Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Teaching in the context of NCLB: a qualitative study of the impact on teachers' work, morale, and professional support
(USC Thesis Other)
Teaching in the context of NCLB: a qualitative study of the impact on teachers' work, morale, and professional support
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
TEACHING IN THE CONTEXT OF NCLB:
A QUALITATIVE STUDY OF THE IMPACT ON TEACHERS’ WORK,
MORALE, AND PROFESSIONAL SUPPORT
by
Mary (Molly) Terese Murphy
___________________________________________________________________
A Research Proposal Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements of the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2008
Copyright 2008 Mary (Molly) Terese Murphy
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES iv
ABSTRACT v
CHAPTER 1 OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY 1
Introduction 1
Purpose of the Study 7
Research Questions 8
Significance of the Study 9
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 11
Introduction 11
Accountability on the Contexts of Teachers’ Work 11
Accountability and Teacher Morale 20
Accountability and Professional Support 29
Conclusion 37
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 41
Introduction 41
Sample and Population 42
Data Collection Procedures 45
Data Analysis Procedures 46
Ethical Considerations 47
Limitations of the Study 48
CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS 50
Introduction 50
Teachers’ Beliefs and Experiences 51
Factors in the School and Community 63
Professional Support 82
Changes in Teachers’ Work 93
Summary of Findings 104
iii
CHAPTER 5 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 108
Introduction 108
Connections to Prior Research 110
Implications for Future Research 115
Implications for Future Policy and Practice 116
Conclusion 118
REFERENCES 120
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Teacher Interview Protocol 126
Appendix B: Recruitment Flyer 129
Appendix C: Information Sheet 131
Appendix D: HyperResearch Codes 135
iv
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Teacher Experience 44
v
ABSTRACT
The federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 has created
accountability systems for schools and because of this, the work lives of teachers
have changed. Teaching in today’s schools has become more intense during this
era of high-stakes accountability. Teachers are experiencing higher levels of stress
and feeling more pressure to improve student achievement and raise individual test
scores. This study focused on the perceptions and realities of teaching in the age of
accountability.
The purpose of this qualitative case study was to answer the over-arching
research question,
How has teachers’ work changed in the age of accountability?
I developed three research sub-questions to guide my study: (1) How do
teachers’ beliefs and experiences about their role as teachers (or the teaching craft)
affect their work in the age of accountability? (2) How do factors in the school and
community affect teachers’ work in the age of accountability? (3) What support
mechanisms are in place to help teachers manage teaching in the age of
accountability?
I selected two elementary schools in Southern California for my study.
Both school sites were selected because they are Title I schools with over 90%
English Learner (EL) students and over 90% Hispanic students on the California
Basic Educational Data System (CBEDS). I interviewed six teachers from each
vi
school and found evidence that teachers’ work has changed in the age of
accountability. I discovered that the majority of teachers have experienced
accountability changes in their work lives. The teachers cited data, assessments,
documentation, and paperwork as major work changes for teachers in the age of
accountability. At the same time, the teachers stressed the importance of
accountability and its focus on benchmarks, goals, and achievement.
Based on my findings, concepts emerged regarding the importance of
support mechanisms for teachers to manage teaching in the age of accountability,
along with the importance of parental education to help bridge the socio-cultural
gap that separates teachers and parents. My suggestions for future research include
a larger-scale study of teachers regarding the perceptions and realities of teaching
in the age of accountability including elementary, middle, and high school teachers.
1
CHAPTER 1
OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Introduction
Background of the Problem
“What nobler employment, or more valuable to the state, than that of the
man who instructs the rising generation?” (Cicero, c. 43 B.C.). Teaching has
always been considered a noble or helping profession. The righteous pursuit of
teaching is the ardent focus on the transformation of the lives of the students.
Most eager teachers enter the field of education in order “to make a difference” in
the lives of children. Hammerness (2006) posited that teachers envision the ideal
learning environment where they and their students could flourish, aided by the
design of the classroom, the type of school, and even the kind of community that
would support their dreams. These images of ideal classroom practice are
teachers’ visions. They embody teachers’ hopes for the future and play a
significant role in their lives and work (Hammerness, 2006, 1). “Good teachers
aim to empower, challenge, and inspire a love of learning in each and every child”
(Hammerness, 2006).
Teaching in today’s schools has intensified during the era of high-stakes
accountability. According to the Center for Education Policy and Leadership
(CEPAL, 2005),
2
High stakes accountability initiatives seek to instill dramatic
improvements in school performance. While these policies take
different forms, they generally try to strengthen the incentives for
school improvement by issuing salient rewards to high achieving
schools and/or by imposing stiff sanctions on low performing
schools (1).
The lives of teachers have changed. “Instead of fostering creativity and ingenuity,
more and more school systems have become obsessed with imposing and
micromanaging curriculum uniformity” (Hargreaves, 2003, 1). Educational
reform today focuses on federal, state, and local involvement, the published high
stakes, and the sanctions for failing schools. Teachers with many years experience
as well as those with few are struggling with the new demands. The public is
highly informed and the student make-up is vastly different in schools today in the
United States. “Not only is the United States the most diverse nation on earth;
America today is the most diverse nation in the history of the earth” (Datnow,
Lasky, Stringfield, & Teddlie, 2006, 156). The world of teaching and our student
population are vastly different today than even ten to fifteen years ago. Our
students come from various cultures and many are second-language learners. The
state of education and the role of teachers have changed in this ever-increasing
multicultural nation. “In place of ambitious missions of compassion and
community, schools and teachers have been squeezed into the tunnel vision of test
scores, achievement targets, and league tables of accountability” (Hargreaves,
2003, 1).
3
The values of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 are clear —
student subgroups in specific academic areas (language arts and math) must
achieve higher levels of achievement through the efforts of highly qualified
teachers as measured by standardized tests. According to Fuhrman (2004), the
new systems have an explicit theory of action about improving student
achievement that stresses the motivation of teachers, students, and administrators.
Therefore, as a result of NCLB and the prescribed sanctions for failing schools,
administrators and teachers are under fire to improve instruction and raise test
scores. “Feeling pressured to produce higher test scores, teachers become more
controlling and less patient, particularly with students who lag behind” (Stipek,
2006, 46). The key is “to find the right mix of tools to provide support for school
improvements that will encourage responsible and responsive education” (Darling-
Hammond & Ascher, 1991, 11).
History of Accountability
When I refer to the age of accountability, I mean the years since the No
Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001, even though accountability began before
the implementation of NCLB in 2002. Twenty years earlier, in April 1983, the
state of education took a drastic hit with the publishing of A Nation at Risk, a
report on American education from the National Commission on Excellence in
Education. The alarming report became the focus of national, state, and local
concerns and the call began for systemic reform in American schools. This
4
landmark moment in education presented us with a sobering and extremely grim
prediction for American schools. The reform called for a major overall in public
education due to the current state of mediocrity. On October 20, 1994, Congress
passed the Improving America Schools Act under President Bill Clinton. It re-
authorized the ESEA of 1965 and was the Clinton administration’s effort to reform
education by appropriating funds for educational improvement purposes. In April
1998, Goals 2000 was passed to reform education in order to improve student
achievement by developing clear and rigorous state standards defining what every
child should know. Goals 2000 supported comprehensive, state, and district
planning of and implementation of these standards to improve student achievement
of those standards. Along with the mastery of standards, the Public Schools
Accountability Act of 1999 measured the academic performance and growth of
schools on a variety of academic measures.
No Child Left Behind
In January 2002, President George W. Bush signed into law the No Child
Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 and made the national government a prominent
player in the effort to use high stakes accountability to drive school improvement
(Hess, 2003). NCLB is a reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act (ESEA) and requires states to test students in second through eighth
grade annually to ensure that students meet proficiency and that high school
students are able to pass a high school exit exam. States are required to participate
5
in the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) every two years to
benchmark their exams. Corrective actions are imposed on schools and districts
that fail to demonstrate “adequate yearly progress” (AYP) for those students in
significant subgroups. At about the same time in the state of California there was
the California Public Schools Accountability Act. According to the California
Public Schools Accountability Act (PSAA), schools are required to reach a score
of 800 or above on the Academic Performance Index (API scale 200-1000) by the
year 2014. All of these high stakes accountability measures have an affect on
administrators and teachers. NCLB has put added pressures on administrators and
teachers. “School leadership is the taking of responsibility for achieving
educational goals and purposes through local reforms” (Goldberg & Morrison,
2003, 80).
This study focused on teacher perspectives, teacher motivation, and teacher
burnout in this new realm of high stakes accountability. Mahoney (2002, 40)
stated, “Nearly 30 years ago when I began teaching, I was motivated by the
prospect of making a difference in children’s lives, occasionally offering hope and
inspiration and, most importantly, helping children learn.” His advice in today’s
environment is to embrace accountability. Unfortunately though, many teachers
feel that they used to be evaluated on what they did as teachers, but now they feel
they are only evaluated on what their students do based on their state test scores.
6
Age of Accountability
The research speaks to educators embracing accountability. According to
Mathis (2003), “We must work to ensure that no school provides substandard,
inadequate, or inequitable educational programs. We must do so not because it is
politically expedient, but because it is what we owe the children, our society, and
ourselves” (685). NCLB is holding teachers and schools accountable for
improving student achievement. Teachers and schools are being held accountable
as professional educators to teach students to the best of their ability by faithfully
replicating district programs, implementing research-based teaching strategies,
continually assessing students through benchmark testing, and continuously
analyzing student data. Proponents of high-stakes assessment have argued that,
“when administered well, large-scale tests and accountability measures need not be
ominous for teachers—indeed, they can serve to clarify goals, unify curricula, and
foster a greater sense of community among teachers and administrators” (Scott,
2005, 48).
Teachers instruct, teach, guide, and motivate students to improve overall
achievement and learning in all classrooms. “Implementing and sustaining school-
wide change through a complete restructuring effort—what has come to be known
as comprehensive school reform is challenging” (Odden, 2000, 433). The current
problem is how to motivate teachers and deal with the reality of teacher burnout in
the age of accountability. The great promise of teaching, the reward of personal
satisfaction and sense of accomplishment, is increasingly being unfulfilled (Gold
7
& Roth, 1993). “The joy of helping others grow and watching them mature is
dampened, even, destroyed, by the growing tensions, stultifying conditions, and
unrealistic demands on the profession and teachers” (Gold & Roth, 1993, 2).
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to better understand the perceptions and
realities of teaching in the age of accountability and to examine how the current
realities and experiences affect individual teachers and their own visions and
beliefs as educators. There is little discussion or awareness outside of limited
education and academic circles of how the large-scale assessment systems
constrain the everyday work of teachers and students (Scott, 2005). McElroy
(2005) has heard teachers from across the country express their frustration and
discontent with the implementation and provisions of NCLB. “I hear it from
experienced teachers at the top of their game and from fresh-faced newcomers
whose excitement is dimming all too quickly” (McElroy, 2005, 6). Teachers
across the nation are experiencing teacher burnout in this age of accountability.
According to Stipek (2006), teachers are feeling pressured to produce higher test
scores and as such, teachers become more controlling and less patient, especially
with students who are underperforming. Teaching is becoming a young person’s
profession again; “whoever enters teaching and however he or she approaches the
work will shape the profession and what it is able to achieve with our children for
8
the next 30 years” (Hargreaves, 2003, 2). Therefore, being a caring and supportive
teacher means holding students accountable while providing the support they need
to succeed (Stipek, 2006).
Research Questions
Hargreaves (2003, 5) posited that “in an educational world dominated by
standards, test scores, and achievement targets, teaching beyond the knowledge
economy means retrieving and rehabilitating the idea of teaching as a sacred
vocation that pursues a compelling social mission.” This qualitative study aims to
explore teacher perceptions and add to the literature by focusing on the increased
demand on teachers and understanding the realities, perceptions, and experiences
of teaching in the age of accountability. “We are living in a defining moment of
educational history, when the world in which teachers do their work is changing
profoundly, and the demographic composition of teaching is turning over
dramatically” (Hargreaves, 2003, 2). The cliché of “making a difference” does not
suffice anymore as a moral purpose for teaching in this high-stakes, high risk
knowledge society (Hargreaves, 2003). Teachers must “make a difference” in this
high stakes, high risk knowledgeable society. Therefore, the over-arching research
question is:
How has teachers’ work changed in the age of accountability?
9
In turn, the following sub-questions will also be addressed to further guide
the research:
1. How do teachers’ beliefs and experiences about their role as teachers (or the
teaching craft) affect their work in the age of accountability?
2. How do factors in the school and the community affect teachers’ work in the
age of accountability?
3. What supports are in place to help teachers manage teaching in the age of
accountability?
Significance of the Study
The purpose of this study is to better understand the perceptions and
realities of teaching in this age of accountability and how the current realities and
experiences affect individual teachers and their own visions and beliefs as
educators. The current problem is how to motivate teachers and deal with the
reality of teacher burnout in this age of accountability. This study offers a glimpse
into the professional ideals and classroom practices of teachers in an elementary
school setting. According to Anna Richert and Mills College, “If you don’t know
where you’re going, any path will do” (Hammerness, 2006, 78). In the present
age, educators must know where they are going and for what purpose. It is crucial
for our students that teachers are on the correct path to reform. This study may
10
prove highly useful and crucial to site administrators as an example of how
teachers’ beliefs, perceptions, and experiences shape their role as educators.
11
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
“A hundred years from now it will not matter what my bank account was,
the sort of house I lived in, or the kind of car I drove, but the world may be
different because I was important in the life of a child” (Witcraft, 1894-1967).
Does this sentiment still ring true today in the lives of teachers? A considerable
research base is accumulating regarding the impact of standards-based
accountability on the contexts of teachers’ work. In order to fully understand the
context of the over-arching research question of this study and the subsequent
research questions, a review of the literature will examine three key areas:
1. An examination of the impact of accountability on the contexts of teachers’
work in relation to school and community contexts;
2. An examination of the impact of accountability on teacher morale both
positively and negatively in school contexts;
3. An examination of the professional support in place for teachers.
Accountability on the Contexts of Teachers’ Work
High stakes accountability is the conduit today intended to drive school
improvement (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004; Furhman, 2004, Stipek, 2006;
12
Hargreaves, 2003; Hess, 2003; Mathis, 2003; Scott, 2005; Yeh, 2006). As a result
of high stakes accountability, the context of teachers’ work in the school setting
has changed immensely. Therefore, this review of the accountability literature
examines the impact of accountability on the contexts of teachers’ work.
Hargreaves (1994) posited,
The teacher’s classroom is embedded within the subject area or
department, which is embedded within the school organization,
which is embedded in turn within the school system, then the
parental community and social class culture, the higher education
context of admission standards and student achievement, the
context of professional associations and networks, and the broad
environmental context of policy initiatives, educational goals,
existing norms of practice and so forth (21).
An examination and interpretation of context help us clearly define what factors
shape the patterns of teaching and teacher development. It is important to
understand that “contexts clearly matter for teachers’ work” (Hargreaves, 1994b,
21)
The School Context
The school context is paramount in the discussion of accountability on
teachers’ work. Schools have their own unique cultures. Each school has its own
unique context. Abelman, Elmore, Even, Kenyon, & Marshall (1999) conducted a
qualitative case study in order to learn about how people in schools actually think
about accountability in their daily work. The data was collected through twenty
diverse schools located in metropolitan areas, half on the east coast and half on the
west coast of the United States. The purposeful sample was constructed in order to
13
maximize the variability in the conceptions of accountability. The results
indicated that all of the schools had distinctive solutions to the problem of
accountability based on their own unique contexts.
Overall, the study concluded that in relation to accountability, schools
develop internal normative structures that are relatively immune to external
influences. It is important to note, however, that this study was at the advent of the
accountability movement. “Accountability mechanisms are, literally, the variety
of formal and informal ways by which people in schools give an account of their
actions to someone in a position of formal authority, inside or outside the school”
(Abelman et al., 1999, 13). Furthermore, Abelman et al. (1999) posited a working
theory where responsibility, expectations, and accountability operate in a close
mutual and reciprocal relationship where the relationships vary based on different
school contexts.
At the same time, this research is timely in relation to accountability on the
contexts of teachers’ work. “Schools will vary in their response to external
accountability systems depending on the level and type of solutions they have in
place to the problems of responsibility, expectations, and internal accountability”
(Abelman et al., 1999, 51). This study is indicative of the over-arching research
question: How has teachers’ work changed in the age of standards and
accountability? Ableman et al. (1999) advocated,
Accountability systems are often constructed by policymakers and
administrators out of normative theories of how schools ought to
act, uncorrupted by understandings of why they act the way they
14
do. Our study suggests that such systems should take their initial
point of departure not from normative theories about how schools
ought to act, but from a finer-grained understanding of why they
act the way they do (51).
Attitudes, values, and beliefs of individual teachers (about what students can do,
their own teacher efficacy, and influences of students’ home lives) are key factors
that determine the solutions that teachers and schools construct in relation to
accountability because of the very nature of the unique context of each school.
Teacher Identity
Sloan (2006), Conley and Goldman (1998), D’Emidio-Caston (1994), and
Borko (1993) conducted individual studies that delved into teacher identity in
relation to accountability-explicit curriculum policies and teacher attitude toward
reform. Sloan (2006) conducted a qualitative case study of three teachers in a
diverse, urban Texas elementary school. The purpose of the study was to explore
and articulate the varied ways the teachers actively read and responded to the
accountability-related curriculum policies. The findings suggest that teachers do
indeed actively read and respond to accountability-explicit curriculum policies in
varied and unique ways. They also suggested that teacher identities are powerful
means through which to understand these varied experiences with and responses to
accountability-explicit curriculum policies (Sloan, 2006, 119). Lastly, teacher
agency as merely a capacity to resist accountability confuses the important issues
of teacher quality and equity.
15
Focusing on teacher identity and agency, Sloan (2006) vividly and candidly
describes the reactions and actions of three Texas elementary school teachers in
this age of accountability through a reflective and dialogic approach. The three
teachers are: Christine (Teaching as a Professional Kind of Status), Dean
(Teacher-As-Entertainer), and Anne (The Born Teacher). All three teachers react
to the accountability-related curriculum policies in their own unique ways; “For
Christine, her ability to exhibit teacher agency is limited not by her identification
with the figured world of school but by a lack of expertise of third-grade
curriculum and pedagogy” (Sloan, 2006, 143).
On the other hand, Dean, though, is quite critical of school as a whole and
tries to emulate a different type of teacher, one who focuses on fun and frivolity at
the expense of good teaching and research-based instructional practices. He shows
no stress, emotion, or regard for that matter in relation to the accountability-
explicit curriculum mandates. Anne, the born teacher, always knew that she
wanted to be a teacher. She is in essence the quintessential teacher . . . . “It
sounds so corny, but I always knew that I was going to be a teacher . . . . I just
knew form early on in my life” (Sloan, 2006, 138). All three teachers self-
authored themselves as teachers within the figured world of school. As
aforementioned, individual teachers both experience and respond to the same
accountability-explicit curriculum policies in different and unique ways (Sloan,
2006).
16
In summary, these three case studies of Texas elementary teachers clearly
demonstrate that as social producers, then, teachers read the accountability-related
curriculum discourses surrounding them, construct their own unique
understandings, and in the end, construct their own self-directed responses.
Schools are part of a complex, hierarchical system and accountability is indeed
more than a state test. Furthermore, accountability and district-level accountability
policies are having positive and negative effects upon the overall quality and
equity of teachers’ classroom practices. Close attention to teacher contexts in
relation to school site factors is the key to producing multidimensional portraits of
accountability on the context of teachers’ work. It was noted that researchers
interested in better understanding teachers’ experiences and responses to
accountability policies need to more openly acknowledge that by the time national
or state accountability policies reach the classroom, the meanings and significance
of these policies have been significantly altered.
Teacher Attitude and Value Systems
Various researchers have studied teachers and their efforts to change their
classrooms, schools, and districts, and have also studied teachers’ attitudes toward
reform (Sloan, 2006; D’Emidio-Caston, 1994; Conley & Goldman, 1998).
D’Emidio-Caston (1994) studied four schools and their journey to effect change.
The case studies reveal the tension between individual learning and collective
learning as an inevitable and significant part of the change process. “Changing
17
schools usually involves an intricate interplay between teachers who themselves
get excited about and are willing to invest energy in changing what they do, and
their peers, who must somehow become interested and involved” (D’Emidio-
Caston, 1994, 9).
However, change can also have a positive effect on the lives of teachers in
the context of their work. D’Emidio-Caston (1994) revealed that teachers can use
their own strengths, talents, knowledge, and shared vision to promote student
growth and development and bring about positive change. Authentic reform must
be a grass-roots effort that spreads like wildfire. “The cases show us graphically
that there are no short cuts to changing schools and that the inspiration of one
person must be caught and experienced by others if any authentic reform is to take
place” (D’Emidio, 1994, 9). He also revealed the reality of school reform that is
still prevalent today,
One of the dilemmas of school reform is that knowledge about the
processes of change, pedagogy, content, and school organization
comes from outside of the contexts of the specific schools that try
to use this knowledge to effect change; yet it must somehow
inform the culture in the school and influence the everyday
activities of the people inside the school (10).
Therefore, change in schools must involve teachers in every stage of the
change process. The reality of accountability on the context of teachers’ work is
that it is indeed teachers’ work that creates the change to bring about the
accountability. Teachers must have a voice. D’Emidio-Caston (1994) reiterated,
“Listening to these teachers’ voices helps us to understand that changing schools is
18
a process that involves teachers on many levels . . . this is a process that enables
teachers to reinvent themselves, their profession, and their communities” (4).
Similarly, Conley & Goldman (1998) conducted a five-year longitudinal
study that focused on Oregon’s comprehensive educational reform legislation.
Their quantitative study used survey instruments that contained various multi-
question dimensions about issues such as the changes in teaching context, teacher
support of reform provisions, assessment changes, and other factors. Findings
revealed that teacher attitudes toward the state reforms were ambivalent, but they
were slowly moving to accept reform requirements. Overall, there was agreement
on the need to increase teacher workload, focus curriculum on state standards,
increase schools’ accountability, increase curriculum integration, increase teacher
collaboration, and increase social-service in schools. As in other studies, the
authors found that accountability plays a crucial role in the context of teachers’
work.
Interestingly, Conley & Goldman (1998) concluded that teachers rely on
their own value systems as a primary filter for determining their response to
reform. Also, they look to their colleagues and the norms present in their schools
as significant influences. “Currently, educator response seems to be primarily
from a compliance perspective: What do we need to do and how will it affect us
and our students?” (Conley & Goldman, 1998, 23) Teachers tend to process
reform in terms of its effect on their workload and through the filter of their
educational philosophy, opinions of their peers, and school norms. Sadly enough,
19
“Belief that real change can or will occur is limited to perhaps a quarter of the
teaching force.”
In another qualitative study, Borko (1993) studied the effects of new
assessments based on case studies in three elementary schools on the outskirts of
Denver, Colorado. Interviews were conducted with teachers about their
knowledge, beliefs, and practices related to classroom-based performance
assessment and instruction in reading and mathematics. The findings revealed that
it is difficult for teachers to change their knowledge, beliefs, and practices in
fundamental ways. At the same time, though, the “teachers at all three schools
reported an increased awareness of their students’ understanding of text. They
also reported that students appeared to be more aware of their own reading ability
and their teachers’ evaluation criteria, and better able to evaluate their reading
performance” (Borko, 1993, 12). Lastly, at least a small number of teachers’
changes in their assessment and instructional practices seemed to be accompanied
by changes in their conceptions of reading.
Summary
The studies examined reveal the frustration of teachers in the age of
accountability, which is a universal theme. The effects of shaming and
demoralization were felt by some teachers, along with sheer exhaustion wrought
by the unsustainable pace of reform. These feelings reached into teachers’ health
and their experience of stress. Some teachers reported bouts of high stress and
20
feeling unappreciated. This leads to the research on the impact of accountability
on the morale of teachers, which is discussed in the next section.
Accountability and Teacher Morale
In addition to accountability affecting the context of teachers’ work,
accountability has also impacted the emotional and professional lives of teachers
(Goodson, Moore, & Hargreaves, 2006; Hargreaves, 2001; Hammond & Onikama,
1997; Sloan, 2007). Therefore, this review of the accountability literature
examines the impact of accountability on teacher morale both positively and
negatively in public and school contexts.
The Public Context
The public discussions of accountability have become polarized largely
because of the educational literature that supports arguments on either side of the
debate. Much of the accountability research consists of two dichotomies, albeit all
good or all bad. “On the all-good side of the public debate, accountability has
helped, in some cases forced, teachers to deliver more focused, higher-quality,
more equitable instruction” (Sloan, 2006, 119). “On the all-bad side,
accountability has forced teachers to teach to the test and has prevented them from
delivering higher-quality, more child-focused instruction” (Sloan, 2006, 120).
Educators have generally been reticent to embrace state-level legislation reform
21
initiatives while simultaneously agreeing with their ultimate goal (Conley &
Goldman, 1998).
As mentioned above, the public discourse and educational literature present
teachers as “mostly passive agents whose teaching behaviors are leveraged
(negatively or positively) in seemingly predetermined ways by accountability-
related curriculum policies, such as rigidly scoped, sequenced, and benchmarked
curricula that are vertically aligned, and high-stakes tests” (Sloan, 2006, 121). On
the contrary, researchers are now exploring and reporting on the complexities of
accountability on the morale of teachers. Individual teachers experience and
respond to test-based systems of accountability in varied, contradictory, and
unique ways (Sloan, 2006). Hargreaves (1994b) echoed this finding, “The
important thing is not merely to present teachers’ voices, but to represent them
critically and contextually (27). Therefore, teachers must play an active role in the
accountability process.
Positive and Negative Effects
Accountability in the form of NCLB is a national policy that states that all
children will learn. There are many positives for holding schools accountable,
such as data-driven instruction to meet the needs of all learners, instructional
pacing guides to ensure equal access to the core curriculum for all students,
instructional coaches to improve instruction through research-based teaching
22
strategies, and improved student achievement (Rentner, 2006; Snow-Renner, 2001;
Linn, 2005; Baker, 2004). Rentner (2006) posited,
Teaching and learning are changing as a result of NCLB.
Administrators and teachers have made a concerted effort to align
curriculum and instruction with state academic standards and
assessments. Principals and teachers are also making better use of
test data to adjust their teaching to address students’ individual
and group needs. Many districts have become more prescriptive
about what and how teachers are supposed to teach (16).
Accordingly, schools can have a tremendous impact on student achievement if
they follow the direction provided by the research. It is crucial for schools to
review, revise, and reform practices, policies, and procedures in their effort to
improve student achievement. According to Marzano (2003), thirty-five years of
research provides remarkably clear guidance as to the steps schools can take to be
highly effective in enhancing student achievement.
New Challenges
In turn, accountability provides new challenges for teachers. The nature
and organization of the profession make teaching inherently difficult. Teachers
face new challenges and opportunities from diverse and needy student populations.
Demands on new skills increase daily and accountability and academic
performance emerge in the balance (Vandenberghe & Huberman, 1999; Brock &
Grady, 2000; Gold & Roth, 1993; Lilyquist, 1998). “Taken together, the
characteristics and conditions of teaching present increasingly stressful situations
for teachers, situations that may have positive or deleterious consequences for
23
them and for their work with students” (Vandenberghe & Huberman, 1999, 59).
As such, the degenerating morale of teachers is a reflection of the stressful
conditions of work and the disillusionment they experience because of unmet
expectations.
Therefore, in the context of teachers’ work and morale, accountability is
the number one stressor for teachers (Brock & Grady, 2000; Lilyquist, 1998;
Vandenberghe & Huberman, 1999; Gold & Roth, 1993). “Teachers suffer work
overload when they experience too many demands, too little time, and too few
resources to accomplish the work” (Brock & Grady, 2000, 13). Education has
become a numbers game and teachers must raise test scores in order to make their
numbers (Sloan, 2007; Brock & Grady, 2000; Hargreaves, 2001; Tye & O’Brien,
2002). This has become difficult in all schools, but especially in urban schools.
Low Morale
In the current state of accountability, teacher morale is an issue in some
schools. Low morale involves levels of high stress, work overload, and rampant
teacher burnout. In essence teachers are at risk (Sloan, 2006; Sloan, 2007;
Goodson, Moore, Hargreaves, 2006; Hammond & Onikama, 1997; Hargreaves,
2001). “Job dissatisfaction leads to stress and, ultimately, to burnout if allowed to
continue unabated (Pearson & Moomaw, 2006, 45).
Accordingly, Sloan (2007) reported that an underlying assumption of
accountability policies is that fear effectively motivates schools and teachers to
24
change or improve their practices and motivates students to perform their best.
This accountability assumption goes against the grain of any teaching philosophy
whereby students need a safe and productive learning environment in order to
succeed in learning, not one set up by fear and retribution. This is true for teachers
as well (Hargreaves, 2001). The stated intent and goal of NCLB is commendable
in boosting academic achievement for all students and to close the achievement
gap for students from different racial and economic backgrounds.
Unfortunately, according to some researchers, the intent and goal of NCLB
has come at the expense of student learning overall in some contexts and teacher
morale as well (Sloan, 2007; Tye & O’Brien, 2002; Brock & Grady, 2000;
Hargreaves, 2001). According to Tye and O’Brien (2002), “The situation has
serious implications for the nation, as talented teachers leave the classroom in
greater numbers and many of those who remain feel increasingly worn out and
discouraged – even trapped” (11). They conducted a quantitative study using a
random sample of 900 teachers who graduated with teaching credentials from
Chapman University in the early 1990s. Their survey questioned teachers
regarding morale, burnout, and alienation. They discovered that alienation,
defined as a combination of feelings of isolation, normlessness, powerlessness, and
meaninglessness, appears to be widespread among teachers today.
Similarly, Sloan (2007) conducted a case study of a Texas elementary
school where teacher morale had been affected by accountability. This qualitative
study consisted of numerous interviews with teachers and administrators and a
25
review of pertinent district and school documents regarding teacher morale and
accountability. A third grade teacher explained, “Boy, if it’s not a testable state
objective in math or reading, don’t teach it. Don’t go there. We don’t have time
for it. We have to get these scores up, and that’s a narrow focus, and I don’t like
that” (Sloan, 2007b, 55). Anxiety levels were so high at the school that teachers
were told to put “NA” on their third quarter report cards under science and social
studies and to focus solely on teaching reading and math for the state test. Clearly,
teacher morale has been affected at this elementary school because of
accountability policies.
Essentially, in this Texas elementary school case study, researchers found
that teacher morale was low because the teachers were no longer educators, but
rather robots to teach to the test. The sole focus was to boost test scores. This
rating response boosted test scores quickly and “compelled teachers to dedicate
large amounts of instructional time to preparing their students for the state’s
annual high-stakes test” (Sloan, 2007, 60). At the same time, the minimal test gain
had caused a maximum frustration level for teachers, which in turn had increased
low morale.
Teacher morale is low in some schools then because bureaucracy only
focuses on the systems world of school, namely accountability. For some, one
single test has come to define all of schooling and its priorities (Sloan, 2006 Sloan,
2007; Goodson, Moore, Hargreaves, 2006; Tye & O’Brien, 2002).
26
Teacher Nostalgia and Community Contexts
At the same time, Goodson, Moore, and Hargreaves (2006) conducted a
four-year international research project of eight schools in New York State and the
province of Ontario, Canada in relation to accountability affecting the morale of
teachers in contextually different ways. In the process, they focused on three of
the eight schools because they reflected variability in story, purpose, and content.
Research has shown that change is difficult for teachers. Goodson, Moore, and
Hargreaves (2006) recorded and interviewed teachers on their life history and in
the process opened up teachers’ nostalgia as a particular form of memory relating
to the change process and overall affecting morale. They posited that teachers’
nostalgia is important in understanding change for a number of reasons. “It is a
testimony of teachers’ experience of change over time. It is an act of ongoing
construction and reconstruction of the meaning of change for teachers’
professional lives” (Goodson, Moore, & Hargreaves, 2006, 43).
Accordingly, the study focused on teachers who began their careers in the
1960s, 1970s, or early 1980s and the nostalgia they feel for that period of time in
education and in their teaching career. As aforementioned, the world of teaching
and the student population is vastly different today. This is an era of educational
reform in a multicultural setting. Goodson, Moore, and Hargreaves (2006)
discovered,
The narratives of these teachers were infused with an intensely
nostalgic tone for a time in their school’s history and their careers
when they felt empowered within small school communities and
27
emotionally connected to academically motivated or motivatable
students (46).
Therefore, the issue is not whether the past was more idyllic then the
present; but rather, contextually these are teachers who are prevalent in all schools.
These teachers may have different faces at various schools, but their frustration,
low morale, and negativity infect the morale of other teachers and the school as a
whole. The concern is that teachers are indeed the professionals who institute new
reforms in order to improve academics and raise achievement; thus, low morale
may mean these reforms may not be implemented to their fullest potential.
Emotional Demands
In addition to providing effective, instructional, and moral services to
students, teachers place extreme emotional demands on themselves (Vandenberghe
& Huberman, 1999). Hargreaves (2001) researched teaching as an emotional
practice with emotional geographies. He interviewed 53 teachers in elementary
and secondary schools in Ontario, Canada regarding their emotions concerning
teaching and educational change, “In today’s rapidly changing world, more and
more children belong to cultures that are different from and unfamiliar to those of
their teachers” (Hargreaves, 2001, 1062). This socio-cultural distance can be the
result of ignorance, poor knowledge, assumptions, or prejudice. Another result is
possibly teachers’ efforts to protect themselves from burnout in urban schools
where intensified working conditions make it difficult for teachers to teach
effectively. Teachers struggle with accountability, but even more so in urban
28
environments where the academic levels of students and the working conditions
may be lower. Hargreaves (2001) postulated,
Yet too often teachers see obstacles rather than opportunities in
the changing lives and cultures of their students, families, and
communities. Stronger efforts and better working conditions are
needed to help teachers build better emotional understanding with
many parents and students and bridge the socio-cultural gap that
separates them (1066).
Perhaps, truly getting to know students and the community in this age of
accountability would help raise teacher morale. At the same time, Hargreaves
(2001) discovered that teachers need appreciation in order to boost their morale.
The emotions project revealed that teachers are highly emotional and need to be
valued and appreciated. In the words of G.B. Stern (1890-1973), “Silent gratitude
isn’t much use to anyone.” Similarly, Hargreaves (2001) reflected that teachers
relished positive feedback and welcomed being singled out by colleagues,
principals, parents, and students. This positive attention reinforces teachers’ sense
of purpose and is a source of positive and energizing emotion for them. Therefore,
ideally, “positive staff morale is essential for any school to be the best it can be”
(Whitaker, Whitaker, & Lumpa, 2000, 225).
Summary
Thus, school reform and working conditions can contribute to teacher
burnout, which in turn affects teacher morale. In regards to burnout, some
teachers are demoralized and dissatisfied and feel that they are not leading
productive or meaningful professional lives. Burnout has long been recognized as
29
an important stress-related problem for people who work in the fields of
interpersonally-oriented professions. Therefore, an examination of the impact of
accountability on the morale of teachers is contextually based, but low morale is
indeed apparent in many school contexts. In order for teachers to raise morale and
improve accountability in the contexts of their work, they need many professional
supports in place.
Accountability and Professional Support
In addition to accountability affecting the context of teachers’ work and the
lives of teachers in the form of morale and burnout, accountability has also
affected teachers positively with various professional support (Olsen, J., 2005,
Pearson & Moomaw, 2006; Scott & Bagaka, 2006; Hargreaves & Fink, 2003;
Hargreaves & Fullan, 2000; Hargreaves, 1994a). Therefore, this review of the
accountability literature will examine the professional support mechanisms in
place for teachers in this age of accountability. Fullan (1996) suggested a critical
link between institutionalism, culture, compliance, and the connectedness of
educational institutions. Teachers are part of a system and how they relate to the
system and to one another partially explains how they make meaning of and
whether or not they comply to mandates that effect building level changes.
According to Hargreaves (1994), “Teachers need to be prepared better to
deal with personal and political conflicts in their work, not to avoid or even endure
30
them but to embrace them as positive forces for change” (20). Some of the
suggested supports for teachers in this age of accountability are teacher leadership,
teacher efficacy, teacher reflection, teacher autonomy, collaboration, and
professional development (Olsen, J., 2005, Pearson & Moomaw, 2006; Scott &
Bagaka, 2006; Hargreaves & Fink, 2003; Hargreaves, 2000; Hargreaves, 1994a).
Teacher Leadership
As part of the standards and accountability movement, teacher leaders are
blossoming into new leadership roles (Olson, 2005; Davis & Wilson, 2000; Acker-
Hocevar & Touchton, 1999; Whitaker, Whitaker, & Lumpa, 2000). As such,
teacher leaders can support peers and implement reform recommendations by
creating learning communities, redirecting conversations around student thinking,
and offering professional development (Olson, 2005, 1). Teacher leadership is a
process by which teachers individually and collectively influence their colleagues
to improve teaching, learning, and instructional practices. Therefore, teachers can
take an active and powerful role in the implementation of this educational reform.
Hargreaves (2003) posited, “Distributed leadership means creating a culture of
initiative and opportunity, in which teachers of all kinds propose new directions
and start innovations” (700).
In one study, Olson (2005) investigated the emergence of teacher
leadership through an 18-month leadership institute consisting of ten teacher
participants. He used a modified ethnographic approach to collect data and then
31
analyzed it using constant comparative methods and matrices. Throughout the
study, teachers were introduced to new notions of learning and teaching based on
cognition, neuron development, and brain-chemistry research. Then the study
shifted from developing teachers’ own practices to creating professional
development for colleagues. The findings showed that seven of the ten teachers
were receptive of the new leadership roles and were leading and interacting with
their colleagues in new ways. Interestingly, “teachers in the leadership institute
demonstrated leadership when they extended their professional lives beyond the
classroom by influencing the actions of other teachers” (Olson, 2005, 4). As a
result, the teachers increased their self-confidence by planning and leading
professional development with colleagues.
In another study, Scribner, Sawyer, Watson, and Myers (2007) examined
distributed leadership as it related to two teacher teams in one public secondary
school. The qualitative study used comparative analysis and discourse analysis to
explore distributive leadership. Data from field notes and video recordings
revealed three constructs that informed the understanding of collaborative
interaction within each professional learning team. In summary, “the nature of
purpose and autonomy within a teacher team can influence the social distribution
of leadership” (Scribner et al., 2007, 67). The nature of teams in shared
governance structures—“the fact that teams can organize to either find or solve
problems—has important implications for the creative and leadership capacity of
individual teams” (Scribner et al., 2007, 67). Thus, the structures and social
32
dynamics of distributed leadership must be attended to and not taken for granted.
In essence, the purpose, autonomy, and patterns of discourse play important roles
in the exercise of leadership and group functioning.
Teacher Reflection
Therefore, deep critical self-reflection is also integral to teacher success. In
order for systemic change to occur, teacher leaders are a critical component of the
process and their development must be nurtured. In turn, teacher development in
the form of self-reflection is a critical part of the process as well. This study
indicated that teachers who are self-reflective about their teaching practices,
passionate about learning, and committed to best practices, expand their leadership
capacity through professional development (Olson, 2005, 7). In addition,
Whitaker, Whitaker, and Lumpa (2000, 111) reiterated that one of the first steps in
helping a person grow is providing opportunity for the individual to reflect or self-
evaluate. In essence, teachers need opportunities to work together, plan, and
present strategies that increase student learning, as well as reflect on their own
practices as a teacher and a learner.
In another qualitative study, Fenwick (2004) explored the implementation
of teacher professional growth plans with a self-reflection component in Alberta,
Canada. Fenwick proposed teacher-directed learning through self-reflection and
dialogue in relationships founded upon trust and respect. The relationships
promoted the reflective processes of writing and dialogue that supported teachers
33
in building personal capacity, which enabled them to confront and reconstruct the
structures of personal narratives that shaped their teaching practice. The results
indicated that teacher self-reflection held the teachers more accountable and
“helped them to focus, to develop a clearer sense of purpose and meaning in their
teaching and learning activities” (Fenwick, 2004, 269). According to Hargreaves
& Fullan (2000, 4), “In the drive to standardize teaching—to define and demarcate
it through graded benchmarks of knowledge and competence—it is easy to lose
sight of teaching’s emotional dimension, of the enthusiasm, passion, and
dedication that make many teachers great.” Therefore, teachers need professional
and emotional supports to talk through their emotions, manage anxieties and
frustrations, and navigate through the course of expectations in their work.
Collaboration
Research over the past two decades has suggested that good things happen
in schools where cell boundaries become permeable and norms of collegiality and
cooperation are established. In other words, success occurs when the cellular
model gives way to a collaborative model. In collaborative schools, pedagogy and
assessment feed on each other through the interaction of teachers to produce better
results. This shift is known as re-culturing and suggests that it is a key to
improving teaching and learning in schools. Fullan (2000) argued that
restructuring is relatively easier to do. However,
It makes no difference by itself to improvement in teaching and
learning. What does make a difference is re-culturing—defined
34
as the process of developing professional learning communities
in the school, i.e., going from a situation of limited attention, to
assessment and pedagogy, to one where teachers and others
routinely focus on these matters and make associated
improvements (Fullan, 2000, 582).
Therefore, going from a cellular model to a collaborative model (where teachers
focus collaboratively on how to improve teaching and learning in concrete,
operational terms) will help produce improvements in teaching and learning.
In one study, Pomson (2005) studied teacher cooperation and collaboration
through the lives of Jewish day school teachers. The data were drawn from three
research projects over a four-year period. Granted, a limitation of the research was
that the private and denominational study cannot be applied to the public school
system, but the shared complexities of cultivating professional community can be
applied because it is highly reflective of all school systems. The findings showed
that “when teachers commit to professional community, they often have different
ends in mind . . . teachers’ investment in community can fluctuate among
cooperation, collegiality, and collaboration” (Pomson, 2005, 787). The schools in
this study were highly collaborative and interestingly for some of the teachers “this
aspect of their professional lives has provided some of the greatest satisfactions . . .
for others, it has resulted in the deepest disappointments” (Pomson, 2005, 789).
Therefore, this study makes clear that school reform is not only about changing
organizational structures, but also about establishing ongoing processes that
nurture teacher community.
35
Professional Development
Professional development is a key component of any school reform.
Although NCLB requires new teachers to have in-depth content knowledge in the
fields that they teach before they enter teaching, professional development is the
primary means for developing content knowledge among current teachers. For
example, Smith and Rowley (2005) analyzed collaboration and teacher
professional development using the nationally representative Schools and Staffing
Survey. They examined the mix between control and commitment strategies and
how they influence teachers’ participation and investment in professional
development.
Smith and Rowley (2005, 126) suggested that “schools organized with a
stronger commitment strategy may have better success in achieving their reform
goals because of increased teacher participation in content-related professional
development and greater stability in its teaching staff.” It is important to link the
organizational strategies to the professional development; “which organizational
strategy dominates at the school level is likely to condition how teachers view the
role of in-service training and other professional development opportunities”
(Smith & Rowley, 2005, 128). Therefore, control-oriented reforms tend to favor
school and teacher accountability taking a carrot-and-stick approach (rewards and
sanctions) to school improvement, while commitment-strategy reforms involve
teachers in the professional development planning process, thereby increasing
teacher professionalism.
36
In summary, the findings of this study suggest that school organizational
factors do indeed influence teachers’ participation in professional development and
that in turn participation affects teacher retention. Similar to morale, professional
supports for teachers in this age of accountability are contextually based. In
essence, increasing the content knowledge of the current teacher workforce will
require an unprecedented level of on-the-job training in the form of professional
development.
In another study, McDiarmid and Kelly (1997) examined how Kentucky
teachers perceive their needs and how best to meet those needs through
professional development in the context of systemic reform. Data came from case
studies of twenty-one Kentucky schools. Accordingly, “virtually all the teachers
with whom we spoke prefer experiences that feature a chance to talk with
colleagues about issues and problems they face in common, daily . . . in other
words, they prefer experiences that are collegial specific, iterative, long-term, and
experimental” (McDiarmid & Kelly, 1997, 19). Therefore, schools in which
professional development initiatives thrive create a collaborative culture of caring,
mutual support, and excitement about learning (Fenwick, 2004).
Teacher Autonomy
Teacher autonomy has been empirically derived as one dimension of
teacher empowerment that assists teachers. Pearson and Moomaw (2005) posited,
“Teacher empowerment is another panacea that many education reformers
37
consider essential for school restructuring and optimum teacher development”
(45). In their study, they surveyed 171 teachers in three Florida districts regarding
teacher autonomy. A limitation of the study was the response rate and sample
size. The findings revealed that teachers view autonomy differently; but
regardless of their views, the majority believed that teachers needed more
autonomy in their profession, like doctors who write their own prescriptions. The
teachers surveyed believed that autonomy was a key element of any true
profession. In the opinion of Person and Moomaw (2005), researchers should
explore autonomy and its related constructs in the context of schools as a social
system. At the same time, Fenwick (2004, 206) opined that supervision that
supports teacher learning must also somehow navigate between teacher needs for
autonomy and flexibility and public demands for professional accountability and
measurable competency.
Conclusion
The literature discussed above will serve as a way to examine and
understand the impact and possible relationships of accountability on the context
of teachers’ work, teacher morale and teacher burnout, and the professional
support in place for teachers in this age of accountability. The specific focus here
is on how teachers perceive teaching particularly in relation to teachers’ work,
teacher morale, and professional supports to assist teachers. As aforementioned, it
38
is important to know that as we understand, appreciate, and utilize teacher
strengths, we must also nurture their growth as individual professionals.
This chapter and review of the literature explored the influences of
accountability on teachers by examining three key topics. The first section, “The
Impact of Accountability on the Context of Teachers’ Work,” examined high
stakes accountability as the conduit to drive school improvement and its effect on
teachers’ work. Additionally, this discussion established that accountability plays
a paramount role in teachers’ lives, but varies by unique school contexts and the
attitudes, values, and beliefs of individual teachers. It was also revealed that
experts in change management have long maintained that energy flows toward the
status quo and change occurs only if the helping factors are strengthened and the
hindering factors are reduced
The second section, “The Impact of Accountability on Teacher Morale,”
discussed the realities of teacher burnout and low morale. This section highlighted
accountability as the number one stressor for teachers, especially in urban school
settings. At the same time, accountability has improved instruction for some
teachers and at times hampered instruction for other teachers depending on the
individual teachers and the unique contexts. In essence, what we want for children
we should also want for teachers. Schools should be places of learning for both
parties, and such learning should be infused with excitement, engagement, passion,
challenge, creativity and joy.
39
The third section, “Professional Support in Place for Teachers in the Age of
Accountability,” examined the professional supports needed to assist and better
prepare teachers in the age of reform. The discussion established that professional
supports like teacher leadership, teacher reflection, or professional development
are critical for teachers’ success. Thus, research suggests that accountability is not
only about changing organizational structures but rather, accountability is also
about establishing ongoing processes that nurture teacher community, like teacher
cooperation and collaboration. Therefore, supporting teachers and improving an
organization must take place within, and across, each level of the organization.
Questions to be Answered
Therefore, important questions need to be answered including:
1. How has teachers’ work changed in the age of standards and accountability?
2. How do teachers’ beliefs and experiences about their role as teachers (or the
teaching craft) affect their work?
3. How do factors in the school and community affect teachers’ work in the age
of accountability?
4. What supports are in place to help teachers manage teaching in the age of
accountability?
Purpose of Study
This study investigates some of these unanswered questions. The literature
helps to lay the groundwork for this study which examines the effects of
40
accountability on teachers’ work, in particular on the relationship between teacher
morale and teacher burnout, as well as the positive effects and professional
supports that hold teachers accountable and support them in this high-stakes
accountability era.
41
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
Introduction
This chapter describes the design, sample, instrumentation, data collection
procedures, and data analysis of the study. The purpose of this study was to
examine and understand the impact and possible relationships of accountability on
the context of teachers’ work, teacher morale and teacher burnout, and the
professional supports in place for teachers in this age of accountability. The
specific focus was on how teachers perceive teaching in this age of accountability,
particularly in relation to teachers’ work, teacher morale, and professional supports
to assist teachers. Two Southern California elementary schools were studied in
order to answer the following research questions:
1. How has teachers’ work changed in the age of accountability?
2. How do teachers’ beliefs about their role as teachers (or the teaching craft)
affect their work in the age of accountability?
3. How do factors in the community affect teachers’ work in the age of
accountability?
4. What supports are in place to help teachers manage teaching in the age of
accountability?
42
A descriptive and analytic qualitative study research design was used to
examine twelve teachers’ perceptions of their work in this accountability age.
Qualitative research focuses on process, meaning, and understanding with a richly
descriptive product (Merriam, 1998). Interviews and document analysis were used
to collect data. This was a qualitative study focusing on two elementary school
sites in Southern California. Qualitative methods permitted inquiry into selected
issues in great depth with careful attention to detail, context, and nuance (Patton,
2002, 227). A qualitative study allowed the production of a wealth of detailed data
about a much smaller number of people. “Qualitative researchers are interested in
understanding the meaning people have constructed; that is, how they make sense
of their world and the experiences they have in the world” (Merriam, 1998, 6).
Specifically, I was interested in studying the descriptive details of teachers’ work
and experience from multiple teacher perspectives. The individual teachers at the
elementary school served as the unit of analysis. According to Patton (2002), this
meant that the primary focus of data collection would be on what was happening
to individuals in a setting and how individuals were affected by the setting.
Individual case studies and variation across individuals focused the analysis.
Sample and Population
Qualitative inquiry typically focuses in depth on relatively small samples
selected purposefully. Hence, “the logic and power of purposeful sampling lies in
43
selecting information-rich cases for study in depth” (Patton, 2002, 230). This
study involved a search for insights and understanding of teachers’ lives in the age
of accountability. How had teaching changed for these teachers at this school and
what happened to these teachers (positively and negatively) at this school because
of the age of accountability? The challenge was to purposefully select
information-rich cases. According to Patton, “There are no rules for sample size in
qualitative inquiry.” Therefore, purposeful sampling was employed for this
qualitative study.
Twelve teachers with various levels of teaching experience were
interviewed from two different urban school sites regarding their beliefs and
experiences about their role as teachers (or the teaching craft) and how it affected
their work. There was an equitable distribution of primary and upper grade
teachers interviewed to give voice to their unique experiences. These teachers
were chosen by the principal and represented six out of the twenty-eight teachers
on each staff. Three of the teachers were Teachers on Special Assignment
(TOSA) supporting literacy. Table 1 displays the breakdown of teacher
experience and their current grade level.
44
Table 1: Teacher Experience
SCHOOL
NAME
CURRENT GRADE
LEVEL
YEARS OF
EXPERIENCE
Woodward Elementary 4th 12
Woodward Elementary 3rd 14
Woodward Elementary TOSA—literacy program 10
Woodward Elementary 1st 8
Woodward Elementary 2nd 28
Woodward Elementary 2nd 5
Elmwood Elementary 4th 13
Elmwood Elementary TOSA—GLAD, EL resource 14
Elmwood Elementary RSP 15
Elmwood Elementary 2nd 9
Elmwood Elementary 6th 11
Elmwood Elementary TOSA—reading resource 25
Both school sites were selected because they were Title I school sites with
over 90% English Learner (EL) students and over 90% Hispanic students on the
California Basic Educational Data System (CBEDS). School sites with these
demographics are particularly interesting because they are indicative of the urban
Southern California elementary schools that are under pressure to raise
achievement and improve test scores. Woodward Elementary is a K-5 school with
approximately 641 students and 28 teachers, while Elmwood Elementary is a K-6
school with approximately 614 students and 28 teachers. Both schools received
funding for and participated in Title I, State Preschool, After School Program,
45
School Improvement Program, and Economic Impact Aid. The students are from
low socioeconomic backgrounds and over 90% participated in the free or reduced
meal program (breakfast and lunch). The sole purpose of these programs is to help
support increased student achievement for economically disadvantaged students.
Woodward Elementary’s 2006 API (Academic Performance Index) was 735 while
Elmwood Elementary’s 2006 API was 671. Both schools provided many after
school programs and interventions, along with parent and adult education
programs.
Data Collection Procedures
Qualitative data was collected in the form of interviews and documents.
Patton (2002) and Merriam (1998) stressed that a rich variety of methodological
combinations could be employed to illuminate an inquiry question. This
qualitative study focused specifically on how teachers’ work had changed in the
age of accountability. Through in-depth interviews and analysis, a vivid depiction
of teachers’ work and experiences will be discussed in Chapter 4. Merriam (1998,
1) posited that qualitative inquiry “focuses on meaning in context, requires a data
collection instrument that is sensitive to underlying meaning when gathering and
interpreting data.”
Twelve teachers were interviewed regarding how their work had changed
in this age of accountability. These interviews were conducted for approximately
46
60 minutes at a mutually agreed upon time and location. Merriam (1998) stressed
the importance of asking good questions as the key to getting meaningful data.
These semi-structured interviews centered on the teachers’ stories in relation to
their work and the teaching craft in this age of accountability in regards to various
contexts, morale, and professional supports. The interviews centered on the
process of accountability at the school, specifically the beginning of accountability
at the school site leading up to today. Each interview lasted approximately one
hour and was tape recorded and a transcription was made. The protocols for all
interviews are included in the Appendix A.
Data Analysis Procedures
Merriam (1998, 149) asserted that “interviewing, observing, and examining
documents merge in the process of understanding and describing the phenomenon
of interest.” In essence, all three procedures merged in the data analysis process.
The collected data was analyzed and coded by transcribing the interviews. Using
HyperResearch qualitative data coding software, each of the transcripts from the
twelve interviews was sorted by codes, responses were compared across data
sources, themes were discovered in the findings, and the findings were cross-
checked as well. See Appendix D for a list of the codes that was used. These
codes represented the possible themes found within the subjects’ responses for
each question and sub-question. Interesting and relevant remarks were clustered
47
into these various codes to better inventory and study their content. Patton (2002)
posited that a qualitative design needed to remain sufficiently open and flexible to
permit exploration of whatever the phenomenon under study offers for inquiry.
Then, the data were coded according to the established research questions for this
qualitative study and the data-coding process in turn supported the discovery of
emerging and common themes in the research. The qualitative software supported
this process and in addition the data was triangulated. Thus, the teacher responses
in the qualitative study guided the research because “qualitative designs continue
to be emergent even after data collection begins” (Patton, 2002, 255).
Ethical Considerations
In order to conduct research on teachers’ perceptions and beliefs
surrounding accountability, approval from the Institutional Review Board (IRB)
through the University of Southern California was obtained. Site approval was
obtained as well. In addition, all IRB rules regulations, and procedures were
honored and adhered to in order to observe the highest degree of ethical standards
while conducting the research. In turn, all teacher participants received a copy of
the “INFORMATION SHEET FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH” (See
Appendix C). It was agreed that participation in the study was voluntary and
refusal to continue with the study may have occurred at any point during the
48
interview process. Furthermore, the information sheet ensured and affirmed that
participants clearly understood the overall purpose of the qualitative study.
As a result of the study being conducted at two school sites, anonymity
may have been compromised. Therefore, the anonymity risks were minimized by
securing the names of all participants from all others and changing participant
names as a safeguard to their true identity. Additionally, all gathered data in the
form of tape recorded interviews and interview transcripts were kept highly
confidential. Lastly, all names and identities of study participants were protected
throughout the final chapters of my dissertation.
Limitations of the Study
Time was a major limitation of the proposed study. This qualitative study
was conducted over a six week period at two school sites. As a result, the time
limitations may have influenced the lack of perspectives of all teachers regarding
accountability because multiple schools and/or multiple districts were not studied.
As such, the sample may not allow for generalization to other schools and districts
because of specific contexts at the school site. At the same time, the selection was
purposeful so as to ensure that the gathered data was relevant and added to the
research surrounding the context of teachers’ work in the age of accountability.
The intent of this qualitative study was an examination of how teachers’
beliefs and perceptions shape their role as educators. Researcher subjectivity or
49
potential bias may be another limitation to the study. The intent in choosing this
topic was to gain a broader understanding of teachers’ work and teachers’ beliefs
in this age of accountability, so as to better support teachers. This study tested the
knowledge base of the sample teachers against the prior literature relating to
teachers’ work under NCLB and in turn looked at the same questions as the
literature review.
50
CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS
Introduction
Teaching in today’s schools has intensified during the era of high-stakes
accountability. The lives of teachers have changed. The values of NCLB are
clear; student subgroups in specific academic areas (language arts and math) must
achieve higher levels of achievement through the efforts of highly qualified
teachers as measured by standardized tests. The purpose of this study is to better
understand the perceptions and realities of teaching in the age of accountability
and how the current realities and experiences affect individual teachers and their
own visions and beliefs as educators. This chapter will present an analysis of the
data and an interpretation of the findings that resulted from analysis of qualitative
data on teaching in the age of accountability. The data gathered for this study was
intended to answer the over-arching research question:
How has teachers’ work changed in the age of accountability?
This was accomplished through the investigation of teacher attitudes on the
following sub-questions:
1. How do teachers’ beliefs and experiences about their role as teachers (or the
teaching craft) affect their work in the age of accountability?
51
2. How do factors in the school and community affect teachers’ work in the age
of accountability?
3. What supports are in place to help teachers manage teaching in the age of
accountability?
The sections that follow will address the research sub-questions in order followed
by the over-arching research question.
Teachers’ Beliefs and Experiences
The first major area of findings involves making sense of how teachers’
beliefs and experiences and their role as teachers affect their work in the age of
accountability. The literature review revealed that as a result of high stakes
accountability, the context of teachers’ work in the school setting has changed
immensely. Another key concept from the literature review was that attitudes,
values, and beliefs of individual teachers (about what students can do, their own
teacher efficacy, and influences of students’ home lives) are important contextual
factors that determine the solutions that teachers and schools construct in relation
to accountability. In order to set the tone and understand the lives and work
histories of these teachers against the backdrop of the age of accountability, it is
important to understand their reasons for choosing the teaching profession and
their own personal teaching philosophies.
52
Reasons for Teaching
The majority of the teachers in this study became teachers because they
enjoyed working with kids. A first grade teacher emphatically added, “Because I
love working with kids. Kids are my passion. And I actually started as a social
worker and realized that I didn’t get to see the kids that much.” Upon further
elaboration, the majority of teachers said that they wanted to make a difference in
the lives of children and that they believed in the power of education. The reading
resource teacher who has taught twenty-five years wisely added, “I became a
teacher because of the feeling that I can impact children and seeing lights go on
. . . and just how much I love interacting with children.” The second grade teacher
with nine years experience shared, “I became a teacher because I have a passion
for kids and I want to make a difference in their lives.” Some said that they
naturally fell into the profession because there was a history of teachers in the
family. The literacy program teacher commented, “It goes way back. My father
was a teacher in Korea and he taught the Korean people to speak English in order
to come to the United States.” The fifth-year second-grade teacher shared her
career change from business to teaching,
I was told to do this eighteen years ago and I said, my mom’s a
teacher, I don’t want to be a teacher and everything I did kept
leading back toward working with kids and I went for a job
change. I said why don’t I try the teaching thing? And my
mom smacked me upside the head and said now you’re going to
do it . . . before I went through life with no time, but a lot of
money. Now I have more time and no money, but my life is
much more enriched. I’m just happier.
53
Still others said that that they went into teaching because the schedule allowed for
them to have a family. The third grade teacher explained, “My dad was a teacher.
So, I enjoyed the schedule that he was able to have with his family and I just like
working with kids. I knew right out of high school I wanted to be a teacher.” A
few others were recruited. A second grade teacher elaborated, “When I was a
teenager, I had people telling me, oh you’d be a good teacher and then I had five
brothers and I enjoyed teaching, you know, teaching them.” The sixth grade
teacher added, “When I was younger, my best friend’s mom suggested it. She was
an assistant superintendent at the time.”
These teachers are typical in the sense that many entered the teaching
profession because they wanted to work with kids. They had a love for children
and they wanted to make a difference in the lives of children. Still others followed
in the family footsteps of education. The majority of these educators entered
teaching because they wanted to help society and impact children’s futures. In
some instances they felt their own passion for working with children and in other
instances those around them felt their passion and knew they had a gift for
teaching and learning.
Teaching Philosophy and Crucial Role
When asked what they believed to be their most crucial role as a teacher,
disturbingly enough, none of the twelve teachers interviewed mentioned raising
academic achievement or preparing students to reach high standards. This is
54
alarming in a time when accountability is rooted in and based on high standards
and high achievement for all learners. In the age of accountability holding up high
standards and increasing achievement scores are supposed to be the ultimate goals.
Now more than ever, schools are being held accountable for their test scores
according to NCLB. In actuality, only one of the teachers made mention of or
alluded to the standards. The first grade teacher believed her crucial role to be
related to “the importance of instructing reading and teaching all of the standards.”
Only two of the teachers mentioned learning in describing their crucial role as a
teacher. According to the English Learner (EL) resource teacher, “The crucial role
is inspiring kids to be life-long learners.” The sixth grade teacher felt that the
crucial role for teachers is in making “the students understand the importance of
continuing education.” Both of these are lofty goals with a focus on learning, but
neither is rooted in standards nor do they relate to accountability.
The other nine teachers believed their crucial role as teachers was to be
good role models, be a motivator, guide students to their futures, and to help them
believe in themselves. According to NCLB, these are not the goals that will raise
academic achievement. These lofty goals are not found in NCLB or the age of
accountability. The cliché of “making a difference” does not suffice anymore as a
moral purpose for teaching in this high stakes realm of accountability. This tells
us that many teachers are not changing their own inner belief systems or teaching
purpose in the age of accountability.
55
The teachers were asked how their teaching philosophy has changed in this
age of accountability. The majority of the teachers stressed the feelings of more
pressure than when they first started teaching and their frustrations with NCLB.
The fourth grade teacher with twelve years of experience lamented, “It has
changed because I used to think everyone could do it and now I know that that’s
not possible. This No Child Left Behind is the absolute craziest thing I’ve ever
heard.” The RSP teacher with fifteen years experience added, “I’ve become more
frustrated. In order to show growth, which I know there’s growth, but to see it on
a test you have to teach to the test and I think that’s the greatest change we’ve had
to do and it’s the one I abhor the most.”
On the other hand, the sixth grade teacher with eleven years of experience
shared, “I don’t think it’s changed that much but my philosophy is that each kid
deserves to reach their full potential. Whatever that may be, and the students that
need the most should receive the most in that order.” This is quite a contrast from
the teacher above who says it’s not possible. There is a definitely a dichotomy
between these two teachers’ philosophies, one who believes those kids can’t while
the other believes those kids deserve more. Two of the teachers said that they
have become more empathetic towards their students since becoming mothers,
while another felt her philosophy has not changed but she documents much better
now. Several of the teachers believed strongly in looking at students as
individuals rather than whole groups. This goes against NCLB, which looks at
students in groups and significant subgroups. The first grade teacher with eight
56
years experience explained, “You have to look at your students as whole beings
and not just a number on their data sheet because there are so many factors that
influence data and academics. Our students’ lives especially at our site here at
Woodward you have to look at the child as a whole person.” In essence, there was
a dichotomy when it came to philosophical changes regarding teaching in the age
of accountability. The varying perspectives can be highlighted by two contrasting
teachers. The second grade teacher with twenty-eight years experience explained
her changing teaching philosophy,
Yes, it has changed over the years, definitely. It used to be easy.
It was easier to teach. You had more support with the parents,
you worked together – the child, the teacher. It’s sort of like an
equilateral triangle, and working together makes the child become
a better person, now it’s kind of lopsided especially in this area.
Oh, it’s changed now, it’s more drill and kill, teach to the test,
review, teach to the test, teach the standards, just drill it.
While the second grade teacher with five years experience (ten years previous
experience in business) explained,
My own personal teaching philosophy has changed off and on. I
think that my philosophy was before that any child can learn
anything and I’ve just added to that in the sense that all children
can learn but some children learn things better and faster than
other children. So you have to work within that.
Therefore, the conclusions that can be drawn from the changing teaching
philosophy is that teachers’ beliefs and experiences do indeed play a crucial role in
defining and affecting their work in the age of accountability. As mentioned
above, one side believes their teaching philosophy has changed because it is harder
to teach now with the lack of parental support and the constant drill and kill, teach
57
to the standards, and teach to the test. However, the other side believes their
teaching philosophy is the same and that all students can learn but some need more
time and more instructional supports. Teaching has become more difficult in our
changing world because NCLB is holding teachers more accountable for student
learning and teachers feel the pressure to raise achievement. For some this
pressure has caused them to look for outside factors and for others it has caused
them to look deeper at inside factors within the school. It is clear through the
above quotes that some teachers do not believe all students can learn. Ideally, in
order to raise achievement in urban schools, teachers should have a solid belief
that all students can learn and should provide them with high standards, high
expectations, and the necessary instructional scaffolding for higher achievement
and academic growth.
Teacher Efficacy Measurement
In turn, teacher efficacy influences a variety of motivational aspects.
Teacher efficacy is the belief that a teacher has the capabilities to affect student
performance. According to Bandura (1995), self-efficacy plays a key role in
cognitive development and accomplishment. This applies to the teacher and
students alike. The focus here, though, is teachers’ personal efficacy to motivate
and promote learning in their students. Albert Bandura’s social cognitive theory
seeks to explain learning in the naturalistic setting. The theory addresses the
social, cognitive, and personal agency factors that influence learning and
58
motivation. Self-efficacy is a content-related judgment. Perceived self-efficacy
refers to a belief in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the actions necessary
to manage particular situations (Bandura, 1995, 2).
The age of accountability is focused on high achievement and raising
achievement for all learners. The values of NCLB are clear — student subgroups
in specific academic areas (language arts and math) must achieve higher levels of
achievement through the efforts of highly qualified teachers as measured by
standardized tests. The teachers were questioned regarding their own
measurement of teacher efficacy in order to compare to the current high stakes
accountability initiatives which seek to instill dramatic improvements in school
performance. Seven of the twelve teachers spoke of data and achievement levels
as an indicator of their own teacher efficacy. At the same time, only three spoke
solely of data and achievement. A second grade teacher commented, “I would say
observation through visual observation and you know a lot of measures, like
assessments, tests, and the Houghton-Mifflin exams.” While the first grade
teacher simply said “My students’ achievement” and the literacy program teacher
explained, “I try to see where my students are at and where they have achieved,
where they’re going each trimester, and at the end of the year. Did I meet their
needs? Did I take them where they were supposed to be?”
The other four teachers spoke of data and achievement in conjunction with
other indicators. The EL teacher added,
59
I suppose by seeing how my students perform on their tests—their
motivation to be in my class—their attitude in my class. And
across the years, if students come back to visit, they remember
me. I think that’s also a very good sign of whether I was a
positive influence or negative influence on them.
One of the other indicators of teacher efficacy was student engagement. Four
teachers spoke of student engagement. Of these four, the Resource Specialist
(RSP) teacher and the sixth grade teacher spoke of engagement, assessments, and
enthusiasm. The RSP teacher elaborated,
When they’re engaged, you know that’s the right thing . . . you
have to see it actually by testing on some of it and throughout the
language program, we can see growth in the IEPs, the yearly
thing, we see the growth. So when you’re working with a child
and you see growth, you know that you’re doing the right thing.
And I also I see it by their enthusiasm for learning.
The sixth grade teacher explained, “Keeping them engaged . . . I think a big part of
my deciding if they’re succeeding or gathering knowledge verbally and through
written tests. And do they like being in my class? Do they come in and feel
comfortable coming into my class?”
Interestingly, the measurement of teacher efficacy of two of the teachers
had nothing to do with achievement, assessments or learning. The second grade
teacher with twenty-eight years of experience first answered, “I don’t know. It’s
so hard for these kids.” Then she added,
I guess if they come back to me and say I’m doing my homework.
I know it’s hard. Second grade is such, they’re still little babies in
second grade and it’s still that you’ve got to really cement the
phonics rules and the reading rules. And then when you see them
in the third grade and they’re going, yeah, you were right. It
60
really was hard but I’m doing this or that. That’s kind of how I
gauge it. They come back and give me a hug.
The fourth grade teacher with twelve years of experience alluded to student
engagement, “I can tell by when I teach a lesson and you can see the looks on their
faces—if it’s over their head, if they’re participating and answering, then I know
that they’re getting it.”
Lastly, two of the teachers referred to articulation, understanding, or
mastery of the student learning as a measurement of their teacher efficacy. The
third grade teacher with fourteen years of experience commented,
On a daily basis I ask my students when they leave, what did you
learn today? And they can’t just say math, you know, they need
to say I learned place value or subtracting into the hundreds place.
I mean, I’m specific and so if they look at me with a blank stare, I
know I didn’t do my job that day.
The reading resource teacher with twenty-five years of experience added,
If they’re doing it. They are able to demonstrate it. I really do a
lot on demonstration of mastery . . . when a child can tell
something back to me in a comprehensible way, then I know that
he has done something or mastered something. And if a child
cannot do that then I’ve missed it. You know?
The findings revealed that when it comes to teacher efficacy the majority
of the teachers focus on academic assessments in conjunction with other criteria
such as mastery of the standards and student engagement, which were both
focused on learning and achievement. This is an encouragement for teachers to
see the validity of the assessments as a measurement of teacher efficacy. At the
same time, many also see the validity of academic assessments with other
61
indicators unrelated to data and assessments but rather an overall level of student
learning, student engagement, and student motivation.
Personal Role in Accountability
As the majority of teachers focused on academic data and achievement
levels of learners as a measurement of teacher efficacy, their personal role in
accountability was investigated in relation to teachers’ beliefs and experiences
about their role as teachers in the age of accountability. All of the teachers spoke
of their personal roles in accountability at their school site relating to data and
student achievement. All twelve teachers were highly involved in leadership roles
focusing on accountability and raising student achievement at their school sites. In
fact two of the teachers had their administrative credential and another was in the
process of completing it. The sixth grade teacher commented, “Accountability is
about change and it eventually got me interested into going into administration
because at that point you want to make decisions and you get to make decisions.”
Four of the twelve teachers spoke of their personal role in accountability as
relating to data. The literacy program teacher spoke specifically of her program,
I am in charge of the literacy program here, which is based on data.
We are working with the students who scored basic on the
California Standards Test (CST) and we’re trying to just give them
one-on-one support. It’s a ratio of five-to-one, so they get pulled
out three times a week for thirty minutes. We work on phonics,
comprehension, fluency, and vocabulary . . . this is my position as a
TOSA (Teacher on Special Assignment), you know, I’m
accountable for this program, analyzing the data, choosing the right
students for this program to see where they’re at and where they
need to be. It’s very specific.
62
The second grade teacher with twenty-eight years experience explained, “We all
have to do the same thing—all data. I mean we’re keeping track of data. I keep
scores on who knows and who doesn’t.” The second grade teacher with five years
experience added, “I’m big on data—very big on data to the point where I have a
personal graph for each one of my kids and I can tell you how much they’ve
grown in each area.” The EL resource teacher elaborated on her program,
School-wide my accountability responsibilities are for the English
Language Development (ELD) of all the English Learner (EL)
students. I run the testing, the annual CELDT (California English
Language Development Test). I run the ELD curriculum,
collecting all the data, analyzing the data, setting the goals, and
helping the instructors and teachers with their instruction.
All twelve of the teachers were either on their leadership team currently or had
been in the past. The RSP teacher explained,
At the school site, I’m on the leadership team and I’m the grade
level chair. So, I make sure all the other information is passed out
to my level, but I also get very involved because of Special
Education. We need to talk about students, so we’re always
conferencing.
The second grade teacher with nine years experience elaborated,
Well, I’m the grade level chair for my second grade team. So, my
role is to help out the other teachers and plan. I help plan their
curriculum with them. I am also on the leadership team with my
principal, so I’m like the liaison between my principal and my
team members.
The findings revealed that all twelve teachers took an active role in
accountability at their school site within their classrooms, with their grade level
team, and in many cases with the principal and the leadership team. The personal
63
role of accountability was apparent in the work lives of all twelve teachers and
they were able to articulate their personal and specific roles relating to
accountability and raising student achievement.
Summary
Therefore, teachers’ beliefs and experiences play a crucial role in defining
and affecting their work. The majority of the teachers in this study entered the
teaching profession because they wanted to work with children and make a
difference in the lives of children. Interestingly, many of the teachers did not cite
academic achievement or high standards as their most crucial role. Rather, many
of the teachers believed being good role models or motivators was their crucial
role. This is surprising because the age of accountability focuses on highly
qualified teachers and the importance of high standards and high achievement.
Indeed, many teachers acknowledged their frustrations with NCLB and the added
pressure.
Factors in the School and Community
The second major area of findings involves factors in the school and
community affecting teachers’ work in the age of accountability. A few key
concepts from the literature review were that teachers face new challenges and
opportunities from diverse and needy student populations, demands on new skills
increase daily, and accountability and academic performance loom in the balance.
64
As aforementioned, the age of accountability is focused on raising student
achievement and increasing student test scores. In the area of academic
improvement, significant subgroups must increase by certain percentages each
year. Both Woodward Elementary and Elmwood Elementary are Title I schools
with student populations that are 90% English Learners (EL), 90% Hispanic, and
90% low socioeconomic status (SES). Raising test scores is crucial and it is
important to understand these teachers’ beliefs and work settings against the
backdrop of the age of accountability.
Teachers’ Beliefs About Students
Teachers’ beliefs about students were investigated in relation to how these
teachers’ beliefs and experiences affect their work in the age of accountability. Of
the twelve teachers questioned, eleven cited various limitations of their students.
Some focused on the language barrier and the below-grade level concerns, in some
cases two to three years below. The EL resource teacher at Elwood Elementary
elaborated,
I work with students who are either brand new to the country or
more than three years below grade level. So my perceptions are a
little skewed because my kids are not working at their grade level.
I have fourth, fifth, and sixth graders who are working at first and
second grade level in language arts. So my perceptions are
different in knowing what my students’ achievement level is, but I
guess I try to strive for higher expectations out of them to try and
pull them up to grade level.
The RSP teacher at Elmwood Elementary commented on the low socioeconomic
status and parent involvement,
65
At your top end schools, the parents are very involved. They
make sure their children are doing what they’re supposed to and
they’re making sure the teachers are doing what they’re supposed
to. Whereas, in schools where people are struggling with three
jobs or they can’t read and support the kids at home—those
children are not getting new projects or reading the textbooks.
They’re getting review which is fine, but they’re not getting the
intensity the other schools are getting and, I mean, no wonder
there’s three or four hundred points difference plus your second
language issue.
All of the teachers except for two spoke only of the dismal limitations of their
students based on their circumstances. The reading resource teacher
acknowledged, “Really good teachers who are doing everything they can and it’s
just, some of it, isn’t working. And some children just don’t respond, you know,
to that kind of rigor . . . if you’re in survival mode, you’re not going to get it.” The
majority of the teachers focused on the living situations of their students. In
essence, these teachers may have been protecting themselves from burnout in their
urban school because they focused on the intensified working conditions as a
hindrance to their success (Hargreaves, 2001).
Hauser-Cram, Sirin, and Stipek (2003) suggested that children from low-
income families enter a path of diminished expectations. The reality is that
relatively low expectations exist in many schools serving low-income students.
Many researchers and policymakers contend also that teachers expect less of
children from low-income and other stigmatized groups and therefore provide less
rigorous academic instruction and lower standards for achievement (Hauser-Cram,
Sirin, & Stipek, 2003, 813). Children who continuously encounter low
66
expectations are most affected by teacher expectations. According to Hauser-
Cram, Sirin, and Stipek (2003), children in stigmatized groups receive more
adverse expectations by teachers and are more likely to have these expectations
lead to self-fulfilling prophecies of poor academic performance. Their teachers
often do not expect much from them, so they do not expect much from themselves.
Hence, low expectations have sustaining effects on students’ performance.
Furthermore, a second grade teacher explained that the students are not
educated at home, so that means the school has that much more work to
accomplish . . . “you know, they expect us to perform miracles and it’s just like,
there’s only so much you can do.” On a positive note, though, this same teacher
added that “when the expectations are higher, I think, the kids perform a little bit
better and I think the parents are more willing to participate in their children’s
education.” The sixth grade teacher was the most uplifting and had the strongest
belief in students. He emphatically stated,
Success. Success. You know I guess I like to see kids succeed
that maybe some teachers don’t believe could have succeeded and
they do. You know you have a lot of negativity in teaching too.
You know, you have a lot of bigotry. You have a lot of written
off kind of attitudes for certain students. You know.
Unknowingly a lot of teachers do it. So sometimes it’s nice when
a kid you know that teachers say that kid can’t do it, that kid can’t
do this, that, and the other for whatever reason. And so, when the
student that they were harping on isn’t going to do any good, does
well, or scores a proficient. That to me, that’s a success.
Thus, only one of the twelve teachers interviewed clearly delineated the
circumstances that a teacher can control a quality education. This is a disturbing
67
finding. The other eleven teachers focused on all of the students’ circumstances
they cannot control. In order for teachers to be successful, they need to focus on
the aspects of education that they have the power to control and influence.
Community Factors
The majority of the teachers in this study spoke of their concerns about the
community. Ten of the twelve cited the language barrier and the lack of parental
support as critical factors affecting school and student success. The third grade
teacher acknowledged her barriers, “There are a lot of outside factors,
demographics, education levels, and support at home.” When asked about how
factors in the community affected her work as a teacher, the first grade teacher
explained, “Majorly, especially in our community because the family support is
not necessarily there. Most of our students are English learners, so they can’t even
help with the homework. So it makes that everything has to be done during the
day.” The majority of the teachers believed that the parents are not supportive
because they are intimidated by the school setting. For example, the first grade
teacher elaborated,
We ask parents to come in and volunteer, not very many do.
They’re afraid because of the language, so that’s understandable.
They’re afraid. We just had conferences and many of my parents
were afraid to help their children because they didn’t want to
teach them wrong.
68
The RSP teacher added, “I think that we’re a team together—the parent, the
student, and the teacher. And we’re all working to make sure the student learns.
And I don’t think the parents always think that they’re part of the team.”
The language barrier and a lack of parental education were mentioned often
as barriers affecting their work as teachers. As a result, the majority of the
teachers made assumptions of the parents regarding language. The third grade
teacher explained,
Fortunately I speak Spanish, but that’s a huge barrier. There are
not a lot of values on school. They’re just thrilled that their kids
are learning English and that’s all they care about. It doesn’t
matter to them what they get on the STAR or the CST or any of
those performance tests. Again, they’re just happy their kids are
learning English.
The second grade teacher with five years experience shared her frustration and her
beliefs,
Some of them don’t have third or fourth grade educations
themselves. So, they almost don’t feel comfortable. You sit in
conferences and they don’t feel comfortable. They don’t
understand the language so they can’t help with the reading
homework . . . being a low-socio school, you’re always feeling
like there’s never enough. You know?
The second grade teacher with nine years experience elaborated on her beliefs,
Well, being in this community with mostly second language
learners, the parents almost kind of step back because they don’t
know the language, so they’re not involved as much as you would
want them to be. And a lot of the children come home and parents
don’t speak any English, so it’s hard for them to get the help they
need. This community is definitely a challenge. And it’s
unfortunate because we do offer a lot of opportunities for these
parents.
69
The reading resource teacher added, “I have ambivalence about the community
status. I wish it were more stable. I wish that it was more accountable for its own
learning—that parents had more time and more stability, so that they could be
better parents.” The second grade teacher with five years experience focused on
the low socioeconomic status as a major factor in the community affecting her
work as a teacher. She shared,
Oh, there are so many things. More parent involvement? Low
socio is the big one. Well, it’s hard with our kids being in this
type of socioeconomic area. The fact that some of my kids live
eight, nine people to a one-bedroom apartment, the fact that the
food isn’t always there for them, the fact that some of my kids
watch mom and dad have fist-fights. You know, either that or
dad’s in jail and mom’s on her fifth other dad. These kids come to
us messed up already. It’s terrifying—life in general or mom’s
been deported. They live in that fight-or-flight zone of their brain,
if we could just change so many different factors, not just within
our school but within society.
The reading resource teacher with twenty-five years experience commented, “I’ve
talked to teachers who’ve been in public schools all these years, many more years
than I have, and they’re saying the population has changed radically.” Another
teacher spoke of the district and made assumptions based on her beliefs about the
district in relation to the community and her Title I school. The RSP teacher
explained,
It’s like the district will give the mouth talking to what is
supposed to be said, but they don’t follow up. They’re not really
supporting us and yes it’s all based on budget, but give me a
break. If we’re supposed to be moving these children forward, it’s
not going to happen, you can’t teach in a classroom with thirty-
eight.
70
In contrast, two of the teachers were very positive about the community
and all inclusive when it came to the parents. The fourth grade teacher at
Woodward Elementary elaborated, “Well, I am a family person. I do a big
Thanksgiving dinner for my families every year and I do home visits. I do things
to be on their level. I go and I interact with the families, so that they understand
how important it is that we all have to work together.” The sixth grade teacher at
Elmwood was also very positive about the community. He shared his beliefs
about the community,
I personally don’t find there to be any major factors within this
particular community. I only have the comparison of the schools I
was at before which were a different environment. So to me when
I come into this school I personally see that it’s a nice school. It
has what it needs. The field is in great shape. The parents, to me,
are blue collar parents, you know. I mean they work one, two
jobs, and they’re working graveyard shifts. I would not call it a
factor. But again, it’s all perception. I mean you talk to other
people and their perception is that because they’re not they way
they see people should be or society should be then. It’s safe here
and that’s what it comes down to, right? A safe environment—
and I feel totally safe here.
These two teachers were not the norm when it came to describing the
factors in the community that affected their work as teachers. Eleven of the twelve
teachers cited a lack of parental involvement as crucial to student success and the
overall achievement at the school. The teachers also noted that it affected their
work lives as teachers. The literacy program teacher explained,
We work in a school where there’s not a lot of parental
involvement. You know, just simply reading to your child—they
don’t, our parents are not educated. They don’t enforce
homework and things like that. So, it’s very hard but we have a
71
great community liaison who has just turned that around. I mean,
we don’t have the parental involvement as we would like, but it’s
slowly starting to go into effect which is wonderful. So, the
parents here don’t speak English so they’re not able to teach their
children English. It’s a big barrier for us. But, that’s the
challenge we accept for working here.
Both Woodward Elementary and Elmwood Elementary have community liaisons.
The two second grade teachers at Woodward had differing opinions on the
position. The second grade teacher with twenty-eight years shared, “I mean we do
have the help of the office. We truly do. Our community liaison is huge—Mrs.
Sanchez is absolutely huge for helping.” The second grade teacher with five years
experience shared,
We have a community liaison that I’m not exactly sure how she
gets our parents involved other than making copies for certain
things or translating. It seems that when she does get them
involved it’s not academic or data driven, it’s not anything to do
academic-wise, it’s gardening, or food-related, not academics.
The third grade teacher from Woodward Elementary brought up another salient
point, stating that because her students speak Spanish all summer, it impedes their
learning when Fall comes. She believed the school calendar schedule is a problem
as well in regards to improving achievement. She expressed a need for the school
year to change and possibly be extended. She shared,
We need tutoring. The kids need to go all day. They need to go
all summer. I came to this school because we were year round
and these kids can’t be off for three months. We don’t have that
anymore. They go home and speak Spanish for three months and
you’ve got to talk the first month, you know. Even worse, it’s
most negative because they can’t remember. So, I think year
round is a start and after school tutoring or after school programs
72
for them. Their school days should be long because when they go
home, there’s not much for them to do except get in trouble.
The EL resource teacher also spoke of the community factors that affected her
work as a teacher. She went one step further though and focused on the English
Language Development (ELD) program specifically relating to her expertise as a
teacher. She further stated,
Oh, there are a lot of factors that affect it. I work with a lot of
parents who have little to no education. Some are actually
illiterate and cannot help their children. So the language
development is difficult there. We work with a lot of students
who don’t come to school with a dominant language. They
understand Spanish, but they don’t read or write it, so then
learning a new language makes it twice as difficult.
The language barrier affected teachers daily as well as at conference time. The
second grade teacher with twenty-eight years experience lamented, “Parents just
don’t understand what I want their child to do. And then they complain because
it’s not in Spanish. It’s hard to communicate with the parents and, you know, at
my age, I don’t want to go back and learn Spanish.” The first grade teacher
explained, “I hire my own translator for conferences because to get conference
translators at school doesn’t work very well. With the scheduling and timing and
all that, it’s just too hard.”
The majority of the teachers cited various community factors as hindering
their teaching in the age of accountability. Specifically, they focused on a lack of
parental support, a language barrier, and the low socioeconomic status as
inhibiting their success as teachers to support students and raise achievement.
73
Parental Involvement
Parental involvement came up often as a community factor that affected
teachers’ work. All twelve teachers mentioned the various activities that the
school promotes to increase parental involvement, ranging from parent education
classes and English classes to parent literacy days and game nights to room helpers
and classroom volunteers. At the same time, the success of these programs and
events varied. The third grade teacher explained, “A lot of my parents don’t want
to come into the classroom, so I think because of language or they have small
children at home.” This issue came up every so often. It was asked of the teachers
on how they do try to involve the parental community in being more a part of the
school. This same third grade teacher answered, “So, I send home timed tests
where they can grade at home just to kind of make them feel a part of the
classroom. We have carnivals and things like that but there is definitely a little bit
of a wall.” The EL resource teacher shared her frustration, “I run the English
Learner Advisory Committee (ELAC) meetings in which parents are informed of
what the programs are here, what we offer to the students. I’ve had the same
parents in my meetings for the last three and a half years.”
Both Woodward Elementary and Elmwood Elementary lacked a
functioning PTO (Parent Teacher Organization). The events were run by the
teachers with some parental assistance. The RSP teacher explained, “There are a
lot of inequalities in schools. Some of that’s seen because some PTO’s can
provide things for schools and others can’t.” The first grade teacher added, “I
74
think they do a parent breakfast, but we don’t have very much turnout. PTO, I
don’t think it’s even existent really this year.” The fourth grade teacher at
Woodward Elementary explained there is somewhat of a PTO, “I’m the PTO
treasurer because we don’t have high parent involvement. I’ve been doing that for
four years. I’ve planned activities. Like, I’m in charge of the carnival and I do a
lot of activities to help in all areas.” Also at Woodward, the EL teacher elaborated
more on the PTO, “We actually this year for the first time, have a teacher for her
adjunct duty who is going to do the room moms.” The second grade teacher with
twenty-five years experience explained further,
Our principal that was here prior, started a program, Proficiency
Achieved as a Community Together (PACT), and made it
mandatory for every parent to work at least five hours for the
school, either helping out in the office or in the classroom, so
we’re trying to bring it back because it kind of faded out.
Elmwood Elementary continues to make a concerted effort to involve parents in
the PTO. The second grade teacher shared,
We have our PTO meetings at night in English and Spanish for
the parents. We do a lot of events on the school site. Next week
we have a game night where the kids get to wear their Halloween
costumes. So we do offer activities for the parents to come and be
involved.
On a positive note both schools offered programs for parents to get
involved and provided many opportunities for them to learn English. The sixth
grade teacher shared, “There’s definitely support if the parents are looking for it.”
Both schools offered the Community-Based English Tutoring (CBET) Program
75
where parents have the opportunity to attend English classes for free. The EL
teacher shared,
I run the after school CBET Program. I not only teach English to
parents, but I also teach them tutorial skills to help their kids at
home. It’s twice a week for two hours each time and we focus on
both learning English as well as skills that they can use at home
with their children or grandchildren . . . they can do
comprehension activities in their native language and that’s what I
do teach in the CBET because the parents are very early in their
English development. They can’t teach their kids in English yet.
They don’t have the vocabulary or the skills. So, those skills I do
teach them and we practice them in Spanish so they can take them
home and transfer.
Parents also have the opportunity to get involved with the English Language
Advisory Committee (ELAC) or School Site Council (SSC). The EL teacher
elaborated, “I run the ELAC, which is the English Learner Advisory Committee.
We have meetings quarterly in which we discuss programs at out school, how
budgets affect our programs, tutoring, what they can do at home, etc.” Elmwood
Elementary also hosted literacy days and math days as well to teach parents how to
help their children improve in reading and math. The EL teacher shared,
We also offer the Parent Literacy Days when the parents are
invited to come into the classroom during language arts to see
how to help their kids at home with reading. They are able to see
what the teachers are doing in the classroom to teach the children
reading. The teachers supply the parents with helpful hints for
reading support.
Elmwood Elementary was also working on a parent resource room according to
the reading resource teacher, “We’re planning on having a parent resource room,
teaching them how to read to their child, and giving them books and materials to
do that.”
76
Parents were also invited to work in the classroom or at the school site on a
regular basis. The literacy program teacher at Woodward explained the need for
parental support with the Captain Numbers Program, “We have several parents
that help with on-site programs like Captain Numbers. It’s a math fact test that we
do school-wide and every Thursday we have a handful of parents coming in to
correct those tests.” Both schools were working to make school less scary for
parents and more inviting. The first grade teacher shared, “At Back-to-School
Night I teach the parents how to help their students with homework. I also made a
tape for each parent with the high frequency words in English, so they can actually
practice with their children.”
Two of the teachers at Elmwood Elementary complimented their principal
on how inclusive he was of parents and how extremely passionate he was when it
comes to making the parents feel welcome at school. The sixth grade teacher
shared,
The principal’s really good about trying to encourage the parents
to get involved. He’s done so much since he’s been here. I mean,
he’s been really good about involving the community and he gets
people in here—the number of parents who’ve shown up in the
past since he’s been here has increased every year.
Both agreed he was a positive influence who works hard to create and promote
programs for parents. The reading resource teacher elaborated,
Last year, I think it was the end of the year or the beginning of the
year, he hired with his own money a mariachi band. He’s just
insane. He loves to do stuff for other people and so his outreach
to parents is huge. He’s very inclusive of parents, very respectful
of parents, and he insists on that from all of his teachers.
77
Parental involvement is important in the age of accountability because parents
should be well informed regarding their children’s school and overall achievement.
The literature review revealed that too often teachers see obstacles rather than
opportunities in the changing lives and cultures of students, families, and
communities. Therefore, increased parental involvement will help bridge the
socio-cultural gap that separates them.
School Factors
As aforementioned the community factors had an effect on the teachers
interviewed for this study. There were in-school factors as well, such as Title I
status, programs, resources, and site leadership. Both schools were Title I schools
and Elmwood Elementary was a Program Improvement (PI) Year Five school.
Furthermore, the teachers were asked how the factors at the school site specifically
affect their work as teachers. Site leadership was a school factor that affected
teacher’s work in the age of accountability. An important point was raised by two
of the teachers in regards to data analysis and new leadership at the school site.
The third grade teacher spoke of her prior principal who was data driven and
raised test scores accordingly. Her concern was that the data focus at Woodward
Elementary was not as intense with the new principal. She explained,
The only training I got was from my last administrator. She was
data driven and she analyzed every single kid, every single way
that you could analyze the data on them. She was amazing that
way. I’ve never been trained by my district for that. I was very
resistant and resilient when we first learned about it because it was
a lot of work on our part, however, I miss that.
78
This same teacher also spoke of how her previous principal was tougher on
teachers, but at the time she did not appreciate it and now misses it under the new
principal. She shared,
I think you’ve got to find the balance. You’re doing this great,
but you need to work on that. I appreciate that now. She would
come in and find my weakness because I was always striving to
improve. You can’t as an administrator be afraid to tell them
what they’re not doing right. You can’t just fluff it with you’re
doing a great job because personally I don’t think that’s going to
move the masses.
Even the second grade teacher with five years experience spoke of the missing link
of data analysis,
The person that we used to have here was very into it. I mean,
literally data driven to the point where it was obsessively data
driven where we all wanted to scream out at meeting because it
was so data driven, but in some ways that helped because it really
taught a lot of us how to look and reflect on our data objectively
and critically. I mean really to say, what am I doing wrong here
or what do I need to do better here? So that was good, but the
negative was that it was constant and too much.
This same teacher also spoke of the new leadership affecting the school site. The
past principal was strong on data and tended to be tough on her teachers with a
more structural leadership style focused on rationality, analysis, logic, facts, and
data. While the new principal tended to have a more human resource leadership
style focused on coaching, participation, motivation, and teamwork. This teacher
believed there was a balance to be found somewhere in between. She elaborated
and shared a personal story,
Our new principal is much more laid back and much more
professional. You don’t freak out when she walks in your room.
79
Whereas the last one, it was so tense all the time when she’d walk
in your room. Prime example, my second year she always picked
one person to pick on and I was it. My second year, she left the
classroom and I’ll never forget that class. This is my room at the
time, right? My filing cabinet was over there and I turned and I
just lost it—balling. And I don’t cry in front of the kids. I try
never to do that. And one of my kids he goes, that’s it—give her a
moment, ladies and gentlemen. I loved that kid. And so every
time since then, that boy has a special place in my heart, but I
mean I haven’t ever felt that way with Helen. In fact, she let’s us
have so much say as professionals that you almost say where’s our
leadership?
Both teachers did not appreciate the harsher approach of their prior principal, but
they missed the intense data analysis, which helped in the effort to raise student
achievement. In contrast, at Elmwood Elementary the EL teacher spoke of site
leadership and shared, “Having a very supportive administrator who goes into the
classrooms and is also aware of what’s going on has helped. Probably the most
active leadership I’ve seen at a school site in my years.”
Teacher Beliefs About Federal/State Policy Contexts
Through the questioning of the teachers regarding factors in the school and
community, the qualitative data revealed findings relating to teachers’ beliefs
about accountability. All twelve teachers believed in the idea of accountability
and analyzing data, but had concerns regarding the current state of accountability
in regards to the punitive nature of No Child Left Behind (NCLB). The fourth
grade teacher lamented,
But the downside with everything that’s happening now is they are
pushing so much scores and they want to take your pay away if
your kids don’t perform. Quite frankly, our kids are so low. They
80
can’t pass and so they are going to take our pay away. And so I
think in the end, it’s going to make honest people start cheating. I
really believe that. I believe that we will. I think it would be good
for all schools to have proctors in the room when we give the big
test.
The first grade teacher simply stated, “First and foremost you have to be here for
the kids and whenever I get frustrated with accountability or demands, I just come
back to the kids. How does it affect the kids? How does me doing this make my
students achieve more?” The second grade teacher with nine years experience had
a different vantage point, “But I think you have to increase the demands because
there’s more. I mean, what Bush is pushing with No Child Left Behind, you have
to make sure the teachers know this is what you need to do and you’re accountable
for every child.” Two teachers spoke of the concern of a loss of critical thinking
skills and an overall frustration with No Child Left Behind. The sixth grade
teacher explained,
That’s good that there’s a sense of accountability, no doubt. The
problem is that all the accountability is weighted on two items—
math and reading and the weight is determined by your ability to
choose the answers rather than create an answer, come up with an
answer. And now with pacing guides and the demand for the test
score, you lose a lot of that spark. You know it gets very
monotonous. You’re teaching towards the test. What a perfect
way to produce a bunch of people who can’t think. I’d say you get
a bunch of people walking around like clones and end up just
doing things because that’s the right choice, like a, b, c, or d. And
you know No Child Left Behind, it’s going be this percentage this
year, this percentage next year, and so forth. Fine, that’s asinine to
begin with, but let’s just pretend — let’s just say in a perfect world
that could happen. We can do that. The ultimate goal is 100%.
The sun doesn’t rise 100%. Nothing is 100%. Statistically,
nothing is 100%. And then you throw in humans who have an
array of issues or multitudes of issues, whether it be emotional or
81
mom didn’t show up this morning, or sister yelled at me, or
whatever it is. I mean, even in a factory where we can control
environment, almost perfectly, there’s no 100%. So, what would
make people in society think that humans, who are totally quirky,
would have any chance of being 100%? But no one mentions that
stuff.
The reading teacher shared her frustrations with accountability,
I hope we learn from what isn’t working and pay attention to that
and you know, not put our head in the sand and say oh, it’s got to
be this or it’s got be that but rather just look at the facts, you know.
They are not learning it. They’re just not learning it. We have to
come up with something else. I can’t believe we’ve been at
education in public schools for this long and we haven’t gotten it
right yet.
The findings revealed that all of the teachers believed in accountability in
the form of data analysis and raising achievement for all learners, but for some
their frustration resonated with the specificity of NCLB and the idea of 100%
proficiency by 2014 for all students and the punitive nature of the act against those
schools not meeting their Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAO).
Summary
Therefore, factors in the school and community affect teachers’ work. As
aforementioned, various community factors were cited as hindering achievement.
The teachers focused on a lack of parental support, a language barrier, and the low
socioeconomic status as inhibiting their success as teachers to support students and
raise achievement. Unfortunately, the teachers focused immensely on factors not
in their control. There were a few school site factors mentioned as well, such as
data analysis and site leadership, which either supported or hampered their success
82
depending on the teachers’ outlook on the importance of data analysis and site
leadership.
Professional Support
The third major area of findings involves the professional support in place
to help teachers manage teaching in the age of accountability. The literature
review revealed that there are various professional support mechanisms in place
for teachers in the age of accountability in the form of teacher leadership,
collaboration, professional development, and teacher resources. It was highlighted
in the literature as well that the age of accountability is grooming teacher leaders
to support colleagues and in turn improve student achievement. It was also noted
in the literature that professional development is a key component of any school
reform.
Teacher Leadership
The majority of the teachers in this study agreed that teacher leadership has
become a strong support in the age of accountability. All twelve teachers spoke
positively of teacher leadership in some form or another, such as, leadership teams,
grade level teams, collaboration, and teamwork. Eleven of the twelve teachers
spoke highly of collaboration and ten of the twelve teachers spoke positively of the
leadership teams. The fourth grade teacher mentioned the importance of these
leadership roles for teachers. She explained, “As a leadership team we talk about
83
things. Then we go back to our grade levels and talk and report back. As teachers,
we have input. We vote on things. Shared decision-making is the key.” The
literacy program teacher added, “We meet with administration, see what we need
do, disseminate the information to the grade level, and then discuss it with them.
Then as a leadership team, we make certain decisions.” The EL resource teacher
articulated the leadership team’s overall purpose,
I’m part of the leadership team and again it’s that collaboration.
Being aware of what’s going on across the school and not just
within my own field and my own department. The leadership
team’s purpose is to guide the instruction at our school and guide
the direction and focus of our students to reach our annual goals,
AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress) and API (Academic Performance
Index) goals as well as our own school site goals. The leadership
team consists of the Special Education Resource, Reading
Resource, EL Resource, Principal, Instruction Coach, and a
representative from each grade level.
The second grade teacher with nine years experience was a strong believer in
effective teacher leadership. She shared,
I think it’s definitely powerful to have teachers be just as aware
and knowledgeable as your principal. You know, whatever
information he’s getting from the district or any data that he
receives, I definitely think there should be somebody that is
familiar or knowledgeable with it and can pass it down to the rest
of the team. So he makes us feel with this leadership team that
we’re together. That, you know, anything that happens to him, he
wants us to be aware of it. Like he sends us, we joke about it,
about twenty emails a day. So it’s good because I’m the kind of
person that needs to know firsthand. That is why I’m on the
leadership team.
The sixth grade teacher added, “Yesterday somebody said oh, teachers don’t want
collaboration but then now that we have it we see, oh my gosh yes, we did need it.
84
Granted, we talk more now that we have to collaborate. We used to never speak at
all. You know, it’s like a relationship. It takes time.” The reading resource
teacher at Elmwood Elementary shared, “We do have a lot of peer support, grade
level support, and team support. Our grade level teams are very, very close, you
know, and they meet on a very definite schedule and they plan together. Schools
that plan together, stay together.” The first grade teacher at Woodward
Elementary had a different take on collaboration. She stated, “I feel like we all say
we are collaborating, but I think it has just become what we say. We just come
and give out messages or complain or share frustrations. It’s not really the true
meaning.” The reading resource teacher at Elmwood also spoke about the power
to be teacher leaders,
What I’ve seen happen here is that the principal gives people the
power to be leaders. His first staff meeting that he ever facilitated,
nobody said a word. Because nobody was used to being asked
anything— it was more, you know, you guys are this and I’m that
and I’m telling you. And he sat there and said, come on you guys,
I need you. And he’s created the culture of leaders in our school.
So people do feel like they matter.
The qualitative data revealed that eleven of the twelve teachers believe in and
support collaboration with colleagues as a powerful professional support in the age
of accountability.
The two teachers who did not speak positively about teacher leadership
specifically voiced their concerns regarding the leadership team. The first grade
teacher with eight years experience had an entirely different vantage point
regarding the role of leadership teams. She lamented, “Basically we’ve just
85
become the issuers or bearers of bad news. And then we’re sounding boards for
the grade level because it seems once we get there, there are no decisions to be
made, it’s just do it.” At the same time, when asked about collaboration. She
spoke very differently. She shared, “I think collaboration with other teachers is the
big one—and experimentation, experimenting with instruction, experimenting with
time frames, and materials.” The first grade teacher believed collaboration was
hugely beneficial, while the leadership team was a waste of time. The second
grade teacher with twenty-eight years experience also did not feel the leadership
team was supporting her in the age of accountability. She elaborated, “I’m on the
leadership team, but it’s the same old ones over and over again. It’s pretty much
become look at me, I’m important, and then pat yourself on the back.”
Professional Development
The qualitative data revealed that all twelve teachers have been provided
with and have participated in professional development at the school site and a few
have sought outside professional development. Since Elmwood Elementary and
Woodward Elementary are Title I schools they have an abundance of professional
development with the sole purpose of raising student achievement. All twelve
teachers explained that the district has three mandatory staff development days a
year, but that they also offer professional development opportunities throughout
the school year as well. Five of the teachers spoke of the importance of
technology and its effective use in the classroom to improve instruction and
86
achievement. Three teachers mentioned their professional development with the
use of SMART Boards in the classroom. SMART Boards are interactive white
boards that have a touchpad screen and are hooked up to a computer and a
projector. Many schools and districts are utilizing these instructional tools to
promote student learning and increase achievement. The first grade teacher
explained,
I have participated in SMART Board training to integrate
technology in the classroom to meet the needs of all learners. With
the SMART Board, my lessons are more interactive with students
and I use United Streaming too, which is a digital video-based
learning resource. United Streaming helps give my students
background knowledge that they are sometimes lacking.
Two teachers discussed professional development with data analysis and Data
Director, a web-based data warehouse and management system for educators.
Basically, Data Director is a technical tool for teachers to analyze data, so as to
improve instruction in order to raise achievement. The literacy program teacher
explained,
Oh what I think that is big is we all have access to Data Director
and you can go in, pull out students, you know your students, see
their scores—there are so many different assessments, their writing
assessment, their language assessment, their CST, their district
math, benchmark assessments, and you can just see where they’re
at, what they need. We can pinpoint if they need to do, you know
like, they didn’t do well on number sense, or they needed help with
geometric shapes or just pulling out a specific area of where their
needs are.
All twelve teachers basically listed the professional development classes
that they have attended on the three-a-year staff development days. The majority
87
of those days offered choice, but sometimes those days were focused on training
for newly adopted programs; such as, Houghton Mifflin, Avenues, Read Naturally,
University of California, Irvine (UCI) Math, Project Guided Language Acquisition
Development (GLAD), and Beginning Teacher Support and Assessment (BTSA)
to name just a few. The second grade teacher with five years experience spoke
highly of district professional development. She elaborated, “Wow, district-wise a
lot—in fact, the one I took Friday, Spellography, was amazing. Letters, I’ve done,
so now I’ve done five of the fluency series. And our district’s really good about
getting us in-services where they really help the BTSA Program.” The EL
resource teacher highlighted Project GLAD. She explained,
We have a lot besides our staff development days, we now have
two certified GLAD key trainers on campus. Project GLAD is the
preferred method of instruction in the district and all teachers are
required to go through at least the first phase of GLAD training
which is the two full days with the history, the background, and the
overview of all the strategies. So we offer that as well as going
into the classrooms and modeling those lessons for the teachers.
We’ve had Step Up to Writing instruction, Curricular Staff
Development, all types of staff development to help teachers reach
our goals.
The second grade teacher with nine years experience explained the professional
development provided to improve academic achievement of students and improve
instructional practices. She elaborated,
Well again, because of our big focus here at Elmwood is reading
we look at the language arts part of the day, so we have a lot of
staff development designed around language arts. Like our reading
coach, our reading resource teacher will provide these in-services
either at our school site or at the district and always just providing
any materials that we need. Also, because our big component of
88
students is EL we just a couple of weeks ago had the lady that’s in
charge of the EL for the district come out to our school site and
gave us small group instruction for our grade level, GLAD
strategies, and how we can implement it into our EL portion of the
day which is thirty minutes. Plus, throughout the year, we have
staff development days and we’ll have somebody come in and
provide extra curricular support in whatever we think our
weaknesses are so it’s usually in reading. Also, we have modified
Wednesdays where the children get out at 12:20 p.m. and those
days are used to do data analysis, grade level planning, and again
sometimes we have extra support come in and do a whole staff
instruction on something we need support in.
The reading resource teachers also spoke highly of the myriad of district trainings.
She explained,
Well again, GLAD and the math training. I have the AB
(Assembly Bill) 430 Training, Houghton Mifflin for ELA,
Avenues for ELD, Step Up to Writing which is a district-wide
writing program which is very, very effective with the colors.
What you see in classrooms, if you are ever in classrooms where
there’s Step Up, is that they work with colors for the topic sentence
and then the details come in another color and then the conclusion.
The different types of writing have a different sort of format that
they go by, but it’s very, very specific how it’s taught. It’s a very
specific in a child-friendly way.
Again, all twelve teachers spoke highly of district professional
development. Two teachers did speak negatively though of financial concerns.
The first grade teacher lamented, “I think some of the professional days are very
beneficial but then again there is a problem when you get all jazzed up about a
training and you can’t implement it because you don’t have the money or the
resources or the time cause you’re doing data—those kinds of things.” The RSP
teacher also shared concerns. She shared,
89
We’ve had Step Up to Writing and then we have had some special
ed. staff development days where we talk about different
disabilities and certain things that will help certain students and
stuff like that. In the past, I have been sent to some conferences
and stuff but since the budget has been cut, I haven’t been. I
haven’t been going for the last couple of years.
Many of the teachers sought out their own professional development as
well, either through professional conferences or further education. The second
grade teacher with five years experience spoke of county conferences. She stated,
Aside from district I’ve gone to a couple of county things. In fact,
the most recent one I went to was on fluency. I’m constantly
looking for articles or anything online I can find that helps,
especially with low socio. I’m always looking for that outreach of
low socio and then personally I’m always on ProTeacher.com.
That website has all sorts of information.
The first grade teacher also spoke of county trainings and other helpful
professional development. She stated, “GLAD is helpful, various SMART Board
training, United Streaming. I’ve also been to the county for the Big Five’s reading
fluency and all of those have been very helpful.” Four of the twelve teachers had a
master’s degree and one was in process. Three of the degrees were in
administration and the other two were in education. The RSP teacher shared, “I
got my Masters in Special Education in 2003. And I just finished my Level II
Special Education which allows me to clear that credential.” District and outside
professional development was highly important and widely utilized by all of the
teachers. Further education was a priority and the teachers articulated the need to
participate in order to raise achievement.
90
Teacher Resources
The interviews revealed that all twelve teachers had been provided with
teacher resources in the form of support personnel and intervention services in
order to improve achievement and manage teaching in the age of accountability.
Again, because Elmwood Elementary and Woodward Elementary are Title I
schools they have Title I funds to provide more services to improve instruction and
raise achievement. The teachers shared various teacher resources provided to
improve their own instructional practices and to increase their students’
achievement levels. Instructional coaches, such as, literacy program teacher, EL
resource teacher, reading resource teacher, RSP teacher, and GLAD key trainers,
were mentioned most often as important resources in helping teachers increase
student achievement overall. The EL resource teacher explained,
As the EL resource teacher, I am on-site instructional coach here as
instructional resource to support all teachers. Before, I could start
teaching High Point, I had to go through a five day training. Two
years ago, I became certified as a GLAD key trainer. It was a lot
of training. Also, I received a lot of training in the Avenues
Program, which is what we use for ELD.
As aforementioned, technologies in the form of SMART Boards and Data
Director were the top teacher resources mentioned most often by the twelve
teachers as being helpful to teachers in managing teaching in the age of
accountability. The fourth grade teacher explained, “I do a lot more hands on now
instead of teacher directed and now that we have SMART Boards and United
Streaming, we can really bring things to life for the kids and make it so much more
91
interesting. I think things are changing for the better that way, especially if you
are at a Title I school where you can get the money to buy these things.”
Again, the various curricular and intervention programs were mentioned as
an integral teacher resource to support classroom instruction and increase student
achievement in the age of accountability. The fourth grade teacher shared her
beliefs regarding teacher resources, “Well, I think every school should have all of
those Houghton Mifflin guided readers because that reading system is incredible
with those.” The third grade teacher elaborated,
I use a lot of GLAD with our kids because it gets their attention.
It’s easier to read. They’re more engaged. They’re more
interested. They walk away with more rather than trying to get
through a textbook for my readers who are like 2.0, 2.3, you know
1.5. So I use a lot of posters and fact-based learning rather than
just all text.
The literacy program teacher added,
At our school we have Houghton Mifflin and that is like our bible.
It’s great. It is our whole language arts program and that’s what
we use, grammar, comprehension, everything, you know, that’s
our whole program. And for math, actually, we go by the UCI
pacing guide. For third grade, we came up with pre and post
assessments for each unit.
Support staff, such as the school psychologist, school nurse, and
community liaison, was also mentioned as a resource to help teachers manage
teaching in the age of accountability. One teacher also mentioned the teacher
union, along with the leadership team as a teacher resource. The RSP teacher
shared,
92
We have our union. Let’s see we also have our leadership team
and our grade levels. We get a lot of support within each other and
we have a very supportive principal. So, in that sense, we have our
own community support which is a real positive. We’re really
positive here at this school as far as that goes.
Eight of the twelve teachers mentioned teacher leaders in the capacity of
leadership teams, collaboration with colleagues, and instructional coaches as
integral resources in helping teachers manage teaching in the age of accountability.
The second grade teacher with nine years experience shared,
Definitely team planning—team planning is a key resource. We
have the coaches at our site and our ILT (Instructional Leadership
Team) where we pick a focus each month. Being able to have
people you know on site who specialize in curricular areas is a
huge support. I mean, you know, like our GLAD trainer comes in
and our reading coach comes in and they help me with my
students. So just having the support system of other people to help
provide you with what things you need to better the success of
your students is an amazing teacher resource.
The findings revealed that all twelve teachers utilized available professional
development, teacher leaders, and teacher resources to manage teaching in the age
of accountability. Professional development focused on teacher learning to inform
best practices and faithful implementation of programs. While teacher resources
focused on the availability of extra support personnel and intervention services.
Ultimately, the intent of the professional development and teacher resources was
to improve instruction in order to raise student achievement.
93
Changes in Teachers’ Work
The final area involves tying the findings presented above together with
additional insights from the data to make sense of how teachers’ work has changed
in the age of accountability. The literature review revealed that teacher morale
appears to be low in some schools and that accountability is the number one
stressor for teachers. Another key concept from the literature review was that
accountability provides new challenges for teachers. As aforementioned, the age
of accountability is focused on raising student achievement and increasing student
test scores. Raising test scores is crucial in this high-stakes era of accountability
and it is important to examine how teachers’ work has changed in the age of
accountability.
Teacher Work Changes
The qualitative data revealed that the majority of teachers have experienced
accountability changes in their work lives. Ten of the twelve teachers expressed
that teachers’ work has changed in the age of accountability. Three teachers in
particular felt that everything is now very scripted and regimented. The reading
resource teacher lamented,
My work as a teacher has changed in that things are more scripted,
especially with Houghton Mifflin and these adoptions. I’ve
worked with Open Court as well. They are all very scripted, a lot
less personal with the children. There’s a lot less time for personal
contact with children. I know that we have it, but it’s like we’re
pushing things down their throats oftentimes. And I think that’s
94
the wrong approach. So I don’t know if that’s changed me, but it’s
certainly changed.
The RSP teacher added,
It’s changed from allowing creativity to no creativity. It’s very
regimented. However in RSP, I have a little leeway then I’ve seen
in the other teachers. I feel that regular ed. is just step by step.
That it’s very difficult to put some creativity in there and I think
that’s what makes teachers zoom. It’s very scripted.
Two teachers spoke specifically of the rigorous demands and pressure.
The third grade teacher with fourteen years experience shared, “I definitely feel the
pressure of accountability. I just feel a lot of pressure that I didn’t used to feel
when I started teaching.” The second grade teacher with nine years experience
added, “It’s just become a little bit more concrete I would say because we have so,
so, much, so many demands. So many standards, so many that we don’t have a lot
of room for freedom so everything that they provide for me is what I have to
utilize.”
Five of the twelve teachers cited data, assessments, documentation, and
paperwork as major work changes for teachers in the age of accountability. The
second grade teacher with nine years experience shared,
We have so many assessments that we do, personal assessments
small group assessments, individual assessments, classroom
assessments, grade level assessments, ELD assessments, I mean,
that’s all we do is assess. I feel like we’re rarely teaching, as we’re
assessing so much and analyzing data . . . like I said before, all I do
is analyze data, so when I give a theme test, we’ll break it down
into sub-categories and then I will assess each child if they passed
or failed in that sub-category. And then I’ll try to re-teach to that
particular group. So, it’s like I used to give the test and everyone
95
passed or failed and then I moved on, but it’s definitely broken
down a lot further now.
The literacy program teacher added,
The work has changed a lot because you are spending more time on
documentation as opposed to really concentrating on how to differentiate
and change your teaching to affect your students. So you spend more time
on paperwork and not as much on the instructional part.
The second grade teacher with twenty-eight years experience shared, “Well, I
don’t do as many fun things. Its test, teach, test, teach, teach, teach, test, test.
Oops, you didn’t get that! Let’s present it in a different way. Let’s test again.”
Two of the twelve teachers did not feel that teachers’ work has changed in
the age of accountability, but they acknowledged the reality of more testing and
assessments. The first grade teacher with eight years experience explained,
Actually, you know, I’ve only been teaching eight years and I
don’t think it has changed. I mean every year I feel like there’s
more that we need to do, more assessments, and you know there
are more assessments. There’s a state assessment, the district
assessments, and we have the language assessments, you know. I
just feel like every year they’re tacking on more. You know, like
for fourth grade they do writing and fifth grade they do science.
They’re adding on more and more.
The second grade teacher with five years experience added,
Since, I’ve always been around during the age of accountability
my work as a teacher has not changed. I think watching where my
mother and her teachers’ friends have come from who have taught
for twenty plus years versus what I do now, we’re doing a lot more
testing. And so your teaching is based more on test rather than life
lessons and what’s going to be used in life. You find yourself
doing far more of the reading and the math because those are on
the tests versus doing the music and the arts.
96
The findings revealed that ten of the twelve teachers identified that
teachers’ work has changed in the age of accountability because teaching has
become highly scripted and high-stakes testing has brought on rigorous demands
and increased pressure. The qualitative data further showed that all twelve
teachers acknowledged specifically that teachers’ work has changed because of
data, increased assessments, documentation, and more paperwork.
Teacher Morale
As aforementioned, teachers’ work has changed in the age of
accountability and in the process teacher morale has been affected as well. The
majority of the teachers noted low morale, high levels of stress, and building
pressure. All twelve teachers spoke of accountability affecting teacher morale
both positively and negatively. The fourth grade teacher explained,
We’re all worried how you can compare our school to the schools
up in the hills. The kids there—I mean it’s just not fair. And there
are a lot of teachers that won’t teach here. These kids need us. So
what are they going to do, take away our jobs? I mean people are
really upset, you know what I’m saying? So I kind of feel
positively our principal’s incredible and she is doing everything
she can to help us succeed. And our scores went down this year
and it was her first year as a principal last year, well where some
will say, that it’s her fault—no, I don’t see that at all. It’s a new
group, new test, new group of kids, new everything . . . I think in
this school, I think people need to quit complaining all the time
and start working together as a team. I have a great team this year,
but there are few grade levels that are very negative and make life
miserable for our principal.
The third grade teacher felt the same pressure and frustration, but viewed the
principal differently. She shared,
97
I notice a pressure on my shoulders where I’m scrambling as a
teacher because I feel like every minute counts and when I’m not
meeting their needs, it gets to me. And I’ve shared this
conversation with numerous teachers and they feel that too. I feel
like my standard is really high and my kids are unfortunately kind
of in the lower end because of their language and because of the
pressure I feel like that the gap is widening and it saddens me. I
almost feel like I’m giving up on them when, you know, I’ve only
worked in Title I and I love this population, but because of test
scores, I feel that pressure and gap widening. And it makes me
want to change to be honest. We used to have an administrator
that basically carried all the weight on her shoulders and so as a
staff we united and we were really moving the kids. Now, it’s a
different administrator and she’s putting it more on the teachers to
make a difference and I’ve noticed a lot of animosity amongst the
teachers because we are all feeling the pressure and we’re
scrambling because we’re trying to come up with our own
practices and it’s a different dynamic.
The literacy program teacher did not feel low morale amongst the school but rather
just people venting frustrations. She spoke highly of the morale and cohesiveness
amongst her teammates though. She elaborated,
Third grade is very cohesive. I think that we do a lot of grade
level meetings, grade level team building, and so since we know
the high demands of accountability, we are there for each other,
so we do a lot of meetings, you know, collaborative teaching, so
we keep each other in perspective. And so we’re there for each
other because we’re all on site and we’re expected to do this, you
know, so there’s a lot of cohesiveness here. And the negativity, I
mean, I don’t know if there’s negativity towards each other or as
a staff because we know what’s expected and we’re just here to
help each other and so we vent our frustrations, but that’s about
it.
Whether one called it negativity, frustration, venting, or low morale, all twelve
teachers felt it and commented on it in some aspect in regards to teaching in the
age of accountability. The first grade teacher explained,
98
I think when the connection isn’t brought to the instruction it’s
very difficult for teachers to grasp. When it’s just give me your
data, give me a number, and the connection from above is not
focused on the instruction, it’s very difficult to digest or to even
comply. So we need to see the connection between the instruction
too and not just what are you going to do, but giving the teachers
time to actually talk about having to change.
The second grade teacher with nine years experience spoke both negatively and
positively in regards to accountability affecting teacher morale,
On the low morale side there are too many demands and teachers
are frustrated. We’re only human and there’s only so much we can
do. So it’s there, the pressure, you can feel it here and everywhere
and women like to voice their opinions. At the same time, though,
I think when the demands are greater for me personally it pushes
me. It pushes me to want to do everything I can. For some people
it’s just overwhelming and it makes them want to kind of
reevaluate if there’s something else, that’s why the teaching
profession, you know, after so many years, teachers kind of fall
off.
Six of the twelve teachers spoke specifically about negative teachers and
negative attitudes frustrating them and their colleagues. According to Clark and
Estes (2002), negative emotion is one of the biggest killers of motivation. The
reading resource teacher explained,
We have only like one percent of our staff that is negative, and you
know that’s been very fortunate. We have a couple, maybe two,
one in particular who no matter what we do it’s always wrong.
Even if it’s given to them on a silver platter and said look you can
do this, it’s still wrong. Even if we spoon feed them, they say, you
know, I don’t like the script on the spoon.
The second grade teacher with twenty-eight years experience was honest and
candid regarding her own personal teacher morale. She elaborated,
99
Personally, I can’t wait. I’ve got two more years and will be gone.
I started in 1969 and I had my first child in 1975 and I took a year
off and then when it was time to come back, I was pregnant with
my second child. I quit, then I got divorced, and then I came back
to teaching. So, I’ve been back in since 1986 and I’ve been
teaching straight on since and I’ve seen it all. As a site though,
their morale is a lot better than mine because I’ve just had it up to
here.
The RSP teacher explained her frustration, “For me personally the frustration is the
added paperwork we get in Special Education. As a school, there are fabulous
teachers here at this school site that work hard but burn out’s going to happen real
quick. I don’t know how we keep going.” The sixth grade teacher spoke of
negative teachers and negative attitudes. He lamented, “We need to screen people
for their outlook on where they are going to be working. This is a major problem.
If you don’t want to work here, then you’re not the best person to work here. You
know what I mean? You’re not going to push to make the achievement gap
shrink.”
As aforementioned, on a positive note, accountability has affected teacher
morale positively through teacher leaders, collaboration and teamwork. The EL
resource teacher shared,
For me I do enjoy being able to talk with other teachers and see
what’s going on across the grade levels. Get their input as to how
kids are doing. Because I don’t work with the students that much,
even though I’m accountable for their language development, I do
like to hear what’s going on across grade levels. As a school site, I
know the biggest complaint is all the testing. There’s not time for
any of the creativity that used to exist in teaching. Everything is
scripted. Everything is standard and everything is to the test, of
which there are several.
100
Teacher morale has been affected both positively and negatively. The majority of
teachers have experienced high levels of stress, low morale, and more pressure in
the age of accountability. At the same time, accountability has increased teacher
leadership and teacher morale has been affected positively through collaboration,
collegial support, and teamwork.
Accountability Successes
At the same time, though, assessments were in turn noted as an
accountability success. The qualitative data revealed that the majority of teachers
in this study take an active role and feel a personal responsibility for accountability
at their school site. Since accountability is important to these teachers, they were
asked to share their biggest successes while implementing accountability
mandates. Notably, seven of the twelve teachers mentioned improvement in
student achievement as their biggest accountability success. The third grade
teacher and the literacy program teacher at Woodward Elementary both
acknowledged their school receiving the Title I California Distinguished School
award as their major accountability success. The third grade teacher explained,
“We got California Distinguished School. When I first came to this school, we
were school improvement. Then, we went all the way to California
Distinguished!” The literacy program teacher exclaimed,
Our Title I school became a California Distinguished School. Our
scores went up for five years and that’s a big plus for our school. I
mean just for our scores to go up with the high accountability, you
know, expectations, and then for us to achieve that and for us to
101
become a California Distinguished School that was big, big, big
success for us.
Five teachers mentioned academic assessment scores as their biggest successes.
The second grade teacher with nine years experience spoke of her California
Standards Test (CST), “Well, last year I had the highest CST scores in my school.
So, that definitely was a big success last year and I’m hoping it continues this
year.” The second grade teacher with twenty-eight years experience commented,
“When I see those test scores . . . and the spark come on, I feel very, very good.”
The first grade teacher shared her reading scores,
I think probably the biggest success is that in first grade we
increased our high frequency words for our students and its direct
correlation to their reading skills was tremendous. So, making us
accountable for the high frequency words has really boosted their
achievement in their reading. So like right now, it’s positive and if
we weren’t forced to do it, I don’t know if we would have figured
it out, you know?
The EL resource teacher spoke of her program,
The biggest accountability success for me is seeing students get re-
designated from being a second language learner to fluent English
proficient speakers and seeing the number of students go up each
year as well as seeing those students who are re-designated as
fluent be honored on the honor roll almost every quarter.
Lastly, the second grade teacher with five years experience elaborated,
To me it’s the small successes—not the big ones. Yes, it’s great to
get good test scores and it stinks to get bad test scores, but when
you get that RSP kid or that Special Ed. kid who came in and their
first math test was a 5% and then you test them post and they’re at
75%, you go, my gosh this is great. It’s those successes.
102
Two teachers shared different accountability successes. The fourth grade teacher
with twelve years experience felt that her biggest accountability success was being
chosen Teacher of the Year. While the RSP teacher explained, “I just feel success
on an individual basis with my students and it has nothing to do with
accountability.”
Six of the twelve teachers highlighted the importance of accountability and
its focus on benchmarks, goals, and achievement. The EL resource teacher shared,
“My students love to see how their performing, so we have little clubs for their
achievement and so they have incentives to achieve.” The RSP teacher added, “I
think some accountability is good because it keeps people on their toes. You’ve
got definite goals to achieve and benchmarks and there’s nothing wrong with that.”
The sixth grade teacher elaborated, “Accountability is positive in the sense that it
does keep you focused. The fact that there has to be organization, objectives, and
goals that is a must. You know we definitely have to have direction.” Lastly, the
reading resource teacher shared,
The positive thing about accountability is that it makes people who
don’t do well, you know, or who aren’t crossing their ‘T’s’ and
dotting their ‘I’s’, it makes them accountable. That’s a good thing
in my book. It gives principals and the district something to fall
back on when here’s what you’re not doing and here’s what we
need you to do.
The majority of the twelve teachers interviewed highlighted improvement
in student achievement as measured on academic assessments as their biggest
accountability successes. These findings reflect the qualitative data relating to
103
teacher efficacy. This is encouraging because the age of accountability is rooted in
academic achievement and academic improvement. The findings revealed that the
majority of these teachers have experienced accountability successes in the form of
improved academic achievement and they are very proud of their students’
academic achievement and improved academic performance and they believe in
the importance of benchmark goals and objectives.
Accountability Challenges
The qualitative data revealed that the majority of teachers believe that time
is the biggest challenge in the age of accountability. The fourth grade teacher
lamented, “There is not enough time in the day to get everything done. I am trying
to figure out how to not work weekends and to not be here until 5:30 p.m. every
night. I am really tired of it.” The second grade teacher with nine years
experience shared,
I think the challenge is the more and more demands that they’re
placing on us. In such a short amount of time, it’s like you have
to cover this story in so many days and there’s only so much time
in the day and there’s not a whole lot room for re-teaching
because we have pacing guides and you know by April and May
you’re taking the CST, while the school year doesn’t end until
June. So you have to crunch it all in and you just have to really
pace yourself and know what I need to teach and you’ve got to
cover all those CST standards.
Time was definitely an issue for teachers in light of all of the increasing demands
bestowed on them. The majority of the teachers lamented that time was the
biggest challenge and their biggest frustration.
104
Summary of Findings
As discussed above, this qualitative study was intended to answer the
following research question:
How has teachers’ work changed in the age of accountability?
Towards that goal, this chapter focused on the findings that answered three sub-
questions. The first of these sub-questions asked, “How do teachers’ beliefs and
experiences about their role as teachers (or the teaching craft) affect their work in
the age of accountability?” As described above in greater detail, the majority of
the participating teachers entered the teaching profession because they wanted to
work with kids and they wanted to make a difference in the lives of children.
Additionally, it was discovered that many of the teachers did not cite academic
achievement or high standards as their most crucial role as a teacher, but rather
believed their crucial role was to be good role models or motivators. Indeed, this
is surprising because in the age of accountability, holding up high standards and
increasing achievement scores is presented as the ultimate goal. In turn, the
majority of the teachers stressed the perception of increased pressure compared to
when they first started teaching and they expressed frustration with NCLB. Thus,
teachers’ beliefs and experiences do indeed play a crucial role in defining and
affecting their work in the age of accountability.
The second of the three sub-questions asked, “How do factors in the school
and community affect teachers’ work in the age of accountability?” The answer to
105
this question was that these factors had a major affect. The majority of the
teachers cited various community factors as hindering their teaching in the age of
accountability. Specifically they focused on a lack of parental support, a language
barrier, and their students’ low socioeconomic status as inhibiting their success as
teachers in supporting students and raising achievement. Unfortunately, the
teachers focused immensely on factors not in their control. In turn, there were a
few school site factors as well relating to data analysis and site leadership that
indeed supported and at times hindered certain teachers’ work. Lastly, the
qualitative data revealed that the majority of the teachers saw obstacles rather than
opportunities in the changing lives and cultures of students, families, and
communities. On a positive note, both schools offered a myriad of parental
opportunities in order to increase parental involvement and help bridge the socio-
cultural gap that separated them.
The third sub-question asked, “What support mechanisms are in place to
help teachers manage teaching in the age of accountability?” The answer to this
question was that there was much professional support and professional
development available for all twelve teachers. The qualitative data revealed that
all twelve teachers had been provided and had participated in professional
development at the school site and a few had sought outside professional
development along with pursuing further education in the form of master degrees.
The various professional support mechanisms in place for teachers in the age of
accountability were in the form of teacher leadership, collaboration, professional
106
development, and teacher resources. All twelve teachers spoke positively of
teacher leadership in some form or another, such as leadership teams, grade level
teams, collaboration with colleagues, and teamwork.
The over-arching research question asked, “How has teachers’ work
changed in the age of accountability?” The qualitative data highlighted that the
majority of teachers have experienced accountability changes in their work lives.
As aforementioned, the age of accountability is focused on raising student
achievement and increasing student test scores. Ten of the twelve teachers
expressed their opinions that teachers’ work had changed in the age of
accountability. Five of the twelve teachers cited data, assessments,
documentation, and paperwork as major work changes for teachers in the age of
accountability. While three teachers in particular felt that everything was now
very scripted and regimented, two teachers felt that teachers’ work had not
changed but they acknowledged the reality of more testing and assessments. At
the same time, six of the twelve teachers stressed the importance of accountability
and its focus on benchmarks, goals, and achievement. Even though levels of stress
were higher and teacher and teacher morale appeared to be low, the majority of the
twelve teachers interviewed highlighted improvement in student achievement as
measured on academic assessments as their biggest accountability success.
Therefore, even though the majority of the teachers did not articulate academic
achievement as their most crucial role, they did indeed highlight academic
107
achievement as their biggest accountability success and time as their biggest
accountability challenge.
108
CHAPTER 5
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Introduction
In this era of high stakes accountability, teaching in today’s schools has
intensified and the work lives of teachers have changed. The purpose of this study
was to examine the perceptions and realities of teaching in the age of
accountability and how the current realities and experiences affect individual
teachers and their own visions and beliefs as educators. All of the data gathered
was targeted towards answering the following research question:
How has teachers’ work changed in the age of accountability?
The answer to this question has three parts. The first is based on how
teachers’ beliefs and experiences about their role as teachers (or the teaching craft)
affect their work in the age of accountability. The second part exposes how factors
in the school and community affect teachers’ work in the age of accountability.
The third part explores the professional support in place to help teachers manage
teaching in the age of accountability.
As aforementioned, the majority of the teachers in this study became
teachers because they enjoyed working with kids and wanted to make a difference
in the lives of children. In some instances they felt their own passion for working
with children and in other instances those around them felt their passion and knew
109
they had a gift for teaching and learning. Nine of the twelve teachers believed
their crucial role as a teacher was to be a good role models, be a motivator, guide
students to their futures, and to help them believe in themselves. According to
NCLB, these are not the goals that will raise academic achievement. These lofty
goals are not found in NCLB or the age of accountability. The cliché of “making a
difference” does not suffice anymore as a moral purpose for teaching in this high
stakes realm of accountability. This tells us that many teachers are not changing
their own inner belief systems or teaching purpose in the age of accountability. At
the same time when questioned further regarding teacher efficacy and
accountability successes, seven of the twelve teachers spoke of data and
achievement levels as an indicator of their own teacher efficacy and cited student
achievement as their biggest accountability success.
The age of accountability is focused on raising student achievement and
increasing student test scores. Parental involvement came up often as a
community factor that affected teachers’ work. Ten of the twelve teachers cited
the language barrier and the lack of parental support as critical factors affecting
school and student success. At the same time, all twelve teachers mentioned the
various activities that the school promotes to increase parental involvement,
ranging from parent education classes and English classes to parent literacy days
and game nights to room helpers and classroom volunteers. The success of these
programs and events varied though. In turn, site leadership was mentioned as a
school factor that affected teacher’s work in the age of accountability.
110
The majority of the teachers in this study agreed that teacher leadership had
become a strong professional support in the age of accountability. All twelve
teachers spoke positively of teacher leadership in some form or another, such as,
leadership teams, grade level teams, collaboration, and teamwork. Eleven of the
twelve teachers spoke highly of collaboration and ten of the twelve teachers spoke
positively of the leadership teams. The qualitative data revealed that all twelve
teachers have been provided and have participated in professional development at
the school site and a few have sought outside professional development. In turn,
all twelve teachers have been provided with teacher resources in order to improve
achievement and manage teaching in the age of accountability. Instructional
coaches, technology, and various curricular and intervention programs were
mentioned as integral teacher resources to support classroom instruction and
increase student achievement in the age of accountability.
Connections to Prior Research
The findings from this study can be connected to the literature review in
interesting ways. Chapter 2 examined teaching in the age of accountability from
three different perspectives: Accountability on the Contexts of Teachers’ Work;
Accountability and Teacher Morale; and Accountability and Professional Support.
There are links between these three areas of research and the findings from this
qualitative study.
111
Accountability on the Contexts of Teachers’ Work
The literature review revealed that accountability provides new challenges
for teachers. High stakes accountability is the conduit today to drive school
improvement (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004; Furhman, 2004, Stipek, 2006;
Hargreaves, 2003; Hess, 2003; Mathis, 2003; Scott, 2005; Yeh, 2006). As a result
of high stakes accountability, the context of teachers’ work in the school setting
has changed immensely. The qualitative data revealed that the majority of
teachers have experienced accountability changes in their work lives. Ten of the
twelve teachers expressed their opinions that teachers’ work had changed in the
age of accountability. Three teachers in particular felt that everything is now very
scripted and regimented. Two teachers spoke specifically of the rigorous demands
and pressure. Five of the twelve teachers cited data, assessments, documentation,
and paperwork as major work changes for teachers in the age of accountability.
The literature review reflected that Conley and Goldman (1998) confirmed that
teachers tend to process reform in terms of its effect on their workload and through
the filter of their educational philosophy, opinions of their peers, and school
norms.
Attitudes, values, and beliefs of individual teachers (about what students
can do, their own teacher efficacy, and influences of students’ home lives) are key
factors that determine the solutions that teachers and schools construct in regards
to accountability because of the vary nature of the unique context of each school
(Abelman et al., 1999). Also, in the literature review Borko (1993) revealed that it
112
is difficult for teachers to change their knowledge, beliefs, and practices in
fundamental ways. In this study, two of the teachers did not feel that teachers’
work had changed in the age of accountability, but they acknowledged the reality
of more testing and assessments. The findings revealed that ten of the twelve
teachers felt that teachers’ work had changed in the age of accountability because
teaching became highly scripted and high-stakes testing brought on rigorous
demands and increased pressure. The findings further showed that all twelve
teachers acknowledged specifically that teachers’ work had changed because of
data, increased assessments, documentation, and more paperwork. Lastly, the
findings revealed that the majority of the teachers saw obstacles rather than
opportunities in the changing lives and cultures of students, families, and
communities. On a positive note, both schools offered a myriad of parental
opportunities in order to increase parental involvement and help bridge the socio-
cultural gap that separated them.
Accountability and Teacher Morale
As aforementioned, teachers’ work has changed in the age of
accountability, and in the process teacher morale has been affected as well. The
literature review emphasized that accountability has also impacted the emotional
and professional lives of teachers (Goodson, Moore, & Hargreaves, 2006;
Hargreaves, 2001; Hammond & Onikama, 1997; Sloan, 2007). Accountability
provides new challenges for teachers. The nature and organization of the
113
profession make teaching inherently difficult, teachers face new challenges and
opportunities from diverse and needy student populations, demands for new skills
increase daily, and accountability and academic performance hanag in the balance
(Vandenberghe & Huberman, 1999; Brock & Grady, 2000; Gold & Roth, 1993;
Lilyquist, 1998).
In this study the majority of the teachers noted low morale, high levels of
stress, and building pressure. All twelve teachers spoke of accountability affecting
teacher morale both positively and negatively. The literature review revealed that
teacher morale appears to be low in some schools and that accountability is the
number one stressor for teachers. Whether one calls it negativity, frustration,
venting, or low morale, all twelve teachers in this qualitative study had these
feelings and commented on it in some aspect in regards to teaching in the age of
accountability. In turn, the studies in the literature review revealed the frustration
of teachers in this age of accountability, which is a universal theme (Hentschke &
Wohlstetter, 2004; Furhman, 2004, Stipek, 2006; Hargreaves, 2003; Hess, 2003;
Mathis, 2003; Scott, 2005; Yeh, 2006; Sloan, 2006).
At the same time, six of the twelve teachers highlighted the importance of
accountability and its focus on benchmarks, goals, and achievement. On a positive
note, accountability has affected teacher morale positively through teacher leaders,
collaboration, and teamwork. This qualitative study mirrors the literature where
D’Emidio-Caston (1994) revealed that teachers can use their own strengths,
talents, knowledge, and shared vision to promote student growth and development
114
as well as to bring about positive change. Therefore, change can also have a
positive effect on the lives of teachers in the context of their work.
Accountability and Professional Support
The age of accountability has also affected teachers positively with various
types of professional support (Olsen, J., 2005; Pearson & Moomaw, 2006; Scott &
Bagaka, 2006; Hargreaves & Fink, 2003; Hargreaves & Fullan, 2000; Hargreaves,
1994a). The findings revealed that all twelve teachers had been provided and had
participated in professional development at the school site and a few had sought
outside professional development along with the pursuit of further education in the
form of master degrees. As aforementioned in the literature review, professional
development is a key component of any school reform. Although NCLB requires
new teachers to have in-depth content knowledge in the fields that they teach
before they enter teaching, professional development is the primary means for
developing content knowledge among current teachers (Smith & Rowley, 2005).
In this study the various professional support mechanisms in place for teachers in
the age of accountability were in the form of teacher leadership, collaboration,
professional development, and teacher resources. The literature review revealed
that teacher leaders are blossoming into new leadership roles (Olson, 2005; Davis
& Wilson, 2000; Acker-Hocevar & Touchton, 1999; Whitaker, Whitaker, Lumpa,
2000). All twelve teachers in this study spoke positively of teacher leadership in
some form or another, such as leadership teams, grade level teams, collaboration
115
with colleagues, and teamwork. Therefore, change in schools must involve
teachers in every stage of the change process (D’Emidio-Caston, 1994).
Implications for Future Research
It is acknowledged that the sample population used in this study was small.
It is further acknowledged that a larger sample group selected from multiple
schools and school districts might have produced a more comprehensive
investigation, possibly with dissimilar outcomes. It is hoped that other
researchers, who share an interest in understanding the perceptions and realities of
teaching in the age of accountability and how the current realities and experiences
affect individual teachers and their own visions and beliefs as educators, will
broaden the sampling begun in this qualitative study and continue this
investigation. An interesting starting point might be a much larger, survey-based
study, seeking answers to a similar over-arching research question and sub-
questions. Through the inclusion of a much larger sample size, such a study would
greatly reduce the amount of error that could be attributed to a small sample size
and in turn would provide a broader range of teacher voices and reduce
idiosyncratic circumstances and local opinions. Listed below are future areas of
possible research on teaching in the age of accountability:
1. Analyze the perceptions and realities of teaching in the age of accountability
for elementary, middle, and high school teachers.
116
2. Analyze the retention of teachers in the teaching profession in the age of
accountability.
3. Analyze the perceptions and realities of parents in the age of accountability
in regards to parental support and parental involvement.
4. Analyze the perceptions and realities of students in the age of accountability
in regards to student efficacy, student motivation, student achievement.
5. Analyze how teachers and schools utilize student, school, and district
achievement data as measured by state standardized test scores, API, AYP,
and local assessments in regards to improving overall academic achievement.
6. Analyze in-depth the various forms of teacher leadership in regards to
collaboration, Professional Learning Communities (PLC), instructional
leadership teams, data teams, instructional coaches, etc.
Implications for Future Policy and Practice
As aforementioned teachers work has changed in the age of accountability
in the area of teacher leadership, data, assessments, documentation, and
paperwork. The age of accountability is focused on raising student achievement
and increasing student test scores. The data revealed that six of the twelve
teachers stressed the importance of accountability and its focus on benchmarks,
goals, and achievement. Furthermore, even though the majority of the teachers did
not articulate academic achievement as their most crucial role, they did indeed
117
highlight academic achievement as their biggest accountability success and time as
their biggest accountability challenge. Based upon the findings of this study in
conjunction with prior research on teaching in the age of accountability,
administrators, schools, and districts should consider the following:
Teacher Leadership — Continue to cultivate and promote teacher
leadership through collaboration time built in the teacher work day, as teachers
cited time as the biggest accountability challenge. All twelve teachers spoke
positively of teacher leadership in some form or another, including leadership
teams, grade level teams, collaboration with colleagues, and teamwork.
Technology/Data Analysis — Continue to implement and upgrade
technologies in the form of data analysis, data tools (Data Director), and SMART
Boards (interactive white boards) that promote student learning and increase
achievement. Oftentimes, these are not available at all schools and budget cuts
impact these instructional tools. Make technology a priority to improve instruction
and impact overall student achievement.
Professional Support — Continue to provide and monitor ongoing
professional development for teachers in order to improve instruction and increase
academic achievement. All twelve teachers had been provided professional
development and spoke highly of its impact in improving instructional practices,
meeting the needs of all learners, and improving the academic achievement of all
students. Also, professional resources in the form of on-site coaches and various
118
curricular and intervention programs are an integral component of improved
instruction and increased academic achievement.
Parental Opportunities — In order to close the achievement gap, teachers
must focus on the factors under their control, namely instruction. At the same time
the qualitative data revealed that the majority of the teachers saw obstacles rather
than opportunities in the changing lives and cultures of students, families, and
communities. Therefore, schools must continue to offer a myriad of parental
opportunities in order to increase parental involvement and bridge the socio-
cultural gap that separates teachers and parents. In turn, parents should be well
versed in the accountability mandates and understand the educational program
components offered to their children.
In light of my findings and as a principal, it is important for principals to
never lose sight of the work reality of teachers and the high expectations placed on
teachers to improve and raise achievement. Teachers need support in managing
teaching in the age of accountability. This support begins with the principal as the
site leader.
Conclusion
The results of this study clearly suggest that teachers’ work has changed in
the age of accountability. In this era of high stakes accountability, teaching in
today’s schools has intensified and the work lives of teachers have changed.
119
Although this qualitative study provides timely and pertinent information
regarding the perceptions and realities of teaching in the age of accountability and
examines how the current realities and experiences affect individual teachers and
their own visions and beliefs as educators, much more research needs to be done to
ensure the validity of these findings. Clearly, in the age of accountability, we have
witnessed higher levels of stress among teachers. However, the overall focus on
holding teachers accountable for improved instruction and increased academic
achievement for all students is monumental, with the ultimate goal of closing the
achievement gap.
120
REFERENCES
Abelman, C. Elmore, R., Even, J., Kenyon, S., & Marshall, J. (1999). When
Accountability Knocks, Will Anyone Answer? (Report No. CPRE-RR-42).
Washington, D.C.: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
Acker, A. (1999). The Realities of Teachers’ Work: Never a Dull Moment. New
York, NY: Cassell & Continuum.
Acker-Hocevar, M. & Touchton, D. (1999). A Model of Power as Social
Relationships: Teacher Leaders Describe the Phenomena of Effective
Agency in Practice. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
Anthony, T. & Kritsonis, W. (2006). Education in a test taking era. National
Forum of Educational Administration and Supervision Journal 24(4), 1-11.
Bachkirova, T. (2005). Teacher stress and personal values: An exploratory study.
School Psychology International 26, 340-352.
Bandura, A. (1995). Exercise of personal and collective self-efficacy in changing
Societies. In A. Bandura (Ed.), Self-efficacy in Changing Societies (pp. 1-
45). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bascia, N. & Hargreaves, A. (2000). The Sharp Edge of Educational Change:
Teaching, Leading, and the Realities of Reform. New York, NY:
Routledge Falmer.
Booher-Jennings, J. (2006). Rationing education in an era of accountability. Phi
Delta Kappan 87. 10 (June 2006), 756. Expanded Academic ASAP.
Thomson Gale. University of Southern California, 23 Mar. 2007.
Borko, H. (1993). Teachers’ Ideas and Practices About Assessment and
Instruction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, Atlanta, GA.
Brock, B. & Grady, M. (2000). Rekindling the Flame: Principals Combating
Teacher Burnout. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Carlson, R. (2000). Case Studies of Rural Schools Implementing Comprehensive
School Reform Models (pp. 1-72). Austin, TX: Southwest Educational
Development Laboratory.
121
Center for Education Policy and Leadership. (2005). The Impact of High Stakes
Accountability Policies on School Capacity for Improvement. Accessed
April 2, 2007 from http://www.education.umd.edu/EDPA/CEPAL/pdf
Cicero, Marcus T. (c. 43 B.C.). Brainy Quote. Accessed online at
http://www.brainyquote.com on February 10, 2007.
Clark, R. & Estes, F. (2002). Turning Research into Results: A Guide to
Selecting the Performance Solutions. Atlanta, CA: CEP Press.
Conley, D. & Goldman, P. (1998). How Education Process and Respond to
State-level Education Reform Policies: The Case of Oregon. Paper
presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, San Diego, CA.
Datnow, A., Lasky, S., Stringfield, S., & Teddlie, C. (2006). Integrating
Educational Systems for Successful Reform in Diverse Contexts. New
York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
D’Emidio-Caston, M. (1994). Teachers’ Voices: Reinventing Themselves, Their
Profession, and Their Communities. New York, NY: National Center for
Restructuring Education, Schools, and Teaching.
Epstein, J. 2005). A case study of the partnership schools comprehensive school
reform (CSR) model. The Elementary School Journal 106(2), 151-170.
Fenwick, T. (2004). Teacher learning and professional growth plans:
Implementation of a provincial policy. Journal of Curriculum and
Supervision 19(3), 259-282.
Fullan, M.G. (1996). Turning systemic thinking on its head. Phi Delta Kappan
77(6), 42-423.
Gold, Y. & Roth, R. (1993). Teachers Managing Stress and Preventing
Bburnout. Washington, D.C.: The Falmer Press.
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.
Goodson, I., Moore, S., & Hargreaves, A. (2006). Teacher nostalgia and the
sustainability of reform: The generation and degeneration of teachers’
missions, memory, and meaning. Educational Administration Quarterly
42(1), 42-61.
122
Hammersness, K. (2006). Seeing Through Teachers’ Eyes. New York, NY:
Teachers College Press.
Hammond, O. & Onikama, D. (1997). At Risk Teachers. Washington, D.C.:
Pacific Resources for Education and Learning.
Hargreaves, A. (1994). Dissonant Voices: Teachers and the Multiple Realities of
Restructuring. Paper presented at he annual meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
Hargreaves, A. (1994). Development and Desire: A Postmodern Perspective.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational
Research Association, April 1994.
Hargreaves, A. & Fink, D. (2003). Sustaining leadership. Phi Delta Kappan
84(9), 693-700.
Hargreaves, A. (2003). Teaching in the Knowledge Society: Education in the Age
of Insecurity. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Hargreaves, A. & Fink, D. (2004). The seven principles of sustainable leadership.
Educational Leadership 61(7), 8-13.
Hauser-Cram, P., Sirin, S., & Stipek, D. (2003). When teachers’ and parents’
values differ: Teachers’ ratings of academic competence in children from
low-income families. Journal of Educational Psychology 95(4), 813-820.
Huberman, M. (1993). The Lives of Teachers. New York, NY: Teachers College
Press.
Lilyquist, J. (1998). Are Schools Really Like This? Factors Affecting Teacher
Attitude Toward School Improvement. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
MacBeath, J. (2006). Finding a voice, finding self. Educational Review 58(2),
195-207.
Mahoney, J. (2002). Finding joy in an age of accountability. School
Administrator 59(5), 40-41.
Mathis, W.J. (2003). No Child Left Behind. Phi Delta Kappan 84(9), 679-686.
McDiarmid, G. Williamson, K., & Phillip, P. (1997). Teachers Planning
Professional Development in a Reform Context: The Case of Kentucky. A
paper presented to the annual meeting of the American Educational
Research Association, Chicago, Illinois.
123
McElroy, E. (2005). Teaching left behind. Teach PreK-8 35(8), 6.
McEwan, E. (2005). How to Deal With Teachers Who Are Angry, Troubled,
Exhausted, or Just Plain Confused. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
McGrath, M. (1995). Teachers Today. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.
Montgomery, C. & Rupp, A. (2005). A meta-analysis for exploring the diverse
causes and effects of stress in teachers. Canadian Journal of Education
28(3), 458-486.
Oakes, J. & Lipton, M. (2007). Teaching to Change the World. New York, NY:
McGraw-Hill.
Olson, J. (2005). Teachers blossom into new leadership roles. Academic
Exchange Quarterly 141(5), 1-9. Expanded Academic ASAP. Thomson
Gale. University of Southern California, 19 Mar. 2007.
Oplatka, I. (2006). Going beyond role expectations: Toward an understanding of
the determinants and components of teacher organizational citizenship
behavior. Educational Administration Quarterly 42(3), 385-423.
Pearson, L. & Moomaw, W. (2006). Continuing validation of the teaching
autonomy scale. The Journal of Educational Research 100(1), 44-51.
Pomson, A. (2005). One classroom at a time? Teacher isolation and community
viewed through the prism of the particular. Teachers College Record
107(4), 783-802.
Rubenstein, M. & Wodatch, J. (2000). Stepping Up to the Challenge: Case
Studies of Educational Improvement in Title I Secondary Schools (Report
No. PES-2000-12). Washington, DC: Policy Studies Associates, Inc.
Scott, T. (2005). Consensus through accountability? The benefits and drawbacks
of building community with accountability. Journal of Adolescent & Adult
Literacy 49(1), 48-59.
Scott, C. & Bagaka, J. (2006). Teacher efficacy, school reform, and state tests.
Academic Exchange Quarterly 178(5), 1-9.
Scribner, J. Sawyer, K., Watson, S., & Myers, V. (2007). Teacher teams and
distributed leadership: A study of group discourse and collaboration.
Educational Administration Quarterly 43, 67-100.
124
Showalter, J. (2002). Searching for Empowerment: The Structuration of
Decision-making Groups in Urban Schools. Paper presented at the annual
meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans,
LA.
Sloan, K. (2006). Teacher identity and agency in school worlds: Beyond the all-
good/all-bad discourse on accountability-explicit curriculum policies.
Curriculum Inquiry 36(2), 121-152.
Sloan, K. (2007). Holding Schools Accountable: A Handbook for Educators and
Parents. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc.
Smith, T. & Rowley, K. (2005). Enhancing commitment or tightening control:
The function of teacher professional development in an era of
accountability. Educational Policy 19, 126-154.
Stern, G.B. (1890-1973). Quote Garden. Accessed online at http://www.quote
garden.com on April 5, 2007.
Stipek, D. (2006). Relationships matter. Educational Leadership 64(1), 46-49.
Tucker, S. (1996). Benchmarking: A Guide for Educators. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
Turchi, L., Johnson, D., Owens, D., & Montgomery, D. (2002). The Impact of
Accountability on the Professional Development of Teachers: Preliminary
Evidence from Case Studies in Six Southern States. Chapel Hill, NC &
Georgia State Univ., Atlanta: Southeast Center for Teaching Quality.
Tye, B. & O’Brien, L. (2002). Why are experienced teachers leaving the
profession? Phi Delta Kappan 84(1), 1-14.
Vandenberghe, R. & Huberman, M. (1999). Understanding and Preventing
Teacher Burnout. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University
Press.
Whitaker, J. (2007). Put the oxygen mask on yourself first. Techniques (ACTE)
82(1), 34-35.
Whitaker, T., Whitaker, B., & Lumpa, D. (2000). Motivating and Inspiring
Teachers: The Educational Leader’s Guide for Building Staff Morale.
Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education, Inc.
Witcraft, Forest E. (1894-1967). Teaching Heart. Accessed online at
http://www.teachingheart.net on April 2, 2007.
125
Yeh, S. (2006). Reforming federal testing policy to support teaching and learning.
Educational Policy 20, 495-524.
Youngs, P. (2007). How elementary principals’ beliefs and actions influence new
teachers’ experiences. Educational Administration Quarterly 43, 101-137.
126
Appendix A
Teacher Interview Protocol
Background/Experience (research question 1)
1. How long have you been a teacher?
2. How long have you been a teacher at this site?
3. What grade level do you teach? How long have you taught this grade
level?
4. What other grades have you taught?
Teaching Philosophy (research question 2)
1. Why did you become a teacher?
2. What do you believe to be your most crucial role as a teacher?
3. What is your own personal teaching philosophy? How has it changed
over the years?
4. How has your teaching philosophy changed in this age of
accountability?
5. How does your role as a teacher or your beliefs affect your work?
Your classroom? Your students?
Accountability (research question 3)
1. What is your role or personal involvement in accountability at your
school site? Your grade level? Your classroom?
2. How has your work as a teacher changed in this age of
accountability?
3. How has the age of accountability affected your school site both
positively and negatively?
4. How has the age of accountability affected your classroom both
positively and negatively?
5. How have your perceptions of your students changed with the
increasing demands?
6. How has teacher morale been affected by accountability both
positively and negatively for your personally? As a school site?
127
7. What is the biggest success that you personally felt in this age of
accountability?
8. What is the biggest challenge that you have faced while
implementing accountability mandates?
Community (research question 4)
1. How do factors in the community affect your work as a teacher?
2. How do you involve the community in your school? In your
classroom?
3. What supports are in place for parents to support their children in this
age accountability at your school site? In your classroom?
Teacher Supports (research question 5)
1. What professional supports are in place to help teachers in this age of
accountability at your school site?
2. What staff development has been provided to you to improve the
academic achievement of your students and your own instructional
practices?
3. What professional development have you personally participated in to
improve your ability as a teacher?
4. How has site leadership contributed to your success as a teacher in
this age of accountability? How has it not contributed?
5. What role as a teacher leader have you played at your school site in
this age of accountability? Who is on your leadership team and what
is their sole purpose?
6. What resources are available to you as a teacher in this age of
accountability to improve your instructional practices as well as
support increased achievement of your students?
7. What resources have you widely used to improve your instruction and
increase the achievement of your students?
8. What other factors have contributed to your successes in this age of
accountability?
9. What factors have hindered your success in this age of
accountability?
10. What could or should be done to improve accountability or increase
achievement at this school site?
11. How do you measure your own teacher efficacy?
12. How often and when does your school site and grade level
collaborate in order to improve student achievement and improve
teaching practices?
128
Closure (research question 6)
1. Reflecting on your experiences, what advice can you give me as a
principal about how I can better support my teachers at my school site
in regards to teaching in this era of accountability?
2. Is there anything else that you would like to add in regards to
teaching in the age of accountability? Is there anyone I should
specifically speak to at this school site regarding accountability?
129
Appendix B
Recruitment Flyer
Y O U A R E IN V ITE D TO Y O U A R E IN V ITE D TO Y O U A R E IN V ITE D TO Y O U A R E IN V ITE D TO
PA R TICIPA TE . . PA R TICIPA TE . . PA R TICIPA TE . . PA R TICIPA TE . . .
Molly Murphy, a student in the doctor of education program
at the Rossier School of Education at the University of
Southern California, is working on her dissertation, a
qualitative study of teaching in the age of accountability.
The study is entitled: Teaching in the Age of Accountability:
A Qualitative Study of the Teaching Craft.
Approximately twelve teachers (with 5 or more years of
experience) are invited to participate in audio-taped
interviews for the study. You must be aged 18 or older to
participate. Interviews will be 45 minutes in length.
Participation is voluntary and all interview information will
be confidential. The purpose of this study is examine and
document the perceptions and realities of teaching in the
age of accountability and how the current realities and
experiences affect individual teachers and their own visions
and beliefs as educators.
Interviews will be conducted before school, after school, or
at a mutually agreed upon time, depending on your
preference. If you participate, you will receive a token gift
card worth $10.00 to Starbucks.
130
More thorough and complete information about the study
will be provided to you via an information sheet which you
will receive prior to the actual interview.
If you are willing to participate in such an interview, please
e-mail Molly Murphy at mtmurphy@usc.edu.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
131
Appendix C
Information Sheet
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
INFORMATION SHEET FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH
Teaching in the Age of Accountability:
A Qualitative Study of the Teaching Craft
You are asked to participate in a research study conducted by Molly Murphy,
principal investigator, and Amanda Datnow, university advisor, from the Rossier
School of Education at the University of Southern California. Results of your
study participation may be included in the final dissertation of Molly Murphy. You
were selected as a possible participant in this study because you are a teacher with
five or more years of experience. A total of 12 subjects will be selected from one
or more school sites to participate. Your participation is voluntary. Please take as
much time as you need to read the information sheet. You may also decide to
discuss it with your family or friends. You will be given a copy of this form.
Response to the interview questions will constitute consent to participate in
this research project.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
We are asking you to take part in a research study because we are trying to learn
more about teaching in the age of accountability. The purpose of this study is to
better understand the perceptions and realities of teaching in the age of
accountability and how the current realities and experiences affect individual
teachers and their own visions and beliefs as educators.
132
PROCEDURES
You will be asked to participate in an individual interview that will be tape
recorded (audio only). This interview will last approximately 45 minutes. The
questions will center on teaching in the age of accountability and how has
teachers’ work changed in the age of accountability. In addition, questions about
how teachers’ beliefs and experiences about their role as teachers affect their work,
how factors in the school and community affect teachers work, and what supports
are in place to help teachers manage teaching in the age of accountability. You
can participate in the interview if you decline to be audio-taped.
POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS
There are no anticipated risks to your participation; you may experience some
discomfort during the interview due to the nature of a question. If at any time
during the interview you do not wish to answer a question, you just need to let the
interviewer know and the question will be skipped. Additionally, if there is
anything that you wish to say “off tape” you should let the interviewer know and
the tape recorder will be turned off. You will be permitted to continue the
interview with the tape recorder turned off.
POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO SUBJECTS AND/OR TO SOCIETY
There are no foreseen potential benefits to you. However, your insight and
feedback will contribute to the educational field’s understanding of the teacher
perspective of teaching in the age of accountability.
PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
You will not receive payment for participating in this study. However, you will
receive a token gift such as a gift card (value not to exceed $10) for your
participation in this study. This token gift will be provided to you at the end of the
interview. You will receive the gift card, whether or not you respond to all
questions.
CONFIDENTIALITY
Any information that is obtained in connection with this study and that can be
identified with you will remain confidential and will be disclosed only with your
permission or as required by law. Audio tapes may be transcribed by the principal
133
investigator or a transcription service. If a transcription service is used, the tapes
will be coded (using numbers and initials, i.e., #1A, 2A, etc.) prior to delivery to
the transcription service, so your identity will remain anonymous.
You have the right to review and edit audiotapes from your interview. If you
prefer not to be audio taped, the interview will be recorded only through written
notes. Data will be recorded individually. Depending upon the results from all of
the interviews, some data may be reported in the aggregate. Audio tapes will be
stored in a locked file cabinet in the home office of the principal investigator.
Three years after the completion of the study, the tapes will be destroyed.
All data will be stored in the principal investigator’s home office in a locked file
cabinet/password protected computer. As aforementioned, confidentiality will be
maintained by the use of codes for your interview and inputted onto a home
computer accessible only to the principal investigator. All interviews will be
coded with the assistance of a qualitative data coding software (HyperResearch).
Each interview will be assigned a code and kept secure in a file cabinet in the
home office of the principal investigator. Three years after the completion of the
study, data will be deleted from the computer and written notes from the interview
will be shredded.
When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no
information will be included that would reveal your identity. If audio-tape
recordings of you will be used for educational purposes, your identity will be
protected or disguised.
PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL
You can choose whether to be in this study or not. If you volunteer to be in this
study, you may withdraw at any time without consequences of any kind. You may
also refuse to answer any questions you don’t want to answer and still remain in
the study. The investigator may withdraw you from this research if circumstances
arise which warrant doing so.
ALTERNATIVES TO PARTICIPATION
Your alternative is to not participate.
134
RIGHTS OF RESEARCH SUBJECTS
You may withdraw your consent at any time and discontinue participation without
penalty. You are not waiving any legal claims, rights or remedies because of your
participation in this research study. If you have any questions about your rights as
a study subject please contact the University Park IRB, Office of the Vice Provost
for Research Advancement, Stonier Hall, Room 224a, Los Angeles, CA 90089-
1146, (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu
IDENTIFICATION OF INVESTIGATORS
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to
contact:
Molly Murphy, Principal Investigator
13822 Prospect Avenue
Santa Ana, CA 92705
(714) 730-7528
mtmurphy@usc.edu
or
Amanda Datnow, Faculty Sponsor
USC Rossier School of Education
WPH 901A
Los Angeles, CA 90089
(213) 740-3443
datnow@usc.edu
Date of Preparation: September 11, 2007 – Info Sheet
USC UPIRB # UP-07-00257
135
Appendix D
HyperResearch Codes
accountability.negativeaspects
accountability.positiveaspects
accountability.teachermorale
accountability.successes
accountability.changes
teacherbackground.experience
teachingphilosophy.changes
teachingphilosophy.crucialrole
teacherbeliefs.accountability
teacherbeliefs.community
teacherbeliefs.students
teacherprofessionalsupports.resources
teacherefficacy.measurement
teacherwork.accountability
teacherwork.changes
teacherwork.schoolfactors
teacherwork.communityfactors
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
The federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 has created accountability systems for schools and because of this, the work lives of teachers have changed. Teaching in today s schools has become more intense during this era of high-stakes accountability. Teachers are experiencing higher levels of stress and feeling more pressure to improve student achievement and raise individual test scores. This study focused on the perceptions and realities of teaching in the age of accountability.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
An examination of professional development in algebra for fifth-grade teachers
PDF
District level practices in data driven decision making
PDF
Data use in middle schools: a multiple case study of three middle schools’ experiences with data-driven decision making
PDF
An alternative capstone project: A gap analysis inquiry project on the district reform efforts and its impact in narrowing the Hispanic EL achievement gap in Rowland Unified School District
PDF
School culture, leadership, professional learning, and teacher practice and beliefs: A case study of schoolwide structures and systems at a high-performing high-poverty school
PDF
The impact of restructuring the language arts intervention program and its effect on the academic achievement of English language learners
PDF
Teacher education programs and data driven decision making: are we preparing our preservice teachers to be data and assessment literate?
PDF
How successful urban superintendents in California improve student achievement
PDF
The impact of resource allocation on professional development for the improvement of teaching and student learning within a site-based managed elementary school: a case study
PDF
College readiness in an era of standardized testing: how one charter management organization tackles both
PDF
An evaluation of the impact of direct instruction intervention on the academic achievement of English language learners
PDF
Location, location, location: a spatial econometric analysis of place-context effects in Los Angeles mayoral elections
PDF
Outsourcing for school outcomes: a multi-case study examination of outsourced and in-house literacy coaching models
PDF
A case study of what really matters: Examining educational leadership and student achievement
PDF
The impact of visual field impairment on health related quality of life: a population-based study
PDF
The role of external pressure and support on teacher choices related to evolution curriculum in the secondary biology classroom
PDF
Superintendents and Latino student achievement: promising practices that superintendents use to influence the instruction and increase the achievement of Latino students in urban school districts
PDF
The impact of professional learning community on teacher learning and student achievement: a qualitative approach
PDF
Fauré's Requiem re-examined: a study of the work's genesis, influences, and influence
PDF
Catastrophe or adaptation? Explaining the impacts of resource scarcity and adaptability on political instability
Asset Metadata
Creator
Murphy, Mary (Molly) Terese
(author)
Core Title
Teaching in the context of NCLB: a qualitative study of the impact on teachers' work, morale, and professional support
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
04/03/2008
Defense Date
03/12/2008
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
age of accountability,NCLB,OAI-PMH Harvest,teacher morale,teacher rrofessional support,teachers' work
Place Name
California
(states),
educational facilities: Elmwood Elementary
(geographic subject),
educational facilities: Woodward Elementary
(geographic subject),
USA
(countries)
Language
English
Advisor
Datnow, Amanda (
committee chair
), Knight, Tony (
committee member
), Wohlstetter, Priscilla (
committee member
)
Creator Email
mtmurphy@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m1084
Unique identifier
UC1268851
Identifier
etd-Murphy-20080403 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-63589 (legacy record id),usctheses-m1084 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-Murphy-20080403.pdf
Dmrecord
63589
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Murphy, Mary (Molly) Terese
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
Tags
age of accountability
NCLB
teacher morale
teacher rrofessional support
teachers' work