curriculum guides are provided to teachers from the district AVID program. At
DMS, two AVID certificated teachers teach the course. AVID is an elective course
and students come to class everyday for one hour to learn from the AVID
curriculum. The contents include time management, inquiry writing and
collaboration on Mondays, Wednesday and Fridays. College volunteer students visit
on Tuesdays and Thursdays to provide tutorial service. Students are formed into
114
small groups, with the college volunteers facilitating each group. Students also ask
questions about college during this time. One of the AVID teachers, David,
commented on the rigor and support in AVID classes as follows:
These kids are motivated but they need help in many areas to get ready to go
to college. They go through an interview process to be selected. Once they
are in the program, we provide them with a rigorous program. We work with
high school AVID teachers so that we make sure that what we do here
connects to high school. Our goal is for students to get ready for high school
and to meet A through G high school requirements and to go to 4 year college
later on.

The program is unique in that AVID coordinators work regularly with [the]
high school.

AVID coordinators guide students’ success beyond the middle school level. On one
particular day, the researcher observed the collaboration process with DMS and the
AVID coordinators from the feeder high school. They were working on yearly
objectives for the school year. David, the DMS AVID coordinator, commented that
the AVID coordinators collaborate often to discuss the preparation of middle school
students to get ready for high school. The high school AVID coordinator then talked
about things that should be focused on more at the middle school level such as the
student taking full accountability as a learner. In the AVID program, teachers make
sure that students are ready to go to high school and to meet A through G college
requirements for a 4 year college later on. The close working relationship with high
school AVID coordinators further enhances the support necessary for students at
DMS. Students are taught to be accountable for their actions and learning in AVID
classes.
115
Academy.
Academy is another intervention program which was identified as an
important factor that enables the learning of at-risk students at DMS. Unlike
students in the AVID program, Academy students lack motivation in learning. The
program is in its second year at DMS and students are recommended by teachers
through identification of CST scores and school grades. This elective intervention
course currently has 19 students in the program. Out of 19 students, 57% of them
have Vietnamese backgrounds and 26% of them have Hispanic backgrounds.
The program focuses on academic learning and mentoring, as well as
developing skills for students to become self-regulated learners.
The focus of the Academy program was well represented in the document
reviews at DMS. Based on the review of the 2009 Distinguished Middle School
Application, teachers in the program focus on “knowing each student well enough so
that each student feels that the teacher is a true advocate for the student as an
individual”. The comments from the interview respondent depict the learning
strategies that are taught in the Academy club to enhance students’ learning. Here is
a comment from David:
We teach kids to take ownership. Note taking from low level questioning to
a higher level of questioning is also taught to students. We use Costa’s level
of questioning for an example. It is a strategy to question when students are
reading or after reading, such as compare and contrast and analyze… Other
strategies include Connell Note taking which is a kind of main tool for
accessing information.

116
In the Academy Club, teachers also help students set short term and long term goals
and try to develop their ability to regulate and monitor their own learning. From the
interview, Tom said that “we teach kids how to be advocates for themselves; how to
talk to a teacher and it’s ok to ask a question in class.” The comments reveal that
students are reinforced on the importance of self regulation and how to be a
responsible person in their own learning. To motivate students to do better in their
learning, some Academy students are allowed to join the Boys and Girls Club which
is an after school program that revolves around sports. The Boys and Girls Club is a
national organization that provides extra support for students after school. It is
sponsored by the United Way and run by college age students, who engage the
students for an hour of homework and an hour of playing sports. However, in order
to join the Boys and Girls Club, the Academy students must have a 2.0 GPA or
better and no unsatisfactory marks in citizenship.
In summary, the most important factors in the intervention programs
identified here were the rigor of content, and the collaboration of the teachers in
these programs: Friday Catch-up, Hispanic Students Helping Hispanic Student
(HSHH), Special Education, AVID and Academy. At DMS, intervention programs
play an important role in providing support needed for students with prompt
feedback. The subgroup student population in AVID and Academy proportionally
represents the school population, especially for Asian and Hispanic student groups.
This indicates that DMS is supporting all students for their academic success
regardless of their learning backgrounds.
117
All stake holders involved collaborate together and clearly understand the
program. Rigor and collaboration are significant factors in the intervention program
at DMS with support provided in a timely manner internally and externally to
increase student performance.
Staff Development Programs
The professional development programs offered by the district to teachers
throughout the school year were also identified as one of the significant factors
affecting student learning at DMS. Bolman and Deal (2003) postulate that the
political framework focuses on providing resources to people while the human
resource framework provides skills necessary for the people to accomplish goals set
forth in the organization. At DMS, the staff development programs provided,
utilizes the resources and skills people need to enhance the learning of all students at
DMS. Darling-Hammond (1999) suggests that skills such as teaching strategies are
one of the essential components for enhancement of student learning. Programs
which specifically support student performance were identified as Super-Week and
Strategy Coaches training provided by the district. These training programs are also
well aligned with the mission statement of DMS. As written in the statement, DMS
is committed “to provide an educational program focusing on student achievement,
high standards, and opportunities for all students to acquire the knowledge and skills
necessary to live a productive life” (School Accountability Report Card, 2008-2009).
The professional development training provided by the school district focuses on
118
providing knowledge and strategies to teachers which are necessary skills in guiding
students towards enhanced learning.
Super-Week professional development training.
The first significant factor in Super-Week is identified as providing
knowledge and strategies for teachers to support student learning in classrooms at
DMS. The training is provided for teachers a week before the school year begins.
Based on the document review of the 2009 Distinguished Middle School
Application, DMS has embraced the Comprehensive School Reform Model (CSR
Model) to achieve its mission. The mission states that DMS will embrace the
concept of high performance schools as articulated by Haycock (1999), Mayer,
Mullens and Moore (1999). In order to meet their goal, DMS was set on delivering
research based instructional strategies to a diverse student population.
The week-long “Super Week” district workshop provided teachers with
instructional strategies in various content areas each day of the workshop, and
teachers had the choice to attend various workshops each day depending on the
length of each session; workshops varied from a half day to all day. One such
training session was specifically focused in helping students to be self regulatory and
effective in their learning at school and at home. The researcher was at the 8AM
workshop on that day. The room, which easily accommodates about 200 people,
was filled to capacity with attending teachers; a festive atmosphere prevailed, and
hot drinks were provided for the attendants. Teachers signed up at the door as they
entered. The newly appointed district assistant superintendent greeted the audience
119
promptly at 8am. An outside speaker led the session which dealt with the
aforementioned topic--understanding and improving self-regulation and student
motivation. The workshop included whole class as well as small group discussions
to further enhance the learning experience of the attendees.
On another day of the Super-Week training, the “Thinking Map” was focused
on as a teaching strategy; the researcher observed this session as well. This all day
training provided teachers the strategies which would enable them to utilize the
concepts embodied by the thinking map, as well as application of the concept to
different subject areas. Initially, for the workshop, teachers were placed in one room
where the district TOSAs explained the concept of the thinking map. The
participating teachers each had their thinking map guide books. After about two
hours of this initial training, teachers split into groups, based on their specific
teaching areas. Once they were in these specified groups, with teachers in the same
content area, more detailed strategies for specific content knowledge were developed
within this small group context of about five teachers each. Liz, a teacher from DMS
commented on the training as follows:
I had my initial training on this subject last year. This is an extension of what
we had learned last year. I get a lot of strategies from the training that I can
use in my class. It is very helpful to attend this kind of training because I can
develop strategies based on what I know already from last year. The new
teachers who did not take this training yet will participate in the other training
that is focused on the first timer on this subject.

The district also provides during and after school workshops specifically targeting
single subject content areas to provide teaching strategies. Substitute teachers are
120
provided for teachers who attend the workshop during school days. One interview
participant mentioned the advantage of taking advantage of professional training
opportunities such as these:
I prefer to attend my workshop after school. I learned so much during my
training. The good thing about the training is that I can talk to the same
content teachers at other schools and discuss the issues I might have. I can’t
imagine the strategies that I use in my class had it not been for the training
that I had attended. I am planning on attending the professional development
training workshops continuously.

Some training programs offered by the district were sequenced to account for and
continue training from the previous year. Each year, the district provides different
levels of training while basic training for new teachers is an ongoing process. One of
the significant findings from the study observations relevant to the issue of training is
that the principal attended the same workshop as the teachers each time the
researcher was there. The principal commented that “the role of the principal for the
training is to provide opportunities for teachers to participate in professional
development and support them after the training is over to practice strategies they
have learned in their classrooms” implying that the support continues after the
training is done at the school site. Teachers receive professional development
training from the beginning through to the end of the first semester with a continuity
of the contents. The participants of the workshop also receive monetary
compensation. During the workshop, teachers in the training sessions, sign in and
out to record their hours at the workshop. By attending the workshop, teachers get
paid a total of 15 hours of stipend per year. An alternative to cash payment is to sign
121
up for a pay scale of up to 9 units which accumulates to a total of 135 hours of in-
service training.
The Super-Week training provides teachers with tools to be used in
classroom instruction to help students with various learning backgrounds. Both
experienced and new teachers receive training based on their content areas. The
research based teaching strategies also support student learning with various cultural
backgrounds. The effort to provide research based instructional strategies is
supported from the district level, while the school practice is supported by the site
principal and teacher leaders, after the training is concluded at the district level. The
principal acts as an instructional leader who plays a critical role in the process of
implementation of new strategies at the school level by providing prompt feedback
and guidance. Teacher leaders also take responsibility for guiding teachers in the
department by enhancing strategies to be utilized in the classroom for positive
student learning to occur. Most importantly, teachers have an opportunity to learn
various strategies a week before school starts, which they can then implement in
their lesson plans for the school year. Timing of the training provided by the district
was well aligned with the plans for the school year. The monetary compensation
from the district for participation in the training was also an indicator of a successful
professional training program, and a motivating factor for the teachers as well to
engage with the professional development opportunity.
122
Strategy coaches training.
“Strategy Coaches” is a new leadership program which started last year at
DMS to guide teachers in the same content area with teaching strategies and skills to
improve student achievement. The district trains the coaches from each subject area,
from each school site, to guide teachers in the same content area at the school site.
The coaches provide feedback to the teachers to improve and adopt strategies in
classroom instruction. Teachers and coaches can observe each other’s class to
provide feedback and guidance in teaching strategies. There are four strategy
coaches in each general education subject area at DMS which includes ELA, math,
science and social studies. The significance of the Strategy Coaches Training is the
collaboration of teachers at school to help teachers in their department. The site
principal, district TOSAs and the Strategy Coaches closely collaborate to guide
student learning.
Another critical aspect of this training is learning how to approach teachers to
share teaching strategies without injuring a teacher’s pride, especially for
experienced teachers. Here are comments from Tom and Emily:
We try to get specialized training for content teaching. Not only that, we
make group efforts and want to present what to do in classrooms. That
means teachers help teachers in the same subject area. The district training
for the coaches is to learn how to administer coaching sessions; the strategy
for coaches when they go back to the school site is how to share those
strategies with other teachers.

I do not want to hurt anyone’s feelings by asking if one needs help.
Experienced teachers may think that they don’t need any help since they are
veterans of the content area that they are teaching. Although they may need
help, they may not ask me directly due to an embarrassment to ask for help.
123
Thus, it is very important for me to know how to approach either experienced
or new teachers to provide them teaching strategies without making them feel
uncomfortable.

During the training session, the modeling provided ways for Strategy
Coaches to approach teachers. Interaction with teachers at the staff lounge and
school campus demonstrated strategies for coaches to replicate when they go back to
their school site to solicit their content area teachers. While the training is in session,
the participants had small group practice sessions to practice what they had learned
from their training.
Strategy training involved site administrators, Strategy Coaches and district
TOSAs. During the training day, about 80 participants were teamed with
administrators, Strategy Coaches from each school site, and the assigned district
TOSAs. The director of instruction led the training session with the district TOSAs.
At the end, the site principal, Strategy Coaches and assigned district TOSAs
participated together in the objectives and goal setting meeting for DMS. The
principal and Strategy Coaches from each subject area from DMS then planned
future training schedules at DMS and ways to offer help or solicit teachers who
might be in need of help for strategies. The parties discussed the possible target
teachers to support, within each content area, and the ways to approach them without
causing apprehension. The target teachers for support included all teachers—both old
and new at DMS.
In summary, the Strategy Coaches act as a role model at the school site for
specific content areas of teaching. The coaches learn how to approach teachers to
124
help and provide assistance to either active or inactive teachers seeking support
within the same content area. Teachers at the school receive help not only from the
administrative team but also from colleagues who are expert in teaching strategies.
The principal also has insight into the program and supports the activities between
Strategy Coaches and content area teachers. The goals and objectives of the program
are set by the administrative team and teacher leaders together, focusing on the
school mission “to provide an educational program focusing on student achievement,
high standards, and opportunities for all students to acquire the knowledge and skills
necessary to live a productive life”. One of the salient aspects of the program is the
level of collaboration among stakeholders--Strategy Coaches, and teachers of any
level of experience support students from various learning backgrounds to produce
positive learning results at DMS.
Findings of School Program
Findings from the school program sought to answer research question three:
What are the perceived programs that have been employed by the school that has
allowed it to narrow the achievement gap and sustain student success?
There were two important factors that emerged from the research
observations relevant to the area of school programs at DMS: school intervention
programs for students with below proficient levels and professional development
programs for teachers. DMS provides various intervention programs for support of
student learning. In particular, intervention programs target to help students with
basic and below basic levels in standardized testing and students’ performance at
125
school. The intervention programs include Friday Catch-up, Special Education,
Hispanic Students Helping Hispanic Student (HSHH), AVID and Academy. These
programs provide rigor and collaboration which were two significant factors
affecting student learning through intervention programs at DMS. Along with this,
professional development such as Super-Week and Strategy Coaches training for
teachers were also significant factors in narrowing the achievement gap in student
performance at DMS.
In order to enhance teaching strategies to help students’ performance, the
district provides rigorous professional development workshops throughout the school
year, particularly focusing on the beginning of the school year. By doing so,
teachers are provided the opportunity to plan yearly lessons a week before school
starts. The intervention programs of the school as well as the staff development
programs were institutionalized at the school and all teachers were willing to
participate in the training sessions. The training schedules for the school year, at
school and at the district, are distributed to teachers before the new school year starts
so that teachers and administrators have an opportunity to plan training sessions
together early on. The teachers who participate in the professional training
programs are compensated by the district to further motivate the teachers. As a
result of the study findings, the perceived programs that have been employed by the
school, that has allowed DMS to narrow the achievement gap and sustain success,
were identified as intervention programs and staff development programs. In both
programs, collaboration is evident school wide and district wide.
126
CHAPTER FIVE
RECOMMENDATIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSION
Urban risk factors associated with schools such as low-income families,
crime, unemployment and feelings of hopelessness due to neighborhood conditions,
further exacerbate already low performance for minority students in urban schools
(Haberman, 2005; Olson & Jerald, 1998). However, against such odds, some urban
schools outperform others in the achievement of minority students. This study
sought to identify the factors affecting student performance through culture, practices
and programs at an urban school which has fostered student achievement for
minority students. The researcher also focused on those leadership factors which
may have also facilitated student achievement and their sustainability of such
academic achievement over time school wide.
The instruments for the study included document reviews, observations, staff
surveys and interviews. The observations included classroom instructions, campus
layout, student interactions and staff meetings and training sessions at the school and
the district. The study utilized the four frames of Bolman and Deal (2002) which
include the symbolic, structural, human resource and political, as lenses by which
one could view the findings, particularly in relation to the three research questions.
This study focused on one specific urban middle school which met the selection
criteria set forth by the thematic dissertation group to answer the following research
questions.
127
1. What are the perceived cultural norms at an urban K-12 school which
allowed the school to narrow the achievement gap and sustain its success
for minority students?
2. What are the perceived practices that have been employed by the school
that have allowed the school to narrow the achievement gap and sustain
student success?
3. What are the perceived programs that have been employed by the school
that have allowed the school to narrow the achievement gap and sustain
its success?
Summary of the Findings and Discussions
The study at Dragon Middle School (DMS) provided an in-depth analysis of
the phenomenon at the school, including: culture, practices and programs which
promote student learning and their sustainability for student achievement. The most
significant themes that emerged from the findings, which could be attributed to
positive student learning were identified as: beliefs, collaboration, leadership, as well
as, intervention and professional development programs. There was no one single
component that alone acted as the sole catalyst for student learning, as all of these
components worked in tandem.
The findings confirmed that the DMS staff has a set of belief patterns for
staff members and parents which drive them to do things a certain way inducing
positive student performance. New teachers are influenced by this belief system of
existing teachers as they become immersed in the culture. The findings of teacher
128
beliefs in DMS are similar to those that have been identified in the literature as being
conducive to positive performance in students. This is similar to the research
findings of Darling Hammond (1999) and Elmore (2002) who suggest that the belief
in students and their potential to do better is more important than students’ home
backgrounds. The fact that 64% of the student population at DMS is on free and
reduced lunch program does not seem to affect student performance negatively due
to the belief of teachers in their students’ ability to do well. Similarly, parents at
DMS value education as one of the most important events in the child’s life. The
parents, who were predominately Vietnamese, regard the success of their children as
a source of honor for their family which is strongly rooted in the Confucian beliefs
within Asian culture. With high expectation of teachers and parents in learning,
students take responsibility for their own learning, focusing on their academic
success at school and to honor their family’s beliefs in education as addressed in the
findings. The beliefs in parents and teachers, was therefore a factor in sustaining
academic success at DMS.
Furthermore, a cultural norm at Dragon was positive collaboration among
teachers and administrators. Teacher collaboration occurred within and across
department levels as well as with district support personnel such as Teachers On
Special Assignments (TOSAs). At DMS, teachers collaborate in carefully analyzing
student performance and assessment results to further inform classroom instructions.
This type of collaboration assures positive student performance. Fullan (1999, 2007)
asserts that professional collegiality may add to the achievement of students at
129
school. At DMS, the teachers’ collaboration was focused on analyzing student
assessment data to guide intervention and classroom instruction. Another critical
factor for collaboration is that all intervention programs offer student assistance with
rigor and relevance in a timely manner, which is a key element for helping struggling
students. This is similar to the scholarship of Marzano (2003), Johnson (2002) and
Elmore (2002), who have indicated that focus on rigorous standards, high
expectations and assessment results may yield success in reducing the achievement
gap for minority students. DMS teachers focus on diagnosing student assessment
results in a timely manner so that the help needed is provided with prompt feedback.
The collaboration within and across departments also was a part of the contributing
factors for student achievement at DMS.
The programs which were identified as significant factors for student
achievement were “Super-Week” and “Strategy Coaches” training. Teachers in the
training learn instructional strategies which can be delivered in the classroom. The
implementation process was supported by the site administrators and teacher leaders
with prompt feedback with open communication lines. This process helped teachers
sustain the school wide practice for teachers over the years to increase student
performance. This support system made teachers initiate, without difficulty, the
implementation process based on the district wide instructional strategies taught at
the workshops.
Similarly, Darling Hammond (1999) has linked the elements of instructional
strategies that are critical to successful student learning. The authors posit that
130
various instructional approaches that can be learned through professional training
produce better instructional strategies in classrooms and produces higher student
achievement. The use of direct and indirect instructions, a mixture of student
centered and teacher centered instructional approaches, led to positive student
performance at DMS.
Along with the professional training, the instructional leadership of the
principal was identified as one of the critical factors enabling student learning at
DMS. Similar to Elmore (2002), instructional leadership to increase practices in
classrooms is an essential element to increasing student performance (National
Center for Education Statistics, 2001; Ferguson, 1998; Sanders, & Rivers, 1996). To
provide the necessary instructional strategies, Copland (2008) posits that
instructional leadership is one of the factors which might relate to the success and
sustainability of the school. Recent studies suggest that instructional leadership can
influence instructional practices and professional learning communities at schools
(Copland, 2008; Elmore, 2002). The leaders at DMS provide necessary support to
the teachers in the process of adopting instructional strategies. The facilitation of the
instructional leadership at DMS and the open communication line changes the
behavior of teachers positively to adopt various instructional strategies which
engender positive student performance and sustain teacher practice over time.
Also important was the collaboration through shared leadership among
teachers. Teacher leaders such as department chairs, Academy Coaches, Strategy
coaches and AVID coordinators collaborate to plan training sessions and objectives
131
to be met during the school year for each program. Dissemination of the information
at school is delivered not only through the administrative team but also by teacher
leaders so that the sharing of information is done in a timely manner. This is similar
to Copland (2008), who has stipulated that teacher collaboration takes place if
leadership for improving teaching and learning is rooted in continual inquiry at the
school while decisions at school are made collectively focusing on improving the
learning of all students. At DMS, the participation of teacher leaders in the decision
making process added to the collaboration of teachers at school and provided them
with a sense of community for positive student learning.
Recommendations for Practice
The findings from this research study suggest that the following factors can
be applied to similar urban schools to improve student performance and sustain such
success: implementation of a belief system for teachers, students and parents; setting
goals and objectives for student achievement; and intervention programs at school.
The first recommendation is to change the beliefs of teachers, parents and
students, about the inherent ability of the students, which can play a major role in
student performance. Parents being aware of the importance of education, is also of
the utmost importance, and such an attitude can support the child’s learning within
their home environment (Goldenberg, 2001; Goldenberg, Gallimore and Reese,
2001). A synthesis of the findings from the study suggests that the beliefs of
parents’ expectations may play an important role in order for students to perform
better. Thus, providing workshops for parents to help their child at home and to
132
enforce the importance of education may play an essential role in motivating their
child in learning. A clear communication line with parents of how and what their
child is doing at school can also inform parents in case of intervention needs. The
communication line also needs to be prompt so that the learning of students is not
delayed. Some parents may view their children’s learning negatively with low
expectations due to their children’s low performance at school (Goldenberg, 2001;
Goldenberg, Gallimore and Reese, 2001). Therefore, educational practices at the
school may play a critical role in bringing hope to some minority students and their
families. Increasing awareness and support to instill belief in education for parents is
important, but also important are the assumptions of the staff at school. A strong
belief in the staff for the success of student performance led teachers to automatically
assume that that’s the way people do things at DMS. Thus, increasing the belief
system of the staff at school may lead to a change in behavior of parents and students
to promote positive achievement of students in urban schools.
The second recommendation is to provide goals and objectives for teachers at
the school; DMS teachers have their quarterly benchmarks for student improvement.
Schools with goals and direction, with specific objectives, will correspondingly
provide a specific time frame for the goals to be met at the school site. Open
communication between administrators and teachers and staff members can all
increase the likelihood of achieving objectives. Meanwhile, school leaders must
provide feedback and support in the process of accomplishing the goal through open
133
communication lines. Clear vision and goals should be set in the beginning of the
school year so that teachers understand how their goals are to be accomplished.
Further recommendations include the analysis of student assessment results
and the importance providing appropriate intervention programs. The analysis of
student assessment results and the application of prompt intervention programs were
implemented at DMS to support the learning of students. Urban schools adopting
the same strategies as used at DMS may not produce similar results if student
backgrounds differ with that of DMS. Nevertheless, careful manipulation of the
study findings to fit the student population may lead to positive student achievement
in urban schools. For recommendations to be adopted successfully, the school first
needs to provide clear vision and goals to all stakeholders at school. When the
teachers, students and parents clearly understand the goals and objectives to be met,
the intervention programs and practices can affect student learning positively as
evidenced at DMS.
Implications for Further Research
The focus today on globalization brings more attention to student
performance in the USA and asks educators to produce students with compatible
knowledge and skills for a global market (Marzano, 2003). However, low student
achievement in K-12 public urban schools, particularly for minority students, has
been scrutinized by the public since the mid 1900’s in the USA (Marzano, 2003; Lee,
2002). This study provided findings from one of nine research studies, conducted by
a thematic dissertation group which focused on urban schools. While the study
134
findings indentify some of the practices and programs that can be utilized in similar
urban schools, further research on factors affecting student performance may provide
meaningful tools for practitioners in urban schools. There are three
recommendations for further research to support student performance in urban
schools: longitudinal research over a period of time; the study of the professional
development programs to see if they are aligned with the needs at the school site for
improvement of student performance; and the study of school level intervention
programs supporting various student populations in urban school settings.
One of the shortfalls of this study is that the findings are based on one year of
research at an urban school. The study in the areas of culture, practices and
programs which affect student performance can be further researched through
longitudinal research over a period of time. Students’ performance over the high
school years may add depth to what was already identified as factors contributing to
student improvements in the urban setting of K-12 public schools.
The study also suggests that research of the current system of professional
development programs at school may identify needs in teacher support to gauge the
alignment of student learning. Clear objectives and goals to guide professional
development, which is an ongoing effort, can support diverse cultural student
backgrounds to boost student learning, especially for minority students. The
dealings with complex learning environments and various stakeholders in urban
schools require that the teachers adapt to situations promptly and work
simultaneously in an ever changing environment. Education cannot be delayed at
135
any moment, thus calling for timely support and feedback for students’ learning at
schools. By looking into the kind of professional programs that are offered at the
school site may provide some helpful tips to support student learning at urban
schools.
Lastly, research on intervention programs can further highlight the practices
that are ongoing at the school level. The study findings suggest that the support
systems provided at the school level played an important role towards the school’s
success. Thus, a study of school level intervention programs might provide some
suggestions on the relationship between students’ learning and the collaboration of
staff for student performance in urban schools.
Conclusions
In California, about 50% of high school students drop out of school in large
cities such as Los Angeles and Long Beach (EPE Research Center, 2009). Among
high school drop outs, about 70% of them will end up in jail. Considering the
competitive global market and the importance of human capital, this is a stark
statistic for a nation such as the U.S., and the fact that it is falling behind many
leading countries in the world in terms of K-12 public education and student
achievement (Lee, 2002). While the performance of students in Asian countries is
rising and exceeds the performance of US students, students in US urban schools
struggle through their rudimentary reading and math coursework. This study sought
to identify factors affecting student performance in urban schools for minority
students. The perceived factors from the study confirmed that beliefs of teachers, as
136
well as students and parents, played a major role while the support system from the
administrative leadership and intervention programs together led to positive student
achievement.
According to Schein (2004), a clear vision guides people with direction in an
organization, while transparency requires individual accountability as well as
supplying the fuel that increases student performance. At DMS, a clear vision and
prompt support from the administrative team played a significant role in enhancing
student achievement and helped to promote the positive beliefs of teachers which
then become rooted as cultural norms at the school.
To accomplish the vision and goals that a school has for itself, there are
numerous factors in play, such as beliefs in people and the leadership that is
available to guide an organization. Schein (2004) asserts that leaders can affect the
values of people which are rooted in people’s beliefs and assumptions which can
then maintain sustainability in reform success in an organization. Thus, practitioners
need to create a school culture which will promote the assumption that all students
can learn. However, as found at DMS, assumptions of people will follow only when
they feel that the support needed to carry out their goals, will be provided by the
administrative team. Once such assumptions become rooted, interventions for
student performance can flourish.
137
REFERENCES
2003-2007 AYP data collected for THS, Torrance Unified School District, June
2008.

Arroyo, C. G., & Zigler, E. (1995). Racial identity, academic achievement, and the
psychological well-being of economically disadvantaged adolescents. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 903-914.

Bali, V. & Alvarez, M. (2004). The race gap in student achievement scores:
Longitudinal evidence from a racially diverse school district, Policy Studies
Journal, 32 (3).

Bennett, C. (2001). Genres of research in multicultural education. Review of
Educational Research, 71(2), 171-217. Emphasis on 171-176.

Berliner, D. & Briddle, B. (1995). The manufactured crisis: Myths, frauds, and the
attack on America’s public schools. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Brewer, Dominic J., Hentschke, Guilbert C., and Eide, Eric R. (2008). The Role of
Economics in Education Policy Research. In Ladd, Helen F. and Fiske.

Bolman, L. & Deal, T. (1997). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice and
leadership (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Brooks-Gunn, J. & Duncan, G.J. (1997). The effects of poverty on children. The
Future of Children, 7, 55-71.

California Department of Education, Retrieved December 20, 2009 at
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ar/

Carnervale, A. P. (1999). Education = success: Empowering Hispanic youth and
adults. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Carroll, G., Fuiton, K., Abercrombie, K., & I. Yoon. (2004). Prepared for the
National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future.

Catterall, J. (1989). Standards and school dropouts: A national study of tests required
for high school graduation. American Journal of Education 98, 1-34.
Cartledge, G., & Lo, Y. (2006). Teaching in urban schools: Eleven principles
toward effective outcomes. Urban Perspectives, 11(2), 2-3, 10.

138
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2002). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting
the right performance solutions. Atlanta, GA: CEP Press.

Coleman, J. S. (1990). Equality and achievement in education. Boulder, CO:
Westview Press.

Coleman, J. S. (1968). The concept of equality of educational opportunity. Harvard
Educational Review, 38, 7–22.

Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C. J., McPartland, F., Mood, A. M.,
Weinfeld, F. D., et al. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity .
Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

College Board’s National Task Force on Minority Achievement. (1999). Reaching
the top: A report of the National Task Force on Minority High Achievement.
New York: Author.

Copland, M. (2008). Leadership of Inquiry: Building and sustaining capacity for
school improvement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25(4). pp.
375-395.

Cresswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches (2
nd
ed.). Thousand Oaks: CA: Sage Publications.

Cross, C. (2004). Political Education; National Policy Comes of Age, chap.7. New
York: Teachers College Press. Edward B. (Eds.) Handbook of Research in
Education Finance and Policy. NewYork: Routledge, pp. 23-41.

Darling-Hammond (December, 1999). Teacher quality and student achievement: A
review of state policy evidence. Center for the study of teaching and policy,
University of Washington.

Dow, P. (1991). Schoolhouse politics: Lessons from the Sputnic era. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.

Dropout Rates, EPE Research Center, Retrieved on March 2009 at
www.edweek.org/info/about/research.html

Dufour, et.al. ( 2006 ) Learning by Doing: A Handbook for Professional Learning
Communities at Work. Indiana: Solution Tree.

EdSource. (2006). The Basics of California’s School Finance System. Mountain
View, CA. EdSource.
139
Edward B. (Eds.) Handbook of Research in Education Finance and Policy. New
York: Routledge, pp. 23-41.

Elmore, R. (2000). Consortium for Policy Research in Education, Winter, The Albert
Shanker Institute.

Elmore, R. F. (2002). Bridging the gap between standards and achievement,
Washington, DC: Albert Shanker Institute. Retrieved July 12, 2003, from
http://www.nsdc.org/library/results/res11-02elmore.html

EPE Education Center, retrieved Jan 20, 2009 from
http://www.edweek.org/info/about/research.html

Evaluation of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s High School Grants. (2005)
Rigor, Relevance, and Results: The quality of Teacher Assignments and
student work in new and conventional high schools. Prepared by the National
Evaluation of High School Transformation, the American Institutes for
Research & SRI International. Retrieved on Jan 21, 2009 from
http://www.air.org/publications/pubs_ehd_school_reform.aspx

Ferguson, R. F., & Ladd, H. F. (1996). How and why money matters: An analysis of
Alabama schools. In H. Ladd (Ed.), Holding Schools Accountable (pp. 265-
298).

Fullan, M., & Hargreaves, A. (1996). What’s worth fighting for in your school? New
York: Teachers College Press.

Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2003). Educational research (7th ed.).
Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.

Gallimore R. & C. Goldenberg. (2001). Analyzing Cultural Models and Settings to
Connect Minority Achievement and School Improvement Research,
Educational Psychologist, 36(1), 45-56.

Goldberg, B., & Morrison, D. M. (2003). Co-Nect: Purpose, accountability, and
school leadership. In J. Murphy & A. Datnow (Eds.), Leadership lessons
from comprehensive school reforms (pp. 57-82). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.

Goldenberg, R., Gallimore, L., Reese, L., & Garnier, H. (2001). Cause of Effect? A
longitudinal study of immigrant Latino parents’ aspirations and expectations,
and their children’s school performance, American Educational Research
Journal, 38(3), 547-582.
140
Goldhaber, D. & Brewer, D. (2000). Does Teacher Certification Matter?
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22, 129-145.

Goodwin, K. & Sheard, W. (2001). Education reform and the politics of 2000.
Publius, The State of American Federalism, 2000-2001, 31(3), 111-129.

Graves, D.H., & Sunstein, B.S. (Eds.). (1992). Portfolio portraits. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.

Greene, J. P. (2004). Graduation rates for choice and public school students in
Milwaukee. Retrieved May 9, 2009 at
http://www.schoolchoiceinfo.org/data/research/grad_rate.pdfs

Greene, J.P., & Winters, M. A. (2006). An Evaluation of the Effect of D.C.’s
Voucher Program on Public School Achievement and Racial Integration after
One Year. Manhattan Institute, Education Working Paper No. 10. Retrieved
May 9, 2009 at http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/ewp_10.htm

Haberman, M. (2005). Star teachers: The ideology and best practice of effective
teachers of diverse children and youth in poverty. The Haberman Educational
Foundation.

Haberman, M. (2003). Who benefits from failing urban school districts? An essay on
equity and justice for diverse children in urban poverty. The haberman
Educational Foundation: EducationNews.org. Retrieved Jan 30, 2009 at
http://www.habermanfoundaton.org

Hartel, E. & Herman, J. (2005). A historical perspective on validity arguments for
accountability testing. National Center for Rresearch on Evaluatioin,
Standards, and Student Testing, UCLA.

Haycock, K. (2001). Helping all students achieve closing the achievement gap,
Educational Leadership, 58 (6).

Jacob, B. (2007). The Challenges of Staffing Urban Schools with Effective Teachers,
Future of Children Conference, 17(1).

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

Kiger, D. (2002). Class Size Reduction: A Facilitator of Instructional Program
Coherence, The Qualitative Report, 7(4).

141
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., Clark, R. (2006). Why minimal guidance during
instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist,
discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching.
Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86. Publications.

Kohlmoos, J. (2006). A Call to Action for the School Improvement Industry: Getting
Involved in the Next Reauthorization of ESEA, National Education
Knowledge Industry Association (NEKIA)

Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). From the achievement gap to the education debt:
Understanding achievement in U.S. schools, Educational Researcher, 35(7).
3-12.

Lee, V., Bryk, A. & Smith J. (1993). The organization of effective secondary schools.
Review of Research in Education, 19, 171-267.

Lee, J. (2002). Racial and Ethnic Achievement Gap Trends: Reversing the Progress
Toward Equity? Educational Researcher, Vol. 31, No. 1. (Jan. - Feb., 2002),
pp. 3-12.3 1. No. I, pp. 3-1 2.

Liberman, A. (1999). Community means more than teamwork. Journal of Staff
Development, 20(2), 46-48.

Malen, B. (2003). Tightening the Grip? The Impact of State Activism on Local
School Systems, Educational Policy (pp. 195-216), Vol. 17, No. 2.

Marzano, R. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into Action.
ASCD: Alexandria, VA. This was an ASCD book and you likely have it one
your shelf somewhere.

McKinney, S., Flenner, C., Frazier W., Abrams, L. (2006). Responding to the needs
of at-risk students in poverty. Essays in Education (17).

McLaughlin, M. & Talbert, J. (1993). Introduction: New visions of teaching. In M.
W. McLaughlin & J. E. Talbert (eds.), Teaching for understanding (pp. 1-10).
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Moffett, C. (2000, April). Sustaining change: The answers are blowing in the wind.
Education Leadership,57(7), 35-38.

Murnane, R. & Levy, R. (1996). Teaching the new basic skills. New York: The Free
Press.

142
National Center for Education Statistics, 2001, Retrieved Jan 5, 2009 at
http://nces.ed.gov/Pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2002130

National Center for Education Statistics, 2006, Retrieved Feb10, 2009 at
https://www.stanford.edu/group/cubberley/blog/archives/87

Newmann, Fred M., Helen M. Marks, and Adam Gamoran (1996). Authentic
Pedagogy and Student Performance. American Journal of Education 104(4),
280-312.

Northouse, Peter G. (2003). Fourth Edition. Leadership – Theory and practice.
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Chapters 1, 2, 4-10.

Odden, Allan R. and Picus, Lawrence O. (2008). School Finance: A Policy
Perspective (4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Chapter 1, Chapter 3 (pp. 76-
81).

Ogbu, J. U. (1988). Class stratification, racial stratification, and schooling. In Weis,
L. (Ed.). Class, race, and gender in American education. Albany: State
University of New York Press.

Okagaki, Lynn (2001). Triarchic Model of Minority Children’s School Achievement,
Educational Psychologist, 36(1), 9-20.

Olson, L. & Hoff, D. (2005). U. S. to pilot new gauge of “growth”: Education
Department to permit shifts in how states track gains. Education Week, 25
(13), 1-16.

Olson, L. & Jerald, C.D. (1998). Barriers to success. Education Week, 17, 9-23.
Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3
rd
ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Palmaffy, T. (2001, May). The Evolution of the Federal Role. In Finn,C. Rotherham,
A. & Hokanson, C. (eds.). Rethinking Special Education for a New
Century.Washington, D.C.: Thomas Fordham Foundation and the Progressive
Policy Institute.

Payne, Ruby K. (2005). A framework for understanding poverty. Highlands, TX:
aha! Process, Inc.

Ravitch, D. (1983). Race and Education: The Brown Decision, The Troubled
Crusade (pp. 114-144). Basic Books.
143
Salamon, L. (1991). Overview: Why Human Capital? Why Now? In David
Hornbeck and Lester M. Salamon (eds.), Human Capital and America’s
Future. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 1-28.

Sanders, W. L. & Horn, S P. (1995). The Tennessee Value-Added Assessment
System (TVAAS): Mixed Model Methodology in Educational Assessment. In
Shrinkfield, A. J. & Stufflebeam, D. (Eds.), Teacher Evaluation: Guide to
Effective Practice (pp. 337-350). Boston, MA: Kluwer.

Sapp, M., Zahorik, J., Farrel, W., Holbrook, T., Maier, P., Molnar, A., Percy, S.,
Pollard, D., & Zmrazek, J. (1996). Evaluation design plan for the Student
Achievement Guarantee in Education (SAGE) program. Milwaukee, WI:
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Urban Research Center.

Schein, E. (2004). Organizational culture and leadership. Jossey-Bass, San
Franscisco.

Seashore, L. & Marks, H. (1998). Does Professional Community Affect the
Classroom? Teachers' Work and Student Experiences in Restructuring
Schools. American Journal of Education, 106(4), pp. 532-575.

Steele, C. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereopytes shape intellectual identity and
performance. American Psychologist, 52, 613-629.

The achievement of students from the early 1970’s to 2008, US Department of
Education, 2008. Retrieved April 5, 2009 at
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d08/ch_2.asp

Tyack, D., & Tobin, W. (1994). The “grammar” of schooling: Why has it been so
hard to change? American Educational Research Journal, 31, 453-479.

Uccelli, P. & Paez, M. M. (2007). Narrative and vocabulary development of
bilingual children from kindergarten to first grade: Developmental changes
and associations among English and Spanish skills. Language, Speech, and
Hearing Services in Schools, 38, 225-236.

Viadero, D. (2000, March). Lags in minority achievement defy traditional
explanations. Education Week, 19(19), 18-22.

Wirt, F. & Kirst, M. W. (2005). The Political Dynamics of American Education, (3
rd

ed.), chap. 1 and 2. Richmond, CA: McCutchan Publishing. Future.
Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, p. 1-28.

144
Zigler, E. & Finn-Stevenson, M. (2007). From research to policy and practice: the
school of the 21
st
century. The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 77(2),
175-181.

Zirkel, P.A. (December 2001/January 2002). Decisions that Have Shaped U.S.
Education. Educational Leadership, 59(4)
145
APPENDIX A
INSTRUMENTATION
RQ 1: What are the cultural norms that have been employed by the school that have
allowed them to close the achievement gap and sustain success?

Data Needs Data Sources Instrumentation
Collaboration • Dept. meeting notes
• Meeting schedules
• Staff development plan/school site plan
Document review
Challenging, rigorous
curriculum
• Textbook adoption list
• College prep/AP/IB offerings
• Instructional minutes
• Assessment tools
• School data to analyze % of students in
CP/AP/IB/honors courses
Document review, survey
Preventions • Preschool availability
• Literacy Programs
• Pre-kinder offerings
• Character education
• Freshman advisory
• AVID
Interviews, document review,
observations
Interventions • SST
• RTI
• Tutorial Programs
• Saturday School
• Intervention during the school day
• Summer school
• Modified year-round school
Document review
Behavioral Expectation • Character education
• Student-parent handbook
• Board policy
• Discipline assembly
• Freshman assembly/freshman day
Document review,
observations
Leadership--Vision for
success with high
expectations
• Vision
• Mission statement
• Teacher evaluations
• Assessment tools
Document review
Professional development • Staff development plan to meet the needs
of diverse learners
Document review, surveys,
interviews
Data-driven decision making • SMART goals
• Assessment tools
• School demographic data
• Student profile data
• Student placement into CP/AP/IB/honors classes
• CST data, CAHSEE, AP, and college-bound
Document review, surveys,
interviews
Recognition of diverse
student population
• Re-classification
• Equitable groupings of minority students in
classrooms
• Full desegregation
• Counseling
• Entitlement funding
Document review, surveys,
interviews
Standards are key to
curriculum and instruction
• Textbook adoption
• Standards posted in every room
• Teacher lessons
• Assessment tools
Document review,
observations, surveys
146

RQ 2: What are the practices that have been employed by the school that have
allowed them to close the achievement gap and sustain success?

Data Needs Data Sources Instrumentation
Administrative leadership on
instructional practices of
teachers
Teacher’s observation
student performance
data
Teacher interview, teacher
survey
Instructional leadership of
administrators
Classroom observation
Teachers practice in
Professional development
PD records, PLCs Teacher interviews,
observations during PD
meetings
Response to Intervention School data Documents; Interviews
Classroom organization on
SLC, class size, block schedule
Schoolwide record Master schedule, observation
ELD CELDT scores, course
placement
Course placement,
benchmarks
Documents; interview,
observations
School safety Suspension records Interventions

RQ3: What are the programs that have been employed by the school that have
allowed them to close the achievement gap and sustain success?

Data Needs Data Sources Instrumentation
I. Information on the program:
o How the program
works/description of the
program
o Who is involved in the
program
o Length of program
o Goal of program
o Level of implementation
Key players/
Stakeholders: Start up
sources/ Implementation 
Questions on
interviews/ survey
II. Assessments: Test scores; CST
Benchmarks; District Wide Assessments
(DWA)
CDE/Benchmark data
system
III. School Artifacts: Attendance,
Agendas/minutes:
Agendas/ minutes/
student and teacher
attendance
List of documents that
are being reviewed
IV. Professional Development
o Who
o Material
o What type: trainer of
trainer/facilitator
Program Environment
Observations
Classroom observation
forms
147
APPENDIX B
DOCUMENT REVIEW MASTER LIST, CATEGORIZED
District
1. Textbook adoption list
2. Modified or year-round school
3. Board policy
4. Vision statement
5. Mission statement
6. Staff development plan to meet the needs of diverse learners
7. LEA Plan
8. District policy for ELM placement
9. District policy for SEI placement
10. LEA code of conduct policy
11. LEA discipline policy
12. LEA drug/alcohol use prohibition policy
13. LEA firearms/weapons policy
14. LEA Gun-Free Schools Act policy
15. LEA plan describing availability of Tobacco Use Prevention Education
services
16. LEA policy regarding tobacco use
17. Full desegregation
18. District-established criteria/procedures for reclassification
19. LEA catch-up plan for monitoring and overcoming any academic deficits
20. District policy on qualifications for instructional aides

School level artifacts
1. Meeting schedules
2. Staff Development plan/School site plan
3. Instructional minutes/Master Schedule
4. Assessment tools
5. Preschool availability or pre-kinder offerings
6. Literacy programs
7. Character education
8. SST
9. RTI
10. Tutorial programs
11. Saturday school
12. Interventions during the school day
148
13. Summer school
14. Student-parent handbook
15. Discipline assembly
16. Vision statement
17. Mission statement
18. Staff development plan to meet the needs of diverse learners
19. Equitable groupings of minority students in classrooms
20. Parent Involvement Policy
21. School Accountability Report Card
22. Teacher and paraprofessional assignments
23. Student profile data
24. Counseling availability and function
25. Entitlement funding/Title I funding
26. School-parent compact for NCLB/Title I
27. Public reports of suspension, expulsion, and truancy rates from Uniform
Management Information and Reporting System
28. Safe school plan (including disaster procedures, crisis management, or
emergency plan)
29. Attendance reports

Instructional
1. Department meeting notes
2. Common planning/Common Assessments
3. Classroom Objectives or standards posted in rooms
4. SMART goals or action plan documents
5. Teacher lesson plans

Differentiated or special services
1. Re-classification of LEP
2. Descriptions of English-language mainstream program
3. Descriptions of structured English immersion program design
4. English learner program evaluation report
5. GATE student identification criteria
6. GATE teacher specifications
7. Analysis of California Healthy kids survey (CHKS) core module data
8. Analysis of CHKS resiliency and youth development module
9. California Healthy kids survey
10. Physical education instructional minutes report

149
California Department of Education website
1. School data to analyze student proficiency (CST and CELDT)
2. School demographic data
3. School data on Program Improvement status: AYP and API information

Pertains to High Schools only
1. College prep/AP/IB offerings
2. School data to analyze % of students in CP/AP/IB/Honors courses
3. Freshman advisory
4. AVID
5. Freshman assembly/freshman first day
6. Student placement criteria into CP/Honors/AP/IB
7. CST data, CAHSEE, AP, and college-bound statistics
8. District career technical education plan and course offerings
9. Work Experience Education District plan
10. Process for adding new courses
11. Description of alternative programs
150
APPENDIX C
SCHOOL OBSERVATION GUIDE
• In all observation situations keep in mind the 4 frames of Bolman/Deal:
o Structural Frame: organization and structure of groups and teams to
achieve goals
o Human Resource Frame: organizational ability to meet human needs,
positive interpersonal and group dynamics
o Political Frame: power and conflict, coalitions, internal and external
politics and their impact on the organization
o Symbolic Frame: positive culture that gives purpose, esprit de corps
through rituals, ceremony, story, shared experiences

• An organization demonstrates what is important to it by what it emphasizes in
daily practice

• First Impressions
o Note time of observations and what expected activity at those times may
look like
o Condition of surrounding neighborhood
o Approach to school
 Exterior condition of structures
 Plants and foliage
 Bus turn-arounds, parking lot: teachers and students
 Supervision around/ in front of school
o The Office
 Entrance/security
 Condition of office compatible with exterior?
 Staff interaction, with guests, parents, community, and peers
o Initial Meeting
 With whom? Principal, Asst. Principal…
 Restrictions on access?
 Are you greeted?
 Staff traffic to administration, open door or appointments
151

o Staff
 Designated representatives, restricted choice, or free access to
staff
 Teacher leaders
• Empowered? Figure heads?
• Emergent leaders or formal structures of leadership
• Experienced or non-experienced?
 Collaboration?
• Structured, non-structured
• Common assessments, formative, summative
• Attitudes towards collaboration
o Students
 Student centered culture?
 Connection with staff at all levels? Any levels?
 Student run events?
 Posters? School spirit?

• Curriculum
o Levels of curriculum
 ESL
 SDAIE
 SPED
• RTI
• Full Inclusion
• Co-teaching Model
• RSP
• SDC
• ED/SED
• SH
 Standard Levels
 College Prep
 Advanced Placement
 International Baccalaureate
 Open Access or restricted entrance
o Support Programs
 AVID
 Credit Recovery
 Concurrent Enrollment with junior college
 Distance Learning credit
152

• Classroom Observations
o Physical condition of room
o Desks or tables
o Student work displayed
o Learning Goal
o Related to Content standard
o Demonstration of Learning
o Asset Development
 Caring
 High Expectations
 Meaningful Participation
o Strategies
 Direct instruction
 Guided practice
 Scaffolding
 Visuals/Graphic Organizers
 Compare and Contrast
 Summarizing or note taking
 TAPPLE (Teach, Ask, Pick, Pause, Listen, Explain, Expand,
Emphasize)
 TPR
 Check for Understanding, summative
o Technology
 Extent available
 Extent used
 Teacher use
 Student use
 Student/teacher feedback on its use
153
APPENDIX D
OBSERVATION LOG
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Focus: Factors Narrowing the Achievement Gap with Sustained
Success in Urban School(s)

Date: _________________________ Page _________ of __________

Type of Observation (Circle One): School Class Leadership Meeting
School Culture Curriculum &
Instruction
Leadership Student
Engagement
Additional
Observations
154
APPENDIX E
SURVEY QUESTIONS
The Staff Input Survey
Your school was chosen for this study based on the success and sustainability in
student achievement. The purpose of this study is to identify your school’s cultural
norms, practices and programs that contributed to the closing or narrowing of the
achievement gap. The results of this study could be useful to schools with a similar
student population. Your input on this survey is anonymous. This research project is
being conducted by a doctoral student from the University of Southern California.
The survey will take about 10-15 minutes to complete.
Thank you for your cooperation.

Please circle the appropriate response:
1. The school supports collaboration among teachers.
a) Strongly Agree b) Agree c) Somewhat Disagree e) Strongly Disagree

2. The teachers at this school believe that students can achieve at high levels.
a) Strongly Agree b) Agree c) Somewhat Disagree e) Strongly Disagree

3. School administration creates a positive school culture for teachers and students.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never

4. Leadership is shared among school personnel.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never

5. Teachers collaborate to discuss student data to improve student learning.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never

6. The school addresses the needs of struggling students.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never

7. School administration conducts classroom observations frequently.
a) Strongly Agree b) Agree c) Somewhat Disagree e) Strongly Disagree

8. The school has a systematic process for identifying and assisting struggling
students.
a) Strongly Agree b) Agree c) Somewhat Disagree e) Strongly Disagree
155
9. School administration communicates vision and goals to the staff.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never

10. School administration ensures the analysis of student assessment data.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never

11. School administration provides support for implementation of new instructional
practices.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never

12. School administration provides ways to improve instructional strategies to meet
the needs of students with diverse backgrounds.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never

13. CST scores and District Assessments are used to plan your instructional
program?
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never

14. Student data is used to identify the instructional needs of my students.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never

15. You utilize the California State Standards to plan and deliver instruction.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never

16. You provide differentiated instructions to meet the needs of all students.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never

17. School administration initiates programs that promote student achievement.
a) Strongly Agree b) Agree c) Somewhat Disagree e) Strongly Disagree

18. The school utilizes a specific program to analyze student data.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never

Please circle all that apply:
19. Who leads the collaboration sessions? 
a) Teachers b) Administrators c) Counselors d) Coaches e) Other:_______

20. What topics are discussed in the collaboration sessions?
a) Curriculum b) Instruction c) Intervention d) Data Analysis e) Operation
f) Standards g) Other: _______________________________________________
156

21. How does the school make collaboration possible?
a) Substitute release time b) Minimum Days c) Partial Day Release
d) After School Time e) Bank Time Activity f) Staff Meetings
g) Preparation Periods h) Other: _______________________________________

22. What type of intervention practices are used for struggling students?
a) Peer Tutoring b) After School Tutoring c) In-class intervention
d) Pull-Out Intervention e) Homework Assistance f) Summer School
g) Off-Track Classes h) Other: ________________________________________

23. Who organizes professional development sessions related to intervention
programs?
a) Teachers b) Administrators c) Department/Grade Level Chairs d) Coaches
e) Other: ___________________________________________________________

24. Rate the following instructional strategies you used to enhance student learning.
Extremely Important 1 2 3 4 5 6 Not Important
___ Direct instruction ___ Guided practice
___ Pre-teaching ___ Re-teaching
___ Visual aids/graphic organizers ___ Note-taking
___ Summarizing ___ SDAIE Strategies
___ Cooperative grouping ___ Peer tutoring
___ Individual instruction ___ Higher Order Thinking Questions
___ Scaffolding ___ Using Prior Knowledge
___ Metacognitive Skills ___ Other (please list)
________________

25. What specific program does the school use to promote collaboration?

____________________________________________________________________

26. What intervention program(s) at your school have contributed to closing the
achievement gap?

____________________________________________________________________

27. What instructional programs do you use in your classroom that has helped close
the achievement gap?

____________________________________________________________________
157

28. Comments about the role of intervention in closing the achievement gap at your
school:

____________________________________________________________________

29. Comments about the role of data analysis which helped close achievement gap at
your school:

____________________________________________________________________

30. Comments about the role of school leadership which helped close the
achievement gap at your school:

____________________________________________________________________

31. Comments about the role of collaboration which helped close the achievement
gap at your school.

____________________________________________________________________

32. Comments about the role of your classroom instruction which helped close the
achievement gap at your school:

____________________________________________________________________

33. Your position at the school and the years of service:

____________________________________________________________________
158
APPENDIX F
INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
1. Collaboration:
a. What does collaboration look like at this school?
b. Who leads the collaboration sessions?
c. With whom do you collaborate? How often?
d. What are the outcomes for student learning?: consider rephrasing?
e. What programs does the school have in place to ensure that students achieve?
What practices does the school have in place to ensure that students achieve?
f. What cultural norms does the school have in place to ensure that students
achieve?

2. School Leadership:
a. What is the school mission?
b. What is the school vision?
c. What is the primary goal for this school?
d. How is the mission/vision/goal communicated?
e. Who usually leads/initiates new program?
f. How does the leadership foster or help student learning?
g. Is the leadership shared among the various school personnel? How?
h. How does the leadership meet the needs of at-risk populations?
i. On what basis are the school decisions made?

3. Program Implementation:
a. What programs have been employed that have allowed the school to close the
achievement gap?
b. Are there programs that have improved attendance? And how is this
affecting achievement?
c. What programs have improved the school climate?
d. What programs have improved content learning for all students but
specifically for students with diverse needs?
e. What programs have improved student achievement in literacy skills?
f. What programs have improved student achievement in mathematics?
159

4. Data Analysis:
a. How is data used to support student learning?
b. Who is responsible for disaggregation, dissemination, and review of data?
c. How is this information shared among the various school stakeholders?
d. Does your school utilize a specific data analysis program? If so, which
program?
e. How often is data analyzed at your school site?

5. Intervention:
a. What are the supports that are in place for students and their families?
b. Who determines which students get support?
c. How are supports implemented and monitored?
d. What is intervention is offered to students who are underperforming
academically?
e. How are these implemented? Who is involved?
f. How do you make sure that every student has his or her academic needs met?
g. What is the way things are done that supports learning in student groups that
are traditional underperforming?

6. Practices that Support Closing the Achievement Gap:
a. What are the school-wide practices that support student learning?
b. Who determined that this practice happens?
c. How is effectiveness measured? Or what data is collected?
d. How do you know that it is successful?
e. Has this practice been modified since the beginning?How do you know that
all (EL, low SES, Special Ed, African American, Hispanic) students have
access to these practices?
f. How do you know students are appropriately placed in classrooms or
courses?
g. What are the departmental or grade level practices that support student
learning?
160

7. Classroom Instruction
a. What are the classroom practices that support student learning?
b. What are teachers supposed to know and be able to do?
c. How do you know that they have done it?
d. How is classroom instruction differentiated to meet the needs of all students?
List some classroom examples.

8. Professional Development Practices that support closing the
achievement gap:

a. What are the professional development opportunities available to teachers?
b. What is the role of the teacher in professional development?
c. What is the role of the administrator in professional development?
d. How do you know that teachers are utilizing skills learned?
e. In the classroom? In specific content areas?

9. Sustainability
a. Have you sustained success?
b. How have you sustained success?
c. What advice would you give to other schools that want to emulate your
cultural norms, programs and practices to close the achievement gap?

Do you have anything you would like to add to this interview in terms of closing
the achievement gap and sustaining success?
161
APPENDIX G
SURVEY RESULTS WITH MULTIPLE ANSWERS 2
Survey Questions Strongly Agree Agree
3. The school supports collaboration among teachers. 69% 31%
4. The teachers at this school believe that students can achieve
at high levels.
88% 13%
9. School administration conducts classroom observations
frequently.
38% 44%
10. The school has a systematic process for identifying and
assisting struggling students.
50% 31%
18. School administration initiates programs that promote
student achievement.
38% 56%
Survey Questions Most of the time Sometimes
5. School administration creates a positive school culture for
teachers and students.
56% 44%
6. Leadership is shared among school personnel. 44% 44%
7. Teachers collaborate to discuss student data to improve
student learning.
81% 13%
8. The school addresses the needs of struggling students. 88% 13%
9. School administration communicates vision and goals to the
staff.
31% 69%
10. School administration ensures the analysis of student
assessment data.
38% 56%
11. School administration provides support for implementation
of new instructional practices.
81% 13%
12. School administration provides ways to improve
instructional strategies to meet the needs of students with
diverse backgrounds.
56% 31%
13. CST scores and District Assessments are used to plan your
instructional program?
63% 38%
14. Student data is used to identify the instructional needs of
my students.
69% 25%
15. You utilize the California State Standards to plan and
deliver instruction.
100% 0%
16. You provide differentiated instructions to meet the needs of
all students.
63% 31%
17. School administration initiates programs that promote
student achievement.
38% 56%

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study specifically examines factors that contributed to the achievement of minority students in urban schools. The practices and programs that are successful in enhancing student performance were explored in addition to the sustainability of such student success. An analysis of the qualitative case study findings, from a Title 1 urban middle school, which was the subject of this study, suggests that instructional strategies, school culture and leadership can influence the performance of students positively. Among those factors, the relationship between leadership and student learning was further investigated to identify how such a dynamic contributes to the achievement of minority students. The study findings also provide probable evidence of school leadership as a critical factor in student learning, in high performing urban schools which have a high minority population.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Narrowing the achievement gap: Factors that support English learner and Hispanic student academic achievement in an urban intermediate school

PDF

Narrowing the achievement gap and sustaining success: a qualitative study of the norms, practices, and programs of a successful high school with urban characteristics

PDF

Factors including student engagement impacting student achievement in a high performing urban high school district: a case study

PDF

A case study to determine what perceived factors, including student engagement, contribute to academic achievement in a high performing urban high school

PDF

Urban schools that have narrowed the achievement gap: middle school math achievement in an urban setting

PDF

Factors that may lead to an urban high school‘s outperforming status: a case study of an institution‘s achievement in the age of accountability

PDF

Narrowing the achievement gap: a case study of an urban school

PDF

The impact and sustainability of programs, practices and norms on student academic performance: a case study

PDF

Achievement gap and sustainability: a case study of an elementary school bridging the achievement gap

PDF

Factors contributing to the high performance of an urban high school

PDF

Factors that contribute to narrowing the achievement gap for elementary age students: a case study

PDF

A case study of student engagement in a high performing urban continuation high school

PDF

Narrowing the achievement gap: a case study of one outperforming urban school making a difference

PDF

Closing the achievement gap: what can be done?

PDF

Factors contributing to outperformance in nontraditional urban schools: a case study of a public elementary school with a dual immersion program

PDF

Sustainability of a narrowed achievement gap: A case study

PDF

A study of an outperforming urban high school and the factors which contribute to its increased academic achievement with attention to the contribution of student achievement

PDF

A case study of factors related to a high performing urban charter high school: investigating student engagement and its impact on student achievement

PDF

The factors present in an outperforming charter middle school: a case study focusing on promising practices, school leadership, and cultural norms

PDF

Closing the achievement gap: breakthrough in the urban high school

Asset Metadata

Creator Daily, Young Shin (author)

Core Title Perceived factors for narrowing the achievement gap for minority students in urban schools: cultural norms, practices and programs

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 03/23/2010

Defense Date 02/25/2010

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

Tag achievement,leadership,minority students,OAI-PMH Harvest,practices,programs,sustainability,urban schools

Place Name California (states)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Gothold, Stuart E. (committee chair), Hocevar, Dennis J. (committee member), Love, Laurie (committee member)

Creator Email dailyscays@aol.com,ydaily1@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m2874

Unique identifier UC1289501

Identifier etd-Daily-3564 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-296457 (legacy record id),usctheses-m2874 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Daily-3564.pdf

Dmrecord 296457

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Daily, Young Shin

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 cisadmin@lib.usc.edu