University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Organizational structures and systems in high-performing, high-poverty urban schools: the construct of race and teacher expectations as mediating factors in student achievement

(USC Thesis Other)

Organizational structures and systems in high-performing, high-poverty urban schools: the construct of race and teacher expectations as mediating factors in student achievement

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES AND SYSTEMS IN HIGH-
PERFORMING, HIGH-POVERTY URBAN SCHOOLS: THE
CONSTRUCT OF RACE AND TEACHER EXPECTATIONS
AS MEDIATING FACTORS IN STUDENT
ACHIEVEMENT
by
Deborah Maryland Neal
__________________________________________________________________
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
August 2008

Copyright 2008 Deborah Maryland Neal

ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The journey to acquire knowledge based on scholarly research is an arduous
endeavor. It requires intrinsic motivation, perseverance, sacrifice, and support. I
give praise and thanks to God, the divine architect of my life’s journey, for guiding
my steps as I traveled the road to advanced knowledge and for providing the
spiritual nourishment that my soul needed to help me endure. I acknowledge the
guiding spirits of my parents, grandparents, extended family, and ancestors, whose
emphasis on lifelong learning and quest for education manifest in my completion of
this dissertation and obtaining the doctorate in education, the ultimate fulfillment of
their dream deferred.
I give special thanks to my mentors and friends who encouraged me for
years to “just do it” and to my study partners—fellow doctoral students—who
shared their time, expertise, and friendship throughout this process.
This endeavor would not be complete were it not for the continued support
of my committee chair, Dr. Kathy Stowe. Her insight and commitment, in collabo-
ration with co-chair Dr. Sylvia Rousseau and Dr. Lawrence Picus, ensured that my
ongoing research pursuits were conducted in true scholarly fashion and with the
professionalism synonymous with such an endeavor.
I applaud and thank my children, Daria Evangeline and Delmont Alexander,
for their constant positive affirmations, their love and their youthful wisdom, which
often left me with a greater sense of empowerment for fulfilling my dream.
Most important, my partner, friend, and constant source of support, my
beloved husband, Delmont, has truly been my anchor. His daily words of encour-
agement, prayers, and unconditional love sustained me and provided the

iii
momentum to propel me toward the achievement of my goals. I love him and I
thank him.

iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................................................................................ii
LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................vii
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................ix
ABSTRACT.............................................................................................................xi
Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION................................................................................1
Background of the Problem............................................................................3
Critical Race Theory as the Theoretical Framework......................................3
A Nation at Risk .....................................................................................10
No Child Left Behind .............................................................................11
Statement of the Problem .............................................................................11
Purpose of the Study.....................................................................................13
Significance of the Study..............................................................................14
Limitations of the Study ...............................................................................15
Delimitations of the Study............................................................................16
Definition of Terms ......................................................................................17
Organization of the Dissertation...................................................................20
Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................21
The Achievement Gap ..................................................................................21
A Nation at Risk .....................................................................................29
A Nation Still at Risk..............................................................................30
Barriers to Achievement...............................................................................32
Tracking..................................................................................................32
Qualified Teachers..................................................................................33
Cultural Differences as Barriers .............................................................33
Motivational Barriers..............................................................................35
Social and Cultural Capital.....................................................................37
Critical Race Theory...............................................................................42
No Child Left Behind ...................................................................................49
Organizational Structures and Systems ........................................................51
Leadership ..............................................................................................52
Parent and Community Involvement......................................................57
High Expectations...................................................................................58
Goal Setting/Feedback............................................................................59
Professional Development......................................................................59
Teacher Expectations..............................................................................60
Conclusions ..................................................................................................71
Chapter 3: METHODOLOGY .............................................................................73
Role of the Researcher..................................................................................74

v
Research Development .................................................................................75
Selection Process ..........................................................................................75
Description of the District ............................................................................77
Description of the School .............................................................................78
Sampling Strategies ......................................................................................80
Data Collection Procedures ..........................................................................80
Observations ...........................................................................................81
Interviews ...............................................................................................82
Artifacts ..................................................................................................83
Conceptual Framework for the Research Questions ....................................85
Data Analysis Procedures.............................................................................87
Validity and Confidence Findings................................................................88
Ethical Considerations..................................................................................89
Chapter 4: FINDINGS, ANALYSIS, AND DISCUSSION.................................90
Introduction ..................................................................................................90
Methodology...........................................................................................91
Description of the School .......................................................................91
Teacher Profiles......................................................................................93
Findings for Research Question 1 ................................................................97
Trends and Patterns ................................................................................98
Academic Performance Index ..........................................................98
Standardized Testing and Reporting: California Standards Test....103
Advanced Placement Courses and California High School
Exit Exam .................................................................................104
Opportunity Transfers and Suspensions.........................................110
Students With Disabilities and English Language Learners ..........114
Analysis of Findings for Research Question 1 .....................................116
Findings for Research Question 2 ..............................................................120
Organizational Structures .....................................................................120
Funding Resources .........................................................................122
Personnel Regulations ....................................................................123
Standards-Based Instruction...........................................................124
Student Discipline...........................................................................124
Special Education ...........................................................................129
Organizational Systems ........................................................................130
School Belief System......................................................................131
Small Learning Communities.........................................................132
Professional Development..............................................................134
Leadership ......................................................................................137
Parent and Community Involvement..............................................138
High Expectations...........................................................................142
Goal Setting ....................................................................................143
Teacher Expectations......................................................................144
Analysis of Findings for Research Question 2 .....................................147
Findings for Research Question 3 ..............................................................149
Teacher Effectiveness...........................................................................150
Personnel/Hiring Practices .............................................................151
Standards-Based Support................................................................152
Professional Development Support ................................................152

vi
Leadership ......................................................................................154
Analysis of Findings for Research Question 3 .....................................155
Findings for Research Question 4 ..............................................................157
Climate/Culture ....................................................................................157
We Are One ..........................................................................................168
Analysis of Findings for Research Question 4 .....................................171
Discussion...................................................................................................173
Chapter 5: SUMMARY, IMPLICATIONS, AND CONCLUSION ..................177
Connection to Prior Research .....................................................................177
Summary of Research Findings..................................................................179
Trends and Patterns ..............................................................................181
Organizational Structures and Systems ................................................183
Structures........................................................................................183
Systems...........................................................................................184
Support for School-Wide Effective Classroom Instruction............186
The Construct of Race ....................................................................186
Significance of the Findings.......................................................................189
Implications for Policy and Practice...........................................................189
Recommendations for Future Study...........................................................189
Limitations of the Study .............................................................................191
Conclusion..................................................................................................191
REFERENCES .....................................................................................................194
APPENDICES
A. INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR ADMINISTRATORS .....................204
B. INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR TEACHERS....................................205
C. INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR PARENTS.......................................206
D. INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR CLASSIFIED STAFF.....................207
E. CLASSROOM OBSERVATION GUIDE.............................................208
F. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OBSERVATION GUIDE .........209
G. LEADERSHIP MEETING OBSERVATION GUIDE..........................210

vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Effective Structures and Systems ........................................................53
Table 2: Overview of Structures and Systems Found in
High-Performing High-Poverty Schools .............................................61
Table 3: High Teacher Expectations and Teacher Self-Efficacy:
Impact on Student Achievement..........................................................64
Table 4: Achievement Trajectory of African American Students as
Reflected in Academic Performance Index (API)...............................79
Table 5: Artifacts Collected as Data for the Study Related to Research
Questions (RQ)....................................................................................84
Table 6: Alignment of Research Questions With Theoretical Framework .......86
Table 7: Overview of the Interviewees..............................................................92
Table 8: Teaching Staff Profile for Educational Excellence High School,
2006-2007............................................................................................94
Table 9: Ethnicity of Teachers at the High School and Their Proportion
in the District, 2006-2007....................................................................95
Table 10: Teacher Credential Status at the High School, 2004-2007..................95
Table 11: Academic Performance Index (API) Scores for all Student
Subgroups, 2000-2007.........................................................................99
Table 12: Results of California Standards Tests (CST) in English
Language Arts at the High School, 2007...........................................105
Table 13: Results of California Standards Tests (CST) in Mathematics
at the High School, 2007 ...................................................................105
Table 14: Percentages of 12th-Grade Students at the Study High School
and in the District Meeting Graduation Requirements......................108
Table 15: Enrollment, Percentages of Total Enrollment, Students in
Advanced Placement (AP) Classes, and Percentages of
Total Enrollment Enrolled in AP Classes, by Ethnicity ....................109
Table 16: Number of Students from the Study High School Taking
and Passing the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE),
Academic Years 2004-2005, 2005-2006, and 2006-2007.................111

viii
Table 17: Opportunity Transfers From the Study School, by Ethnicity
of Student, 2004-2007 .......................................................................112
Table 18: Suspensions at the Study School, by Ethnicity of Student,
2004-2007..........................................................................................113
Table 19: Special Education Enrollment at the Study High School,
2002-2007..........................................................................................115
Table 20: Special Education Enrollments at the Study High School
by Gender and Ethnicity, 2007-2008.................................................116

ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: U.S. second graders scoring Below Basic Proficiency on the
2004 assessment ..................................................................................25
Figure 2: State of California second graders scoring Below Proficiency
on the 2004 assessment........................................................................25
Figure 3: Critical race theory: Theoretical framework of the study....................44
Figure 4: Implementation of effective schools structures and systems
leads to student achievement ...............................................................56
Figure 5: Theoretical framework for the study of high-performing/
high-poverty schools............................................................................76
Figure 6: Process of data analysis: Creswell data analysis graph .......................89
Figure 7: Ethnic distribution of teachers at the high school, 2006-2007 ............96
Figure 8: Ethnic distribution of teachers in the district, 2006-2007 ...................96
Figure 9: Overall school Academic Performance Index (API)
scores 2000-2007...............................................................................100
Figure 10: Academic Performance Index (API) scores for African
American students, 2000-2007..........................................................100
Figure 11: Academic Performance Index (API) scores for Asian
students, 2000-2007...........................................................................100
Figure 12: Academic Performance Index (API) scores for Hispanic
students, 2000-2007...........................................................................101
Figure 13: Academic Performance Index (API) scores for White
students, 2000-2007...........................................................................101
Figure 14: Growth Academic Performance Index (API) scores for
all subgroups, 2000-2007 ..................................................................102
Figure 15: Results of California Standards Tests (CST) in English
Language Arts at the High School by ethnicity, 2007.......................106
Figure 16: Results of California Standards Tests (CST) in Mathematics
at the High School by ethnicity, 2007 ...............................................106
Figure 17: District enrollment in A-G courses by ethnicity, 2007-2008 ............108

x
Figure 18: Vision and mission statements for Educational Excellence
High School (the study school) .........................................................132
Figure 19: Expected School-Wide Learning Results (ESLR) at the
study school .......................................................................................133
Figure 20: School leadership organizational chart..............................................139

xi
ABSTRACT
This qualitative study focused on school organizational structures and
systems in high-performing high-poverty urban schools with large concentrations
of students of color. The focal group of the study was African American students in
a comprehensive high school grades 9 through 12. The study began with an analy-
sis of the historical achievement disparity between African American students and
their White counterparts. The study addressed four research questions for which the
overarching theoretical framework was sociocultural in nature. Operational defini-
tions developed by a thematic dissertation group were provided for school struc-
tures and systems as a prelude to the line of inquiry and discussion about their
effectiveness.
An examination of trends and patterns of achievement of African American
students as well as other students of color within this high school addressed social
and cultural capital as espoused by Coleman, Bourdieu, and Stanton-Salazar.
School organizational structures and systems were identified and examined through
Brofenbrenner’s ecological model. Effective classroom practices were examined
from the perspective of their support from school structures and systems, using
Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory of learning as the framework. The construct of race
was addressed through the lens of critical race theory, an emerging theoretical
framework in education pertinent to the exploration of the impact of race and
racism in education as manifested through school structures and systems. The study
presents recommendations and implications for further research in the area.

1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Historically high-poverty urban schools with large concentrations of
students of color have been associated with low student achievement (Darling-
Hammond, 2000; Kozol, 1991). Despite historical trends, research-based structures
and systemic practices have contributed to high student performance in high-
poverty urban schools (Denbo & Beaulieu, 2002; Marzano, 2003; Washington
Learns, 2006). This chapter provides an overview of structures and systemic
practices that have a positive impact on classroom instruction as evidenced in high-
performing urban schools. School organizational structures include standards-based
instruction, school funding, and school policies and procedures, such as those
related to school discipline and referrals for special education. Systems refer to the
means by which the school implements its structures. Systems may include pro-
fessional development, parental involvement, accountability, data collection and
time management, and a composite of beliefs that serve as the framework for
teacher and staff expectations. Although the literature speaks to school structures
and systems that facilitate high performance, few studies have examined the impact
of school structures and systems on student achievement from a motivational or
racialized theoretical framework.
Researchers in the Washington Learns Study (2006) found that professional
development was an essential element to the success of high-performing high-
poverty schools. High-quality professional development provides support to
teachers in improving instruction, building professional relationships, and a shared
instructional vision. Systematic methods of parental involvement have been found

2
to be important factors in facilitating community relationships, communication, and
student learning (Marzano, 2003; Morris, 2004). The use of data is a salient com-
ponent of school reform (Johnson, 2002). High-performing high-poverty schools
engage in consistent measurement and monitoring of student progress, which leads
to improved program development and implementation. With the utilization of
accountability systems, high-performing high-poverty schools hold all stakehold-
ers—administrators, teachers, parents, and students—responsible for student
learning. Systems and structures are in place for fiscal accountability, discipline,
and meeting the educational needs of the special needs population (Izumi, 2002).
While advocating an achievement culture, high-performing high-poverty schools
create a safe climate conducive to learning (Marzano) as well as one that is
culturally sensitive (Gay, 2000; Irvine & Armento, 2001). High-performing high-
poverty urban schools promote high teacher expectations and promote a belief in
the capabilities of all students. In addition, they focus on goal setting with timely
feedback on student performance. All of the aforementioned organizational
structures and systems are consistent throughout the literature on high-performing
high-poverty schools. Their effectiveness works in concert as a result of strong
leadership and serves as the foundation for the development of instructional
practices.
In an effort to understand the significance of the success of high-performing
high-poverty schools, it is essential to examine the extant problems in education.
There is a prevailing gap between the achievement of students of color and their
counterparts from the White dominant culture. This gap has been documented in
the literature over several decades (Bennett, 2001; Denbo & Beaulieu, 2002; Gay,
2000; Johnson, 2002; Ladson-Billings, 1994, 1995; Woodson, 1933) but has been

3
particularly noted between African Americans and Whites for over a century as a
result of institutionalized racist practices (Darling-Hammond, 2000; Gay; Kozol,
1991; Ravitch, 2000; Woodson). In this study the scope of the problematic issues in
education encompasses factors surrounding disparities in academic achievement
between African American and White students.
Background of the Problem
The disparate achievement between students of color and their White
counterparts is well documented (Denbo & Beaulieu, 2002; EdSource, 2006;
Johnson, 2002; Marzano, 2003). There are various perspectives from which one
can draw possible reasons for this gap. Among them are cognition (the mental
processes involved in learning and behavior; Bandura, 1977; Ormrod, 2006),
sociocultural perspectives (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977; Coleman, 1988; Gay,
2000; Stanton-Salazar, 1997; Stanton-Salazar & Dornbusch, 1995) and race
(Crenshaw, 1995; Ladson-Billings, 1999a). Racism presents at the forefront of the
reasons for the achievement gap (Bell, 1995a, 1995b; Crenshaw, 1995; Ladson-
Billings, 1999a; Tate, 1997). Racism has led to unequal access to educational
resources, including appropriate and challenging curriculum, effective instruction,
and qualified teachers (Darling-Hammond, 2000; Ladson-Billings, 1999a). Further
examination of the achievement gap in terms of unequal access can be seen through
the lens of critical race theory (CRT).
Critical Race Theory as the Theoretical Framework
An examination of organizational structures and systems as they relate to
student achievement must include discourse surrounding race and its implications.
To that extent CRT has been explored within the past 2 decades as a vehicle

4
through which these structures and systems can be explored. It is a school of
thought that holds to the premise that race lies at the core of American society. In
addition, it stems from the challenge of legal scholars to the ways in which race and
racial power are constructed and represented in the American legal culture. Legal
scholars key to this theory include Bell (1995a), Lawrence (1993), Matsuda (1995),
Delgado (1995), and Crenshaw (1995). Utilizing CRT as a conceptual framework
for understanding the salience of racism is essential to educational discourse. The
tenets of this theory attack the deficit model that is often used to address achieve-
ment by African American students and gives credence to the important implica-
tions of examining student achievement from a sociocultural perspective. In
addition, it is useful in examining the applications and implications for educational
policy and procedures as well as organizational structures and systems at the local
school and district levels.
The significance of CRT was brought to light in the 1990s with increasing
application to scholarship in education. In evaluating certain educational policies,
proponents of CRT concluded that the restrictive nature of the interpretation of the
law limited educational access for African American students (Crenshaw, 1995).
Further research (Ladson-Billings, 1999a; Tate, 1997) provided exposure to
qualitative research in education pertinent to CRT. Through this research, CRT is
examined as a lens through which to explore educational practices and policies. It
is a methodological venue facilitating greater revelation of the ontological and
epistemological foundation of the impact of racism on education (Lynn, Yosso,
Solórzano, & Parker, 2002).
An historical examination of educational trends in the United States
suggests the development of an educational system based on the dominant culture’s

5
belief that education was only for those of high socioeconomic status. The
inequality of schools, as evidenced by limited funding, poor facilities and
resources, and unqualified teachers, was the result of legally sanctioned segrega-
tion, which has created a dual system of education. This institutional practice of
segregation was legally sanctioned by the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Plessy v.
Ferguson in 1896, validating a doctrine of separate but equal. The Court decision in
Brown v. Board of Education in 1954 overturned Plessy v. Ferguson, disallowing
racially segregated schools and mandating desegregated education. Race-based
educational inequality was thus recognized, which provided an important stimulus
for the modern-day civil rights movement for African Americans and other margin-
alized and disenfranchised peoples of color (Weinstein, Gregory, & Strambler,
2004). Access for educational opportunity was expanded through additional federal
legislation and court decisions, including Title I of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act in 1965, Title IX of the Educational Amendment Act in 1972, Lau v.
Nichols in 1974, and the Education for All Handicapped Children in 1975
(Weinstein et al.).
Despite the changes resulting from the Brown decision, more than 50 years
later there is a preponderance of statistical and anecdotal evidence that reflects the
continuing glaring disparity in educational outcomes between African American
students and their counterparts from the dominant culture, as well as other students
of color, including Hispanics and students from indigenous groups. The longi-
tudinal results from the National Assessment of Educational Programs (NAEP), a
nationally administered test of voluntary school districts for grades 4, 8, and 12,
reveal that in the 1970s and 1980s there appeared to be a narrowing of the achieve-
ment gap among diverse groups. This narrowing of the gap may be attributed to the

6
increase in funding for school programs and supports as a result of President
Lyndon B. Johnson’s War on Poverty (Johnson, 2002). However, there was a
reversal of that trend in the 1990s, at which time the gap appeared to be widening
again (Johnson; Marzano, 2003). There were higher dropout rates among African
American students, as well as other students of color (Education Trust, 2004;
Johnson). Data revealed higher discipline rates, such as suspensions and expul-
sions, and fewer enrollees in advanced placement courses and college entrance
(Education Trust; Johnson). There is evidence to support the disproportionate
placement in special education, particular under the eligibility criteria of mental
retardation and emotional disturbance (Education Trust; Gardner & Miranda,
2001). The gap exists among the aforementioned groups regardless of socioeco-
nomic status and is evident from elementary through postsecondary education.
Therefore, there is continuing concern regarding equity in educational opportunity
and the continuing achievement gap.
One of the recurring themes that characterized the school/civil rights legal
battles was equal opportunity. This notion of equal opportunity was associated with
the idea that students of color should have access to the same school opportunities
such as curriculum, instruction, funding, and facilities as children from the domin-
ant culture (Ladson-Billings, 1999a). While examining the current organizational
structures and systems of public schools, the application of CRT can be a vehicle
for understanding the sustained inequity experienced by African American
students. An analysis of educational structures and systems, including but not
limited to professional development, school culture/climate, and teacher expecta-
tions is a useful exemplar of the relationship that can exist between CRT and
education. CRT speaks to curriculum, instruction, assessment, and school funding,

7
which may also be included as components of school organizational structures and
systems. While not the specific focus of this study, the importance of curriculum,
instruction, and school funding as mitigating factors of achievement should be
noted, as studies of high-performing high-poverty urban schools suggest that these
schools purport a rigorous curriculum for all students and frequent assessment to
determine appropriate levels of instruction.
From the early 1900s through about 1960 public policy dictated that schools
should concentrate on practical vocational training for African American students
in preparation for their subsequent employment (Ravitch, 2000). Public policy was
the result of the creation and cultivation of the construct of race by the dominant
White culture. African Americans were portrayed as intellectually inferior, thus
serving as justification for the inequity in educational and social institutions.
Curriculum differentiation was meant to relegate African Americans to inferior
education that would continue to perpetuate limited access to economic and
political capital (Ravitch). Researchers, including critical race theorists proposed
that school curriculum is more often than not culturally incongruent (Gay, 2000;
Ladson-Billings, 1999a; Ogbu, 1995a, 1995b) and is not as rigorous as that found
in schools of the dominant culture. CRT also examines the distortions, omissions,
and stereotypes of school curriculum. In looking at the rigor of school curriculum,
the theory addresses access to what is deemed enriched curriculum through gifted
and talented classes. Some scholars (Kozol, 1991; Ladson-Billings, 1999a) ascribed
to the idea that curriculum in predominantly White schools emphasizes higher-
order thinking skills while curriculum in high-poverty schools with high concentra-
tions of students of color focuses more on basic knowledge. Specific learning
activities that promote creativity, critical thinking, and reasoning skills are often not

8
accessible to children of color. This restricted access to the curriculum illustrates
the function of intellectual property. Curriculum represents a form of intellectual
property and the quality and quantity of the curriculum varies with the property
values of the school. The availability of rich or enriched intellectual property
delimits the opportunity to learn. Many educators make the presumption that, along
with standards that detail what students should know and are capable of doing,
students must also have the material resources that support their learning. Thus,
intellectual property must be supported by real property such as science labs,
computers, and other state-of-the-art technologies and appropriately certified and
prepared teachers. This is often not the case in high-poverty schools with high
concentrations of students of color (Denbo & Beaulieu, 2002; Gay; Ladson-Billings
& Tate, 1995). The absence of these resources is the result of racial discrimination
that limits school funding and places the least qualified and experienced teachers in
schools (Darling-Hammond, 2000; Ladson-Billings, 1999a). Such practices limit
the development and implementation of instructional strategies and methodologies
that effectively facilitate student learning.
Critical race theorists posit that current instructional strategies within school
systems work from a deficit model for African American students (Ladson-
Billings, 1999a, 2005). However, the deficit model is slowly being rejected as a
result of new research through the investigation and affirmation of the integrity of
effective teachers of African American students (Gay, 2000; Ladson-Billings,
1994, 1995, 1999b).
While emphasizing the impact of the implementation of strategies that work
from a deficit model, CRT also examines how assessment and school funding are
racialized. CRT asserts that school systems, structures, and resources would

9
produce higher academic results among students of color if they were used to
support an asset perspective on students of color.
Critical race theorists suggest that, under the guise of scientific rationalism,
intelligence testing has long been a means by which to legitimatize African
American students’ deficiencies. The system of assessment has led to dispropor-
tionate representation in special education (Gardner & Miranda, 2001; Gay, 2000;
Ladson-Billings, 1999a; Skiba, Chung, Wu, Simmons, & St. John, 2000; Skiba,
Simmons, et al., 2006). Inappropriate curriculum in conjunction with ineffective
instruction manifests in poor student performance on traditional assessment
measures that often fail to assess what students actually know and are capable of
doing.
Perhaps no area serves a better example of institutionalized and structured
racism than school funding (Ladson-Billings, 1999a; Ladson-Billings & Tate,
1995). Differentiated methods of school funding, such as property taxes, leave
schools in high-poverty areas with limited fiscal resources to implement an educa-
tional program consistent with that of their White counterparts in more affluent
areas (Darling-Hammond, 2000; Ladson-Billings, 1999a; Ladson-Billings & Tate,
1995; Lopez, 2003; Weinstein et al., 2004). This structure puts high-poverty
students at an academic disadvantage and exacerbates the achievement gap.
One of drawbacks found in the research of CRT is that there is limited
research on the specific outcomes of its application in the classroom. Researchers
speak to curriculum, assessment, instruction, and other areas of the educational
system that have been affected by racist practices (Gay, 2000; Ladson-Billings,
1995, 1999a; Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995; Weinstein et al., 2004). There is
research on CRT as it applies to teacher education and specific legal cases in

10
education (Crenshaw, 1995; Ladson-Billings, 1995, 1999a). However, from the
research one can only surmise the probability of improved educational outcomes
for African American students. There appears to be minimal statistical evidence to
indicate a direct correlation between the application of CRT and educational
outcomes. However, there is evidence of qualitative research that suggests that,
when applied to organizational structures and systems, CRT provides greater
awareness of the need to ensure equity for all students (Isaksen, 2005; Lopez,
2003).
In light of the inequity in education outlined thus far in this historical
perspective, steps have been taken to narrow the gap through reform of school
organizational structures and systems. These reform efforts began with the
examination of educational opportunities for students of color during President
Lyndon B. Johnson’s War on Poverty. As part of that strategy, the results from a
survey on educational opportunities for students of color resulted in the Coleman
Report, which spoke to the variance in the impact of schools and family back-
ground on student achievement. The report suggested that schools did little to alter
the variance in achievement between wealthy and poor students and that little
evidence existed to suggest that school reform could improve a school’s influence
on student achievement (Marzano, 2003).
A Nation at Risk
A Nation at Risk (National Commission on Education [NCEE], 1983)
documented the ineffectiveness of the nation’s public schools and the need for
reform. It underscored that the United States was in jeopardy of losing its competi-
tive economic edge in the world and paralyzing its democracy because of the

11
inadequate education of its children. Most salient within the report was its reference
to equitable treatment of the nation’s diverse student population and the suggestion
that the goal of equity and high quality in schools should be simultaneous. How-
ever, the recommendations of the commission led to minimal reform. A Nation Still
at Risk (Hoover Institution, 1998) reported the continued poor performance of
students in the United States in areas of mathematics and science 15 years later. For
students of color, the achievement gap appeared to be widening.
No Child Left Behind
In an effort to continue the reform movement the No Child Left Behind Act
of 2001 (NCLB) was passed. The provisions of this act focus on low-performing
schools by setting high expectations for schools and creating clear expectations and
sanctions for weak performance. A performance-based accountability system
focused on test results made the goal of NCLB to improve student performance.
Despite its good intentions, the act did not provide a road map or blueprint to help
schools navigate the conundrum of queries arising from efforts toward implementa-
tion, such as defining qualified teachers. The act is punitive in nature; rather than
rewarding schools that demonstrate improved performance, noncompliance with
the mandates of the act results in reduction of funds and services.
Statement of the Problem
The variance in achievement by African American students produced by the
educational system has created differentiated pathways of access to education that
have led to inequities in many areas of their lives, such as employment and the
political, social, and economic structures of the nation (Morris, 2004; Weinstein et
al., 2004). The inequities in education for African Americans and other students of

12
color have been well documented and acknowledged as a reality (Bennett, 2001;
Isaksen, 2005; Ladson Billings, 1999b; Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995; Morris;
Woodson, 1933). There is a reciprocal relationship between education and one’s
place in the social structure of society. The social circumstance of poverty often
affects the institutional structures of schooling and those structures in turn affect a
student’s social circumstance.
The literature indicates how some schools have overcome the negative
trajectory of poverty (McGee, 2004; Pressley, Gaskins, Solic, & Collins, 2006;
Pressley, Raphael, Gallagher, & DiBella, 2004; Washington Learns, 2006;
Weinstein et al., 2004). In order to improve the instructional quality of the educa-
tional system, practitioners have used research-based data as the foundation for the
development and implementation of organizational structures and systemic
practices that have been demonstrated to increase student achievement.
In recent years attention has been placed on efforts that improve not just
schools in general but schools that serve a large concentration of students of color.
An increasing body of research posits the utility of implementing school-wide
practices resulting from organizational structures and systems such as data-driven
decision making, accountability, professional development, leadership, parent
involvement, goal setting, feedback, and teacher expectations to increase student
achievement (Johnson, 2002; Marzano, 2003; Ormrod, 2006). There has been some
evidence of improved public school performance nationwide since the implementa-
tion of these practices. These structures and systems support and sustain the
trajectory toward excellence for students of color. School practices and decision
making are purposeful, based on previously established norms and expectations.
However, the existing research that studies high-performing high-poverty urban

13
schools is limited in addressing the impact of race and racial beliefs on goal setting
and teacher expectations. Although the literature examines the impact of teacher
expectations as part of educational systems, the correlation between these expecta-
tions and teacher beliefs is not clear. What currently is not known is how these
belief systems impact a teacher’s ability to deliver effective classroom instruction.
It is also not known which organizational structures and systems have the most
impact on teacher expectations, beliefs, and instructional practices at schools with
high concentrations of students of color and high poverty. Further inquiry into these
unknown organizational structures and systems led to the current study.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to examine organizational structures and
systems that lead to high performance in students of color in high-poverty urban
schools. This study focuses on the impact of race and teacher expectations as
mediating factors of student achievement. The findings can provide practitioners
with an in-depth understanding of the causes of the disparities in achievement and
the structures and systems within the educational systems that are effective in
decreasing or eliminating those disparities. The overarching inquiry of this study
was to determine what organizational structures and systems contribute to high
student performance in high-poverty urban schools. To pursue this inquiry, the
following research questions are addressed:
1. What are the trends and patterns of performance among students of
color?

14
2. What organizational structures and systems are perceived to contribute to
high student performance in high-poverty urban schools with large concentrations
of students of color?
3. How are the organizational structures and systems implemented to
support school-wide effective classroom instruction that promotes student learning?
4. How is the construct of race reflected in the school’s structures and
systems?
Significance of the Study
This study was designed to determine how school organizational structures
and systems impact student performance. Specifically, it examined the implementa-
tion of school-wide practices resulting from those structures and systems by focus-
ing on high-performing high-poverty urban schools with high concentrations of
students of color. While extensive literature exists on the reasons for low achieve-
ment by students of color, there is a dearth of literature on what structures, systems,
and practices are in place that lead to the high performance by students of color.
Therefore, this study is significant in that it adds to the limited literature base
linking research to practice. This linkage contributes to the ongoing search for
effective school practices as it pertains to closing the achievement gap and
promoting high performance. To that end, this study examines the correlation
between structures and systems and the instructional practices from a racial and
motivational perspective and their subsequent effect on student achievement. It is
significant because it examines organizational structures and systems that facilitate
high expectations and their relationship to expectations of the teacher and how they

15
serve as a mediating factor in student achievement, specifically with African
American students.
This study has national and global implications. The disparity in achieve-
ment between students of color and those of the dominant culture must be
addressed because continued miseducation of students of color has profound
economic repercussions by adversely affecting employment, economic gains, and
the quality of life for these students as they move into adulthood.
Limitations of the Study
Data collected for this study were the result of a 10-week triangulated
qualitative examination of the implementation of organizational structures and
systems in a high-performing high-poverty urban high school. The school, with
grades 9 through 12, was located in a large urban district in southern California and
had a high concentration of students of color. Only 6.9% of the student population
was African American, which was the focal population of this study but this
percentage represented a statistically significant portion of the overall student
population.
The most notable limitations in this case study research were the small
sample size and purposeful sampling. The limited number of people in the sample
size prohibited the generalization of the findings beyond the specific populations
from which the sample was drawn (Patton, M. Q., 2002). Generalization of the
findings was limited in light of the short 10-week time frame allocated for the
study. The time frame did not allow for in-depth or longitudinal study of the issues.
Respondents were available throughout the study; however, time schedules of the
respondents and the researcher made immediate access difficult. Reliance on the

16
selective perceptions of the participants may have compromised the internal
validity of the findings as they may not accurately reflect the opinions of the
sampling population. Interpretation of findings was based on school reporting and
definitions determined by the thematic dissertation group prior to the study.
Delimitations of the Study
Delimitations or external validity of the study were determined by a group
of seven doctoral candidates who were focusing on school-wide implementation of
effective practices in high-performing, high-poverty urban schools. Although the
study focused on students of color, Asian students were not included in the sample
population because, overall, this student population does not fall into the trend of
low performance, as do African American and Latino students. Consideration was
given to population density and diversity in defining urban schools and varied
educational resources for defining additional terms used in the study. The small
sample population was feasible for the researcher in light of the focus on a single
school within a certain geographic area. This is significant in that the findings may
not be applicable to other schools.
Methodology was a significant delimitation to this study. The qualitative
methodology and sample size used in the study were purposefully selected based
on the following criteria: (a) high-performing schools in which the school-wide
trajectory of Academic Performance Index (API) and Average Yearly Progress
(AYP) showed growth over 3 years (the growth was noted in all subgroups with
minimal movement of two deciles within 3-5 years); (b) high poverty, in that the
school had at least 75% of its students receiving free/reduced-price lunches;

17
(c) high concentration (60%) of students of color; and (d) a school serving pre-
kindergarten through 12th grade and located in an urban area.
Definition of Terms
For the purpose of this study, the following terms are operationally defined
as specified below, according to the EdSource electronic glossary:
Academic Performance Index (API): The cornerstone of California’s Public
Schools Accountability Act of 1999. The API measures the academic performance
and growth of schools based on a variety of tests and establishes a statewide
ranking of schools according to those scores. Most schools have an API, a state
ranking in comparison to 100 similar schools, and growth targets for the following
year (EdSource, 2007).
Accountability: An obligation or willingness to accept responsibilities or
account for one’s actions.
Achievement gap: The difference in academic achievement between
students of color and those of the dominant culture.
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP): A goal of the 2001 federal law NCLB,
which requires schools and districts to measure and report students’ annual pro-
gress toward proficiency in English/language arts and mathematics by 2013-2014.
Progress is based on whether the school or district has met its Annual Measurable
Objectives and demonstrated 95% participation on standardized tests, achieved its
target on the API, and (for high schools) met target graduation rates (EdSource,
2007).
Assessment: A process for observing a sample of student behavior and
drawing inferences about the students’ knowledge and abilities (Ormrod, 2006).

18
API growth: Growth in student ratings from Far Below Proficiency and
Below Basic Proficiency.
Critical race theory: A school of thought that holds the premise that race
lies at the core of American society and is a conceptual framework for understand-
ing the salience of racism to education.
Disparity: A term often used synonymously with achievement gap; the state
of not being equal.
Disproportionality: A condition in which the proportion of one group in a
program is not in proportion to that group across racial/ethnic groups
Equity: Policies and practices that provide high expectations and appropri-
ate resources to facilitate student achievement at a single rigorous standard, with
minimal variance for ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic status, or language
(Johnson, 2002).
Ethnicity: The designation of students and staff according to seven ethnic/
racial groups for application in the California Department of Education (CDE)
California Basic Educational Data System (CBEDS). These seven groups, along
with a multiple/no response category, meet state and federal reporting require-
ments.
High concentration: Majority of students in the school are students of color.
High performance: High transferability of successful practices; API scores
demonstrate a consistent pattern and rate of growth within a minimal score.
High performing: Schoolwide trajectory of API (if in California)and AYP
growth over 3 years (including all subgroups); minimal movement of two deciles
within 3-5 years.

19
High poverty: At least 75% of students in the school receive free/reduced-
price lunches.
Implementation: The act of carrying out strategies, policies, and procedures.
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB): The 2001 reauthorization of the federal
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) that places comprehensive
accountability requirements on all states, with increasing sanctions for schools and
districts that do not make AYP toward proficiency in English/language arts and
mathematics or that fail to test 95% of all students and all significant subgroups. In
California, those sanctions currently apply only to schools and districts that accept
Title I funding.
Professional development: A term used synonymously in the literature with
staff development, referring to opportunities for teachers and other instructional
related staff to acquire knowledge and skills for improving teacher and student
performance.
Standards-based instruction: Teaching strategies based on general state-
ments regarding the knowledge and skills that students are expected to gain
(Ormrod, 2006).
Student performance: Student demonstration of learned skills.
Students of color: Historically disenfranchised and marginalized popula-
tions such as African American, Hispanic/Latino, and indigenous people.
Structures: Institutional mechanisms, policies, and procedures put in place
by federal, state, or district policy and legislation or widely accepted as the official
structure of schools and not subject to change at the local school site: funding
mechanisms (federal, state, district), personnel policies (hiring, evaluation,

20
credentialing), use of instructional time, class size, and program regulations
(e.g., special education, bilingual education).
System: Coordinated coherent use of resources (time, personnel, students,
parents, funds, facilities) at the school site to ensure that school visions, missions,
and goals are met.
Urban: Although the term has several definitions, for purposes of this study
it is defined as an area of high population density and high concentration of
students of color.
Organization of the Dissertation
Chapter 1 provides an overview of the study, including an historical per-
spective of the factors leading to the achievement gap. It includes the introduction,
statement of the problem, the purpose of the study, the research questions, the
significance of the study, the study’s limitations and delimitations, and operational
definitions of terms. Chapter 2 provides a review of the salient research on the
issues to serve as the theoretical and contextual framework for the study. Chapter 3
includes a rationale and description of the sample, data collection techniques, and
instrumentation and strategies employed for data analysis. Chapter 4 presents the
findings, including analysis and discussion to address each research question, and
related findings. Chapter 5 presents a summary of the findings, conclusions regard-
ing the meaning of the findings, and implications for future research.

21
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
The chapter begins with an historical overview of the literature regarding
factors associated with low student achievement. To understand the current gap in
achievement, the historical reasons for low student achievement must first be
explored. This historical overview provides an examination of the resulting dis-
parities in achievement. Second, the chapter reviews literature on the barriers that
continue to impact achievement by African American students. Third, the review
examines school organizational structures and systems that have led to improved
student achievement. The review explores how the implementation of specific
school organizational structures and systems facilitates consistently effective
school-wide practices that lead to high performance in high-poverty schools.
The Achievement Gap
Throughout history the overwhelming belief has been that education was
for the elite and that the masses should be trained in vocational arenas (Ravitch,
2000; Weinstein et al., 2004). This belief was reflected in and reinforced by an
educational system that provided differentiated pathways of achievement for people
of color and Whites (Weinstein et al.). For decades, schools in the United States
were segregated institutions–separate and unequal. The inequality was evident in
limited funding, poor facilities and resources, and inadequate and inexperienced
teachers (Ravitch). This institutional practice of segregation was legally sanctioned
by the Supreme Court decision in Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896, which validated a
separate but equal doctrine. The decision in Brown v. Board of Education in 1954
overturned Plessy v. Ferguson, disallowing racially segregated schools and

22
mandating desegregated education. Race-based educational inequality was thus
recognized, which provided an important stimulus for the modern-day civil rights
movement for African Americans and other marginalized and disenfranchised
peoples of color. Access to educational opportunity was expanded through addi-
tional federal legislation and court decisions, including Title I of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act in 1965, Title IX of the Educational Amendment Act
in 1972, Lau v. Nichols in 1974, and the Education for All Handicapped Children
Act in 1975 (Weinstein et al.).
Despite the changes resulting from Brown v. Board of Education and the
resources provided under ESEA that followed, more than 50 years later there is a
preponderance of statistical and anecdotal evidence that reflects glaring disparity in
educational outcomes. The disparity continues to exist between African American
students and their counterparts from the dominant culture, as well as with other
ethnic groups. Inequality in schools and discriminatory practices have led to higher
dropout rates among African American students, as well as higher discipline rates,
such as suspensions and expulsions (Education Trust, 2004; Johnson, 2002). There
is evidence to suggest that there are fewer African American students enrolled in
advanced placement courses and entering college with continued disproportionate
placement in special education, particular under the eligibility criteria of mental
retardation and emotional disturbance (Education Trust; Gardner & Miranda, 2001;
Skiba et al., 2000; Skiba, Simmons, et al., 2006).
A relatively consistent pattern of disproportionality in special education is
documented in the literature (Gardner & Miranda, 2001; Skiba et al., 2000; Skiba,
Simmons, et al., 2006; Skiba, Wu, Kohler, Chung, & Simmons, 2001). The pattern
of disproportionality is most severe in the categories of emotional disturbance and

23
mental retardation among African American students (Gardner & Miranda). Skiba
et al. (2005) suggested that African American students are overrepresented among
students with mental retardation because that particular disability is associated with
poverty and a greater proportion of this population lives in poverty compared to
other ethnic groups. Taking a different perspective were Coutinho and Oswald
(2006), who maintained that, although not a manifestation of explicit racism, over-
representation of African American students is markedly evident in categories that
provide a judgment of a student’s intellectual capacity, which is the case with
mental retardation. They also posited that overrepresentation in emotional disturb-
ance is based on cultural or race-based expectations for what is considered appro-
priate behavior. These patterns of identification are often ignored at the risk of
admitting that there may be a continued reproduction of historical patterns of
inequity (Coutinho & Oswald).
In 2004 Education Trust reported student performance in varying subject
areas based on the NAEP. The report revealed that African American students in
grade 4 reading and grade 8 mathematics scored below White students. Fewer were
enrolled in advanced placement classes and more scored lower than White students
on advanced placement tests. Fewer African American students graduated from
high school and college than did White students (Education Trust; Johnson, 2002).
The same assessment instrument reveals significant demographics in teach-
ing staff. The data revealed that 1 in 4 of all secondary classrooms was taught by a
teacher lacking either a major or minor in his/her subject area (Education Watch,
2004). Students in high-poverty and high-minority areas were far more likely than
students from more affluent and nonminority areas to be taught by teachers out of

24
their field of expertise (Darling-Hammond, 2000; Education Watch; Johnson,
2002).
In 2003, 21% of the African American second graders who were assessed
scored below basic proficiency on the statewide assessment; on the same assess-
ment 9% of White second-grade students scored below basic proficiency (Educa-
tion Trust, 2004). Comparisons in performance in mathematics revealed that 28%
of African American and 9% of White second-grade students scored below basic
proficiency. Data from the CDE revealed significant gaps in achievement by
African American students when compared to their White counterparts. Disparities
were seen in the 2004 data that showed that 25% and 18% of African American
students tested scoring below proficiency in English language arts and mathe-
matics, respectively. This is in comparison to 11% for White students in both
English Language Arts (ELA) and Mathematics. Figures 1 and 2 reflect these
reported disparities. There was an increase in the percentage of African Americans
scoring below basic proficiency in these areas. The same pattern was evident for
sixth graders; in 2003 nearly 50% of African American students who were tested
scored below basic proficiency in mathematics, compared to about 20% of White
students (CDE, 2004).
Overall, by the end of high school, African American as well as Latino
students have skills in both reading and mathematics that are the same as those of
White students in the eighth grade. According to the NAEP 2005 Trial Urban
District Assessment, while the average reading scores for White students ranged
from 209 to 253 on the scale of 0 to 500, African American student scores ranged
from 187 to 207 and Hispanic student scores ranged from 190 to 209 (National
Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2005).

25

Figure 1. U.S. second graders scoring Below Basic Proficiency on the 2004
assessment.

Figure 2. State of California second graders scoring Below Proficiency on the 2004
assessment.

There is a plethora of research regarding disparities in achievement between
African American students and their dominant culture counterparts (Darling-
Hammond, 2000; Denbo & Beaulieu, 2002; Education Trust, 2004; Johnson, 2002;
Ladson-Billings, 1999a, 1999b; Morris, 2004; Ogbu, 1994; Ravitch, 2000). These

26
disparities have been analyzed from numerous perspectives, including educational,
racial/ethnic, economic, sociological, psychological, socioeconomic status, gender,
and cross-cultural (EdSource, 2007; Lyman & Villani, 2004). The interdisciplinary
synthesis of research and practice encompasses diverse fields of study that seek to
address the relationships among the social, cultural, and cognitive aspects of
learning (Kozulin, Gindis, Ageyev, & Miller, 2003).
Several researchers have asserted that the achievement gap is a manifesta-
tion of inequitable access to opportunities to learn (Gay, 2000; Ladson-Billings,
1999a; Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995). Inequitable learning opportunities are the
result of inadequate structures and systems within the educational system, including
but not limited to school finance, assessment, curriculum, instruction, and support
resources (Gay; Ladson-Billings, 1999a; Ladson-Billings & Tate; Weinstein et al.,
2004). It has been proposed that the achievement gap begins when children enter
school as a result of the coupling of placement and teacher judgment of learning
related behaviors attributed to various cognitive development levels (Tach &
Farkas, 2006). However, there is limited research in this area.
There is evidence to suggest that the gap may be due to cognitive disson-
ance resulting from the differences in cultural and social orientation between home
and school (Ogbu, 1995a, 1995b; Ogbu & Simons, 1994). Vygotsky’s fundamental
premise regarding the learning process is based on an understanding of cognition
and learning as social and cultural and not on individual phenomena (Kozulin et al.,
2003). Vygotsky spoke to the cognitive schema that children bring to the learning
process to facilitate the learning of new knowledge (Ormrod, 2006). If there is a
disconnect between the existing schema and new knowledge, learning becomes
difficult. This schema has been cultivated by the student’s social and cultural

27
orientation. However, a lag in achievement can result from the disconnect between
existing schema and new knowledge and limited inclusion of culturally relevant
pedagogy in the instructional process (Bennett, 2001; Gay, 2000). Bronfenbren-
ner’s ecological model views learning from a sociocultural perspective, consistent
with other researchers, including Vygotsky (Gay; Kozulin et al.; Ogbu, 1995a,
1995b).
While Brofenbrenner’s ecological model views learning from a
sociocultural perspective, as does Vygotsky, the latter’s theory speaks to the
disconnect between cognitive schema, which is the result of social and cultural
orientation and new knowledge, Bronfenbrenner’s “nested systems” within the
ecological model views behavior and development as shared functions of biological
and personality factors and the environment which is comprised of the social,
physical, and cultural aspects of one’s surroundings (Gardiner & Kosmitzki, 2005).
The environment, which includes family, school, and neighborhood, functions in
concert with the contemporary and historical context of which these are an integral
part. Both theorists purport the importance and interrelationship and influence of
cultural and social systems as the framework within which learning takes place.
Although the achievement gap has been well documented for the past 3
decades, the trend of disparities has existed for more than a century. Efforts have
been made to improve high poverty schools; however, both race and poverty
continue to be inextricably linked to educational inequities (Lyman & Villani,
2004). As a component of President Lyndon B. Johnson’s War on Poverty, the
Civil Rights Act of 1964 mandated a nationwide survey of the availability of
educational opportunities within the nation (Marzano, 2003). The resulting report,
Equality in Educational Opportunity, published in 1966, became known as the

28
Coleman Report. This document suggested that student background accounted
most for student achievement, with only a small variance due to the impact of
schooling. This facilitated a reexamination of the educational system, leading to the
beginning of reform efforts that have included standards-based instruction and the
implementation of accountability systems for greater documentation and monitor-
ing of instruction and student progress.
In an era of accountability, which includes high-stakes testing and
standards-based reform, the country continues to struggle with how to achieve
educational equity. The gaps in achievement appear across socioeconomic strata
and race/ethnicity (Marzano, 2003). Underrepresented groups, which include
African American, Hispanic, and indigenous groups, are achieving at lower levels
than Asians and middle- and high-income Whites (Johnson, 2002).
Singleton and Linton (2006) referred to the achievement gap as a racial gap
due to the variance in performance between students of different skin colors. They
purported that racialized external social, economic, and political factors are often
blamed for the achievement gap. They suggested that the rapid change in the racial
composition of the nation’s student population is inverse to the population of
educators. In other words, the majority of educators are White while the majority of
students are of color. Therefore, organizational structures and systems should be in
place to help educators to develop cultural proficiency and instructional effective-
ness. These strategies may be a means of narrowing or eliminating the gap.
The racial achievement gap exists not solely due to socioeconomic dispari-
ties; it exists among students within the same socioeconomic status (Johnson, 2002;
Singleton & Linton, 2006). Thus, poverty alone does not provide an explanation for
the achievement gap. In an analysis of premises espoused as the reasons for the

29
achievement gap, Singham (1998) spoke to the premise that there are social
pathologies within the African American community that cause the gap. A genetic
explanation for the achievement gap suggests that African Americans are not as
smart as Whites and are therefore not capable of competing equally with them
(Hernstein & Murray, 1994). Others have asserted that the racial achievement gap
is the result of an educational system that is not designed to educate students of
color and that educators continue to be unwilling to or lack the skills or knowledge
to address racial diversity (Singleton & Linton). Thus, concerns about the achieve-
ment gap continue to be echoed throughout educational discourse. To that end,
national reports since the Coleman Report have been presented and analyzed
regarding the achievement gap in an effort to ascertain the reasons for this educa-
tional disparity and to recommend reform efforts to address this issue. The major
reports are reviewed in the remainder of this section.
A Nation at Risk
In 1981 the NCEE was created in the Reagan administration by then-
Secretary of Education T. H. Bell, with the charge of examining the quality of
education in the United States. Within the 18-month timeline for completion of the
report the commission developed practical recommendations for educational
improvement/reform. The commission report spoke to the disenfranchisement of
citizens who do not possess the literacy skills and training required to perform
competently and participate fully in the mainstream fabric of society. Numerous
indicators of the risks are documented in the report, which compared student
achievement at the time of the report to that of a previous decade and discussed
functional illiteracy in adults and youth, particularly minority youth (NCEE, 1983).

30
The report also spoke to the decline in Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores, the
decline in science and mathematics achievement, and the increase in remedial
courses for college students.
The movement by politicians and educational leaders was an attempt to find
solutions for the myriad risk factors outlined in the report. Their ideas of reform
focused on teaching learning in all academic areas. Most salient to the reform focus
as presented in the report is what was termed excellence in education (NCEE,
1983), a reference to equitable treatment of the nation’s diverse student population,
thereby suggesting that the goals of equity and high quality in schools should be
simultaneous.
In contrast, a critique of A Nation at Risk (Willie & Willie, 2005) provided
a dissonant view of the allegations made in the report. They claimed that the
research on the highly publicized A Nation at Risk report provided minimal evi-
dence to support its assertions, characterizing it as a backlash to Brown v. Board of
Education. It was asserted that, due to the lack of sufficient evidence to support its
assertions, scholars have labeled the school reform movement for which A Nation
at Risk was the impetus as a manufactured crisis (Berliner & Biddle, 1995) and
that, actually, although an achievement gap continues to exist, the gap has
narrowed over the 50 years since Brown. This narrowing has largely been due to
reforms focused on equity and inclusion espoused by Brown, in contrast to
excellence and exclusion, which Berliner and Biddle alleged has become so
dominant in the past 20 years of educational reform (Willie & Willie).
A Nation Still at Risk
While A Nation at Risk served as the catalyst for the reform movement in
education in the United States, its implications and recommendations led to mini-

31
mal transformation to the system. Fifteen years following the publication of A
Nation at Risk, a follow-up report revealed the extent of the changes that had been
anticipated. A Nation Still at Risk (Hoover Institution, 1998) served as an educa-
tional manifesto outlining the continuing disparities in the educational system.
American students continued to exhibit poor performance in the areas of mathe-
matics and science. Illiteracy in the country was measured in the millions. Millions
of high school students reached 12th grade without learning to read at a basic level
and were unable to compute basic mathematics. A dismal 25 million persons
reportedly did not have basic knowledge about U.S. history. However, during the
same period about 6 million Americans had dropped out of high school. For
students of color, 13% of African American students ages 16 through 24 were not
in school and did not hold a diploma, while 17% of first-generation Hispanic
students had dropped out of high school; this number included 44% Hispanic
immigrants. Reportedly, 30% of entering freshman needed some type of
remediation in reading, writing, and/or mathematics.
Consistent with other research (Ladson Billings, 1999a; McCarty, 2004;
Weinstein et al., 2004), the Hoover Institution (1998) policy review reported what
appeared to be the re-creation of a two-tiered educational system, separate but
unequal, just over half a century after Brown v. Board of Education had led to the
dismantling of unconstitutional government-sanctioned segregation. Students of
color, particularly those who live in poverty, more often than not attend inferior
schools, have less experienced teachers, and fewer resources (Bennett, 2001;
Darling-Hammond, 2000; Hoover Institution; Ladson-Billings, 1999a). A Nation
Still at Risk suggested that those recommendations for reform espoused by A

32
Nation at Risk had gone unheeded and that there was a diminished sense of
urgency.
Termed the great equalizer (Hoover Institution, 1998), education is still
controlled by a privileged few. The chasm between educational opportunity for the
privileged few and that of the less-privileged citizens is facilitated by the former
group’s ability to manipulate and navigate the system. To renew the commitment to
reform, the report recommended two major strategies: (a) standards, assessment,
and accountability; and (b) pluralism and competition of choice. Recommendations
were also made for structural changes and power shifts. The threat to public educa-
tion was the ineffective status quo. Although A Nation Still at Risk addressed
numerous inequalities in the educational system, an analysis of this broad docu-
ment provides minimal or no data to substantiate its allegations.
Barriers to Achievement
Researchers acknowledge that, in spite of efforts to diminish disparities in
education between students of color and their White counterparts through school
reform, structural and systemic barriers continue to exist and impede achievement
and equity in education (Darling-Hammond, 2000; Mitchell & Mitchell, 2005).
Tracking, continued lower levels of funding, lack of rigorous curriculum, and lack
of qualified teachers impede equality in access to knowledge and resources
(Darling-Hammond).
Tracking
Tracking research suggests substantial differences in the demographics in
multitrack year-round schools, perpetuating a form of re-segregation. Lower-

33
achieving students tend to be placed in one track with the least-experienced and
least-qualified teachers (Mitchell & Mitchell, 2005).
Qualified Teachers
Teacher expertise has been identified as a fundamental predictor of student
achievement (Darling-Hammond, 2000). Unqualified teachers are less able to plan
and implement appropriate instruction and may not take responsibility for student
learning if the teaching is not successful (Darling-Hammond; Diamond, Randolph,
& Spillane, 2004). The concentration of ill-prepared and unqualified teachers in
urban school districts serving low-income students of color is often the result of
funding inequities, local power distribution, and dysfunctional hiring practices, all
of which lead to teacher shortages. Due to seniority issues, more-experienced
teachers are likely to be assigned to higher-achieving nonurban schools, leaving the
less-experienced to work with the children who are in most need of experienced,
credentialed teachers (Darling-Hammond).
Cultural Differences as Barriers
In addition to institutional barriers, cultural differences and motivational
factors are potential barriers to achievement. In the aftermath of Brown, Ogbu
emerged as a forceful critic of the biogenetic arguments of Jensen and others who
had legitimatized de facto segregation in U.S. schools (McCarty, 2004). Along with
other researchers within the past 20 years, Ogbu has addressed the importance of
culture and its impact on academic achievement (Bennett, 2001; Denbo &
Beaulieu, 2002; Fordham & Ogbu, 1986; Gay, 2000; Ogbu, 1994, 1995a, 1995b;
Ormrod, 2006). From an oppositional cultural framework, Ogbu and Simons (1994)
engaged in a mixed-methods study of 16 schools in the Oakland School District

34
that included 2,245 students in grades 5-12. From this study they posited that
differences in ethnic groups were dependent on their incorporation in the United
States. Incorporation refers to involuntary minorities being incorporated into the
United States against their will through slavery or conquest, while voluntary
minorities chose to come to the United States (Ogbu & Simons). Pair-wise com-
parisons between African American and Chinese American students and Mexican
American/Latino students and Chinese students in that study indicated that volun-
tary minorities considered education to be the gateway to success in society. They
demonstrated less concern with racial issues and greater willingness to conform to
the dominant society’s culture as an avenue to success, and they were not afraid
that crossing cultural boundaries would compromise their identity. Thus, they were
more willing to conform to school expectations. In contrast, the educational model
for the involuntary African American students was ambivalent. This group reported
ambivalent educational strategies involving claims of parental support and high
student and parental aspirations. There were exaggerated claims of school success
and reportedly less effort than that exerted by the Chinese American students.
Ogbu and Simons reported that school success for African American students was
stigmatized by other students. Such contradictions in beliefs may manifest in a lack
of effort within the context of schools where expectations are low, thus compromis-
ing school success.
In their 1986 work Fordham and Ogbu proposed that African American
young people sabotaged their school success by taking an oppositional posture
toward academic achievement, with culture being a significant factor in that
achievement. Among members of an involuntary minority group (as proposed by
Ogbu), education may be rejected as an avenue to success, as it can be a vehicle for

35
breaking what the minority group perceives as the permanence of barriers caused
by discrimination. Entrance into the labor market may be perceived as impossible
as a result of discrimination; therefore, education that may lead to facilitating that
entrance is not perceived as valuable (Mickelson, 2003).
Contrary to that position, Tyson, Darity, and Castellino (2005) posited that
African American adolescents are generally achievement oriented and that the peer
pressure associated with race proposed by Fordham and Ogbu was not evident in
all schools. Further research has provided little evidence to suggest that African
American youth are oppositional to achievement (Ferguson, 2001; Tyson et al.).
However, the adoption of Ogbu’s oppositional framework may be faulty as is
suggested in the literature. If Ogbu’s premise is true, the oppositional attitudes of
African American youth are not likely to be attributed to ethnicity but related to the
daily experiences of inequality in placement and achievement. These inconsisten-
cies in research may suggest that a greater understanding of the causal factors of
these oppositional attitudes may be more contextual in nature. Therefore,
researchers have speculated that there should be a focus on systemic changes in
school structures rather than culture that may yield greater insight and more
consistent results. Patterns of social inequality resulting from systems such as
tracking, teacher quality, and discipline may exacerbate the opposition to achieve-
ment (Patillo-McCoy, 1999; Tyson et al.).
Motivational Barriers
Research suggests that barriers to achievement from a sociocultural per-
spective are also motivational in nature, particularly for African American males.
Qualitative research engaging high school African American males (Irving &

36
Hudley, 2005) and African American and Latino second, fourth, and seventh
graders (Taylor & Graham, 2007) addressed barriers from the expectancy value
theory perspective. The expectancy-value model of motivation is the premise from
which these researchers approached possible barriers to achievement. This theo-
retical perspective characterizes human behavior as the result of the influences of
one’s expectancy of a successful outcome when engaged in a particular behavior
(Weiner, 1992). Students are motivated by the perceived likelihood that an achieve-
ment outcome will be obtained (expectancy) and the desirability of the outcome
(value). Values are more rooted in cultural experiences that serve as the foundation
for the appeal and utility of achievement-related activities. Expectancy of success
and perceptions of value are mediating factors in one’s willingness to persevere
toward a goal (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002). There is a relationship among the percep-
tion of cultural barriers, educational outcomes, expectations, and values. Cultural
mistrust can lead to low outcome expectations and outcome values (Irving &
Hudley; Taylor & Graham). Rather than present themselves as incompetent,
students who perceive structural barriers between personal effort and achievement
may discount academic endeavors to be successful in favor of social or athletic
activities in order to protect their self-worth (Irving & Hudley).
Within the context of motivation, another barrier to academic achievement
suggested in the literature is stereotype threat (Steele, 1997). Steele examined how
the cultural stereotypes related to Black intellectual inferiority affect the academic
performance of highly capable Black students. He posited that this stereotype is a
part of the fund of knowledge in all Black students. His experimental data demon-
strated that cueing about race prior to engaging in a task facilitated lower achieve-
ment in higher-achieving Black students than in students who did not receive such

37
cues. Steele argued that stereotype threat inhibits academic performance by African
American students because these students are reluctant to engage in intellectual
challenges for fear of validating the stereotype by trying and failing; rather, their
anxiety unconsciously leads them to disengage, and disengagement undermines
performance (Mickelson, 2003).
Social and Cultural Capital
Although not specifically noted in national reports about the achievement
disparities, there is research to support social and cultural factors that impact
achievement to which the achievement gap may be attributed (Bennett, 2001; Gay,
2000; Ladson-Billings, 1994; Ogbu, 1995a, 1995b). When addressing the achieve-
ment gap, consideration must be given to the resources or capital that students
bring to the learning process, and how, if at all, they are used within educational
structures and systems. Hence, there is a need for discussion of social and cultural
capital as they relate to academic achievement.
An examination of educational outcomes through the lens of social and
cultural capital has been employed by several researchers in the field (e.g.,
Bourdieu, 1986; Coleman, 1988; Stanton-Salazar, 1997). Despite contradictions in
their work, there are common themes. Bourdieu viewed social capital as an invest-
ment in the dominant class to maintain and reproduce group solidarity and to pre-
serve the group’s dominant position. In other words, social capital is a means by
which the dominant class maintains its dominance through networking in terms of
information and resources. Bourdieu’s definition works on the premise that those
who are successful have the resources to continue to be successful. He purported
that social capital is comprised of social obligations or connections that can be

38
converted into economic capital (Dika & Singh, 2002). Bourdieu viewed this as
the reason for inequality in academic achievement and the lack of development of
human capital. Because of the organizational structure of public schools, the social
capital of educated middle-class White families is more conducive to school
success than is the social capital of less-educated and/or families in poverty
(Mickelson, 2003). The basis for creating this kind of social reproduction lies in the
construct of race created by White Americans that ensures that people of color are
viewed as less than equal to Whites and therefore less entitled to equal access to
resources.
In contrast, Coleman, whose work is most frequently cited in educational
literature (e.g., Dika & Singh, 2002) theorized social capital as intangible, taking
the forms of trust as evidenced by obligations and expectations, information
channels, and norms and sanctions that promote the common good over self-
interest (Coleman, 1988). His view suggests the importance of social networks, as
does the work of Bourdieu, but it focuses primarily on the inherent structure of
relationships that serve as the social structure facilitating the emergence of effective
norms. Coleman asserted that it is the expectations and involvement of such social
structures as the family that dictate a child’s opportunities for academic success and
that social capital must come from family relationships. Thus, Coleman’s work
supports the idea that it is the family’s responsibility to the values and norms
required to advance their children’s opportunities for success, whereas Bourdieu’s
work stressed the structural constraints and unequal access to institutional resources
based on class, gender, and race (Dika & Singh).
The focus on relationships as the core of social capital rings true from
Salazar’s perspective. His social capital conceptual framework addresses the

39
socialization of racial minorities in the context of the intrinsic mechanisms of main-
stream institutions, such as schools, that account for difficulties in the accumulation
of social capital for low-socioeconomic status students (Bennett, 2001; Stanton-
Salazar, 1997). Salazar examined the inequity of opportunities for entering different
social and institutional contexts that lead to the establishment of relationships with
teachers and others at school. These individuals have control over resources that
facilitate greater access to social capital (Stanton-Salazar, 1997; Stanton-Salazar &
Dornbusch, 1995).
The significance of multicultural competence, as discussed in Bennett’s
genres of research in multicultural education, is worth discussion within the context
of cultural capital. If the educational system is not inclusive in its consideration of
the attributes of the diverse cultures of its students as they relate to the value
systems and learning styles of the students, then it continues to maintain a system
that perpetuates the advancement of the dominant group at the expense of under-
represented groups. This is evident in the disproportionate number of African
Americans and Latinos in special education (Bennett, 2001; Ladson-Billings,
1999a; Skiba et al., 2005). Even when underrepresented groups attain a level of
education that is competitive with that of the dominant group, particularly at the
secondary level, the dominant group designs methods that systematically continue
to keep others from attaining an even higher level of education. This was implied
by Bourdieu and Passeron (1977) and Bowles and Gintis (1976) when addressing
cultural reproduction. Lareau and Horvat (1999) showed that the value of cultural
capital is dependent on the social setting and the skills of both parents and students
at utilizing their cultural capital resources, in addition to how schools respond to
and legitimize their social capital. Mickelson (2003) argued that these factors create

40
moments of inclusion or exclusion for families. The combined effects of historical
racial discrimination and school structures and operations make it more difficult for
Black parents, regardless of socioeconomic status, to use their cultural capital on
behalf of their children.
Other studies (Monkman, Ronald, & Theraméné, 2005; Ream, 2005) have
examined academic achievement through the conceptual framework of social and
cultural capital. Both of the cited studies involved students between first and eighth
grades in urban schools with students of low socioeconomic status who were either
Mexican American or immigrants from Mexico, El Salvador, or Guatemala.
Although the key constructs were social and cultural capital, the researchers
examined their effects on achievement from very different perspectives. Ream
examined the relationship between the two constructs and student mobility in order
to demonstrate a correlation between low average test scores and the instability of
the students’ social networks. The instability of these networks were posited to be
associated with high transience rates. The study also made comparisons between
the utility of various forms of social capital, taking into consideration the impact on
achievement of adolescent close peer relationships in comparison to that of educa-
tionally oriented peer relationships. This longitudinal study included data from the
National Education Longitudinal study of 1988. Results indicated an increase in
test scores, particularly since the correlation of scores from year to year was large
during high school. Student mobility may compromise the cumulative effects as a
result of the negative impact on peer social capital.
Consistent with Ream’s (2005) research on the relationship between social
and cultural capital, Monkman et al. (2005) showed their function not on mobility
but on how they function on literacy and sociocultural contexts of learning.

41
Teachers assigned greater social and educational value to social and cultural knowl-
edge than to academic knowledge. This is in contrast to what other researchers have
posited regarding the devaluation of social and cultural knowledge by the dominant
culture (Gay, 2000; Ladson-Billings, 1999a, 1999b; Lopez, 2003; Ogbu, 1995a,
1995b).
Discourse regarding social capital theory works on the premise of discon-
nectedness among African American institutions (Morris, 2004). Historically, all
Black schools were an integral part of African American families and communities.
In many ways, policies of desegregation fractured those relationships as the poli-
cies were based on the notion that Black students would have greater access to
social capital (resources and information networks) if they attended middle-class
White schools. In many cases, once enrolled in these schools, the students experi-
enced continued marginalization and disenfranchisement through such systems as
tracking and disproportionate discipline, as well as disproportionate referrals for
special education services (Mitchell & Mitchell, 2005), which led to lack of access
to social capital. Consequently, social capital, as espoused by Coleman (1988),
does not provide an adequate explanation in terms of African American educational
experiences because it ignores (a) the significance of White interests, (b) the impact
of race and racism on the extent to which African Americans can acquire social
capital in White settings (Laureau & Horvat, 1999), and (c) the sociohistorical
experiences of African American people (Morris). Hence, Bourdieu’s 1986 theo-
retical articulation of social capital explains how the ideology of Whiteness has
ensured the continued domination of African Americans in society and education.
Despite this, African Americans have demonstrated efforts amid adverse structural

42
forces and have used their social and cultural capital to positively impact African
American students’ education (Morris), as will be seen in this study.
One of the drawbacks of social and cultural capital, as argued by Dika and
Singh (2002), is that the current framework serves to describe rather than explain
the effects of inequality on educational outcomes, thus having the potential of being
viewed from a deficit perspective. The issues of power and domination are not
addressed nor are the connections between lack of connections to institutional
agents, forces, and patterns of discrimination.
Knowledge of the social and cultural resources accessible to or denied to
African American students creates a greater understanding of their impact on
achievement. However, the construct of race continues to dictate educational
opportunities and pathways to achievement for African American students. The
most recent theoretical framework to focus on this phenomenon is CRT.
Critical Race Theory
An examination of organizational structures and systems as they relate to
achievement of African American students should include a discussion of racism
and its implications, which are often overlooked (Lynn, 2006). To that extent, CRT
has been explored within the past 2 decades as a theoretical framework through
which these structures and systems can be explored. An outgrowth of the dissatis-
faction with the pace of racial reform in the post civil rights era, CRT stems from
the challenge of legal scholars of the ways in which race and racial power are
constructed and represented in the American legal culture. Legal scholars key to
this theory include Bell (1995a, 1995b), Lawrence (1993), Matsuda (1995),
Delgado (1995), and Crenshaw (1995).

43
CRT is a school of thought that holds to the premise that race lies at the
core of American society and that racism is a normal endemic component of the
social tapestry of that society. Figure 3 provides an overview of scholars supporting
the theory and their specific areas of concentration.
Understanding the salience of racism is essential to educational discourse.
CRT, as applied in organizational structures and systems within the educational
system, provides a framework for examining the application and implications of
race for educational structures, such as policy and procedures, as well as systems at
the local school and district levels. CRT offers a perspective on curriculum, instruc-
tion, assessment, school funding. and desegregation for which there have been sig-
nificant implications for the educational outcomes of African American children
along the spectrum of socioeconomic levels (Ladson-Billings, 1999a).
The significance of CRT was brought to light in the 1990s with increasing
application to scholarship in education. In evaluating certain educational policies,
critical race theorists concluded that the restrictive nature of the interpretation of
the law limited educational access for African American students (Crenshaw,
1995). Ladson-Billings (1995) provided greater focus on the subject in educational
academia. Further research (Ladson-Billings, 2005; Tate, 1997) provided exposure
to qualitative research in education pertinent to CRT. Through this research, CRT
is viewed as a lens through which to examine educational practices and policies.
It is a methodological venue through which to facilitate revelation of the

44

Figure 3. Critical race theory: Theoretical framework of the study.

ontological and epistemological foundations of the impact of racism on education
as viewed currently and from an historical perspective (Lynn et al., 2002).
Historically, African Americans in the United States have been systematic-
ally disenfranchised as a result of the deeply embedded tenets of racism in the
culture throughout social, political, economic, and educational institutions. African
Civil Rights

Matsuda
Delgado
Feminism

Crenshaw
Davis
LaCrit

Solorzano
Valenzuela
Villenas
Education

Ladson-Billings
Tate
Race/
Racial
Formation

Omni
Bell
Critical
Race
Theory

45
Americans have been denied equal access to education. From the early 1900s
through about 1960, public policy dictated that schools concentrate on practical
vocational training for African American students in preparation for their subse-
quent employment (Ravitch, 2000). The goal was to train for servitude, not to
educate (Ravitch; Woodson, 1933). This doctrine of curriculum differentiation was
meant to relegate African Americans to inferior education that would perpetuate
limited access to economic and political capital (Ravitch). Even today, African
American and Latino students are more likely to be found in lower-level vocational
and curriculum tracks in U.S. schools.
The Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education provided the
catalyst for dramatic changes in the U.S. educational system by striking down the
long-held doctrine of separate but equal schools for Whites and Blacks. In addition,
the Civil Rights and Economic Opportunities Acts and Lau v. Nichols advanced
social justice and its implications for education. These historical events of social
justice set the stage for the transformation of education. Yet, the continuing power
of the construct of race poses a new segregation with the significant demographic
shifts in language and students of color. The widening chasm resulting from
implicit and explicit ideologies of those with and without access to educational,
economic, and social capital is evident in rates of educational attainment and family
incomes (McCarty, 2004). The intersection with ideologies of meritocracy and
privilege resulting from these gaps facilitates the persistence of existing power
hierarchies, which suggests differences from the norm as deficiencies or disabilities
that perpetuate placing students of color at greater risk for inequitable opportunities
to learn.

46
As seen through the lens of CRT from the historical perspective, evidence
suggests that racism has been the major obstacle to the attainment of educational
opportunities by African Americans. The lack of schooling for many, limited
curriculum, inadequate instruction and school funding, and inappropriate assess-
ment have contributed to educational inequity and thus the gap in achievement
between African Americans and Whites (Ladson-Billings, 1999a; Tate, 1997).
While critical race theorists are committed to social justice in general
principle, their focus is on the pervasiveness of race and racism as they affect the
experiences of students of color and in the structures and practices of educational
institutions. Despite the scientific refutation of race as a legitimate biological
concept and attempts to marginalize race in much of the public political discourse,
race continues to be a powerful social construct and signifier (Ladson-Billings,
2005). Therefore, defining race and racism in specific historical and social contexts
is a key component of educational research in addressing this theory. It is a deeply
embedded component of the educational system through historical conscience and
ideology (Lynn et al., 2002). Although it is seen as a social construct, the use of
race has had an adverse effect on people of color and has thereby caused critical
race theorists to draw from a legal studies framework to focus on the role that the
law has played in racializing citizens and in legal construction of citizenship, both
of which lead to educational entitlement and a denial of equitable educational
opportunity (Bell, 1995a; Crenshaw, 1995). In examining the current organizational
structures and systems of public schools, the application of CRT provides an analy-
sis of those systems and structures and is a useful exemplar of the relationship
between race and education.

47
CRT speaks to curriculum, instruction, assessment, and school funding
(Ladson-Billings, 1999a) as components of school organizational structures and
systems. While not the primary focus of this study, the importance of curriculum,
instruction, assessment, and school funding as mitigating factors of achievement is
duly noted. Researchers, including critical race theorists, purport that school curri-
culum is more often than not culturally incongruent (Gay, 2000; Ladson-Billings,
1999a; Ogbu, 1995a, 1995b; Ogbu & Simons, 1994). The rigor of school curricu-
lum is also examined through the context of CRT, just as are the distortions,
omissions, and stereotypes of school curriculum. In looking at the rigor of school
curriculum, the theory addresses access to what is deemed enriched curriculum
through gifted and talented classes. Some scholars (e.g., Kozol, 1991; Ladson-
Billings, 1995) have subscribed to the idea that curriculum in predominantly White
schools emphasizes higher-order thinking skills but is not the case with children of
color, particularly in high-poverty schools. Specific learning activities that promote
creativity, critical thinking, and reasoning skills are often not accessible to children
of color. This restricted access to the curriculum illustrates the function of intellec-
tual property in terms of an organizational structure that promotes gaps in achieve-
ment. Curriculum represents a form of intellectual property. The quality and
quantity of the curriculum varies with the property values of the school. The availa-
bility of rich or enriched intellectual property delimits opportunities to learn. There
is the presumption that, along with providing standards that detail what students
should know and be able to do, they must be given material resources to support
their learning. Thus, intellectual property must be supported by real property, such
as science labs, computers, and other technologies, as well as appropriately certi-
fied and prepared teachers; this is often not the case in high-poverty schools

48
(Denbo & Beaulieu, 2002; Gay; Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995). Lack of real
property (appropriate resources and qualified teachers) impacts the level and
quality of instruction (Darling-Hammond, 2000; Ladson-Billings, 1995).
Critical race theorists purport that current instructional strategies within the
school system work from a deficit model for African American students (Bell,
1995a; Ladson-Billings, 1999a). When certain strategies are not effective with this
population, the assumption is made that there is something wrong with the child
rather than the method of instruction. This promotes instructional approaches that
typically involve some form of remediation (Ladson-Billings, 1999a). The deficit
model is slowly being rejected as a result of new research through the investigation
and affirmation of the integrity of effective teachers of African American students
(Barth et al., 1999; Darling-Hammond, 2000; Denbo & Beaulieu, 2002; Gay, 2000;
Ladson-Billings, 1994, 1995; Levine, 1994).
Critical race theorists suggest that, under the guise of scientific rationalism,
intelligence testing has long been a means by which to legitimatize the African
American student’s deficiency. The system of assessment has led to disproportion-
ate representation in special education (Gardner & Miranda, 2001; National
Research Council, 2002; Skiba, Poloni-Staudinger, et al., 2006; Skiba et al., 2000).
Inappropriate curriculum in conjunction with ineffective instruction manifests in
poor student performance on traditional assessment measures that often fail to
assess what students actually know and are capable of doing.
As posited by CRT, perhaps no area serves as a better example of institu-
tionalized and structured racism than school funding (Ladson-Billings, 1999a;
Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995; Lopez, 2003; Tate, 1997). Differentiated methods of
school funding, such as property taxes, leave schools in high-poverty areas with

49
limited fiscal resources to implement an educational program consistent with that
afforded to White counterparts in more affluent areas (Ladson-Billings, 1999a;
Ladson-Billings & Tate; Lopez). This structure puts high-poverty students at an
academic disadvantage and exacerbates the achievement gap.
One of drawbacks in the research regarding CRT is that there is limited
research on the specific outcomes of its application in the classroom. Researchers
speak to curriculum, assessment, instruction, and other areas of the educational
system that have been affected by racist practices (Gay, 2000; Ladson-Billings,
1999a; Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995; Weinstein et al., 2004). There is research on
CRT as it applies to teacher education and specific legal cases in education
(Crenshaw, 1995; Ladson-Billings, 1999a). However, from this research one can
only surmise the probability of improved educational outcomes for African
American students. There appears to be minimal statistical evidence to indicate a
direct correlation between the application of CRT and educational outcomes.
However, there is evidence of qualitative research that suggests that CRT, when
applied to organizational structures and systems, provides greater awareness of the
need to ensure equity for all students (Ladson-Billings, 1999a, 1999b, 2005;
Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995; Lopez, 2003). In light of the inequity in education
outlined thus far in this historical and theoretical perspective, steps have been taken
in school reform of organizational structures and systems to attempt to narrow the
achievement gap revealed by NCLB.
No Child Left Behind
Leading the nationwide surge in accountability is the NCLB. The NCLB of
2001 is the reauthorization of the ESEA of 1965. NCLB has focused greater

50
attention on low-performing schools by setting higher expectations for schools and
creating clear expectations and sanctions for weak performance.
Having claimed the spotlight in the national accountability arena, NCLB
has set the goal to improve education through a performance-based accountability
system that focuses on student test results. The emphasis on performance-based
accountability systems represents a significant paradigm shift from federal educa-
tional initiatives of the past, which focused on ensuring that services were
provided.
Supporters of NCLB have posited that evaluating student performance is a
mediating factor of student improvement. To that end, researchers analyzed
accountability systems from the economic sector to ascertain their applicability in
education. The systems included specific methods for encouraging performance
excellence and professional accountability mechanisms. Despite the uniqueness of
the educational setting, which is dramatically different from that of other organiza-
tions, it was concluded that each model could improve performance of schools and
districts (Rand Corporation, 2006).
Disparities culminated with NCLB to close the gap in achievement that
resulted from the entrenched achievement culture of schools (Weinstein et al.,
2004). However, NCLB has failed to address the underlying impact of higher
expectations on achievement. High standards were set, holding all stakeholders
accountable except the entity that voted on the law: the government. This legisla-
tion failed to establish how the goal of standards would be achieved. High
standards and punitive consequences have heightened the salience of achievement
differences in assigning descriptions to all students and schools as underperform-
ing. The ineffective consequences, such as school closures, grade retention, and

51
failure to graduate, have offered an achievement culture that has compromised the
positive expectations of the law (Weinstein et al., 2004).
Although NCLB fell short of addressing the achievement gap in some
respects, there have been recommendations for closing the gap in the literature
(Lyman & Villani, 2004). The practice of culturally relevant pedagogy has been
recognized as effective (Gay, 2000; Ladson-Billings, 1994; Irvine & Armento,
2001). The development of trust in the educational process and building relation-
ships between school and home have been explored as vehicles for enhancing
community involvement (Brophy, 2000; Morris, 2004). Having teachers take a
more parental role during the educational process has been suggested (Morris).
Extending learning from school to home maintains collaborative relationships with
parents and encourages their active involvement in the learning processes.
Organizational Structures and Systems
Although barriers persist that compromise achievement, there are research-
based structural and systemic practices that contribute to high student performance
in high-poverty urban schools (Denbo & Beaulieu, 2002; Marzano, 2003; Washing-
ton Learns, 2006). Several of them have been noted earlier in this review as recom-
mendations for closing the achievement gap. Edmonds (1982) identified several
characteristics of effective schools that are seen in the current literature (Levine,
Cooper, & Hilliard, 2000; Levine & Ornstein, 1993; Marzano, 2003) and are
evident in high-performing, high-poverty urban schools. These characteristics
include high expectations for students, strong administrative leadership, emphasis
on learning basic skills, monitoring of student progress, and safe and orderly
climate conducive to learning (Levine et al.). Organizational structures suggest

52
those policies and procedures that serve as mechanisms for school operations, such
as funding mechanisms, class size, instructional time, program regulations, and
personnel issues.
Systemic practices facilitate goal achievement for the school through the
provision of coordinated and coherent utilization of resources such as professional
development, parental involvement, accountability systems, data-driven decision
making, school leadership, and school climate (Johnson, 2002; Marzano, 2003;
Washington Learns, 2006). In addressing organizational structures and systems
Marzano posited a triangulated approach in assessing the impact of these factors on
student achievement: school, teacher, and student factors. School factors include a
guaranteed and viable curriculum, challenging goals and feedback, parent and
community involvement, and collegial professionalism; instructional strategies,
classroom management, and curriculum design are designated as teacher influenc-
ing factors. Home environment, intelligence, and motivation complete the triangle
as student factors. A comparison of research on factors affecting student achieve-
ment can be seen in Table 1. Although there is variation in terms among
researchers, the same conceptual themes are evident. These organizational struc-
tures and systems have been effective and have compromised the racial theories
that have been the basis for previous instruction. Figure 4 shows the hierarchy of
structures and systems leading to student achievement.
Leadership
The dominant leadership style in high-performing, high-poverty urban
schools appears to follow the structural model proposed by Bolman and Deal
(2003). Principals worked with parents to facilitate involvement and support for the

53

54

55

56

Figure 4. Implementation of effective schools structures and systems leads to
student achievement.

school’s mission and provided consistent professional development to develop
teachers’ skills and knowledge of curriculum and instructional strategies. They
used creative methods to fund school programs (Carter, 2000; Morris, 2004) and
were problem solvers who created an orderly environment, had control over

57
personnel practices such as hiring and firing teachers, and had control over curri-
culum (Izumi, 2002). Concomitant with this characteristic was their political
expertise, a leadership characteristic seen in the political frame of Bolman and
Deal. They understood what resources were available within the district and how to
obtain them by effectively navigating the political landscape of the district.
Leadership is seen throughout the literature on effective schools (Izumi,
2002; Marzano, 2003; Morris, 2004; Pressley et al., 2004). It is necessary for
effective reform at all levels: school, teacher, and student. Leaders are visionaries
for change, able to communicate effectively, support staff and guide them through
instruction of curriculum, and facilitate monitoring of student progress. Leaders in
high-performing, high-poverty urban schools believe that students are capable,
operate on that belief (Carter, 2000), and are able to perpetuate that belief system
through buy-in by all stakeholders. They insist on a rigorous curriculum, emphasize
personal relations, and bring about change through abandonment of deficit thinking
about students’ abilities (Lyman & Villani, 2004).
Parent and Community Involvement
Lawson (2003) suggested that parents’ and teachers’ perceptions of the
meanings and functions of parent involvement are not always the same and can
sometimes overlap when considering school-centered versus community-centered
activities. In high-performing schools it has been found that parent involvement is
more school centered as it focuses on helping students to learn within that setting.
Communication and participation were viewed by Marzano (2003) as the defining
feature of parent and community involvement. In the work of Pressley et al. (2004)
on high-performing high-poverty schools, regular communication existed between

58
the school and parents. Home-to-school correspondence reflected the school’s
belief that parents were concerned about the students’ academic development and
wanted to work collaboratively with the school to promote achievement. Parents
were invited to school programs and events that were specially designed to show
appreciation for their support. Parents engaged in reciprocal reading activities at
home (Pressley et al., 2004). They received communication through email, work
in the library, and conferences (Haycock et al., 1999). In some schools, parent
councils have been established to monitor specific expenditures. Most frequently,
they participate in activities that relate to student instruction surrounding standards
and curriculum (Izumi, 2002; Morris, 2004; Pressley et al., 2004). Carter (2000)
found that parent involvement extended into the home through parent contracts to
support students’ efforts to learn. Teaching parents to read to students, check for
homework, and make inquiries about school assignments through weekly updates
was effective as well. Morris underscored the importance of establishing relation-
ships with parents and the community, understanding the social capital that
students possess and how it can be used to facilitate student achievement.
High Expectations
In high-performing high-poverty schools, high expectations are espoused by
all stakeholders: administrators, teachers, and parents. There is a shared belief that
every student can learn and succeed (Towns, Cole-Henderson, & Serpell, 2001).
School mottos were developed to accentuate success. Principals worked individu-
ally with students who were experiencing academic challenges. High expectations
were demonstrated through challenging and rigorous curriculum, which critical
race theorists have purported to be lacking for African American students. There

59
were high expectations for teachers as well as students, with teachers being held
accountable for student learning.
Goal Setting/Feedback
The literature supports goal setting and feedback as important predictors of
student achievement (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002). There is evidence at high-perform-
ing schools that goal setting was an integral part of the school culture (Carter, 2000;
Pressley et al., 2004). School-wide tangible goals were found to be the focus in
some high-performing high-poverty schools (Carter). Goals, standards, and long-
term outcomes for students were clear and measurable, challenging, and concrete
(Johnson, 2002; Marzano, 2003; Ormrod, 2006; Pintrich & Schunk).
Goal setting is important for students but must also be a part of teacher
development. In high-performing high-poverty schools, professional development
is the vehicle by which goals are articulated. The professional development is goal
oriented and ensures that teachers are cognizant of what the areas of focus should
be and the strategies to be implemented in order to achieve them. Setting school-
wide academic goals has a triangular effect, impacting administrators, teachers, and
students and leading to student success as well as effectiveness and cohesiveness
within the school overall (Marzano, 2003).
Professional Development
Fermanich, Mangan, Odden, Picus, Gross, and Rudo (Washington Learns,
2006) found that professional development was an essential element in the success
of high-performing schools. Much time was spent on professional development to
support teachers in improving instruction, building professional development
relationships, and developing a shared instructional vision. Ongoing professional

60
development with a focus on instructional strategies and assessment was consistent
among other researchers (Carter, 2000; Haycock et al., 1999; Pressley et al., 2004).
Professional development for leadership was found to exist in high-performing
schools, along with subject-based professional development to provide support to
teachers through coaches who provided materials and sample lessons (Izumi,
2002). While professional development to address instruction and assessment was
evident in the literature, several studies suggest that professional development
should focus specifically on teacher expectations and teacher self-efficacy
(Diamond et al., 2004). Table 2 presents an overview of the research in school
organizational structures and systems that are evident in high-performing, high-
poverty urban schools.
Teacher Expectations
Researchers have examined how students’ responses to school-level structures and
practices have contributed to social reproduction (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977;
Fordham & Ogbu, 1986). The interplay of these factors contributes to continued
inheritance of privilege for the dominant culture and pervasive disadvantage for
poor students and students of color (Diamond et al., 2004). One of the possible
explanations of these patterns lies in teacher expectations.
The significance of the relationship between teacher expectations and
student achievement is viewed as both a reason and a solution to the achievement
gap (Brophy, 2000; Darling-Hammond, 2000; Gay, 2000; Haycock, 1999; Ladson-
Billings, 1995). Teacher expectations, reflecting teacher beliefs, tend to shape both
what the teacher attempts to elicit from the students and what students expect of

61

62

63
themselves (Brophy). Table 3 reflects some of the research pertaining to teacher
expectations and teacher self-efficacy and their impact on student achievement.
The literature on teacher expectations suggests that teacher expectations for
academic ability are lower for low-income and African American students than for
their counterparts in the dominant culture. Low teacher expectations lead to
reduction of student self-image and lack of motivation in terms of effort in school
and they lead teachers to give less-challenging assignments and have fewer teacher-
student interactions (Diamond et al., 2004).
Teacher expectations can be examined from the perspective of individual
teacher-student interactions or from an organizational focus to illustrate school
context conditions and how teachers evaluate and behave toward students. Teacher
beliefs about students’ capabilities coupled with their own sense of responsibility
for student learning impact student achievement (Diamond et al., 2004). Diamond
et al. posited that, for students in predominantly low-income and African American
schools, teachers emphasize deficits and have a reduced sense of responsibility for
student learning. They posited that teacher expectations are a more powerful
influence on African American students and low-income students than on White
students and that racial stereotypes may influence teacher expectations.
Organizational habitus (Diamond et al., 2004) or school climate gives
direction to beliefs about student capabilities, suggesting that the current set of
beliefs and practices within the school context tend toward lower expectations,
followed by a reduced sense of responsibility for students. One such organizational
indicator of teacher expectations for student learning is collective responsibility
(Lee & Smith, 2001). In schools where teachers, administrators, and staff
collectively have high expectations for student learning, students exhibit greater

64

65

66
achievement. For Lee and Smith, collective responsibility entailed teachers’
internalization of responsibility for student learning, their willingness to adapt
teaching to student needs, and a sense of self-efficacy in their teaching practices.
Diamond et al. found that teacher expectations had a positive impact on student
achievement when teachers felt responsible for student learning, despite students’
academic challenges. School leadership worked to increase teacher expectations
and to create organizational structures and occasions designed to increase sense of
responsibility in teachers through professional development. Professional develop-
ment was also used to steer teachers away from situations that fostered the coupling
of acknowledgment of student challenges and decreased sense of responsibility for
student learning.
Teacher beliefs are the basis for expectations, which are correlates of effect-
ive schooling (Teddlie & Reynolds, 2000). Teacher expectations may be influenced
by the teacher’s sense of personal self-efficacy, which is the belief that the teacher
is able to bring about the desired outcomes of student engagement and learning.
Teachers with a high sense of self-efficacy believe that their students are capable of
learning and mastering the curriculum and that they (the teachers) are capable of
motivating and instructing students (Ormrod, 2006; Timperley & Phillips, 2003).
Teachers with a high sense of self-efficacy themselves are motivated. They are
more willing to experiment with new ideas and instructional strategies, have high
expectations and set high goals for students, put more effort into their teaching, and
show more persistence in helping students to learn (Bandura, 1997; Omrod). Effi-
cacy and expectations affect teachers’ choices, goals, and persistence and are in
part the result of teachers’ attributions for student success or failure. A strong

67
relationship exists between teacher expectations and teacher self-efficacy, resulting
from the similarity of the effects of each (Timperley & Phillips).
To understand how teacher expectations or goals influence teacher actions
in the classroom, the construct of self-regulated learning should be examined. Self-
regulated learners judge performance in relation to goals, generate feedback about
progress toward goals, and make adjustments to goals or further actions or
behaviors based on that feedback (Marzano, 2003; Timperley & Phillips, 2003;
Zimmerman, Bandura, & Martinez-Pons, 1992). Within the context of teaching this
would translate into holding high expectations of students, monitoring student
progress toward realizing those expectations, and adjusting instructional methods
or strategies when existing actions do not result in desired outcomes. Goals are
central to self-regulated learning because they drive what is focused on and
determine the monitoring and feedback that are the catalysts of self-regulation
(Timperley & Phillips). Goal setting, feedback, and monitoring of student progress
are characteristics consistently noted in effective schools (Marzano). Feedback, in
turn, regulates engagement decisions and actions. Together, they provide informa-
tion about goal achievement and the teacher’s ongoing engagement in the task of
improving student achievement in line with the goals. Low expectations yield
limited incentive to change student goals or the methods employed to achieve the
goals. In contrast, high expectations suggest that those goals that may positively
impact expectations and the sustaining of the goals are more likely to be reached.
Timperley and Phillips suggested that teacher expectations, self-efficacy, and self-
regulated learning provide the conceptual framework for positing the possibility of
changing and sustaining expectations through professional development. Con-
sideration of the impact of teacher expectations and the structures and systems

68
outlined in the literature leads to further inquiry into the importance of effective
classroom practices that facilitate academic achievement by African American
students.
Teacher expectations of student achievement are often based on beliefs
about race and student ability (Brown & Medway, 2007; Dusek & Joseph, 1983;
Ladson-Billings, 1999a, 1999b). The social construct of race can produce attitudes
and funds of knowledge that impact teacher perspectives about students of color.
As permeable mental structures, belief systems are susceptible to change based on
experience. The dual relationship between belief and practice is based on beliefs
being influenced by practical experiences and vice versa (Muijs & Reynolds,
2002). Gill and Reynolds (1999) found that teacher expectations had a direct
impact on academic achievement by low-income African American students. This
suggests that stigmatized groups such as African Americans are both prone to
adverse expectations by teachers and likely to have such expectations lead to self-
fulfilling prophecies of poor academic achievement. Low expectations are likely to
have sustaining effects on children’s performance and may be especially powerful
for young low-income African American children as they enter school (Gill &
Reynolds). Consequently, these beliefs become the goals for these students and the
instructional curriculum is in line with those expectations (Brown & Medway,
2007; Timperley & Phillips, 2003).
Despite claims of having high expectations for students of color, teachers
often demonstrate no visible signs of disappointment when students of color
perform poorly. Such nonverbal demonstrations suggest the true level of teacher
expectations. A teacher’s construct of race impacts the teacher’s self-efficacy.
Teacher self-efficacy increases when teachers address issues of race at the

69
classroom level because there is a reduction in teacher anxiety about the
capabilities of students of color (Singleton & Linton, 2006).
From a cognitive perspective, one of the most effective ways to change
beliefs is to present information that is discrepant with those beliefs. The change
process may be iterative in that changes in beliefs, actions, or outcomes are both
shaped by and built on each other (Timperley & Phillips, 2003). Timperley and
Phillips proposed that professional development should address student achieve-
ment, teachers’ sense of self-efficacy, and provision of domain-specific new knowl-
edge, such as how to teach a task or the nature of a task. This triangulated focus
helps to shape teacher goals for students, cues to which teachers attend, such as
achievement, self-esteem, and behavior, and monitoring of their behavior through
self-regulating activities, leading to more effective instructional practices.
Classroom instructional practices that have been effective for students in
high-poverty schools vary in the literature, although many are consistent through-
out. Instructional strategies related to constructing meaning for comprehension,
writing, developing oral language skills and phonics, and vocabulary development
have been effective. In some instances instruction based on Vygotsky’s theoretical
tenet of the zone of proximal development (ZPD) has been noted (Levine et al.,
2000). Levine (1994) found that implementation of the comprehensive develop-
ment instructional strategies program was an effective practice with African
American students. The instructional strategies embedded in this program included
higher-order thinking skills and metacognitive strategies included in regular class-
room instruction as a result of large-scale ongoing professional development.
Morris (2004) and Darling-Hammond (2000) reported highly qualified
teachers and stability of staff as contributors to increased achievement in African

70
American children. There should be a heavy reliance on the interrelationship
between parents and educators and a value of the African American repertoire and
interaction styles (Gay, 2000; Morris). Establishment of trust is critical. Supportive
classroom climate transcends race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and gender
(Brophy, 2000). Brophy contended that the teacher is a model, displaying maturity
and caring, connecting with and building on prior knowledge and experiences,
including culture. Cultural affirmation presented in various school milieus, such as
assemblies and hallway displays, rather than explicitly through curriculum, sug-
gests culturally responsive pedagogy and respect (Ladson-Billings, 1994). An
ambience and interaction style that fosters understanding of history and culture,
such as culturally relevant teaching and pedagogy, can contribute to greater
achievement by African American children (Gay; Ladson-Billings, 1994; Lynn,
2006). Schools with strong leadership and a school culture that promotes high
expectations for students’ achievement promote high performance in African
American students (Carter, 2000; Izumi, 2002; Levine, 1994). Cooperative learning
groups as an instructional strategy have been shown to be effective with African
American students (Denbo & Beaulieu, 2002; Levine). Academic achievement
increases with this group and with Latinos as a result of the implementation of this
strategy. Culture could be a causal factor in this achievement, as cultural patterns
within the historical context of their community are based more on cooperation and
interdependence than on individual/competitive independence, which is the Euro-
centric classroom instructional model (Levine). This speaks to the importance of
considering student culture in instructional program development and implementa-
tion (Bennett, 2001; Denbo & Beaulieu, 2002; Gay; Irvine & Armento, 2001;
Ormrod, 2006).

71
Conclusions
For several decades the education arena has acknowledged a gap between
the achievement of students of color and that of students from the White dominant
culture. There have been numerous attempts to address the causal factors for the
gap from several perspectives, including racial, sociocultural, and cognition. The
literature supports theoretical perspectives of race and culture and suggests motiva-
tion as a plausible explanation. Efforts have been made to narrow the gap through
legislation such as NCLB as part of a nation-wide thrust toward school reform.
Despite this achievement gap and the historical trends of underachievement docu-
mented for students of color, research-based structures and systems have contri-
buted to high student performance in high-poverty urban schools with high concen-
trations of students of color. Throughout the literature, research has shown the
importance of professional development, leadership, data-driven decision making,
goal setting, school climate/culture, parent involvement, and expectations as
organizational structures and systems implemented in high-performing high-
poverty schools. All of the studies in the reviewed literature were qualitative in
nature and did not sufficiently identify racialized structures and systems. Hence,
the literature has spurred further inquiry as to how the construct of race influences
the development and implementation of these structures and systems. Under the
overarching sociocultural framework, CRT serves as the overarching conceptual
framework for examining racialized school structures and systems. Inquiry into
how these systems and structures are implemented is warranted, as well as inquiry
regarding the instructional practices resulting from their implementation.
Inconsistencies in the research on barriers to achievement, such as noted in
Ogbu’s oppositional theory, suggest a more contextual nature to achievement

72
barriers. Therefore, focus should be placed more heavily on systemic school struc-
tures, rather than culture, and patterns of social inequality resulting from these
systems. The current literature leads to research on motivational factors related to
these structures and systems in addition to the generalizability of these structures
and systems.
The literature reflects a history of research on teacher expectations. The
impact of the construct of race as part of teacher belief systems has led to discourse
on its impact on student achievement. What still is not known is what school-wide
organizational structures or systems are in place to address this issue and their
possible impact on student achievement. Therefore, this study examines high-
performing, high-poverty urban schools within the context of race and the
interrelationship of motivational factors as they affect student achievement.

73
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
Historically, African American students have been denied equitable access
to educational opportunities in the United States. Many of these students reside in
impoverished areas where the opportunities for access and achievement are com-
promised as a result of numerous factors, including inadequate funding, unqualified
teachers, and lack of rigorous curriculum and instruction (Darling-Hammond,
2000; Haycock et al., 1999; Johnson, 2002; Marzano, 2003). The gap in achieve-
ment between African American students and their White counterparts is well
documented throughout the literature (Education Trust, 2004; Johnson; Marzano).
In contrast to this trend of low achievement as outlined in the research, some
African American students and other students of color are meeting with success, as
evidenced in their high performance despite the social circumstances of poverty
(Carter, 2000; Izumi, 2002; Pressley et al., 2004; Reeves, 2004). Through this study
the researcher attempted to address why some schools are meeting with success in
light of the historical achievement disparities between the two aforementioned
groups.
The purpose of the study was to examine organizational structures and
systems that lead to high performance in students of color in high-poverty urban
schools. The focus of the study was on the impact of the construct of race and
teacher expectations as mediating factors of student achievement. The study
examined the causes of the disparities in achievement and the structures and
systems within the educational system and their effectiveness in addressing the
disparities. The goal of the study was to determine what organizational structures

74
and systems facilitate the most effective school-wide instructional practices that
contribute to high performance in high-poverty urban schools.
To conduct the overarching inquiry of the study, four research questions
were addressed:
1. What are the trends and patterns of performance among students of
color?
2. What organizational structures and systems are perceived to contribute to
high student performance in high-poverty urban schools with large concentrations
of students of color?
3. How are the organizational structures and systems implemented to sup-
port school-wide effective classroom instruction that promotes student learning?
4. How is the construct of race reflected in the school’s structures and
systems?
Role of the Researcher
The researcher served as the primary instrument in this study. According to
Merriam (1998), “In a qualitative study the investigator is the primary instrument
for gathering and analyzing data and, as such, can respond to the situation by
maximizing opportunities for collecting and producing meaningful information”
(p. 20). The current study was qualitative in nature. Qualitative study involves
having close personal contact with the participants of the study and the situation
(Patton, M. Q., 2002). To that end, the researcher engaged the participants over a 6-
day period to collect data through observations, interviews, and review of artifacts
to maintain the authenticity and integrity of the study.

75
Research Development
The theoretical framework for this study was designed in collaboration with
a thematic dissertation group. The theoretical framework was derived as a result of
the orientation that each member of the cohort brought to the discussion of the
study. Orientation of the cohort members refers to the perspective from which they
viewed the study, such as from a social cognitive, sociocultural, racial, or motiva-
tional perspective. Merriam (1998) referred to theoretical framework as the
“structure, scaffolding and frame of the study” (p. 45). The doctoral students in the
cohort engaged in extensive discourse about the disparate achievement gap between
students of color and their counterparts in the dominant culture. The gap in
achievement was determined to be a starting point for exploring why, despite an
historical trend of low achievement in students of color, there are some schools in
which this trend has been reversed and students are performing above traditional
expectations. Based on that discourse, the group decided to explore educational
practices resulting from specific organizational structures and systems within the
school that facilitated high performance (see Figure 5).
Selection Process
A cohort of 17 doctoral (Ed.D.) students from the University of Southern
California’s Rossier School of Education formed the thematic dissertation group
and determined the criteria for schools to be included in the study. The schools
were selected through purposeful sampling (Patton, M. Q., 2002) based on criteria
defined by the group. Purposeful sampling was selected because it enables the
researcher to identify specific types and numbers of cases, depending on the pur-
pose of the study and available resources. The purpose and rationale of the study
are the criteria by which a sample is judged. This qualitative methodology, as

76

Figure 5. Theoretical framework for the study of high-performing/high-poverty

schools.described by M. Q. Patton, provides information-rich in-depth insight about
issues of central importance to the purpose of the study. Also known as purposive
or judgment sampling, the selection method provides an in-depth understanding of
an issue rather than empirical generalizations. The sample in this study was judged
in context with consideration for the depth of the study. The following criteria were
applied for selection of the study school: (a) urban school district within an area of
high population density and where a majority of students enrolled were from
historically disenfranchised and marginalized populations, such as African
American, Hispanic/Latino, or indigenous people; (b) school within the district

77
with a school-wide trajectory of API growth over 3 years, including all subgroups
within minimal movement of two deciles within 3-5 years; (c) at least 75% of the
students receiving free/reduced-price lunch; and (d) school enrollment of at least
400, 700, and 1,000 for elementary, middle, and high schools, respectively.
Following extensive dialogue about the criteria, the cohort searched the
CDE Web site (CDE, 2007) to gather a pool of schools for the study. Additional
Web sites, including Just for Kids and Moving Up, were reviewed as part of the
search. An in-depth analysis of the Web sites was conducted to ensure that schools
met the criteria of prekindergarten through grade 12 high-performing high-poverty
schools. Analysis of the above stated Web sites led to establishment of a pool of
schools. Several members of the cohort considered location of the school in making
their decisions. For some students, the school for study had to be accessible in
terms of proximity to the student’s work location; others considered proximity to
their residence.
Of the 17 students in the thematic dissertation cohort, 15 chose to study an
elementary school and 2 chose to study a high school. Schools were chosen using
purposeful sampling, as noted earlier in this chapter.
Description of the District
The Outstanding Unified School District (pseudonym) is a large urban
district located in southern California. Based on the 2006-2007 demographics,
78,000 (11.2%) were identified as African American. The majority of students in
the district (516,000 or 73%) were identified as Hispanic, following by White
(62,000, 8.9%), Asian (26,600, 3.6%), Filipino (15,800, 2.2%), and Pacific Islander
(2,200, 0.3%). The district had 635 Title I schools. The 2006 base API scores for

78
the district and for African American students were 655 and 606, respectively. The
majority of the students were English Language Learners (ELL) and received free/
reduced-price lunches. Factual information about the participants and the district
are presented in the study; however, pseudonyms were assigned to protect the
anonymity of the district and schools.
Description of the School
Educational Excellence High School (pseudonym) is a comprehensive high
school in the Outstanding Unified School District with grades 9 through 12. It is
located in a densely populated area within the boundaries of the large urban school
district. For purposes of this study, the school is referred to as an urban school
based on the study criteria.
The student population of the school (3,800) included 58% Hispanic, 18%
White, 12.8% Asian, 6.9% African American, 3.8% Filipino, 0.2% American
Indian or Alaska Native, and 0.3% Pacific Island students. The school reported that
approximately 66% of the students received free/reduced-price lunches and 25%
were ELL students. The school’s API scores had increased over a 3-year period.
The school met all of the study criteria, with the exception of the high-poverty cri-
terion. The cohort decided that at least 75% of the students enrolled in the school
had to be receiving free/reduced-price lunches. With a documented 66% of the
students receiving free/reduced-price lunches, there was a discrepancy between the
criterion and the reported percentage. This deviation from the criteria was discussed
by the cohort and the dissertation chairs. It was the consensus of the group to pro-
ceed with the selected school for the study. The cohort considered possible errors in
reporting and submitting information by high school students due to the social

79
stigma that students may feel regarding the implications of the socioeconomic
status associated with free/reduced-price lunches. With that in mind, the researcher
proceeded to use the selected high school for the focus of the study.
The school was distinguished from other high schools in the district by
several reasons. With a trajectory of improved achievement over the past several
years, this high school was of great interest to the researcher, primarily due to its
implementation of a specific program. The We Are One program (pseudonym) was
started by three African American teachers at the school as a result of their concern
about the low academic performance of the school’s African American students.
Since the implementation of this intervention, API scores for African American
students had increased, thus increasing the overall scores of the student population.
The improvement trajectory of the school had led to it being named a California
Distinguished School. Table 4 indicates the achievement trajectory as reflected in
the API scores of African American students. Scores for the 2006-2007 school year
exceeded the targeted growth by 15 points, with the 2007 score of 702.

Table 4

Achievement Trajectory of African American Students as Reflected
in Academic Performance Index (API)

Year/
Year/growth Year/base API growth target Year/growth

2005/664 2004/627 2004-2005/5 2004-2005/37
2006/693 2005/664 2005-2006/3 2005-2006/29
2007/702 2006/687 2006-20076 2006-2007/15

80
Sampling Strategies
Specific strategies were used to analyze the study data. Purposeful sampling
was used. With this type of sampling the researcher identified specific types and
numbers of cases, depending on the purpose of the study and available resources.
The purpose and rationale of the study were the criteria by which the sample was
judged, with consideration for the depth of the study. This type of sampling focuses
on information-rich cases because the study of such cases provides in-depth
information in response to the questions being studied (Patton, M. Q., 2002).
Unique case orientation captures the details of the individual case about organiza-
tional structures and systems that are being implemented in the particular setting
under study. The researcher in the current study looked for emerging patterns or
themes and interrelationships between structures, systems, and their implementa-
tion. These interrelationships formed the inductive analysis strategy. The researcher
examined interdependence of systems and their relationship to student perform-
ance. Context sensitivity was addressed through a sociocultural and historical per-
spective, with an historical overview of factors leading to the academic disparities
between students of color and students from the dominant culture. Figure 5 illus-
trates the interconnectedness of sociocultural historical influences and school
organization structures and systems as they influence student achievement.
Data Collection Procedures
A written invitation to participate in the study was extended to the school by
the researcher. Following a meeting with the school administrator regarding the
research and procedures, a schedule was established between the administrator and
the researcher for days of observations and interviews. Data were collected through

81
observations, review of artifacts, and semistructured interviews. Multiple methods
of observations were used because each method could result in different aspects of
empirical data. Such methods provided several perspectives, as the data were
collected from grade-level teacher chairpersons, school administrators, classified
staff, and parents. Multiple data sources were utilized to decrease the possibility of
errors linked to a particular method, thus providing cross-data validity checks and
allowing strong research inquiry based on the strengths of the methods. Although
different approaches to data collection yielded different results, triangulated data
provided insight into the relationship between inquiry approach and the phenome-
non being studied (Patton, M. Q., 2002).
Observations
The 17-member thematic dissertation group developed an observation guide
consistent with the theoretical framework and research questions. Observations
were recorded through scripting. Observational data should provide a description of
the setting that was observed, including the activities that took place in the setting.
It should also include the participants in the activities. The description offered
accurate, factual, and thorough information with minimal irrelevant information
(Patton, M. Q., 2002). Observations were open-ended and focused. Both are useful
in gathering information although the latter method is more specific. Observations
were recorded for inclusion in the research report. They capture the context within
which the people interacted, which is an important component of observation from
a holistic perspective (Patton). The thematic group determined that observations
should include but not be limited to the physical setting of the school, classroom
arrangement, evidence of student work, visible representation of standards and

82
schedules, student engagement/time on task, and materials, such as books, that
reflected multiple cultures.
Interviews
Interviews were semistructured. In qualitative investigation these types of
interview questions are more flexibly worded or a mixture of more or less struc-
tured inquiry (Merriam, 1998). A list of questions and issues was composed to
“allow the researcher to respond to the situation at hand, to the emerging world-
view of the respondent and to new ideas on the topic” (p. 74). Interview data
consisted of verbatim quotations from the respondents resulting from transcriptions
of the tape-recorded interviews. These quotations, with sufficient context for inter-
pretation, allowed for more in-depth responses about the respondents’ experiences,
perceptions, and feelings and opinions, as well as their level of knowledge (Patton,
M. Q., 2002). The thematic dissertation group determined who would be inter-
viewed and developed an interview protocol. The following individuals were inter-
viewed for the study: school principal, three assistant principals, ELA teachers,
veteran and new teachers, and the school leadership team (SLT). The school office
manager and custodian were interviewed as representative of classified staff, and
several parents were interviewed consistent with the ethnic demographics of the
school. The interview protocol indicated that the interview was not an evaluation of
performance when presented to the teachers. Prior to the beginning of the inter-
views, an interview plan was developed (Patton). An interview plan is developed as
part of qualitative methodology to serve as a sequential guide for inquiry during the
course of the interview. The plan was meant to ensure that the same basic line of
inquiry was used with each interviewee (Patton). Questions were asked in a manner

83
designed to encourage spontaneity and to engage the interviewee in conversation
while remaining focused on the topic. Interviews were recorded using a digital
recorder. Recording the interview facilitated continued eye contact and flow of
conversation. Each interview was transcribed and the researcher’s notes were
reviewed after each interview.
Artifacts
Artifacts constituted part of the repertoire of resources for this study
because they were a rich source of information. Artifacts can not only provide
direct information but can also serve as a stimulus for further inquiry (Patton, M.
Q., 2002). “For documents, it is helpful to note whether the information represents
primary material (such as information directly from the people or situation under
study or secondary material, such as secondhand accounts of the people or situation
written by others” (Creswell, 2003, p. 190). The thematic dissertation group deter-
mined that the artifacts to be used in this study would include but not be limited to
student records, such as report cards, cumulative records, and assessment results;
and student portfolios, attendance records, bulletins, and other written communica-
tions. Artifacts consist of rich sources of data that reveal equities and inequities
within school systems (Johnson, 2002; Merriam, 1998). Artifacts are reflective of
the school culture and the systems in place. Information taken from the collected
artifacts in the current study provided insight into how students were graded, disci-
plined, and recognized throughout the school. A complete list of artifacts collected
is located in Table 5.

84

Table 5

Artifacts Collected as Data for the Study Related to Research Questions (RQ)

Artifact RQ1
a
RQ2 RQ3 RQ4

From administration:
Meeting agendas X X X X
Master calendar X
Classroom configuration X X X X
School-wide discipline plan X X X
School-wide schedule X X
Staff profiles in school report cards X
Mission/vision school site plan X X X
Parental involvement plan X X
Professional development agendas X X X
School site council agendas X X X X
District assessments X X
Referrals X X X X
Volunteer schedule X X X
Grading procedures X X X X
Blank report card X X

From teachers:
Assessments X X X X
Curriculum materials X X X
Grading rubric(s) X X X
Grading procedures X X X
Classroom discipline plan X X X
Samples of standards-based
unidentified student work X X X

From parents:
Volunteer schedule
Parent meeting agendas
Student artifacts provided voluntarily

a
RQ 1 = performance trends, RQ2 = systems and structures, RQ3 = school-wide
instruction, RQ4 = constructs of race.

85
Conceptual Framework for the Research Questions
Research question 1 asked, What are the trends and patterns of perform-
ance among students of color? A variety of data is needed to understand how
schools function on behalf of students’ growth and development. The researcher
considered not only student scores on standardized tests but also other forms of
assessment and other artifacts to obtain a global view of student performance and to
determine what, if any, interventions had been implemented to facilitate perform-
ance. The conceptual frameworks of social and cultural capital formed the basis of
addressing trends and patterns of performance among students of color. While
examining the artifacts that revealed data indicative of student performance, con-
sideration was given to the resources or capital that students bring to the learning
process and how, if at all, they were used within the school’s organizational
structures and systems. Table 6 shows how the research questions for the study
were aligned with the theoretical frameworks for the study.
Research question 2 asked, What organizational structures and systems are
perceived to contribute to high student performance in high-poverty urban schools
with large concentrations of students of color? The researchers sought to identify
the organizational structures and systems that facilitated high performance in high-
poverty urban schools with high concentrations of students of color. The study
focused on African American students, while addressing teacher expectations and
goal setting. The theoretical framework that formed the foundation for addressing
this question was based on the premise that multiple key school-based factors work
together in a systematically integrated system to establish a belief system that
affects teacher goal setting and expectations and their impact on student achieve-
ment. Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model served as the theoretical framework

86
Table 6

Alignment of Research Questions With Theoretical Framework

Research question Theoretical framework

1. What are the trends and patterns of
performance among students of color?
Social and cultural capital (Bourdieu,
Coleman, Ogbu, Stanton-Salazar)
2. What organizational structures and systems
are perceived to contribute to high student
performance in high-poverty urban schools
with large concentrations of students of
color?
Ecological model (Bronfenbrenner)
3. How are the organizational structures and
systems implemented to support school-
wide effective classroom instruction that
promotes student learning?
Sociocultural theory of learning
(Vygotsky)
4. How is the construct of race reflected in the
school’s structures and systems?
Critical race theory (Ladson-Billings)

for this premise. In addressing the research question from this framework, the study
addressed student achievement (behavior) as a result of the shared function of
student development and the environment that entailed the social, physical, and
cultural aspects of the environment, such as the school, family, and neighborhood.
Research question 3 asked, How are the organizational structures and
systems implemented to support school-wide effective classroom instruction that
promotes student learning? Based on a sociocultural framework, including
Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context, this question explored the
instructional strategies utilized by the school resulting from the school’s structures
and systems. Vygotsky’s theoretical framework led to inquiry regarding the social
and cultural underpinnings of classroom practices. It examined how these strategies

87
were communicated to school staff and monitored and how feedback was provided
to systematically inform teachers in the pursuit of continued implementation.
Research question 4 asked, How is the construct of race reflected in the
school’s structures and systems? Understanding that race is a social construct that
affects various institutions in the United States, including education, it was import-
ant to address this issue. The historic documentation of educational disenfranchise-
ment of students of color led to the need to examine the extent to which this con-
struct currently influences student achievement, particularly in high-performing
high-poverty urban schools. The construct of race was examined through the lens
of CRT. The construct of race impacts belief systems and has worked from a deficit
model. CRT challenges this perspective and examines the construct of race that
defies the negative beliefs of race. Throughout the collection of data, the researcher
looked for signs of the positive or asset model of a belief system, building on the
social and cultural capital of the students.
Data Analysis Procedures
Data analysis is an iterative process that continues throughout the research
study. The process involves memoing, data entry, storage, coding, and developing a
system of categorization. Memoing throughout the process involves recording
reflective notes regarding what is gleaned from the data. This was done at the com-
pletion of each interview and included ideas and insights as additional data were
collected. Interviews were audio taped. Notes were taken in the event of equipment
failure. The notes reflected information about artifacts, such as documents, or other
materials, as well as key ideas in the documents (Creswell, 2003). Artifacts were
maintained in a coded notebook to facilitate access for analysis. Data from

88
interviews and observations, as well as memos, were transcribed using word
processing software.
Detailed analysis of the data began with a coding process. This process
involves dividing data into analytical units through segmenting and chunking.
Coding entailed marking the segments of data with symbols or some form of
description, such as names or a phrase, based on the actual language of the partici-
pants, often referred to as an in vivo term (Creswell, 2003). A master list of codes
was maintained throughout the research study. Figure 6 outlines Creswell’s
sequence of data analysis.
Validity and Confidence Findings
With qualitative inquiry, validity is dependent on the depth or richness of
the information obtained from the sample and the skills of the researcher in terms
of observation and analysis. “Validity is seen as a strength in qualitative research,
but it is used to suggest determining whether the findings are accurate from the
standpoint of the researcher, the participant or the readers of the study” (Creswell,
2003, p. 196). Validity and confidence in findings were addressed through data
triangulation. Triangulation in qualitative inquiry is accomplished by combining
data from several sources. In this study the data sources were semistructured inter-
views, observations, and artifacts. Through triangulation the various sources of data
were analyzed for evidence that was useful in building a coherent justification for
themes or patterns. Strategies were implemented to reduce threats to validity and
reliability while ensuring credibility of the research findings.

89

Figure 6. Process of data analysis: Creswell data analysis graph. Source: Research
Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches (3rd ed.), by
J. W. Creswell, 2003, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ethical Considerations
The proposal was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the
University of Southern California to ensure that human research protocols were
appropriately followed. Written consent was obtained from all participants prior to
the beginning of the research to ensure that their participation was voluntary. All
interviews, tapes, and case study notes were regarded as confidential data and were
destroyed at the conclusion of the study. Pseudonyms were used to protect the
anonymity of the participants.

90
CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS, ANALYSIS, AND DISCUSSION
Introduction
Chapter 4 presents the findings from a case study the purpose of which was
to examine the organizational structures and systems that are perceived to contri-
bute to high performance in high-poverty urban schools with large concentrations
of students of color. It began with an examination of the causes of the historical
trend of disparities in achievement between African American students and White
students and the effectiveness of structures and systems within the educational
system in an effort to narrow the historical achievement disparity. The study
focused specifically on the impact of race and teacher expectations as mediating
factors of student achievement.
The findings in this case study were directly related to the following four
research questions:
1. What are the trends and patterns of performance among students of
color?
2. What organizational structures and systems are perceived to contribute to
high student performance in high-poverty urban schools with high concentrations
of students of color?
3. How are the organizational structures and systems implemented to
support school-wide effective classroom instruction that promote student learning?
4. How is the construct of race reflected in the school’s structures and
systems?

91
Methodology
Although the African American student population was only 6.9% (approxi-
mately 267) of the 3,800 students in the case study school, this proportion is signi-
ficant in that this population has demonstrated an improvement trajectory over the
past 3 years. These students were the focal group of the study. The 10- week study
included classroom observations and observations of the overall physical environ-
ment, nutrition period, and students’ passing periods. An observation protocol was
developed by the thematic dissertation group to serve as a guide for directing docu-
mentation of the observations. Observational data were examined in relation to the
research questions. Interviews were conducted with school administrators, class-
room teachers, parents, and classified staff. Interview questions aligned with the
research questions were developed by the thematic dissertation group and differen-
tiated according to personnel classification. Table 7 presents an overview of the
interviewees; racial demographics are included.
Description of the School
One comprehensive ethnically diverse high school within a large urban
district in southern California was chosen for this qualitative case study, having met
the criteria established by the thematic dissertation group prior to conducting
research. As noted in chapter 3, 68% of the students were eligible for free or
reduced-price lunch. Although the dissertation group set 75% eligibility for
free/reduced-price lunch as the criteria for high poverty, it was decided that the
percentage at this school was acceptable for high poverty due to the margin of error
in terms of reporting that tends to be consistent with high school students.
The school has received state recognition for its achievement. The school is
diverse in its programmatic implementation. It offers a humanities magnet school

92
Table 7

Overview of the Interviewees

Years of
Interviewee service Race
a

Administrator A About 25 W
Administrator B About 20 W
Administrator C 12 H
Administrator D Unknown A
Teacher A About 25 B
Teacher B Over 30 W
Teacher C First year B
Teacher D Over 20 B
Teacher E 5 W
Classified A Unknown W
Classified B Unknown H
Parent A Unknown B
Parent B Unknown H

a
W = White, B = Black/African American, H = Hispanic, A = Asian.

and residential community school. Several nontraditional courses of study are
offered through small learning communities (SLC). Thematic in nature, the SLC
enrollment is based on student interests, with a focus on academics, service learn-
ing, mentoring and the arts. Students may have some of the same teachers through-
out their high school career while in the SLC. These SLCs provide a diverse pro-
gram with greater opportunities for individualized and small group instructional
practices and opportunities to build relationships with other students and staff.
The catchment areas for the high school represent an economically and
socially diverse spectrum of students ranging from upper middle class

93
socioeconomic status (SES) to federal housing projects for low-income families.
Although the majority of the students reside in the surrounding neighborhoods, the
majority of magnet students are transported via bus from a wide area in the greater
urban community. The school is also a Capacity Adjustment Program (CAP)
receiver school. By serving in this capacity, the school receives the overflow of
students from three large high schools within the adjacent communities that have
reached maximum capacity in student enrollment. For the 2006-2007 school year
approximately 68% of the students received free or reduced-price lunches through
the federal school lunch program. This Title I school with an enrollment of 3,800
students has a 42.6% transience rate. The school offers Advanced Placement (AP)
classes and honors-level classes. College enrichment programs include the
University of California Berkeley Pre-Collegiate and the Posse Foundation.
Teacher Profiles
Research suggests that high-poverty urban schools with large concentra-
tions of students of color are more likely than schools in more affluent, predomin-
antly White areas to have poorly qualified and inexperienced teachers (Darling-
Hammond, 2000; Gay, 2000; Ladson-Billings, 1999a). Disaggregated data on
teacher experience and stability at Educational Excellence High School (EEHS; a
pseudonym) would suggest a contradiction to that premise. Table 8 summarizes the
teaching staff profile for the high school. Table 9 and Figure 7 summarize the
ethnicity data for teachers at the high school, and Figure 8 displays the ethnicity
data for the district.
As seen in the data, the majority of the teachers at EEHS are White but the
majority of the students are of color. The significance of this demographic is noted

94
Table 8

Teaching Staff Profile for Educational Excellence High School, 2006-2007

Group and category f

Teaching staff data
Certificated management 6
Certificated teachers 124
Certificated others 9

Teaching staff status
Continuing 98
Probationary 23
Temporary 8
Provisional 3
District intern/trainee 3
University intern 3
Extended substitute 0

Teaching experience at the high school
1 year 0
2-5 years 11
6-10 years 58
11 or more years 31

Teaching experience in the district
1 year 32
2-5 years 40
6-10 years 24
11 or more years 32

in that the focus of the study addresses the construct of race and teacher expecta-
tions as mediating factors of student achievement. The key system that may impact
student achievement is the belief system of the school, which may well reflect the
belief systems of the teachers. School systems are addressed further in this chapter.
The literature suggests that high-poverty urban schools are often staffed
with teachers who are not credentialed and are teaching outside their subject area of
expertise (Barth, 2000; Darling-Hammond, 2000). Table 10 indicates the number of

95
Table 9

Ethnicity of Teachers at the High School and Their Proportion in the District,
2006-2007 (N = 152)

Ethnicity f % of high school % of district

American Indian 0 0.0 0.6
Asian 13 8.6 8.9
Pacific Islander 0 0.0 0.3
Filipino 2 1.3 2.6
Hispanic 25 16.4 29.7
African American 18 11.8 12.3
White 94 61.8 45.4
Multiple/no response 0 0.0 0.2

Source: California Department of Education, Educational Demographics Office,
by California Department of Education, 2008a, retrieved April 27, 2008, from
http://www.ed-dataK12.ca.us.Navigation/fsTwoPanel.asp?bottom=%2

Table 10

Teacher Credential Status at the High School, 2004-2007

Status 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007

With full credential 132 136 142
Without full credential 19 14 10
Teaching outside subject area of competency 144 150 126

Source: California Department of Education, Educational Demographics Office,
by California Department of Education, 2008a, retrieved April 27, 2008, from
http://www.ed-dataK12.ca.us.Navigation/fsTwoPanel.asp?bottom=%2

96

Figure 7. Ethnic distribution of teachers at the high school, 2006-2007.

Figure 8. Ethnic distribution of teachers in the district, 2006-2007.
0%
9%
0%
1%
16%
12%
62%
0%
Am. In.
Asian
Pac. Is.
Filipino
Hispanic
Af. Am.
White
No Resp.
1%
9%
0%
3%
30%
12%
45%
0%
Am. In.
Asian
Pac. Is.
Filipino
Hispanic
Af. Am.
White
No Resp.

97
teachers assigned to the school with and without full credentials and those who are
teaching outside their area of competence. It must be noted that, at the secondary
level, this count is at the course assignment level and is a duplicated count of
teachers (California Department of Education, 2007).
These teacher profiles suggest that EEHS has a stable and experienced
teaching staff. Ninety-three percent of the teachers are certificated, 73% are con-
tinuing teachers, 44% have been teaching at the same location for 6-10 years, and
26% have been at this high school for 11 or more years. There is variance in the
length of teaching service within the District; Twenty-nine percent have been
employed in the district for 2-5 years and 23% have been employed in the district
for only 1 year or for 11 or more years. The number of credentialed teachers has
increased over 3 years. Teacher credentialing has been noted in the research as a
negative factor in high-poverty urban schools due to the higher number of noncre-
dentialed teachers in those schools than in more affluent areas (Barth et al., 1999;
Darling-Hammond, 2000). The ratio of fully credentialed teachers and the ethnic
make-up and longevity of the teaching staff are atypical of large urban schools with
large concentrations of students of color.
Findings for Research Question 1
Research question 1 asked, What are the trends and patterns of perform-
ance among students of color? The overall theoretical framework is sociocultural
theories of learning. The theory of social and cultural capital formed the conceptual
framework for this inquiry. This question addresses the concept that high-perform-
ing schools have multiple factors at work that interact as systems. Consistent with
sociocultural theories of learning, research suggests that resources or capital that

98
students bring to the learning process from their home or community cultures
should be considered as factors that affect student learning as well as the capital
through structures and systems of the school itself. These factors serve as mediating
influences in student learning and development. While examining the trends and
patterns of achievement at EEHS, consideration was given to the historical negative
trajectories of achievement of the focal group in comparison to those of White
students as presented in the literature.
Trends and Patterns
Academic Performance Index
For the 2006-2007 school year African American students surpassed
previous scores as seen in an API score of over 700 achieved by this subgroup.
This surpasses the three year achievement trajectory that was determined by the
thematic dissertation group at the beginning of the study. Although indicative of a
gap between that subgroup and White students, the API scores for African-
American have increased consistently from the year 2000.
The most significant improvement in API scores is evident for the 2003-
2004 school year at which time the API for this subgroup increased by 56 points.
That year was the beginning of student participation in the recently organized
We Are One, a program focused on motivation and empowerment for African
American students. Table 11 and Figures 9 through 13 reflect the trend in growth
and base scores for subgroups from 2000 to 2007.
Figure 9 reflects a comparison of API scores for all subgroups reflecting the
base score and the growth score. Figures 10 through 13 indicate the growth and
base scores for each individual subgroup for 2000-2007. (The base score for the

99

100

Figure 9. Overall school Academic Performance Index (API) scores 2000-2007.

Figure 10. Academic Performance Index (API) scores for African American
students, 2000-2007.

Figure 11. Academic Performance Index (API) scores for Asian students, 2000-
2007.

101

Figure 12. Academic Performance Index (API) scores for Hispanic students, 2000-
2007.

Figure 13. Academic Performance Index (API) scores for White students, 2000-
2007.

school and the subgroups is not reflected in the 2007 data because it was not
available at the time of the study.) It should be noted that, despite the steady
increase in API scores for African American students, their achievement based on
this standardized measure continues to reflect an achievement disparity between
White students and this subgroup at EEHS. However, although the dominant
subgroup has higher scores, their gains have not been as large as that of African
American students. The same comparison can be made with Asian students, who,
although scoring higher than African American students, did not have the

102
significant gains noted for the latter subgroup. It should be noted that Hispanic
students scored lower than any of the other subgroups on the assessment measure;
however, they, too, have made gains over the course of the same time period.
Figure 14 reflects only the growth score of each subgroup from 2000 through 2007.

Figure 14. Growth Academic Performance Index (API) scores for all subgroups,
2000-2007.

The year 2004 marked the beginning of the We Are One program, at which
time API scores increased to an even greater extent. The founders or elders are all
African American and are Afrocentric in their approach to students. Teacher
interviews suggest that the content of the program and teachers who facilitate its
implementation are culturally responsive to participants. Being culturally respons-
ive as part of school organizational systems, as posited in the literature, more
effectively engages students in the learning process, thus providing greater oppor-
tunities to learn (Gay, 2000; Irvine & Armento, 2001).
Central to its programmatic thrust are issues that are relevant to the social
and cultural environment in and outside of the school. Such an approach serves as a

103
framework for the social and cultural capital asserted in the literature (Coleman,
1988). Salazar’s conceptual framework of social capital examines socialization of
racial minorities in the context of the mechanisms of a mainstream institution such
as the school. That may account for difficulties in the accumulation of social capital
for low-SES students such as those at EEHS. However, their involvement in the We
Are One program has led to the establishment of relationships with teachers and
others at the school who have control of resources that facilitate greater access for
these students. Establishment of these relationships is important because the
relationships counter what literature posits as the inequity of opportunity for
students of color entering different social and institutional contexts that lead to the
establishment of such relationships. Difficulty in establishing relationships limits
access to resources. The resources provided by this program may have served as
capital to support students’ educational programs. Teacher interviews supported the
importance of relationships and trust between teachers and students and their effect
on student motivation to achieve. This point is discussed in greater detail later in
the chapter.
Standardized Testing and Report-
ing: California Standards Test
Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) was developed specifically for
California by California educators and test developers. These tests are part of the
structures put in place by the state of California to measure progress toward
California’s state-adopted academic content standards. The standards describe what
students should know and be able to do in each grade and subject. Multiple-choice
California Standards Tests (CSTs) in various subjects are administered to students
in grades 2 through 11, and students in grades 4 and 7 complete a writing

104
assessment as part of the CST ELA test (California Department of Education,
2008b). An examination of the school’s CST scores suggests that more African
American students are performing at the Basic level than at other levels on this
performance test and that fewer are performing Far Below Basic than at any other
level. However, a combination of the Basic, Below Basic, and Far Below Basic
percentages for African American and Latino students far exceeds this combination
for White students, despite of the gains. The above CST data do not include Asian
students because district data for that group were not available at the time of the
study. ELL students and Students With Disabilities are not included as focal groups
in this study. However, instructional obstacles are noted in the data germane to the
latter group when addressing the obstacle that the school has encountered in main-
taining its high performance (see Tables 12 and 13 and Figures 15 and 16).
Advanced Placement Courses and
California High School Exit Exam
Required A-G courses for the University of California system are offered at
EEHS. A-G courses are 15 year-long courses taken during high school, 7 of which
must be taken the last 2 years of high school. The courses are history/social science
(2 years required), English (4 years required), mathematics (3 years required),
laboratory science (2 years required), language other than English (2 years
required), visual and performing arts (1 year required), and college preparatory
electives (1 year required; University of California, 2008). It is recommended that
more than the required number of years be taken in mathematics, laboratory science
and language other than English. Students must pass with a grade of C or better for
consideration at the University of California.

105
Table 12

Results of California Standards Tests (CST) in English Language Arts at the High
School, 2007

Percentage of students in each proficiency level
Group f FBB BB B P A

All 2,775 10.9 17.1 24.3 23.6 24.1
Black 199 12.1 22.1 27.1 23.6 15.1
Hispanic 1,601 15.1 21.9 29.5 22.9 10.6
White 489 5.7 7.4 14.5 24.3 48.1
ELL 550 34.4 40.7 20.2 3.8 0.9
SWD 193 42.0 38.3 16.1 3.1 0.5

Note. FBB = Far Below Basic, BB = Below Basic, P = Proficient, A = Advanced,
ELL = English Language Learners, SWD = Students With Disabilities.

Table 13

Results of California Standards Tests (CST) in Mathematics at the High School,
2007

Percentage of students in each proficiency level
Group f FBB BB B P A

All 2,333 7.8 22.1 28.9 27.9 13.3
Black 146 8.9 30.1 34.2 19.9 6.8
Hispanic 1,304 10.6 28.5 32.3 24.1 4.5
White 432 4.2 14.6 24.8 36.3 20.1
ELL 424 22.9 38.4 23.6 12.0 3.1
SWD 138 37.7 41.3 15.2 5.8 0.0

Note. FBB = Far Below Basic, BB = Below Basic, P = Proficient, A = Advanced,
ELL = English Language Learners, SWD = Students With Disabilities.

106

Figure 15. Results of California Standards Tests (CST) in English Language Arts at
the High School by ethnicity, 2007.

Figure 16. Results of California Standards Tests (CST) in Mathematics at the High
School by ethnicity, 2007.

107
Time limitations of the study did not allow the researcher access to the
school staff who maintain data on these courses. Figure 17 and Table 14 reflect
enrollment data for A-G course requirements in the district and completion of high
school graduation requirements at EEHS compared to the district, respectively.
Figure 17 displays the percentage of students who met all state and local graduation
requirements for grade 12 completion, including having passed the California High
School Exit Examination (CAHSEE) or received a local waiver or state exemption.
The graduation rate for EEHS is 85.1%.
Research suggests that fewer African American students across the nation
are enrolled in AP classes as compared to their White counterparts (Johnson, 2002).
EEHS offers AP classes in the following subjects: Physics, Spanish Language,
Spanish Literature, Art, Art History, English Literature, Chemistry, Biology,
Government, European History, French, and Calculus. School data indicate an
enrollment of 907 students in the school’s 12 AP classes, and two or three periods
are offered for several of the classes. This number may be magnified because one
student may be enrolled in more than one class. Disaggregation of the data by race
revealed that only 28 African American students were enrolled in AP classes, of
whom 5 are taking more than one AP class. Thus, only 0.03% of the students
taking AP classes are African American. The remaining racial group enrollment in
AP classes is as follows: White 266, Hispanic 259, Asian 324, Filipino 28, and
Other 6. The aforementioned numerical data and those noted in Figure 10 should be
viewed with caution, as some students were enrolled in more than one of the AP
classes. The largest enrollments for Hispanic students in AP classes were in AP
Spanish Language and AP Spanish Literature. Asian enrollment was heavily

108

Figure 17. District enrollment in A-G courses by ethnicity, 2007-2008.

Table 14

Percentages of 12th-Grade Students at the Study High School and in the District
Meeting Graduation Requirements

Student group School District

All Students 98 92
African American 100 89
American Indian or Alaska Native N/A 93
Asian 100 97
Filipino 100 98
Hispanic or Latino 95 91
Pacific Islander N/A 91
White (not Hispanic) 99 98
Socioeconomically disadvantaged 84 75
English Language Learners 92 84
Students With Disabilities 96 92

109
represented in AP calculus, AP biology, and AP physics. Table 15 summarizes AP
demographic enrollment at EEHS during the study year.

Table 15

Enrollment, Percentages of Total Enrollment, Students in Advanced Placement
(AP) Classes, and Percentages of Total Enrollment Enrolled in AP Classes, by
Ethnicity

% of AP % of total
Ethnicity Enrollment enrollment students enrollment in AP

African American 267 6.9 28 24
White 363 12.1 266 45
Hispanic 2,063 68.7 259 26
Asian 252 8.4 324 25
Filipino 108 3.6 28 12
Other 14 <1 6 <1

The literature reports dropout rates for African American and White
students (Johnson, 2002). EEHS provides instructional interventions in the form of
tutoring to support students who are struggling to prepare for the CAHSEE, another
structure required for all high school students prior to graduating from high school.
Tables 16 through 18 show disaggregated data by ethnicity of students taking and
passing the CAHSEE. Scores reflect passing rates in English Arts and Mathematics
for the academic years 2004-2005, 2005-2006, and 2006-2007.

110
Opportunity Transfers and
Suspensions
Opportunity Transfers (OTs) are transfers from one school to another
school within the district. According to school district literature, there are two
purposes for OTs: (a) to promote the positive social and/or academic adjustment of
a particular student, or (b) to promote school safety for all students. Each school is
responsible for providing a safe campus for its students and must develop a fair and
effective school safety plan that includes procedures for issuing OTs. Since it is
each school’s responsibility to be accountable for an effective discipline policy,
OTs should not be the immediate disciplinary response to student misconduct,
except in extreme cases. In general, OTs intended as disciplinary actions should be
issued only after other interventions have proven unsuccessful.
Table 17 presents data regarding OTs by race from 2004 through 2007.
However, it does not indicate the reasons for these OTs.
According to the school administrator, suspensions are infrequent and may
take the form of an out-of class suspension for a period or a full day. Suspension
data noted in Table 18 are not disaggregated by type of offense or length of the
suspension.
There was a 56% increase in suspensions of African American students in
the 2005-2006 school year compared to the previous year; however, in the follow-
ing year there was a 42% decrease. Interview responses from the administrator did
not clarify the pattern of suspensions with a significant decrease in 2006-2007. The
data were not disaggregated to depict whether suspensions were from class or from
school. The mean number of African American students during the period was 44,
compared to 16.6 for Whites. Likewise the OT data were not disaggregated to
explain whether the OTs were for behavioral or safety factors. The numbers are

111
Table 16

Number of Students from the Study High School Taking and Passing the California
High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE), Academic Years 2004-2005, 2005-2006, and
2006-2007

Year Subject area Ethnic group Took Passed % passed

2004 Mathematics African American 80 60 74
2005 American Indian
a
2 0 0
Asian 141 135 96
Filipino 35 30 68
Hispanic/Latino 639 476 74
Pacific Islander 5 0 0
White/non-Hispanic 215 187 87

ELA
b
African American 81 55 68
American Indian
a
2 0 0
Asian 152 127 84
Filipino 35 81 89
Hispanic/Latino 656 441 67
Pacific Islander 5 0 0
White/non-Hispanic 207 188 91

2005 Mathematics African American 115 80 70
2006 American Indian
a
4 0 0
Asian 143 136 95
Filipino 41 35 85
Hispanic/Latino 709 502 71
Pacific Islander 5 0 0
White/non-Hispanic 209 194 93

ELA
b
African American 115 79 69
American Indian
a
4 0 0
Asian 168 139 83
Filipino 40 33 83
Hispanic/Latino 771 444 58
Pacific Islander 5 0 0
White/non-Hispanic 212 189 89

2006 Mathematics African American 103 73 71
2007 American Indian
a
0 0 0
Asian 111 106 95
Filipino 44 42 95
Hispanic/Latino 667 466 70
Pacific Islander 4 0 0
White/non-Hispanic 163 143 88

112
Table 16 (continued)

Year Subject area Ethnic group Took Passed % passed

ELA
b
African American 101 71 73
American Indian
a
1 0 0
Asian 125 107 86
Filipino 46 42 91
Hispanic/Latino 779 463 59
Pacific Islander 4 0 0
White/non-Hispanic 173 142 82

a
Includes Alaska Native.
b
English Language Arts.

Table 17

Opportunity Transfers From the Study School, by Ethnicity of Student, 2004-2007

Ethnicity 2006-2007 2005-2006 2004-2005

American Indian/Alaska Native 0 0 0
Asian 0 3 0
Filipino 0 1 0
Pacific Islander 0 1 0
African American 9 12 15
Hispanic 56 49 24
White non-Hispanic 3 8 3
Total 68 74 42

113
Table 18

Suspensions at the Study School, by Ethnicity of Student, 2004-2007

Ethnicity 2006-2007 2005-2006 2004-2005

American Indian/Alaska Native 0 0 1
Asian 3 12 6
Filipino 0 4 1
Pacific Islander 1 1 0
African American 28 66 38
Hispanic 192 200 129
White non-Hispanic 12 22 16
Total 236 305 191
Average days of suspension 1.67 1.88 2.09

disproportionate, considering that African American students comprise 6.9% of the
student population and White students comprise 12% of the population. The mean
number of OTs for that period was 12 for African American students compared to
4.6 for White students. An examination of the numerical OT data shows a pattern
of decline over a 3-year period. There does not appear to be a clear rationale for
this decline. Teacher interviews suggest that greater equity in the implementation
of school discipline policy interventions and teachers working more closely with
students on academic and behavior challenges may account for this pattern. There
may also be a correlation between the decline and student participation in the We
Are One program, as noted from one teacher’s perspective.

114
From the triangulated data, it is not evident that race is a causal factor in the
disparity in suspensions. Administrator reports and artifacts indicate that many of
the referrals for discipline are frivolous, such as not having appropriate materials
for class, and that staff are working to provide teachers with more effective
strategies for addressing the issues in question within the classroom rather than
having them referred for disciplinary action.
Students With Disabilities and
English Language Learners
The extant literature on special education reports the current reality of over-
representation of African American students in special education classes, perpetuat-
ing the sociohistorical legacy of inequality (Patton, 1998). The deleterious effects
of these often misidentified and misplaced students is documented (Gardner &
Miranda, 2001; Patton, J. M., 1998). The school administrator admitted to low
achievement in special education and among ELLs and was of the opinion that both
of these subgroups should be targeted for greater intervention. Although not the
focus of this study, these two groups were mentioned several times during inter-
views and observations. In light of the reported disproportionate representation of
African Americans in special education (Gardner & Miranda; Johnson, 2002;
Skiba, Simmons, et al., 2006; Skiba et al., 2001), data germane to this population
were included. Data disaggregated by race for the 3-year trajectory as focused in
this study were not available at the time of the study. However, data were available
for the current (2007-2008) school year. The percentages in Table 19 and Table 20
reflect the percentage of students within the ethnic group who are enrolled in
special education. For example 1.9% of the Asian students receive special educa-
tion support, 2.2% of the Filipino students, and so forth.

115
Table 19

Special Education Enrollment at the Study High School, 2002-2007

2002- 2003- 2004- 2005- 2006- 2007-
Group 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

RSP 66 134 138 136 14 156
SDP 106 91 99 123 38 141
Total 172 225 237 259 252 297

Note. RSP = Resource Specialist Program, SDP = Special Day Program.

One Administrator reported the following:
Special Education is no longer just a little group of students that coexists
with the general education population. They are merged with the general
population. . . .We get this level of students very low. We get them to move
up, but it’s not enough to achieve on the CSTs or on a standardized test.
They make wonderful strides based from what they come in. But to com-
pare them to the rest of the population is really not fair. And they have a
valid point. We might have autistic children or who come really basically
functioning at a 2nd-grade level and expecting them to pass the 8th- or 9th-
grade level tests. Unrealistic!
Students with disabilities are performing significantly below other sub-
groups on CST (Tables 12 and 13). Test scores indicate that 42% and 37.7% are
performing Far Below Basic in ELA and Mathematics, respectively. Below Basic
performance is at 38.3 and 41.3, respectively. However, 96% of them met the
requirements for high school graduation. The number of students in special educa-
tion has steadily increased. This could be attributed to the increase in student
population or the increase in identification. Data indicated the number of students
enrolled in the Resource Specialist Program (RSP) and Special Day Program (SDP)
but the eligibility criteria were not available. Although there has been a trend in an

116
Table 20

Special Education Enrollments at the Study High School by Gender and Ethnicity,
2007-2008

Students in RSP Students in SDP % of
Ethnicity Males Females Males Females Total students

Native American/
Alaskan Native 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Asian 2 1 5 1 9 1.9
Filipino 0 1 2 0 3 2.2
Pacific Island 1 0 0 0 1 7.7
African American 10 5 9 4 28 10.5
Hispanic 63 51 64 40 218 9.5
White 16 6 10 6 38 6.1
TOTAL 92 64 90 51 297

Note. RSP = Resource Specialist Program, SDP = Special Day Program. Source:
Student Information System, Outstanding Unified School District [pseudonym],
2008, available from researcher.

increase in enrollment and students are performing below basic, data show a steady
improvement based on API scores.
Analysis of Findings for Research Question 1
Research question 1 examined the trends and patterns of performance
among students of color. Social and cultural capital formed the conceptual frame-
work for this research question. The concepts of social and cultural capital focus on
supportive relationships with institutional agents, teachers, and administrators, as
well as parents, who have the capacity and commitment to negotiate within school
structures and systems, thus serving as conduits in the transmission of institutional
resources (Stanton-Salazar, 1997; Stanton-Salazar & Dornbusch, 1995). These
resources include academic tutoring, college admission information, and advance

117
courses information. Feelings of distrust and oppositional orientation often serve as
constraints for students of color in the educational setting, which is often the
primary source of social capital for students of color in high-poverty schools
(Ogbu, 1995b, 2004). To that end, the trends and patterns of achievement found at
EEHS in African American students suggest that there are forms of capital at the
school to which students have access that lead to improved achievement outcomes.
The majority of the teachers are fully credentialed, a number which has
increased over the past 3 years. The stability, experience, and credentials of the
staff are significant, as the literature suggests that these factors positively impact
student achievement and are usually missing in high-poverty urban schools (Barth
et al., 1999; Darling-Hammond, 2000).
As the focal group of this study, African American students have a positive
achievement trajectory based on API scores beyond the 3-year predetermined
criteria set by the thematic dissertation group. As scores for African American
students have steadily increased, so have those for other subgroups. However, a
greater average increase is evident with African American students than with other
subgroups for the period 2000 through 2007. For example, the mean increase for
African American students in comparison to other subgroups was 28.1 points. The
group with the second-highest mean point increase was Hispanics, with a mean of
25.5 points. Mean point increases for other subgroups included Asian students at
18.6 points and White students at 7.3 points, the latter showing the lowest mean
point increase. The overall school mean for the period was 20.1 points.
An analysis of the improvement trajectory in API scores for African
American students elicits inquiry as to the factors that led to this improvement. As
suggested by one teacher interviewee, there was a pedagogical shift in beliefs

118
within this time period. There was a change in teacher attitude—an increased focus
on achievement and increased professional development—that may have led to
increased teacher self-efficacy, which may have manifested in increased student
self-efficacy (students’ belief in their capability to achieve). This may have
increased students’ achievement. If this be the case, it is evidence of the
researchers’ assertion that there should be a focus on systemic changes in school
structures rather than culture, which may lead to greater insight and more consistent
achievement results for African American adolescents (Tyson et al., 2005).
This pattern of achievement may be attributed not only to a paradigm shift
in the school’s belief system but also to the development and implementation of the
We Are One program, discussed further in this study. A belief system that focuses
on all students being capable of learning and high teacher expectations regardless
of race or culture, seems to have emerged.
Although there is evidence of a positive trajectory of achievement for
African American students, as seen by API scores, there are few African American
students enrolled in AP classes. Twenty-four percent of African American students
are enrolled in AP classes, compared to 45% of the White students. The explana-
tion for this phenomenon is not clear. AP classes are available but the criteria and
method for selecting students for these classes were not established as part of this
study.
An examination of CST scores indicates that a greater percentage of African
American students, as well as Hispanic students, are performing Below Basic and
Basic than White students in ELA and Mathematics. However, White students are
only 0.7% above African American students scoring Proficient in ELA, with a

119
greater percentage scoring Proficient in Mathematics. This performance compari-
son still shows disparate levels of achievement in the two areas assessed.
Students are encouraged to take higher-level courses, and enrollment is
monitored by race within the district. The researcher did not have access to dis-
aggregated school level data tracking students enrolled in A-G courses. This would
have provided a profile of students by race who are college bound, as these courses
serve as the pipeline to college admittance.
Data suggest that 100% of African American students met graduation
requirements. Causal factors are not clear; however, interventions such as academic
tutoring and CAHSEE preparation are available to students. The number passing
the CAHSEE over the past 3 years has been fairly constant, between 68% and 74%
of those taking the test.
Special education enrollment reveals a disproportionate number of African
American students enrolled, based on the enrollment of this subgroup in the school.
This percentage of 10.5% is larger than that of any other subgroup, with the next
highest representation being that of Hispanics at 9.5%, even though this population
is larger. The cause for the increase in overall special education enrollment may be
the result of increased student enrollment or increased identification. The reason is
not clear.
Data revealed an increase in school-wide OT for the 3-year period under
study. However, they revealed a decreased pattern of OTs for all subgroups, with
the exception of Hispanics, for whom there was an increase. However, causal
factors leading to this pattern are not evident. One might surmise that it is the result
of increased staff knowledge and implementation of the discipline policy programs
or parent involvement. There may be a correlation between this decrease and

120
student interventions, such as those provided through the Impact program. The
reason is not clear. An unusual pattern surfaced when exploring suspensions. Data
revealed an increase in suspensions for all subgroups between the 2004-2005 and
2005-2006 school years. However, there was a decline in suspensions from 2005-
2006 to 2006-2007 for all subgroups. Again, this pattern may be attributed to
greater enforcement of the discipline policy and student access to systems capital,
such as the intervention and Impact programs that address academic and social/
behavior issues that may ultimately lead to suspensions.
Findings for Research Question 2
Research question 2 asked, What are the organizational structures and
systems that are perceived to contribute to high student performance in high-
poverty urban schools with large concentrations of students of color? The theoreti-
cal framework for this research question was based on the premise that multiple
key school based factors work together in a systematically integrated system. This
system reflects the school’s belief system, which affects instruction and impacts
student achievement. While Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model served as the theo-
retical framework for this premise, Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory of learning
encompasses the interconnection between school achievement and environment as
well. Before attempting to respond to this inquiry, operational definitions are pro-
vided for the concepts of school organizational structures and organizational
systems.
Organizational Structures
Organizational structures were defined by the thematic dissertation group
for purposes of this study as institutional mechanisms such as policies and

121
procedures put in place by federal, state, or district policy and legislation or widely
accepted as the official structure of the school, not subject to change at the local
school site. Structures include standards-based instruction, school funding, and
school policies and procedures, such as those related to personnel policies, school
discipline, and program regulations, such as those for special education or bilingual
education. Consistent with Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model, there was evidence
to suggest that student achievement or behavior is a result of the shared function of
their development and the environment. Environmental factors include the social,
physical, and cultural aspects of the school, family, and neighborhood (Kozulin et
al., 2003). Vygotsky's holistic model of adolescent development integrates cogni-
tive, social/emotional, and motivational aspects of this developmental period.
Although preceding Bronfenbrenner, both perspectives crystallize the intercon-
nection between student development and environment. The framework is empha-
sized through triangulation of the research data. For example, during his interview
one administrator commented on the stage of development of the students (“teen-
agers, adolescents”) and their desire to be empowered while also seeking adult
support. “We teach students to question authority”; however, he noted that this is
done within a nurturing environment where students are respected for their
diversity, are expected to achieve, and are rewarded for their achievement. School-
wide activities such as mini concerts and dances during lunch reflect the interests of
students at this stage of development. Students have the opportunity to participate
in interest-based organizations. Classroom writing assignments reflect student
interests and concerns that are often consistent with adolescents.

122
Funding Resources
Research suggests that certain characteristics are prevalent in high-
performing high-poverty schools (Carter, 2000; Izumi, 2002; Levine et al., 2000;
Marzano, 2003). Organizational structures seen in high-performing high-poverty
schools include funding resources. EEHS has several mechanisms for addressing
funding issues that impact the development and implementation of the educational
program.
The school receives Title I federal funding and funds allocated from the
local district. There is also funding from state compensatory education and carry-
over from the state-allocated funds from the previous year. The SLT examines
these funding sources, develops budgets for school programs, makes recommenda-
tions for funding allocation that includes funding the systems that provide coherent
and coordinated utilization of resources, such as professional development, parental
involvement, and school climate. Review of artifacts shows an itemization of the
budget with much of the budget allocated for instructional programs as well as
salaries. The system of school leadership and school structures funding are
addressed in the literature as factors leading to high performance in high-poverty
urban schools.
Carter (2000) and Morris (2004) noted that school leadership uses creative
methods to fund school programs. Administrator A spoke about school funding as a
concern in providing programs and addresses the creativity involved in funding.
We don’t have a lot of Beyond the Bell [an intervention funding source]
money so we don’t have a Saturday school other than CAHSEE prep or
CST prep, so we try to provide as much after-school tutoring as possible
within the budgets and those budgets that don’t exist; money through other
programs through paying teachers professional expertise time. I try to find
money—creative financing.

123
Grant writing and teachers with social capital in the form of connections to
entertainment and the arts community have obtained gymnasium equipment and
many of the resources for the Media Academy. The district in which the school is
located is instrumental in funding special events. For example, it donated funds to
defray the cost of sending one teacher, founder of the We Are One program, to visit
a school in South Africa to which he had been invited. The Media Academy
adopted a school in Sierra Leone and generated funds for computers at the school
through parent donations and fundraising. Although the funding was not specific to
EEHS, it presents as an extension of the schools belief system regarding student
learning. The significance of parental involvement in school funding is evident in
the Friends of EEHS, a group of parents and community members who donate
monies to the school. They are recognized for their contributions through a wall
display in the hallway of the main building of the school.
Personnel Regulations
Personnel issues, such as teacher hiring, was addressed as an organizational
structure during interviews. District policies and procedures are in place for the
hiring and placement of personnel; however, school site personnel may also play a
significant role in determining placement at the school. Teachers take an active role
in hiring new teachers, from whom demonstration lessons are required. Teacher A
reported the following:
All the teachers, for example, in the English department are hired by com-
mittee. The principal doesn’t come in and say, “Oh, I hired this person
here” and dump them off on the department chair and say, “Teach them
what you want them to know.” The people in the department have an active
involvement in hiring the people. Just about everybody in the English
department . . . I sat on their interviews.
The system to support this personnel structure is addressed further on in the study.

124
Standards-Based Instruction
As evident in the literature, standards-based instruction has proven to be an
effective structure in facilitating student achievement (Barth et al., 1999; Izumi,
2002). The school emphasizes standards-based instruction, as outlined by district
policy and evident in classroom instructional practices. Standards are posted in the
classrooms and goals are aligned with the standards. Teacher, administrator, and
classified staff interviews corroborated standards-based instruction throughout the
school. Standards-based instruction increases equity in opportunities for learning as
all students are exposed to the same standards on which their achievement is
measured.
Student Discipline
Disproportionate discipline of African American students is documented in
the literature, with reasons for the disproportionality not clearly delineated. Litera-
ture suggests that African American students are referred for disciplinary actions
for infractions that are subjective in interpretation (Skiba et al., 2001). An increas-
ing body of research demonstrates the utility of proactive and preventive
approaches to school discipline practices (Lassen, Steel, & Sailor, 2006). Disci-
plinary approaches working in concert with clearly established expectations and
support for appropriate behavior lead to positive achievement outcomes (Lassen et
al.). EEHS has a school-wide discipline plan and utilizes local district staff as a
resource for facilitating the implementation of a positive behavior support plan.
Referred to as the Positive School-Wide Tone and Discipline Program, the program
is designed to be proactive and not reactive. It posits that the key to a successful
discipline program is to establish and promote a culture of respect, honesty,
responsibility, safety, and appreciation of difference on the campus. These values

125
are communicated to all school stakeholders: administrators, teachers, parents, and
students. Information is included in the student handbook and student code of
conduct and posted in classrooms and on the school Web site.
The Positive School-Wide Tone and Discipline program has two key com-
ponents: a strong tardy program and a strong physical education program. School
staff feels that a well-organized strong program in the latter area with clearly
defined goals and objectives and clearly stated consequences for nonparticipation
will be reflected throughout the rest of the campus and the student’s academic
achievement. A well-organized tardy program sets a “no nonsense” business-like
tone on campus, thus making students cognizant of the value of instructional time.
The more time students are in class, the greater the opportunities to learn, which
increases student achievement. Records are kept of the number of tardy students.
Detention is a consequence for tardy students, as well as parent conferences to
discuss how to facilitate students being prompt. Campus aides are placed strategic-
ally in certain areas on campus where students are most likely to congregate or hide
during passing periods. The students’ use of hall passes and the visibility of addi-
tional adult supervision reduce the number of students out of class and facilitate the
identification of truants and trespassers, thus increasing the safety of the school.
Administrator B reported that with the tardy program there are few students
roaming the halls during class time and fewer unidentifiable people on campus.
During this researcher’s observation, students were not observed in the halls during
class without a pass or without adult supervision. All stakeholders had knowledge
of the discipline plan and felt that it was fair and equitable. The discipline plan
itself was evident in some classes observed. However, behavioral expectations were
posted in those classes that did not have evident displays of the discipline plan.

126
Although the school has a formal discipline plan, there are instances in
which student behavior deviates or is judged to deviate from the expectations out-
lined in the plan. It should be noted that, in addition to the Positive Behavior Plan,
EEHS employs several proactive interventions that were addressed during one of
the observed professional development meetings. The intervention programs are
designed to defuse potential volatile situations. Of the intervention programs sup-
ported by the triangulated data, the most comprehensive is the HEART program.
HEART (Human Efforts at Relating Together) is a school-wide program that
enlists “natural leaders” in an effort to increase communication among various
groups on campus. With respect to natural leaders, Administrator A said,
We have committees made up of students. We have students working with
students instead of so many adults addressing students. We funded a second
school psychologist; one works with special education and the second one
works with the peer counseling program and works with students to look at
some of these issues. The Blue Ribbon committee–Mr. S. identifies key
leaders, which means that they probably have had some disciplinary prob-
lems, not the ones from the leadership class. We’re not going there picking
out kids of different ethnicities. That probably would not do us any good.
We look for natural leaders, students may not be doing well in class but
may have leadership skills and may be able to relate well with people in
their class. We empower these students to work with other students.
The concept of natural leaders is significant in relation to the theoretical
framework that serves as the basis for research question 2 regarding organizational
structures and systems. The microsystems of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model
represent the interactions between the student and the student’s immediate environ-
ment, in this case the school. Bronfenbrenner defined this system as patterns of
relationships experienced by the student in a setting with particular physical, social,
and symbolic features that facilitate or inhibit engagement or sustained, progress-
ively more complex interactions with and activities within the environment
(Gardiner & Kosmitski, 2005). Students serve as active constructors of the

127
activities and the relationships in the environment consistent with the Vygotskian
view of adolescence (Kozulin et al., 2003). This system of relationships, facilitated
by “natural leaders,” serves as a mediating factor in the development of and
engagement in behaviors that are expected at school, which may increase oppor-
tunities to learn and thus impact student achievement.
The natural leaders serve as social and cultural capital for their peers. This
is consistent with the overarching sociocultural theory of learning as these natural
student leaders are allowed to bring their own cultural orientations to create a
school community. They represent the social network espoused by Coleman (1988)
in his theory of social capital. These students are a trusted network of peers
developing relationships that serve as the social structure facilitating the emergence
of appropriate norms or expectations of the school. These leaders interface several
times a month to discuss ongoing problems on campus and are given the skills to
increase their ability to communicate and engage in conflict resolution in a non-
violent manner. Parent conferences are convened for students who become
involved in combative situations are suspended and referred to peer counselors who
have been trained by the school psychologist. Students must engage in dialogue
about the reasons for their disagreement and must design and sign a contract that
details how they will coexist on campus in a peaceful manner. Data are maintained
on the names of students and the reasons for discipline referrals and are used
collaboratively by staff. For example, if a student is suspended (out-of-class
suspension) for one class but is doing well in another class, teachers are aware of
the student and address factors such as instructional strategies and methodologies
and/or teacher student dynamics that may impact behavior or academic
performance. Teachers receive the data indicating reasons for referrals and the

128
outcome. Referral data disaggregated by race were not available at the time of the
study.
The Impact program was the key intervention program discussed at the first
of two professional development programs observed by this researcher. It is
designed to serve students who are dealing with issues adversely affecting their
educational program. The program is staffed by specially trained faculty members
who conduct discussion groups with students who have issues with anger manage-
ment, substance abuse, grief, or sexual identity. A form has been designed for
making referrals to the program. Administrator B summed up the discipline plan as
follows:
[In] secondary schools . . . two things that are going to drive discipline: the
P.E. department and your tardy program. Okay, P.E., every kid takes P.E.
. . . You get more of continuity with a program happening in P.E. If you
have a tight P.E. program . . . it sets a tone on the campus and carries over.
If you have a loose P.E. program, where you get away with stuff and there’s
anarchy down there, then you’re going to have anarchy on your campus.
The other thing is that you have to get them to class on time. You kind of
model the behavior you feel is important.
Although stakeholders viewed the discipline policy as fair and equitable,
data suggest a level of disproportionate representation of African American student
suspensions. The literature suggests that the chasm between the achievement of
African American students and that of White students may be attributed to dispro-
portionate discipline and referrals for special education, most specifically in the
areas of mental retardation and emotional disturbance (Johnson, 2002; Ladson-
Billings, 1999a; Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995; Marzano, 2003). Therefore,
attention was given to suspension data at EEHS. These data are presented in the
discussion of research question 1, with an examination of trends and patterns
related to student achievement.

129
More African American students were suspended in 2005-2006 than in
2004-2005, with a significant decrease in 2006-2007. However, the data were not
disaggregated to depict whether suspensions were from class or from school. The
mean number of suspensions of African American students for the period was 44,
compared to 16.6 for White students. Likewise, the OT data were not disaggregated
to depict the reasons for the OTs, whether for behavioral or safety factors. The
mean number of OTs for that period was 12 students for African Americans, com-
pared to 4.6 students for White students. From the data, it is not evident that race is
a causal factor in the disparity in suspensions. Administrator reports and artifacts
indicate that many of the referrals for discipline are frivolous, such as not having
appropriate materials for class, and that staff is working to provide teachers with
more effective strategies for addressing the issues in question within the classroom
rather than refer for disciplinary action. These actions may reflect disparities in
teachers’ approaches to students of different cultural or racial orientations.
Special Education
While discipline represents a significant structure of the school’s organiza-
tion, policies, and procedures are in place for special needs students. The referral
procedure for special education services begins with a meeting of the Student
Success Team (SST), composed of the designated special education school admin-
istrator, parent, student, and the student’s teachers. The purpose of the SST is to
address issues adversely affecting a student’s access to his/her educational pro-
gram. The team meets to ascertain the causes of the difficulties, whether academic
or social/emotional, and to make recommendations for interventions and/or adapta-
tions to the existing educational program. Instructional strategies to be used in the

130
classroom and follow-up at home are also addressed. A notice is distributed to all
stakeholders who should attend the meeting, with the name of the student, date, and
time. The team may reconvene after several weeks to determine whether the inter-
ventions and resources recommended at the SST meeting were successful. At that
time the team may make a referral for an evaluation to determine special education
eligibility.
The school has been encouraged by the district to utilize interventions and
make adaptations to the student’s educational program before making referrals to
special education, based on research data documenting the disproportionate and
sometimes culturally biased placement of African American students in special
education (Gardner & Miranda, 2001; Skiba, Simmons, et al., 2006). The district
is also being monitored by a consent decree regarding the number of African
American students found eligible for special education services, particularly in the
area of emotional disturbance. In an effort to decrease the number of referrals and
special education eligibilities, intervention strategies are also being monitored.
Organizational Systems
Organizational systems were defined by the thematic dissertation group as
the means by which a school implements its structures. Systems may include
professional development, parental involvement, accountability, data collection,
and time management. Systems may also include a composite of beliefs that serve
as the framework for teacher and staff expectations. They are a coordinated
coherent use of resources at the school site to ensure that school visions, missions
and goals are met. They are the mechanisms that support school structures.

131
School Belief System
There is evidence of a belief system at EEHS that is achievement oriented.
A culture of achievement and respect between administrators and teachers is con-
sistently modeled. Teachers reported a “drive, determination, and focus on achieve-
ment and goal orientation that facilitates learning.” According to one administrator,
“Failure is not acceptable.” This view of achievement was shared by several staff
who were interviewed. Other staff did not focus on failure but more on numerous
opportunities for students to learn and receive additional support through school
interventions, such as after-school and Saturday tutoring. Teacher interviews
reflected an attitude of success, that all students can be successful in college, the
military, or the vocational arena. “There is no reason for a student not to be
successful in some way,” was one teacher’s comment. As Teacher A noted,
People come in believing that all students can learn. They come here trying
to make a difference. We created for many, many years programs to target
“at-risk” students or students that were gifted and needed even more
challenges. . . . Small learning communities; they dreamed about it, it came
true.
With regard to a belief system, the school mission and vision statements set
the tone for a system that focuses on student achievement. The vision and mission
statements presented in Figure 18 are posted throughout the school.
To address the expectations of the Western Association of Schools and
Colleges (WASC), Expected School-Wide Learning Results (ESLR) were initiated
by the chair of the English department and developed by school staff. The ESLRs
(Figure 19) are an extension of the school mission as evidence of the goals that the
school staff want students to achieve reflecting both a performance and mastery
goal orientation. The vision and mission statements and ESLRs are indicative of

132

Vision Statement

Educational Excellence High School fosters academic and personal
success in a safe educational environment that teachers
young adults to thrive in a changing world.

Mission Statement
• To ensure all students a rigorous, relevant and coherent standards-based
curriculum
• To examine data and implement activities that monitor and focus on student
achievement
• To employ current research on effective professional development as a
means to raise student achievement
• To allocate resources and utilize strategies to help students succeed
• To promote parental and community involvement
• To provide support systems that meet student academic and emotional
needs.
• To collaborate with students in establishing learning plans that explore
educational and career goals.

Figure 18. Vision and mission statements for Educational Excellence High School
(the study school).

the expectations not only of the students but of the teachers themselves in terms of
long-term goals for students in the academic and social domains.
Small Learning Communities
Research suggests that one element of school reform may involve
restructuring existing structures and systems. There are reciprocal relationships
among restructuring, teacher learning, and teacher practice that lead to increased

133

Educated Young Adults who

Analyze, interpret, synthesize, evaluate and use information
from a variety of sources

Apply technology to research and produce original works

Read, write, listen, and speak critically and reflectively

Self-Sufficient Individuals who

Generate solutions and adapt to change

Develop self-esteem and positive identity

Explore resources beyond school to enhance learning

Long-Range Planners who

Contribute time, energy and talents to improve the quality
of life in their community

Establish meaningful personal academic and career goals
Continue life-long learning pursuits

Respectful Citizens who

Acquire knowledge of a variety of cultures and languages
and appreciate individual differences

Demonstrate personal integrity and assume responsibility
for decisions and actions

Respect and conserve the environment

Figure 19. Expected School-Wide Learning Results (ESLR) at the study school.

student outcomes, while good practices and student outcomes result from restruc-
turing (Ancess, 2000). Several theme-based SLCs have been formed at EEHS.
Through these SLCs greater opportunities appear to be available for students to
develop increased interpersonal relationships with teachers, the resource of social
and cultural capital for many students. Social capital is more accessible to students

134
when they are in an environment of increased personalization where they get the
needed attention from the adults in the school who have social capital. If this be the
case, it would be consistent with social and cultural capital perspectives outlined in
the literature. There is increased opportunity for individual and small group instruc-
tion as well as for identification of student needs. Since the SLCs are theme-based,
students are able to access curricular material that includes specific areas of interest
to them. For example, one of the SLCs focuses on various forms of media. Students
were observed videotaping and interviewing other students for a broadcast as part
of an assignment. Students prepare a weekly closed-circuit television broadcast.
Teachers reported increased student engagement resulting from interest-based
activities.
SLCs also provide increased opportunities to facilitate early-stage inter-
vention for students who are experiencing academic difficulties. Teachers reported
referring students for tutoring or providing increased individualized instruction
when academic problems arise.
Professional Development
Professional development has been found to be an essential element to the
success of high-performing high-poverty schools (Izumi, 2002; Pressley et al.,
2004; Washington Learns, 2006). Ongoing professional development is evident at
EEHS. Triangulated data indicate that professional development has a focus on
instructional strategies and assessment, consistent with research on high-perform-
ing high-poverty schools (Carter, 2000; Haycock et al., 1999; Pressley et al., 2004).
One professional development observation yielded data on school-wide
intervention, resources, and strategies presented to the SLCs. Teachers and support

135
staff collaborated on the interventions that form the composite of the Impact pro-
gram. Data were provided on the school tutoring program options, frequency of
school bullying, risk of harassment, and resulting dropout rates. In addition, the
data examined the correlation between harassment and use of weapons and the
impact of these factors on school attendance and achievement. Participants during
this professional development engaged in active dialogue. The presentation was
aligned to the school vision and its ESLR. This student-centered professional
development was performance goal oriented and both proactive and adaptable.
Teachers were encouraged to refer students for Impact intervention. A referral
process is in place for not only teacher referrals of students but of student self-
referrals. Teachers are encouraged to provide alternatives for student accountability
for any assignments not completed as a result of intervention participation. This
professional development provided teachers with knowledge of resources available
to offer students additional social and emotional support that may be needed to
foster positive school performance.
Staff collaboration in dyads and triads was evident during a professional
development session that was geared primarily toward preparation for the WASC
accreditation. Focus groups had been used to engage the entire school com-
munity—administration, teachers, parents, and students—in self-assessment prior
to the professional development training. This professional development activity
served as a venue for addressing data and how the data should drive decisions
regarding curriculum and instruction. It focused on data germane to underperform-
ance by students of color. Interethnic achievement comparisons were reviewed in
relation to achievement disparities of students of color and special education
students. Disparate comparisons of student achievement based on socioeconomic

136
status were addressed. Disaggregated data reflected a pattern of low achievement
by African American and Hispanic students in comparison to White students. Data
were used to identify critical academic needs, which included performance and
mastery goal orientation. This professional development activity was practical and
adaptable in that the information was used to drive decisions about instruction. It
reflected accountability with leadership stressing high teacher expectations, teacher
accountability for student learning, and teacher beliefs about student learning.
Attention was given to teacher expectations and beliefs and teacher efficacy as
components of professional development evident in the literature on professional
development in high-performing, high-poverty urban schools (Diamond et al.,
2004). Evaluative tools were distributed at the conclusion of each professional
development session. In their interviews teachers spoke about professional
development as an essential component of the school’s high performance. Teacher
E remarked,
Teachers consistently engage in professional development. Even if there is
no professional development scheduled for the week, teachers meet with
their department chairs to discuss instructional strategies and analyze data
to monitor student performance. This is especially true for the math depart-
ment, which I think accounts for our students doing so well in that area.
Administrators and teachers agreed on the importance of professional
development. Teachers remarked that professional development is not always what
the staff wants but that it does provide a venue for interdepartmental collaboration
and the presentation of different perspectives on learning and instruction. This is
particularly helpful to new teachers.

137
Leadership
The effectiveness of strong leadership as seen in the literature (Marzano,
2003) is evident at EEHS. The administrative leaders, including the principal and
assistant principals, collaborate with teacher leaders and parents through various
councils, one of which is the SLT. This body of stakeholders perpetuate a belief
system that emphasizes that all students can learn and should have opportunities to
learn and insists on high-level rigorous curriculum. Meeting observations and arti-
facts such as meeting agendas and minutes as well as interviews with leadership
team members supported this belief.
The School Site Council (SSC), with representation from all school stake-
holders, is one of the decision-making councils for the school. It reviews student
achievement data and revises and recommends annually the school Single Plan,
including proposed expenditure of funds allocated to the school (the school
receives categorical funding). This council engages in ongoing review of program
effectiveness and the annual revision of the school plan, including modifications
that reflect changing needs related to student achievement. The council, which
elects officers yearly, also establishes a budget with input from appropriate
advisory committees, including the SLT. Observation, meeting minutes, and inter-
views reflected the council’s engagement in its ongoing activities.
In addition to the SSC and SLT, the school has a Curriculum Council in
place as part of its organizational leadership system. This council is composed of
the chairs of the SLCs, department chairs, and deans. The council reviews hiring
practices, allocation of resources, assessments, transportation, and equity with
SLCs and disaggregated data, which at the time of the observation revealed a gap in
achievement scores between the resident school students and those in the magnet

138
schools. Informational as well as operational in nature, this council meets on a
regular basis to address the above issues and their impact on curriculum develop-
ment and implementation. The duties of the council seem to overlap those of the
SLT and the SSC, as the issues that they addressed at their respective meetings
were similar in nature. This overlap of duties seems to strengthen the system of
leadership and presents a positive impact on student achievement outcomes. It
provides a system of checks and balances for ensuring implementation of structures
and systems. This system of collaborative leadership conforms to Bronfenbrenner’s
microsystem in the ecological model in terms of providing a multifaceted system
facilitating the provision of resources to perpetuate positive student outcomes.
There is an expressed feeling by some staff that the leadership has been
effective because it has “empowered” teachers and “collaborated” with them on
ideas for the instructional program. One teacher commented, “Probably the most
important thing is when the school administration has been supportive of the
program.” The school principal has served in that capacity at the school for 2 years
but has a long history of school leadership. He supports staff through encourage-
ment of professional development and serves as institutional leader in promoting
rigorous curriculum and monitoring of student progress. During his interview the
principal addressed the importance of data and his role in ensuring that this
resource is used as a tool to effectively monitor student progress. Figure 20
presents the school leadership organizational chart.
Parent and Community
Involvement
Marzano (2003) cited parent communication and participation as the defin-
ing features of parent and community involvement. Pressley et al. (2004) cited the

139

140
importance of regular and consistent communication. EEHS has a Parent Teacher
Student Association (PTSA) that serves as a vehicle for facilitating parental part-
nership with the school staff. This group implements programs that provide
scholarships for volunteers and high school seniors who are PTSA members,
including medical, dental, and vision clinics and various student activities. There is
a nominal membership fee and an official membership drive at the beginning of the
year, although membership is accepted throughout the year.
Parental involvement in decisions regarding expenditures and curriculum
and instruction are factors noted in high-performing high-poverty schools (Barth
et al., 1999; Izumi, 2002). At EEHS parents are involved in key decision-making
components of the school. They participate on the SLT, SSC, and curriculum
council, where they have input on school expenditures as (Barth et al.) and curri-
culum and instruction (Izumi). The principal convenes monthly parent “coffee
klatches” that are open to all parents. Attendance reportedly varies from as few as
10 to several dozen. At these meetings parents articulate concerns and engage in
dialogue on school issues such as student achievement and school safety. Systems
are in place to consistently communicate information to parents. Parents are
informed through telephone calls, emails, conferences, newsletters, bulletins,
school Web site, school calendar, and letters.
The school has established a parent center located in a bungalow on the far
side of the campus. Vibrant murals encase this Title I-funded facility, which is open
to all parents of students enrolled in the school and to students enrolled in the
school who are pregnant or young parents themselves. Classes are offered in
English as a Second Language (ESL), technology (there are nine computers in the
center) and parenting classes. A child care area is located in the center for students

141
who are parents and desire to continue attending school. Working in concert with
the school belief system of achievement, the parent center staff, composed of parent
volunteers from the local community, ensures that student parents are cognizant of
standards and teacher expectations and facilitate completion of assignments.
Student parents must attend the center once a week for an hour, at which time they
are engaged in various programs such as Planned Parenthood. There is a waiting
list; however, EEHS students have priority. Students must have a 2.0 grade point
average to participate in the program at the center. Student parents as well as other
parents have access to the Web as a resource for completing class assignments as
well as for seeking employment.
Parent B reported serving as liaison between teachers and parents who are
Limited English Proficient on non-English speaking. These primarily Latino
parents seek out the parent center and teachers seek out the liaison to forward
information to the parents. Parents are aware of the discipline policy and teacher
expectations via the aforementioned practices. The practices resulting from this
reciprocal foster greater parent involvement.
To ensure parental involvement, the Dean of Student Attendance or the
Assistant Principal in charge of discipline conducts parent conferences in the parent
center. They make home visits and complete daily and weekly reports regarding
excessive absences. The discipline policy supports student learning in that it facili-
tates school attendance. Students are placed on a contract to address excessive
absences and, if all else fails, the school police are requested to go to the home of
the student by 7:00 a.m. and get the student ready for school. Parents reportedly
think that the discipline policy is fair and they like the strategy used by administra-
tion whereby students involved in physical altercations must eat lunch together for

142
a week. They applaud the school’s efforts to limit suspensions, as they feel that
students are not learning when they are not in school. Suspension increases the
possibilities of getting into greater difficulties if the student is not supervised at
home. Teachers spend a great deal of time with parents at the center or other venues
at the school engaged in dialogue about how to facilitate learning at home. Parents
feel comfortable in advocating for their children. As Parent A reported,
I ask the teacher questions. I ask for information and how to apply skills. . .
I asked how I can be of better help to my child in the Spanish class. And so
the teacher told me a Web site that is in my daughter’s Spanish book that I
could go to if she wants to practice. . . . So every time she gets ready to take
a test or something that’s the Web site she goes to and she practices. She
actually got a B in class. I appreciate the extra help from the teacher.
High Expectations
High expectations are noted in the literature as contributing to high per-
formance in high-performing high-poverty urban schools (Izumi, 2002; Morris,
2004; Pressley et al., 2004; Pressley et al., 2006). At EEHS high expectations are
espoused by all stakeholders. These expectations are demonstrated through the
rigor of the curriculum and are consistently communicated verbally to students.
Numerous interventions are offered to facilitate students meeting the academic
expectations of the school. Tutoring is offered during the week after school, the
schedule for which is consistently posted throughout the classrooms. CAHSEE
preparation is offered on Saturdays and many teachers work individually with
students during nutrition periods and lunch periods. Activities that promote high
expectations are often the focal point during lunch. The ESLRs communicate the
expectations and are posted throughout the classrooms observed during the study.
In light of the environment of achievement and the expectations as outlined
by the ESLRs, students are encouraged to take higher-level classes to ensure that

143
they meet college requirements. Data across the district are maintained, using a
specific computer program, on students who are on track with the A-G require-
ments for the University of California system. The school has an individual
graduation program whereby parents of the 11th graders meet with the school
counselor to review the A-G data, review transcripts and any other data pertinent to
the student’s achievement. Parties then address college possibilities and proceed to
explore resources to fulfill that goal or that of a specific vocation
Goal Setting
Goal setting and feedback are supported in the literature as predicators of
student achievement (Pintrich & Schunck, 2002). There is evidence in high-per-
forming high-poverty schools that goal setting is an integral part of the school
culture (Carter, 2000; Pressley et al., 2004). School-wide goals are reflected in the
school’s vision and mission statement and the school’s ESLRS. Teacher C reported
the importance of providing immediate and direct feedback to students.
When grading papers reading giving feedback and interacting with the
students to find out exactly what they were thinking during some the
assignments and did they actually comprehend what was expected of them.
So always letting them know what’s expected is always good. It gives them
a model to follow. I provide feedback to students regarding their perform-
ance. I do it immediately. You don’t want to wait too long. If you wait too
long, it’s not totally useless but it does not have the same effect. So it’s like
if you sit down and actually spend some time working with a student and
figuring out where they’re making a mistake that gives them information
they might need to help them improve.
Teachers were observed giving feedback in various ways. One word to
acknowledge performance was provided such as “good,” “great job,” or more
detailed with extensive input on the approach to the task, which led to its accuracy
or inaccuracy.

144
Our House for 9th graders is a SLC that facilitates the transition from
middle school to high school. Through this SLC students engage in their academic
studies while learning the importance of goal setting and strategies for self-
regulation. Several administrators meet with select students weekly as a means of
motivating student achievement. They monitor students’ grades and help students
to establish performance-oriented goals as well as work on self-regulatory skills
such as study skills, time management, self-evaluation and reflection, and social
skills in terms of relationship building. For special needs students, goals and
objectives are individualized as they are developed by the Individualized Education
Program (IEP) team, which is federally mandated. The team must implement those
goals in order to be in compliance with state and federal mandates. The special
education teacher reported that there were very few African American students in
special education. However, students are held accountable for their work in special
education classes, regardless of their ethnicity or their disability.
Teacher Expectations
Teachers’ beliefs about students’ capabilities in conjunction with their sense
of responsibility for student learning have been found to impact student achieve-
ment (Diamond & Spillane, 2004). In schools where all stakeholders have expecta-
tions for student learning, students exhibit greater achievement (Lee & Smith,
2001). Belief in student achievement is systematically demonstrated throughout
EEHS. Such a belief system manifests in high expectations for student achieve-
ment. Teacher expectations that reflect teacher beliefs tend to shape both what the
teacher attempts to elicit from the students and what students expect of themselves
(Brophy, 2000). Research suggests that teachers’ sense of personal self-efficacy,

145
which is the belief that they express about the desired outcomes of student engage-
ment and learning, facilitates motivation and learning within their students
(Ormrod, 2006; Timperley & Phillips, 2003).
Teachers with high efficacy are motivated and are seen as being willing to
engage in professional development in order to become more knowledgeable about
instructional strategies and techniques that facilitate greater learning opportunities
for students. They are willing to take instructional risks in trying new and challeng-
ing methods and curriculum and setting high expectations and goals for their
students (Bandura, 1997). These characteristics are evident in teachers with high
self-efficacy.
At EEHS there was evidence of engaging students in higher-level thinking
skills supported by numerous opportunities for students to demonstrate an in-depth
comprehension of the instructional material rather than mere literal knowledge.
One teacher who demonstrated high self-efficacy was Teacher D. As demonstrated
in his interview responses and classroom instruction, confidence in his ability to
teach, knowledge of the subject matter, and his ability to improve performance and
to make a difference in the lives of African American students in particular were
evident.
I think first and foremost (in terms of what has been done over the last 3 to
5 years to improve performance) being open to change. And in order to be
open to change that means you have to be open to criticism. . . . I think that
as the former magnet coordinator used to say, he wanted all of his teachers
(name of administrator) to be students. . . . You have to study all the time.
. . . And so I think I continue to be a student. I’m amazed at what I don’t
know after I’ve been on the planet as long as I have. I’m constantly learn-
ing. I’m constantly trying to find out more. And I’m learning from all kinds
of sources, including the students. I really have grown as far as appreciating
how much they can teach me. . . . There’s been a tremendous desire always
to be innovative, cutting edge, out front, a leader as far as new modalities.

146
Expectations are communicated to students and parents at EEHS through
the vision/mission statement and ESLRS. Administrator expectations of the teach-
ing staff are consistently communicated through professional development and staff
meetings. In addition to professional development and staff meetings, expectations
are articulated during classroom visitations by administrators. Administrators have
communicated their expectation of academic rigor to be demonstrated during these
classroom visitations. There is an expectation that, “If you are going to fit in, you
have to produce as an educator.” In other words, there is an expectation that the
teacher’s productivity is evident not only in test scores but in other ways of show-
ing student achievement. When teachers meet these expectations of productivity,
students are motivated and there is a demonstrable belief in their ability to accom-
plish task–an increase in their self-efficacy as well as self-advocacy. Faculty make
a conscious decision to ensure equity in access to higher-level classes to allow all
students to be exposed to higher-level classes whether or not the student is ready.
However, “Counselors have a very strong dialogue with the students whether that is
an appropriate choice,” according to Administrator D. This has led to over 1,000
students taking AP tests.
In terms of communicating expectations to students, the methods vary
according to teacher. They may be verbally communicated to students. Expecta-
tions for behavior and academic assignments are communicated via poster or charts
posted in the classroom. Each class observed during the study presented a rubric to
the students for assignments and a syllabus distributed to students and parents at the
beginning of the year. A student handbook has been developed that focuses on
expectations in terms of dress, discipline, and attendance, as well as academics and
behavior. The handbook is distributed to students at the beginning of the school

147
year and is available on the school Web site. Expectations are also published in
student newsletters and aired on the news station every Friday.
Analysis of Findings for Research Question 2
Research question 2 answered the inquiry as to the organizational structures
and systems that are perceived to contribute to high student performance in high-
poverty urban schools with large concentrations of students of color. Reiteration of
the operational definitions of structures and systems facilitated the triangulation of
data obtained through observations, artifacts, and the interview questions aligned
with the research question and posed to administrators, teachers, parents, and
classified staff. Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model served as the theoretical
framework for this inquiry.
In terms of organizational structures the researcher examined the effects of
school funding, evidence of standards-based instruction, hiring practices, and
school policies and procedures for discipline and special education referrals. The
school receives Title I funding and, although funding is limited, school leadership
is creative in its use of funding sources for intervention and programmatic imple-
mentation while maintaining the fiscal integrity of the budget. Teachers play an
active role in hiring decisions and all stakeholders are cognizant of standards that
form the basis for instruction. There is consistent evidence of standards-based
instruction.
EEHS has policies and procedures in place for discipline and special educa-
tion referrals. All stakeholders are aware of the discipline policy and perceive that
it is fair and equitable. Staff members are encouraged to develop and implement

148
strategic interventions and adaptations to the instructional program prior to making
referrals for special education services.
Organizational systems are the means by which the school implements its
structures. Most significant among the systems prevalent at EEHS is the
achievement-oriented belief system, evident in the vision and mission statements of
the school. A focus on achievement and goal orientation facilitates learning. Pro-
fessional development serves as a vehicle for increasing teachers’ knowledge of
instructional strategies, interventions, and assessments. There is an overarching
expectation that techniques and educational pedagogies acquired during in-house
and outside professional development sessions will be replicated in the classroom
Leadership is distributive in nature. While the principal serves as the key
instructional leader, department chairs, chairs of the SLCs, and various councils
form a collaborative community of leaders that set the tone for achievement
expectations and decisions surrounding funding and program development and
implementation.
As seen in the literature review, parent involvement is a key element in
high-performing high-poverty urban schools with large concentrations of students
of color. Systems are in place that effectively communicate school expectations and
activities to parents. Parents play an active role in decision making and fund rais-
ing. In line with the belief system of achievement, EEHS has a facility for meeting
the social/emotional needs of parents in the community and students who are
parents while also serving as a resource for technology access.
High expectations are consistently communicated throughout the school
community. Administrators and teachers facilitate goal setting and the development
of self-regulatory skills, both of which lead to a positive trajectory of student

149
achievement. These expectations are clearly communicated by teachers to students
through various modalities, as are administrators’ expectations of the teachers.
Teacher expectations reflect teachers’ beliefs in their capabilities to transform
student outcomes and serves as motivation toward learning. This personal self-
efficacy is evident in those teachers who engage in professional development, are
creative, and are innovative in curriculum development and methodology that
promotes cognitively challenging instruction.
The integration of the school’s organizational structures and systems
provides a coherent, cohesive programmatic thrust. As espoused by
Bronfenbrenner, student achievement is the result of the shared function of student
development and the environment. Students are empowered to seek support from
authority figures while questioning authority consistent with their developmental
stage. Systems are in place for addressing social/emotional needs and the cultural
diversity at the school. The school is the micro system of the ecological model
whereby the organizational structures and systems work in tandem to provide an
environment conducive for learning and student achievement.
Findings for Research Question 3
Research question 3 asked, How are the organizational structures and
systems implemented to support school-wide effective classroom instruction that
promotes student learning? The theoretical framework for this research question is
sociocultural in nature, based on Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory of learning.
Vygotsky posited that learning is a social process and that the social and cultural
backgrounds of students form the cognitive schema from which they approach the
learning process within the school setting. The social and cultural context of class-

150
room practices resulting from school organizational structures and systems may be
incongruent with those already established in the student’s social and cultural
repertoire, thereby affecting achievement. The current researcher examined how
instructional strategies resulting from the implementation of school structures and
systems was communicated to school staff and how feedback was provided to
systematically inform teachers for continued implementation. The study examined
perceptions of teacher effectiveness and the impact on student achievement.
Teacher Effectiveness
Numerous perspectives were offered regarding the identification of an
effective teacher at EEHS. Research suggests that certain characteristics are
consistent with effective teaching in high-performing high-poverty urban schools
(Edmonds, 1982). An effective teacher has been described as one who collaborates
with other teachers and is engaged in continuous professional development and as
one who promotes student engagement and knows the subject matter in different
ways for special education and general education. Teaching to the students’
interests and incorporating those interests into the curriculum facilitate increased
student engagement, as perceived by some at EEHS. Classroom observations
reflect teacher interests in literature and instructional approaches to engage students
through active dialogue and creative writing activities. Patience, individual atten-
tion, and flexibility were noted as characteristics of the effective teachers. An
effective teacher was described as one who plans and is willing to modify instruc-
tion based on the needs of students and demonstrate respect for change in demo-
graphics in the school. This respect was emphasized by all school staff interviewed

151
for this study. For example, respect for cultural diversity was evident in the school
library as well as in classroom libraries.
Personnel/Hiring Practices
Personnel issues were presented as one organizational structure for which a
systematic process has been implemented to ensure the hiring of qualified teachers
who have knowledge of effective classroom practices. The process involves more
than the usual interview. In addition to an interview, teachers seeking a position at
the school are observed by the designated school leadership in the actual process of
teaching. There are expectations of expertise in the subject matter and an ability to
effectively interact with and engage students in learning. Observations yielded
greater insight into the skills and strategies utilized by the prospective teacher and
whether the person presents as one who meets the expectations of the school. This
process helps the school to support the research-based systems that support high
performance in high-performing high-poverty urban schools, such as high expecta-
tions and buying into the school belief system as espoused by its mission and vision
statements. As Teacher A stated,
We have teachers actually come in and teach during the summer when we
do our hiring. It’s a part of our hiring process. We have the people that
come in that interview for a job. We have them come into the classroom and
then we get that same committee to evaluate their teaching. And in that pro-
cess we how they relate to students. You can see a whole lot by actually
watching someone work. And we do this observation. Sometimes we have
them come back twice and tell them to show us, “What do you have?” And
then we sit down and we ask all kinds of questions to access their ability in
the subject matter and in other things–just in practice. You know we come
straight out, “How many times were you absent during the last school
year?” They’re like “10” and we’re like, “Oh we don’t want you!” I mean,
we really want people that are going to come her to do a job because when
they don’t, it drags us down. We are trying to stay afloat.

152
Standards-Based Support
Standards-based instruction supports effective classroom practices (Barth et
al., 1999; Carter, 2000; Izumi, 2002; Pressley et al., 2004). Standards are clearly
posted and articulated to all stakeholders so that they are cognizant of their exist-
ence. Goals and objectives are aligned with the standards and instructional strate-
gies are utilized that promote performance and mastery goal orientation while
ensuring focus on the standard. For example, students were observed during a
science lesson in which the standard being covered was reviewed at the beginning
of the lesson. Vocabulary consistent with the standard was presented using the
cloze format to facilitate contextual comprehension. An English literature class was
observed in which the standard was reviewed prior to the beginning of the lesson.
Round robin strategy was used in which individual students engaged in oral reading
from the text; however, students were required to listen for certain facts prior to
reading. During an observation of ELL instruction, students were constructing new
cognitive schemata by using prior conceptual knowledge and knowledge of
primary language vocabulary to facilitate comprehension of the standard.
Professional Development Support
Professional development is ongoing at EEHS. Triangulated data suggest
that school funding and the commitment of school leadership support building
capacity and leadership to design, deliver, and monitor coherent and consistent
professional development. The principal reported that teachers are encouraged to
attend professional development opportunities outside the school. He provides
information on a weekly basis regarding the availability of district, local, and state
professional development opportunities and provides funding based on availability.
As he stated during his interview, he uses “creative financing” to fund such

153
opportunities and pays teachers “expert rate” as determined by district policy for
conducting in-house professional development based on information that they have
obtained from outside resources. Therefore, teachers have access to knowledge of
practices that can be implemented in the classroom to enhance the instructional
program. For example, there has been professional development activity on
culturally relevant and responsive education. One classroom observation revealed
individualized instruction in which teacher and student were engaged in developing
an essay relevant to cultural diversity. Artifacts included student-generated posters
and journals reflecting cultural diversity in the classroom.
Administrator C engages in Internet research for professional development
and uses that research as a platform for professional development programs. Pro-
fessional development activities are scheduled once a month during the academic
year, as seen in the master calendar that is disseminated at the beginning of the
school year to inform teachers of the opportunities and content of this ongoing
system.
Although professional development serves as an important system at EEHS
to support instruction, access to professional development outside the school could
be problematic because it requires teachers to be absent from their classrooms. To
promote teacher participation in outside professional development and support the
instructional program, school administrators periodically serve as “substitute
teachers,” covering classes for those teachers who wish to engage in professional
development during instructional time. Such support is offered throughout the year,
even when teachers are not attending outside professional development. School
administrators teach classes periodically throughout the year and engage in periodic
classroom observations as part of the evaluation process during which they provide

154
immediate feedback to teachers on instructional strategies and methodologies. They
reported engaging in dialogue to assess teachers’ needs and offer professional
development or observations of other teachers at the site who serve as models of
expertise in their subject matter and effective instructional practices. Administrator
A commented,
If a teacher desires to attend a professional development workshop or con-
ference, we will take over the class so that he/she can attend. Each of us
teaches a class during the school year. It helps us keep a frame of reference
for what occurs in the classroom and provides opportunities to talk with
teachers about instructional strategies.
Leadership
The literature suggests school leadership as a system is found consistently
in high-performing high-poverty urban schools (Carter, 2000; Izumi, 2002; Morris,
2004; Pressley et al., 2004; Pressley et al., 2006). However, leadership is not
limited to one individual. There is evidence at EEHS of a distributed leadership as
seen through collaboration by school administrators, teacher leaders, and the
various leadership councils. This system of leadership perpetuates a belief in
student achievement and, to that end, supports program implementation through
allocation of required resources. For example, through the Gifted and Talented
(GATE) funds computer programs are purchased for classroom usage. One
observed class uses the programs to help students to construct their own learning
through group projects such as DVDs. Artifacts such as student-created posters,
journals, and DVDs were created using computer programs purchased by the
school. These artifacts reflect racial pride and addressed stereotypes and
perceptions of parents and community. “I let students create their own culturally
relevant instruction,” reported one teacher. The relevance of such classroom

155
practices resulting from the support of a school organizational system, such as
leadership and structures such as funding, reflects the sociocultural framework that
served as the basis for the research question. This allows students to use their
culture as a framework not only for learning the standards but also for developing
an understanding and respect for the cultural diversity of the school environment.
In addition to providing ongoing professional development and funding for
programmatic implementation, the school leadership has been supportive of the We
Are One program. Teachers reported that the school administrator, specifically the
principal, has supported the program since its inception and has not accepted any
opposition from the faculty. The current principal has been at the school for only
about 2 years but has continued to support the program by encouraging student
participation and the efforts of the program founders.
School leadership encourages leadership development in students. There are
opportunities for student leadership. Those natural leaders who emerge, often as a
result of disciplinary referrals, serve as a source of social capital that elicits trust
and brings a cultural orientation that is important in the provision of emotional and
academic support. During school-wide observations students were observed in a
leadership capacity for media production and the organization of groups in the
classroom for specific projects.
Analysis of Findings for Research Question 3
With Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory of learning serving as the theoretical
framework for this research question, the findings suggest that the implementation
of school-site organizational structures and systems at EEHS support some instruc-
tional practices that are based on a sociocultural perspective consistent with a

156
sociocultural framework found in the social and cultural relevance of instruction
and the strategies used during that instruction. Classrooms that have a highly
coherent and inclusive social system lead to positive student outcomes (Kozulin et
al., 2003). Just as the conceptual framework of social and cultural capital stresses
relationships (Stanton-Salazar, 1997; Stanton-Salazar & Dornbusch, 1995),
Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory also addresses the development of relationships in
which each person is valued and is able to participate successfully (Kozulin et al.).
Students are respected and expected to learn rigorous curricula and engage in
critical thinking. However, the teacher/student relationship mediates access to
academically demanding content (Kozulin et al.). This was evident in some of the
observed classes, where teachers were engaged in individualized instruction,
facilitating active discussion among students and utilizing instructional strategies
that engaged students in the use of higher-order cognitive skills. Cooperative
groups as an instructional methodology were seen consistently throughout the
study. The literature suggests that this is an effective strategy, particularly for
African American students as a result of the cultural patterns within the historical
context of the community being based on cooperation and interdependence
(Levine, 1994).
Organizations are in place for student participation whereby students
engage in activities that reflect their heritage and serve as a vehicle for learning.
Vygotsky noted the cognitive schema that students possess when they enter the
educational environment. EEHS seems to respect this schema and demonstrates its
utilization as a foundation for instruction.
Analysis of the triangulated data suggests that the school structures and
systems work in concert to provide a cohesive and coherent educational program

157
in a culturally responsive and respectful environment, providing opportunities to
learn. Leadership facilitates the design and implementation of consistent pro-
fessional development that ensures the continued enhancement of teacher expertise
in effective instructional strategies and methodologies that focus on a holistic
approach to learning.
The school belief system, as evident in its vision and mission statements,
serves as the fundamental system to support effective practices. Teachers and
administrators approach instruction with the belief that all students are capable of
learning. They do not appear to work from a deficit model or perception of remedi-
ation with African American students or other students of color. This results in
increased teacher expectations that are clearly communicated to all stakeholders.
This belief system also facilitates teacher self-efficacy, evident in their willingness
to seek and implement innovative and creative instructional practices that cogni-
tively challenge students as well as themselves.
Findings for Research Question 4
Research question 4 asked, How is the construct of race reflected in the
school’s structures and systems? Using CRT as a theoretical framework for this
research question provided a vehicle for examining student achievement from an
asset model. Through this framework and through triangulation of data resources,
the researcher examined the school climate, culture, and supports for students of
color.
Climate/Culture
All stakeholders who were interviewed noted the professionalism that was
demonstrated by administrators and teachers and the respect that all stakeholders,

158
including students, demonstrated toward each other. SLCs provide a holistic
approach to addressing student achievement, which staff feels is “unique” to them.
Teachers and administrators are caring and nurturing and present a supportive,
positive attitude. Teacher D said,
There’s a real sense of caring on this campus. It’s part of what We Are One
is about. Kids don’t know. The kids don’t care what you know until they
know that you care. And so, I think the kids on this campus know that we
really care about them.
Other teachers echoed the same sentiments regarding the level of support
and nurturing at the school. Teachers provide individualized support to students
during unstructured periods. Administrators and counselors meet individually with
students or in small groups to address student concerns on issues of achievement
and behavior. Students were observed “checking in” with administrators on a
regular basis to keep them abreast of their progress and any supports that the
students thought were needed, academically or socially. According to Teacher A,
The climate in the school–the teachers are number one in creating that
atmosphere and the students are number two. Whatever teachers say, the
students will try to emulate: our attitudes, our passions and styles and
acceptance and levels of tolerance and that kind of stuff.
Classified staff reportedly perceive themselves as role models, demonstrat-
ing a positive caring attitude and contributing to the positive climate of respect for
students and staff diversity. As observed by this researcher, staff addressed students
entering the office in a respectful manner and inquired how they could be of
assistance. Students were observed articulating their concerns to office staff about
issues such as classes and discipline in a reciprocal fashion. The interaction with
office staff from a Vygotskian perspective suggests the concept of adolescents
using adults as models for social norms and standards of behavior for themselves.
Comments by classified staff suggested the perception of a color-blind environ-

159
ment, while at the same time noting a contradiction to that perception. When
students seek help from the office, they tend to address office staff of the same race
or ethnicity. For example, the office staff includes one African American, one
White, and one Hispanic holding classified positions. Observations and interviews
suggested that the African American students tended to address their concerns to
the African American office clerk, as did Hispanic and White students to their
respective office staff member of the same race. However, other students addressed
their inquiries to whoever was available to respond, regardless of race. The varia-
tion of staff from whom students seek assistance may reflect their desire to work
with staff of the same cultural orientation. The reasons are not clear.
A culture of achievement is evident by the accolades that students receive
for their achievement. Such acknowledgement is evident through verbal praise in
the classroom and achievement displays on the walls in the classrooms and halls.
Student achievements are presented on Fridays during the school television
broadcast.
To ensure the establishment of a quality educational environment, deface-
ment of the campus is not tolerated. Graffiti found on campus is photographed,
documented, and removed as quickly as possible, usually before the students arrive
at school. To that end, the school has been recognized with a beautification award
that is posted in the form of a banner on the wall near the school’s entrance. The
Media Academy, with the support of school administration, created a DVD that
was aired on the school television station to encourage the value of school cleanli-
ness and appreciation for its aesthetics. Expectations were clear and presented in a
humorous and entertaining manner. All stakeholders address responsibility for
advocating a climate and culture conducive to learning. Classified staff B said,

160
My job is to keep the school clean. I make sure the classrooms are clean and
that restrooms are open and ready so that way the students do not waste
time, instructional time, going to find a restroom.
There is a culture of belonging at EEHS. There are numerous opportunities
for student involvement. At least 40 clubs and organizations have been formed,
from those that address ethnic diversity and sexual orientation to those that address
fashion and the arts. Many of the African American students are involved in the We
Are One program. A similar organization was being formulated for Latino students
at the time of the study. Information about the level of membership in these
organizations was not available at the time of the study.
Multicultural fests are reportedly held during the year to promote cultural
awareness and respect through foods and music. The school library displays
culturally relevant posters, and books that are ethnocentric in nature. Most
classrooms displayed ethnically diverse literature in small-scale classroom libraries.
The most highly recognized program is We Are One, which focuses on the
achievement and empowerment of African American students. Information regard-
ing this program is posted in classrooms. Colorful brochures are available in the
office with information about We Are One, and information is available on the
school Web site.
Focusing on the social/emotional and cultural factors that impact student
performance included issues surrounding race. This school has the unusual resource
of two psychologists, while the majority of schools in the district have only one.
School leadership agreed to fund one psychologist to address special education
issues; the other focuses primarily on the affective domain through counseling and
intervention. This resource works in tandem with the peer counseling component of
the overall intervention program. Students who have been trained in conflict resolu-

161
tion serve as a vehicle for resolving racial disharmony as well as other social issues.
The availability of Impact resources is evident throughout the school in posters in
the hallways, postings in the classrooms, and the weekly in-house televised student
activities program.
Although ethnically diverse, the students continue to segregate themselves
during unstructured periods of the day, such as nutrition and lunch. As an assistant
principal noted, “You see Asians kind of grouped together, African Americans
grouped together, and Whites grouped together.” She reported that, even as
administrators and staff at staff meetings, people tend to be drawn to their “friends
and sit.” The school reportedly is attempting to integrate students through various
school-wide cultural fests and the many multicultural organizations on campus. The
attempt to integrate students through these fests and multicultural organizations is
an asset in moving toward a positive culturally respectful environment. However,
the pattern of self-segregation by staff and students as reported to this researcher
suggests the continuance of a racial division. Such patterns of behavior lead to the
question of whether this self-imposed segregation stems from some self-preserva-
tion of identity or a representation of what is systemic outside of the school culture.
As noted in the findings pertaining to school organizational structures and
systems, the SST was discussed as part of the school’s structure leading to possible
special education evaluation. The researcher observed an SST meeting for an
African American student who reportedly had been enrolled in a RSP at his
previous school and was currently experiencing academic difficulties. In attendance
at the meeting was the school administrator responsible for special education (a
Latina) and the student’s teachers, all of whom were White except the African
American music teacher. One of the key points addressed by the parent during the

162
meeting was culture. Her concern revolved around the need to consider the cultural
differences of her son and to respect those in light of the diversity evident at the
school and the dominant group responsible for her son’s educational instruction.
The administrator responded to the parent’s concern by speaking about the school’s
engagement in culturally relevant and responsive education and stressing the
school’s desire to address each student’s culture in the instructional program. She
referred the student and parent to We Are One, which focuses on cultural issues of
African American students at the school. This observation was relevant in that,
although the term culture was used in the dialogue, the construct of race was
embedded in the discussion of culture and the student’s issues were being
addressed from a deficit perspective by members of the dominant culture. The
administrators’ reference to We Are One was important for this student because it
provided a vehicle for him as a new student to develop social capital, as espoused
by Coleman (1988), and the interrelationships that can forge the development of
skills required within the current environment as well as skills that serve as a
cultural frame of reference.
Examining the instructional needs of students of color was included in the
inquiries as part of this study. During the SST meeting there was reference to cul-
turally relevant and responsive education. This pedagogy is reportedly aimed at
African American and Latino students and is presented during professional
development activities. Most teachers who responded to a school survey indicated
that they integrated students’ culture and prior knowledge into their instruction.
Administrator C commented,
The District has the cultural relevant and responsive education . . . we have
presented it to the teachers in professional development. And we have
talked about the need of not just accepting that we have students of other

163
colors in this school, but it’s also trying to learn about their background,
their culture. And once they learn . . . it’s not just, “Okay! They’re here. I
know where they come from. I tolerate them.” It’s embracing who they are.
It’s also respecting where the students come–accepting their differences and
showing the students that, regardless of what their background is, we are
here to support them. . . . I know that CRRE is mostly for Latinos and
African American students, but we take it for our entire student [body].
They all need to learn to respect each other.
One of the criticisms of CRT is that African American students are not
exposed to challenging or rigorous curriculum and the resources or real property to
support their curriculum and instruction (Ladson-Billings, 1999a, 2005; Ladson-
Billings & Tate, 1995). It speaks to school curriculum as intellectual property that
must be supported by real property such as computers and technology. Adminis-
trator A at EEHS emphasized during his interview the importance of rigor in the
instructional program and noted that it is an expectation for all teachers to engage
in rigorous instruction. The rigor of the instruction is dependent on the content of
the course. There was evidence of rigorous instruction in the classrooms observed
during this study. Students were actively engaged in discourse in dyads or small
groups or whole class; the discourse required students to analyze, synthesize, and
evaluate information rather than engage in activities requiring rote memory. Each
observed classroom had real property in the form of several computers and students
were engaged in activities utilizing technology either individually or with the
teacher. Group and individual projects such as journals, student made videos and
student-authored books reflect creativity and mastery goal orientation.
During one teacher interview it was reported that students “need to be able
to demonstrate their knowledge by doing something with their hands.” Students are
expected to create a visual representation through a poster or DVD of the California
state standards being studied. The standard is the criterion. Students reportedly
work outside the school day in cooperative groups to complete the project. Such

164
projects provide cross-curricular learning opportunities in mathematics through
cost analysis on how to finance the project. Observations revealed that student peer
feedback and teacher feedback provided support and facilitated greater on-task
behavior and more in-depth understanding of information. Observations and
interviews reflected student engagement in activities in which they must draw
inferences and conclusions while extrapolating information from various sources.
Writing rubrics were provided during writing activities and were posted on chalk-
boards or walls in the classroom, with explicit expectations for specificity and
clarity. Word banks were displayed on charts or the blackboard/whiteboard to
incorporate higher-level vocabulary usage in written work. There is evidence of
high teacher efficacy as the teachers effectively engaged students during instruction
and provided multiple opportunities for students to engage in higher-order cogni-
tive thought processes through the use of creative instructional strategies. Use of
such skills enabled students to demonstrate a greater understanding of the lessons
and facilitated a greater mastery goal orientation on the part of the students while
increasing the students’ self-efficacy about their performance.
There was a focus on differentiated instruction in terms of its need and
implementation. Instructional practices vary but do not appear differentiated
because of race. The principal reported that differentiated instruction is done by
those who teach honors or AP classes. These teachers must have 32 hours of
professional development in differentiated instruction. “But for students of color,
right now, there isn’t a specific training for those teachers teaching those students,”
according to one school administrator. However, it was reported that instructional
strategies are being implemented for special education students, such as scaffolding
and breaking down assignments into smaller tasks. Observations did not reveal

165
instruction being presented to African American students any differently from that
presented to Whites. However, there were opinions voiced during interviews
regarding differentiation in terms of content and concerns about racially oriented
content. Administrator A said,
When the teacher is instructing, I expect the teacher to have rigor in the
classroom, but the rigor may be different in an AP or honors class than what
might be seen in an EL class or class with sheltered English students. I
would expect to see less lecture, use of visuals; you may speak more slowly.
I would not look for that in an AP class. . . . Students must be engaged,
working in groups . . . project based, cooperative groups.
While the administrator spoke of rigor and instructional strategies based on
the type of class, one teacher’s comments suggested that differentiation of instruc-
tion from a racial perspective is not implemented. She suggested that instruction is
all inclusive and that the content of that instruction is racially inclusive. Another
school administrator addressed culturally relevant and responsive education as a
pedagogical basis for responding to the educational needs of students of color. This
pedagogy is consistent with the literature that suggests the importance of education
from a sociocultural perspective and CRT in terms of educating African American
students from an asset model (Gay, 2000; Ladson-Billings, 1999a; Ladson-Billings
& Tate, 1995). Teacher A seemed offended at the idea of differentiating or modify-
ing instruction to meet the needs of students of color.
I have not modified my instructional practice because of color in my
classroom. It’s not something that I’m going to pick out to make special.
We read authors of different colors, ethnicities, and everything like that. . . .
I don’t go out and particularly find, “Oh gee, let me find the picture of
somebody Black to put on my wall.” I don’t do that. I reach my students.
We read people of color. . . . We read great literature from all over the
place. And so everybody will have a chance to be inclusive. . . . So every-
body gets covered, but not being patronized that they were doing this
because we have to make some check box on a culturally relevant education
box that says, “Oh, we have the color of this girl.” I don’t do that. And I
don’t find it necessary to do that. . . . I think it’s insulting when you make

166
that grand effort to just, “Let me just make sure I covered this.” However,
we sit down and we discuss literature.
One teacher interview revealed a belief consistent with the school belief of
respect as espoused in its vision statement. This teacher reported promoting racial
and cultural respect through literature. The instructional strategy included having
students choose a literary character of a race different from that of the student
reader. Students kept an ongoing journal about the character. Students developed
cultural and racial respect as they examined the character through its historical
relevance and societal context. Creating stories or counter storytelling is one of the
tenets of CRT. Counter storytelling in education may be found in personal stories
or narratives, other people’s stories or narratives, and a composite of stories or
narratives (Solórzano, Ceja, & Yosso, 2002).
In tandem with this thought process is an understanding of the need to
provide opportunities for exposure to instructional material that promotes skill
development for standardized test performance.
Well, I feel like if a kid lives on [name] Street, okay, he already knows what
happen on [that] street. But when he takes his SAT, I can assure you that
there will be no [name] Street questions on the SAT. . . . They don’t have
gang questions on the CAHSEE. So when teachers say, “I want them to
read about who they are,” I want them to read about who they are, too, on
their own time. If I’m going to read someone of color, I’m going to read
[author] or [author] . . . . I’m going to read people that have some kind of
literary merit to bring kids up. . . . I want them to know something challeng-
ing. I’m going to teach history, art, and science and social studies and use
literature as a vehicle. I’m not going to teach you literature of your own
culture in school and that’s all you learn. I think that’s more destructive
than constructive. So when you try to appease someone by trying to check
off the little check box that says when you’re culturally relevant, it has a
backlash and can have frightening results.
The comments from Teacher A are in stark contrast to the concepts
espoused by sociocultural and CRT perspectives, which proponents of culture
suggest are an integral part of and/or a framework from which to provide

167
instruction. Yet, race and culture were evident in this classroom. Students had
completed culturally relevant and ethnocentric projects, such as books, posters, and
journals, that reflected cultural diversity and the use of technology. Using techno-
logy, individual and group projects, such as plays and videos, revealed positive
images of students of color, including African Americans, and pointed out the
absurdity of buying into negative racial and ethnic stereotypes.
Teacher D commented on the content of the curriculum, positing a view
similar to that of Teacher A noted above but taking a contradictory stance as to the
importance of the racial perspective of instruction. This teacher’s classroom was
filled with murals depicting Afrocentric culture, including large paintings of
renowned African Americans and other persons of color. A wall display of former
students, many of whom were African American, was prominent in the front of the
classroom.
I’m all about trying to make sure that what’s being taught is not from a
Eurocentric perspective. I’m all about trying to make sure that kids of color
can see themselves in the history of this nation, can see themselves in the
development of this nation, can see themselves as a part of the United
States, that it is not a lily-White, blonde-hair, blue-eyed experience. . . . But
one of the most difficult parts [of teaching] for me was, “Where do you
include the color experience. . . . How much time can I spend on the African
American experience. . .? How much time can I spend on the Native
American experience? How can you talk about U.S. history and pretend the
Native American experience wasn’t really a part of it? How can you leave
out Asians, Chinese in particular, when you get to the industrial develop-
ment of the country in the middle of the 19th century?” So how can you be
an effective teacher of history and not include all those experiences? . . .
The nation was built on the backs of a lot of people of color. And to pretend
that didn’t happen . . . and we don’t have to talk about it, that’s not accept-
able to me.
The focal group throughout the study of EEHS was African American
students. More often than not during interviews with various stakeholders, African
American students were not singled out in terms of support from specific

168
organizational structures and systems, with the exception of the consistent referral
to We Are One when inquiries were made about students of color. Teacher C
remarked,
We have We Are One, which I believe is based on meeting the individual
needs of certain subgroups here on campus to where they’re able to meet as
a group and honestly vent and discuss problems that are targeted towards
that racial group. . . . It has been very successful. It also actually increased
test scores and motivational levels. It has also empowered the student more
and gives them a better outlook on their future and expectations of living in
reality and not just here on campus.
The school administrators referred to We Are One during their interviews
when discussing diversity and respect for students of color. Administrator A spoke
of the importance of its empowerment of African American students and com-
mented that it has probably promoted working with students of different cultures.
Students of color appear to be categorized into one group when discussing racial
issues with stakeholders, as engaging in frank dialogue about the issue was
presented as being uncomfortable.
We Are One
Every African American student is considered a member of We Are One,
according to the founders, who are referred to as “elders.” The mission of this
program focuses on the creation of a learning environment for underrepresented
students in which the students are motivated and exposed to instructional strategies
that build self-regulatory skills and test-taking skills and foster learning. Its
seminars, workshops, and small group meetings serve as a conduit for the promo-
tion of academic and social success and provide social and cultural capital for these
students in terms of networking resources and a venue for self-expression and self-
advocacy. One of the goals of We Are One is to connect African American students

169
to a past of which they do not appear to be aware. To help students make this
reconnection, We Are One presents what is referred to as “Impact Assemblies.”
These assemblies have engaged students in dialogue about the concept of intelli-
gence and achievement as being the sole province of Whites and the effects of
patriarchy and misogyny and their influence via Hip Hop culture. Such assemblies
are significant in that CRT has analyzed the construct of race and the epistemology
of intelligence (Bell, 1995a, 1995b; Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995) while others
(e.g., Ogbu, 1995a, 2004) have addressed the achievement of African American
students through an examination of their attitudes toward intelligence and its
manifestation in academic achievement. CRT has been used to examine the impact
of “words,” particularly when they are used in a racially derogatory manner
(Matsuda, Lawrence, Delgado, & Crenshaw, 1993). These assemblies very likely
create cognitive dissonance within the students by presenting racial perspectives
that are often counter to their belief systems. Nevertheless, the assemblies allow
students to see how these beliefs and attitudes affect learning, thus leading to
changes that create a desire to increase school performance.
Motivational in nature, We Are One attempts to tap into what is important to
students at the time and to provide a venue for critical analysis of societal issues.
For example, despite the media blitz regarding the use of racial epithets, specific-
ally the word nigger, We Are One held a special assembly entitled “The N-Bomb.”
We Are One has been addressing this issue for the past 4 years but held this
assembly due to the recent heightened usage of the word as well as other racial and
sexually denigrating terms. To be cognizant of these issues, such assemblies pro-
vide an opportunity for students to explore the historical context of such verbiage
and, more important, the historical context of contributions, sacrifices, disenfran-

170
chisement, and marginalization of people of African descent—in other words, to
facilitate the development of an asset perspective rather than a deficit perspective of
their race and to understand and appreciate the social and cultural capital possessed
by African Americans, thus building their self-efficacy and their belief in their
ability to achieve and creating an attitude of activism. Such an objective is in line
with a key component of CRT in defining race and racism in specific historical and
social contexts.
We Are One attempts to help students to focus on the value of education
through motivation. Students are expected to achieve and be successful, which is
consistent with the belief system of the school. Students’ expectations to succeed
and the value of education are mediating factors in a willingness to persevere
toward a goal (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002). If this be the case, these students may be
more willing to work toward those classroom academic and behavioral goals.
Despite the existence and impact of this program and efforts to address the
diversity on the campus, the pervasiveness of racism was still acknowledged.
Teacher D reported,
And still what happens on this campus is not enough. There is still a lot of
bigotry on this campus. There’s still a lot of resentment of catering to
people of color. And then White people are always uncomfortable talking
about race, always. You know that’s the elephant in the room.
EEHS does not present itself as a totally colorblind culture. Triangulated
data suggest a culture in which race is a factor. For, example, observed classrooms
and the school library have visual and written representations of people of color.
Student group and individual projects are indicative of class discussions and
research that reflect a focus on students of color. One class observed has wall-sized
murals of people of color. The We Are One program is specific to African

171
American students as a motivational and empowerment venue addressing social,
cultural, and academic issues that may be influential factors in the level of students’
school performance. A similar group is in the initial stages of development to
address similar needs for Hispanic students. We Are One has promoted greater
communication and positive relationships with Hispanic students through specially
designed interethnic seminars. In addition there are ethnicity-oriented clubs in
which students can participate. As noted by one school administrator, “There is
something for everyone.” However, during interviews, responses to issues of race
manifested in uncomfortable affect and an emphasis on inclusion.
Analysis of Findings for Research Question 4
The sociological construct of race serves as the foundation for examination
of school organizational structures and systems in this research question. The use of
CRT as the theoretical framework from which to examine race and its impact on
student achievement facilitated this examination from an asset perspective rather
than the deficit perspective from which African American students are usually
viewed by defying stereotypes and critical examination of how students have
access to resources to negotiate institutions such as schools (Ladson-Billings,
1999a, 1999b). Triangulated data suggest evidence of race. Ethnocentric literature
is present in some classrooms and the school library. Classroom practices are
inclusive of projects that reflect racial and cultural backgrounds of students and
enable students to construct their own learning from an ethnocentric perspective.
The construct of race is evident but does not appear to be fully developed
throughout the school. Triangulated data suggest dissonance regarding this issue.
There is evidence to suggest a colorblind and inclusive culture, with simultaneous

172
evidence to reflect that systems that are racially specific have led to improved
student performance.
The school belief system has fostered an achievement-oriented culture.
Beliefs in student ability and teacher expectations seem to supersede consideration
of the construct of race as an underlying factor in student achievement. There may
be a correlation between African American students’ consistent upward trajectory
of achievement, as well as that of other students of color, and the paradigm shift in
belief in student achievement.
There was evidence of classroom instructional practices in artifacts such as
books, journals, and posters that, from the lens of CRT, suggest counter storytell-
ing. An essential feature of CRT, this method of telling a story is aimed at casting
doubt on the validity of those premises and misrepresentations of people of color
held by the dominant culture (Delgado & Stefancic, 2001). This method speaks to
the centrality or importance of experiential knowledge in challenging dominant
ideology.
In addition to counter storytelling, CRT speaks to a master script as part of
the design for the dominant culture to maintain its dominance (Matsuda et al.,
1993). The master scripting silences the voices and perspectives of nondominant
groups, these being people of color, and serves as a means of legitimizing the
voices of the White dominant culture as being the only knowledge that students
should acquire. The voices and perspectives of others are omitted from the master
script unless they can be disempowered through inaccurate representations.
Knowledge that does not reflect the dominant culture is manipulated, eventually
becoming part of the master script.

173
The concept of master scripting is germane in the examination of race in
this study and the impact of We Are One on student achievement. This program that
seeks to empower students challenges the master script perpetuated by the domin-
ant culture and manifested in the negative scripts that members of their own group
write for them. Responses of one teacher reflected a commitment, although not
evident in other interviews, to ostensibly contradicting the master script through
instruction about the accomplishments of people of color within the historical
context of the nation’s development. Instructional practices suggest that students
are viewed from an asset perspective rather than the usual deficit model. This asset
model aligns with CRT in relation to its position on this construct. There are con-
tradictions in the belief system: Although there is the belief that all students can
learn, there is also disagreement about the pedagogy of specific instruction that
focuses on differentiation because of race or cultural relevance. Most interviewees
referred to one specific program as having a major impact on African American
students rather than achievement as a result of a coherent, cohesive instructional
program, despite evidence pointing to this.
Discussion
Chapter 4 presents the findings of the research study as they aligned with
the research questions. Trends and patterns of performance by students of color
were viewed through the conceptual framework of social and cultural capital, the
interrelationship between student and the environment, the sociocultural process of
learning, and the construct of race. The findings suggest an overall pattern of
improve achievement for African American students in the study school. Despite

174
the disparity in achievement between this subgroup and White students, they
continue to progress.
The inherent nature of socialization as part of the school experience has
provided students with access to resources essential for positive academic out-
comes. School organizational structures are in place with supportive systems, as
outlined in the literature work, to form an educational entity that is achievement
oriented, bound by mutual respect and culturally responsive pedagogy. Students’
achievement is the result of a triangulated school environment addressing the
social/emotional, physical, and academic domains, all of which speak to the
interrelationship of numerous factors involved in the learning process. From the
perspective that learning takes place in a social context, it was found that this
construct was interwoven throughout the fabric of the school.
Test scores are generally viewed as the criteria for measuring school and
student success. A more global perspective of success is evident at EEHS. Teachers
reportedly use attendance data and student grades to assess and monitor improve-
ment in student achievement. Student grades were not included in this research due
to issues of confidentiality. Attempts were made to obtain racially disaggregated
attendance data; however, such data were not accessible. Additional evidence of
student achievement is seen as students engage in cooperative groups, teamwork on
thematic unit projects, and collaborative problem solving. There is evidence of
creativity and innovation evident in student-authored books and journals found in
the classroom and the weekly television broadcast. The variability in assessing
students’ achievement is reflected not only in test scores but in preparation for
class, engagement, and performance on teacher-created and textbook tests, all of
which are used to monitor and articulate student achievement.

175
Part of the research inquiry pertaining to school organizational structures
and systems focused on maintenance of high performance. This was evident at
EEHS. Critical to this maintenance is the concept of teacher expectations that are
addressed within the school system. However, the staff’s willingness to think
outside the box speaks to their self-efficacy in terms of being willing to take risk—
to transcend the standard processes of instruction and engage in instruction that
transforms students into critical thinkers. As Teacher D noted,
The programs here are based on thinking outside the box. . . . We’re push-
ing the envelope, period. We’re trying to find new ways to do it and really
embracing a holistic approach in education. If you’re about innovation, then
you need to be about innovation, not “cookie cutter” programs where every-
body’s got to teach the same thing across the board.
Maintenance of high performance is facilitated by continued teacher
empowerment to make decisions within the school structures and systems germane
to the school’s self-determination and student achievement. One of the challenges
faced by the school as it propelled to the current performance level has been
working within the structures of the district. Mandated assessment, curriculum
adoption, and implementation have challenged the school staff in their efforts to
abstain from a “cookie cutter mentality” and immerse themselves in “out-of-the-
box thinking.”
The ever-present construct of race as reflected in the school suggests a
concerted effort to provide venues for expressions of racial pride and empower-
ment. Classroom instructional practices demonstrate a respect for racial and cul-
tural diversity. Yet, the dichotomy reflecting perceptions of a colorblind inclusive
school environment is in contrast to an inclusive climate that also presents with
racial ambiguities. However, the belief system embraced by the school stakeholders

176
encapsulates the mission and vision of the school that promotes high expectations
and achievement for all students. Teacher A summed it up as follows:
For the school such as ours that created a core curriculum where we sat
down and we labored over it for a period of years trying to decide what was
9th grade, 10th grade, and so forth . . . the kinds of writings that we wanted
to do, all those things. We’re reaping the benefits in our scores, in our
CAHSEE results, in our API scores, and we’re doing all of these positive
things. And we’ve finally gotten everything in line and we’re just going
along like a well-oiled machine.

177
CHAPTER 5
SUMMARY, IMPLICATIONS, AND CONCLUSION
This chapter presents an overview of the qualitative research study of one
comprehensive urban high school that exemplifies the characteristics of high-
performing, high-poverty urban schools consistent with what is evident in the
literature. The purpose of the study was to examine these characteristics in the
form of school organizational structures and systems while focusing on the impact
of race and teacher expectations on student achievement. Through this study the
researcher explored trends and patterns of achievement for African American
students, as well as other students of color, while simultaneously examining the
school structures and systems and how they support effective classroom
instructional practices. As the sociological construct of race is a historically
significant factor in the differentiated achievement trajectory of African American
students, the focal group of the study, it was incumbent upon the researcher to
critically examine these structures and systems from a racial perspective. A
collective analysis of the research findings formed the framework for implications
for policy and practices, recommendations for future study, and conclusions.
Connection to Prior Research
The findings from the study are connected to the literature on high-perform-
ing high-poverty schools. Chapter 2 reviewed the extant literature in this area and
the theoretical framework that served as the basis for the research questions. The
overarching theoretical framework for this case study was sociocultural in nature.
Social and cultural capital as they relate to student outcomes was examined. The
concept of social and cultural capital within the educational milieu suggest that

178
school structures and systems should consider the resources that students bring to
the learning process as a result of home and community influences. Consideration
must also be given to the resources to which students have access within the educa-
tional environment.
Research suggests that school organizational structures and systems are
interconnected, forming a belief system that impacts student achievement.
Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model served as the theoretical framework, suggesting
that school outcomes are a result of the student’s development and environment
working in concert.
The current research study connects school structures and systems and
learning outcomes with Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory of learning. The theory
suggests that learning takes place in the context of a social plane, with cognition
developing as a result of the social context (Kozulin et al., 2003). Students enter the
learning process with a cognitive schema or map resulting from the socialization
process at home and in the community prior to entering school. Therefore, instruc-
tional practices in the educational milieu should in some way reflect student’s
cultural orientation.
The literature reports research on the construct of race in terms of the
historical achievement disparities between the focal group of this study, African
American students, and their White counterparts. This construct was examined
through the lens of CRT. The study examined school climate and culture and
supports for students of color within the school structures and systems.

179
Summary of Research Findings
The overarching theoretical framework for this case study was sociocultural
in nature. The line of inquiry of the study focused on the following four research
questions, each based on specific theoretical or conceptual frameworks with over-
lapping social and/or cultural aspects that serve as integral components for learn-
ing. Four research questions guided the study:
1. What are the trends and patterns of performance among students of
color?
2. What organizational structures and systems are perceived to contribute to
high student performance in high-poverty urban schools with large concentrations
of students of color?
3. How are the organizational structures and systems implemented to
support school wide effective classroom instruction that promotes student learning?
4. How is the construct of race reflected in the school’s structures and
systems?
The literature suggests that high performance in high-poverty urban schools
may be attributed to instructional practices resulting from the implementation of
organizational structures such as funding and program regulations and from
systems such as leadership, professional development, parent involvement, goal
setting and feedback, and teacher expectations. However, the existing research that
studies high-performing high-poverty urban schools is limited in scope in that there
is minimal focus on race and racial beliefs within these organizational structures
and systems and the impact on instructional practice.
The correlation between belief systems and the teacher’s ability to deliver
effective instruction is not clear nor is there clarity on organizational structures and

180
systems that most impact teacher expectations, beliefs, or instructional practices at
high-poverty schools with large concentrations of students of color. Further inquiry
into those unknown organizational structures and systems led to the current study,
the purpose of which was to examine the organizational structures and systems
that lead to high performance in students of color in high-poverty urban schools.
Central to the study was the construct of race and teacher expectations as mediating
factors of student achievement.
For purposes of this study, school organizations were defined as institu-
tional mechanisms, policies, and procedures put in place by federal and state policy
and legislation or widely accepted structures of schools not subject to change at the
local school site. Such structures include school funding, personnel policies, and
program regulations. School systems were defined as the mechanisms that support
the structures providing a coordinated coherent use of resources. Systems include
leadership, professional development, parental involvement, and belief systems that
encompass high expectations and teacher expectations. Most significant in the
study was the belief system that promotes the other systems.
The researcher sought a school that exemplified the organizational struc-
tures and systems outlined in the literature and agreed on by the thematic disserta-
tion group. To that end, a comprehensive high school with grades 9 through 12 was
chosen for this qualitative study. The school met the criteria established by the
thematic dissertation group for high-performing high-poverty urban schools with
large concentrations of students of color. Observations, artifacts, and interviews
comprised the triangulation of data obtained in the research. Analysis of the data
facilitated the responses to the research questions.

181
Trends and Patterns
Research suggests that the capital that students bring to the learning process
should be considered as a factor that affects student learning (Bennett, 2001;
Coleman, 1988). Research suggests that the capital that students bring to the
learning process from their homes and communities has a significant impact on
student learning. In addition, school structures and systems serve as mediating
factors in student learning and development (Stanton-Salazar, 1997). The school
has a stable staff, most of whom are fully credentialed—a trend that has been on the
incline since the 2004-2007 school year. These two factors—teacher stability and
teacher credentials—have been found to be significant mitigating factors in high-
performing high-poverty urban schools (Barth et al., 1999). With this stability,
students are able to establish ongoing relationships with instructional staff, which is
a source of social and cultural capital. These relationships are part of the socializa-
tion process inherent in schools and lead to greater access to resources and oppor-
tunities for learning.
It would be difficult to analyze the impact on school achievement based on
family relationships in this study. The school serves many low-income students,
with 68% of the population eligible for free or reduced-price lunches. Although
many of the students come from low-income families; however, only two parents
were interviewed for the study, which is not representative of the parent population.
It is known that the school is racially diverse and relationships are established at
school as part of the socialization process. It is also known that social agents
working on behalf of students should respect the social and cultural capital that
students bring to the school setting.

182
At EEHS there is a positive achievement trajectory for African American
students as measured by API scores, which have consistently increased since the
2000-2001 school year. The pattern of achievement for African American students
has been a steady incline, surpassing the 3-year achievement trajectory determined
by the thematic dissertation group. Analysis of these data suggests that this
improvement may be attributed to a paradigm shift in the belief system of the
school and the incorporation of the We Are One program, a programmatic social
and culturally based system that targets African American students. Establishment
of this program has led to the development of relationships with teachers and
administrators at the school who have access to resources that provide increased
learning opportunities.
Data for the 2006-2007 school year suggest that most African American
students were performing at the Basic level in ELA and Mathematics (27.1 % and
34.2 %, respectively) with White students performing at 14.5% and 24.8% in these
respective areas. While more African American students were performing at the
Basic level, more White students were performing at the Proficient and Advanced
levels.
The literature reports historical underenrollment of African American
students in AP classes (Johnson, 2002; Ladson Billings, 1999a). Only 28 of the 267
African Americans students enrolled at EEHS were enrolled in AP classes, which
amounts to 24% of African American students based on subgroup student enroll-
ment, compared to 48% of White students. African American students showed a
consistent pattern of high percentages in passing the CAHSEE in preparation for
high school graduation from 2004 to 2007. Although still higher than White
students, there has been a decline in the number of African American students

183
undergoing OT from 2004 through 2007 and fewer suspensions in 2006-2007 than
in 2005-2006. A higher percentage (10.5%) of African American students were
enrolled in special education compared to White students (6.1%). Enrollment based
on eligibility criteria was not available at the time of the study. Disproportionate
enrollment in special education is consistent with the literature on disproportion-
ality (Gardner & Miranda, 2001; Skiba et al., 2005; Skiba et al., 2006). The causal
factors of disproportionate representation are not clear. Racially based teacher attri-
butes and expectations may play a role in initiating evaluations for special educa-
tion services. Referral systems are in place, part of which is the SST discussed in
chapter 4. Through this system staff can address adaptations to the student’s
existing educational program. Effective implementation of this system may lead to
fewer referrals and thus fewer students in need of special education support.
Organizational Structures and Systems
Structures
School structures were defined as institutional mechanisms such as policies
and procedures put in place by federal, state, or district policy and legislation or
widely accepted as the official structure of the school not subject to change at the
local school site. Standards-based instruction is one such school structures to which
all students have access. Standards are communicated to all stakeholders in the
school community.
Funding resources for the school include Title I funds and funding from the
local district. Budgeting of funding resources is facilitated by school leadership,
which provides utilization of the resources for systems supporting the instructional
program.

184
While personnel regulations, such as those involving teacher hiring, are
usually the purview of the local district, EEHS staff take an active role in hiring
teachers for the school. The implementation of a positive, proactive discipline plan
is in effect in an effort to promote a culture of respect and responsibility, as well as
honesty and safety. The plan reportedly has been well received by school staff,
parents, and students as a structure that is fair and equitable.
Systems
There is evidence to suggest that the structures and systems at EEHS form
an integrated system to establish a belief system that impacts student achievement.
Triangulated data reflect a belief system that is achievement oriented and focuses
on all students being capable of learning. The social, physical, and cultural aspects
of the school environment work in concert with the students’ development to
produce positive achievement and behavioral results.
The inherent structure of relationships facilitate the emergence of those
norms and expectations of the school and expectations and family involvement are
causal factors in fostering academic success. High teacher expectations and
parental involvement are two of the key systems that form the social capital for
student at EEHS. This adds credence to the necessity for culturally relevant peda-
gogy as part of the instructional program, as seen through student artifacts and from
teacher interviews. However, observations did not reveal the amount of student
teacher interaction in the classroom with students of color, as was expected.
SLCs provide greater opportunities for students to develop increased
interpersonal relationships with teachers and increased access to resources. These
theme-based learning communities promote student interest in specific skill areas,

185
in addition to fostering opportunities for intercommunity collaboration between
students and staff.
There is evidence of strong leadership, consistent with the literature on
high-performing high-poverty urban schools. Administrators, teachers, parents, and
students form a team of distributive or collaborative leadership through the numer-
ous councils that have input into decisions on usage of school funding and hiring
policies and systems, such as professional development and parent involvement to
promote a cohesive, coherent educational program. Student leaders are evident as
part of this leadership component. Students are part of the SSC. Those students,
who are referred to as “natural leaders,” further develop those skills through adult
support allowing students to serve as a resource for conflict resolution and
emotional and academic support.
A belief system focused on achievement is evident in the mission and vision
statements of the school and in its ESLRs. To that end, funding is provided for pro-
fessional development, classroom resources, and intervention programs. Parent
involvement is evident through their participation on various school councils and in
fundraising efforts. Consistent with its belief system of achievement, the school has
a parent center that provides resources and support for parents and for students who
are parents. Communication and participation are key components of parent and
community involvement. There is ongoing communication with this group of stake-
holders in a number of ways, including the use of technology.
The literature on high-performing high-poverty schools suggests that goal
setting and feedback are predictors of student achievement (Pintrich & Schunk,
2002). Triangulated data revealed evidence of these factors. Although school-wide
goals and those required for completion of assignments were clearly displayed and

186
articulated, a teacher engaged in individual goal-setting with students was not
apparent as expected. Teacher expectations are high and are communicated to
stakeholders with evidence to suggest that these high teacher expectations translate
into high teacher efficacy.
Support for School-Wide Effective
Classroom Instruction
Findings from the current study suggest evidence at EEHS of organizational
structures and systems consistent with those noted in the literature on high-
performing high-poverty urban schools. In addition to an examination of those
systems, the study examined how the implementation of these structures and
systems supported effective classroom instruction.
Evidence of classroom instructional support was seen through funding of
professional development. Funding of professional development facilitates teacher
acquisition of instructional strategies used in the classroom and further develop-
ment of teacher expertise in subject matter. School leadership supports continued
professional development and engages in dialogue with teachers, providing feed-
back germane to instruction. Instructional strategies are implemented to engage
students in high-order cognitive skills and performance as well as mastery of goals.
The Construct of Race
CRT formed the basis of analysis for the construct of race in this study. This
conceptual framework consists of basic insights, perspectives, methods, and peda-
gogies in which the researcher seeks to identify, transform, and analyze those struc-
tural and cultural aspects of education that maintain subordinate and dominant
racial positions within the classroom as well as society at large (Matsuda,

187
Lawrence, Delgado, & Crenshaw, 1993; Solórzano & Ornelas, 2004). Efforts are
being made by the school to foster an inclusive climate, evident by its numerous
organizations that focus on student assets and respect for their cultural diversity.
Culturally relevant pedagogy is evident through the triangulation of data from
observations, artifacts, and interviews. Creation of greater opportunities for
inclusion, respect for the cultural capital that students bring to the learning process,
and the social capital resources through relationship building provide greater access
to resources and opportunities to learn, which leads to increased achievement.
In this inclusive environment the diverse student population at EDHS has
numerous opportunities for participation in organizations that reflect its cultural
diversity. The respect for this diversity and the cultural capital that students bring to
the learning process work in tandem with the social capital resources resulting from
relationship building to facilitate learning opportunities leading to greater achieve-
ment. The inclusivity of the school culture contradicts the concept of social repro-
duction, the basis for which lies in the construct of race created by the dominant
culture. Social reproduction stems from the concept of social capital, which is
viewed as an investment by the dominant culture to maintain and reproduce group
dominance. Working on the premise that those who are successful have the
resources to continue to be successful suggests that students must have social
capital in order to be successful at school. The inclusive culture at EEHS provides
students an opportunity to break through the cycle of social reproduction and
access the resources available through teachers, school intervention programs, and
the like, which promotes their success.
The construct of race presented as a difficult point of discussion. The
majority of the teaching staff at EEHS were White, while the majority of students

188
were of color. There were differing perceptions as to how race factored into
instruction and achievement─perceptions that were not totally drawn along racial
lines. A “colorblind” approach was reflected in discussion with some staff who
asserted the notion of an inclusive culture. Others articulated the continued
struggle with racial issues. Evidence of a belief in the ability that all students can
achieve and be successful offers a paradox to the consideration of race and the
importance of incorporating culturally relevant instruction into the educational
program. There is evidence to suggest the implementation of culturally relevant
pedagogy, and some teachers have embraced a belief system of achievement with
an understanding that the incorporation of the student’s cultural repertoire into the
instructional program may facilitate improved student performance.
EEHS offers AP classes as part of its instructional program. However,
the full extent to which students and parents are engaged in the educational
structures, practices, and discourse pertaining to access to AP classes is not clear.
School artifacts at EEHS suggest that students have access to AP classes as a class
enrollment option. However, the data were not disaggregated by race, so there was
no way to delineate how students of color, particularly the focal group of the study,
responded to this inquiry. Is there an effort to ensure greater proportionality of
African American students in these courses? Such enrollment is significant in
that it is a factor in preparing students to be competitive applicants in university
admissions. As noted in the data, 24% of the student enrollment in AP classes is
African American. However, placement criteria are not clear. This led to a further
line of inquiry for the researcher in line with the literature in terms of school
structures that might maintain this pattern of racial disparity in access to these
courses (Ladson-Billings, 1995; Solórzano & Ornelas, 2004; Tate, 1997).

189
Significance of the Findings
This research study was conducted to enhance the body of research on high-
performing high-poverty urban schools with large concentrations of students of
color. The research lends additional validity to the current literature base. However,
the construct of race and teacher expectations within the context of a sociocultural
framework requires greater exploration. This research contributes to that explora-
tion. These findings are significant in that they examine the correlation between
school structures and systems and student achievement from an asset paradigm.
From this perspective, the illumination of “what is working” in the school for
students of color to foster academic achievement is significant.
Implications for Policy and Practice
Based on the findings of this study and consideration of prior research on
high-performing high-poverty urban schools, consideration should be given to the
following implications: (a) engaging in honest dialogue about race and racism that
challenges the dominant discourses of education and educational research, and
(b) reformation of the educational system through educational policies may very
well be contingent on policymakers’ substantial recognition of the underpinnings of
race and racism in education and how they perpetuate inequity and meritocracy in
the system in concert with a willingness to change.
Recommendations for Future Study
The following recommendations are made based on the findings of the
study. They are not in any way a commentary on the school under study but rather
areas that might be considered focal points based on the implementation of

190
research-based structures and systems found in high-performing high-poverty
schools with large concentrations of students of color.
1. There is evidence of a belief system that promotes achievement. Stake-
holders promote the belief in all students’ ability to achieve. As students were not
included in the study, their belief in their capabilities is not known. To that end,
studying student self-efficacy in comparison to the belief system of the school
would increase the knowledge base as to the causal factors of student achievement
from the student’s perspective..
2. Interventions for academic improvement are provided at the school.
What is not known is the level of participation by African American students. An
examination of participation by this subgroup in intervention programs and the
impact on student achievement would enhance the body of knowledge about the
factors leading to their achievement.
3. Students’ progress is reported during specific reporting periods through-
out the year, consistent with district policy. Review of reporting methods led to an
inquiry on reporting methods for standards. Do reporting methods for standards-
based instruction reflect student progress toward meeting the standards? This
inquiry lends itself to future avenues of study.
4. Ongoing instruction in culturally relevant and responsive education
should be included in the school’s professional development repertoire to increase
culturally relevant instructional practices.
5. As a major program at the school of study, We Are One has been referred
to as a significant factor in improved achievement by African American students. A
longitudinal study of this program would provide more in-depth data about its long-
term impact on student self-efficacy and achievement.

191
6. Findings of the study indicated high expectations espoused by adminis-
trators, teachers, and parents. Teacher expectations are communicated to all stake-
holders. However, students’ perceptions of expectations were not included in the
study. Future studies of school organizational structures and systems in high-per-
forming high-poverty schools could examine students’ perceptions of expectations,
with comparisons of those of students of color to those of students of the dominant
culture.
Limitations of the Study
This study provided an in-depth examination of school organizational
structures and systems. However, there were limitations to the study. As noted in
chapter 1, the time allocated for the study was a limitation. This limitation did not
permit time for additional teacher and parent interviews. Time constraints did not
allow for a more thorough examination of teacher expectations as measured by
student/teacher interactions and engagement. Greater breadth would have been
added to the study had students been included as interviewees. Their responses
would have provided an additional perspective cogent to the perspectives of the
entire school community.
Conclusion
High-performing high-poverty urban schools with large concentrations of
students of color are products of a combination of factors. Organizational structures
and systems are fundamental components of the nation’s schools. Literature sug-
gests that implementation of these structures and systems fosters effective class-
room instructional practices, promoting positive achievement outcomes for students
of color. From a sociocultural perspective, students’ social and cultural capitals

192
work in conjunction with the capital or resources within the context of these
structures and systems to promote school achievement.
Much of the dialogue about race takes place within the context of education.
In addition to school organizational structures and systems, an examination of
issues relative to bilingual programs, school desegregation, affirmation, as well as
ethnic studies in higher education suggests. Such dialogue was not a pervasive
component of this study; however, the construct was explored in terms of how it is
embedded in structures and systems. In concert with teacher expectations, it was
examined as a mediating factor of student achievement. EEHS has organizational
structures and systems in place that provide a cohesive educational program for its
students. There is evidence of a strong belief in students' ability to achieve.
Despite this belief system and its accompanying systems and structures it is
difficult to ascertain definitively their individual impact. However, it is clear that
the combined implementation of these structures and systems has led to positive
achievement outcomes for students.
Although there was evidence of the acknowledgment of racial and cultural
diversity, actual instruction utilizing culturally relevant pedagogy was not evident.
However, the absence of observed instruction does not suggest that such pedagogy
is not a part of program development. Student artifacts substantiate that
contradiction.
There is evidence to suggest that students at EEHS are motivated to
achieve. Students were actively engaged in learning in all classrooms observed.
What actually motivates them is not clear and could be further examined in the
future.

193
Using an asset paradigm to examine achievement by students of color may
foster the development and implementation of more proactive, creative, and
innovative policies and instructional practices based on research-based sociocul-
tural pedagogy proven to be effective with this population. Articulation of motiva-
tional factors that impact student learning must also occur within the context of this
asset paradigm, as motivation is not a factor of learning that is consistently
addressed in racially based educational dialogue. It is the hope that, from this study,
education scholars will enhance their knowledge base of what school structures and
systems are effective in educating students of color and seek the means by which
they can be replicated.

194
REFERENCES
Ancess, J. (2000). The reciprocal influence of teacher learning: Teaching practice,
school restructuring and student learning outcomes. Teachers College
Record, 102, 590-619.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
Barth, P. (Ed.). (2000). Honor in the boxcar: Equalizing teacher quality. Thinking
K-16, 4(1). Retrieved April 12, 2007, from ERIC database.
Barth, P., Haycock, K., Jackson, H., Mora, K., Ruiz, P., & Robinson, S., et al.
(Eds.). (1999). Dispelling the myth: High-poverty schools exceeding ex-
pectations. Retrieved April 12, 2007, from ERIC database
Bell, D. A. (1995a). Brown v. Board of Education and the interest convergence
dilemma. In K. Crenshaw, N. Gotanda, G. Peller, & K. Thomas (Eds.),
Critical race theory: The key writings that formed the movement (pp. 21-
28). New York: New Press.
Bell, D. A. (1995b). Serving two masters: Integration ideals and client interests in
school desegregation litigation. In K. Crenshaw, N. Gotanda, G. Peller, &
K. Thomas (Eds.), Critical race theory: The key writings that formed the
movement (pp. 5-19). New York: New Press.
Bennett, C. (2001). Genres of research in multicultural education. Review of Edu-
cational Research, 7, 171-217.
Berliner, D., & Biddle, B. (1995). The manufactured crisis: Myths, frauds and the
attack on America’s public schools. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2003). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice and
leadership (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bottoms, G. (1998). Outstanding practices: Raising student achievement by focus-
ing on the ten key practices: High schools that work. Atlanta: Southern Re-
gional Educational Board.
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook for
theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241-258). Boulder,
CO: Greenwood Press.
Bourdieu. P., & Passeron., J. (1977). Reproduction in education, society and
culture. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

195
Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (1976). Schooling in Capitalist American. New York:
Basic Books.
Brophy, J. (2000). Dispelling the myth: Teaching educational practices, series 1.
Washington, DC: International Bureau of Education.
Brown, K. E., & Medway, F. J. (2007). School climate and teacher beliefs in a
school effectively serving poor South Carolina (USA) African American
students: A case study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 529-540.
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483, 1954.
California Department of Education. (2004). California Department of Education
Standardized Testing and Report (STAR) results. Retrieved November 5,
2006, from http://star.cde.ca.gov
California Department of Education. (2007). California Department of Education.
Retrieved February 27, 2007, from http://data 1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/
SpecEd/SeenrEthDis3.asp?Disttype=S&cSelect=196473
California Department of Education. (2008a). California Department of Education,
Educational Demographics Office. Retrieved April 27, 2008, from
http://www.ed-dataK12.ca.us.Navigation/fsTwoPanel.asp?bottom=%2
California Department of Education. (2008b). California Department of Education
Standardized Testing and Report (STAR) results. Retrieved April 27, 2008,
from http://www.startest.org/cst.html
Carter, S. C. (2000). No excuses: Lessons from 21 high-performing high-poverty
schools. Washington, DC: Heritage Foundation.
Coleman, J. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Jour-
nal of Sociology, 94(Supplement), 95-120.
Coutinho, M. J., & Oswald, D. P. (2000). Disproportionate representation in special
education: A synthesis and recommendations. Journal of Child and Family
Studies, 9, 135-156.
Crenshaw, K. (1995). Introduction. In K. Crenshaw, N. Gotanda, G. Peller, & K.
Thomas (Eds.), Critical race theory: The key writings that formed the
movement (pp. xi-xxxii). New York: New Press.
Creswell, J. W. ( 2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed
methods approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). New standards and old inequalities: School reform
and the education of African American students. Journal of Negro Educa-
tion, 69, 263-287.

196
Delgado, R. (1995). Critical race theory: The cutting edge. Philadelphia: Temple
University Press.
Delgado, R., & Stafancic, J. (2001). Critical race theory: An introduction. New
York: New York University Press.
Denbo, S. J., & Beaulieu, L. M. (Eds.). (2002). Improving schools for African
American students: A reader for educational leaders. Springfield, IL:
Thomas.
Diamond, J. B., Randolph, A., & Spillane, J. P. (2004). Teachers’ expectations and
sense of responsibility for student learning: The importance of race, class,
and organizational habitus. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 35(1),
75-98.
Dika, S., & Singh, K. (2002). Applications of social capital in educational litera-
ture: A critical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 72(1), 31-60.
Dusek, J. B., & Joseph, G. (1983). The bases of teacher expectancies: A meta-
analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 327-346.
Eccles, J., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values and goals. Annual
Review of Psychology, 53, 104-132.
Edmonds, R. R. (1982). Programs of improvement: An overview. Educational
Leadership, 40(3), 4-12.
EdSource. (2006). Glossary of terms. Retrieved March 3, 2007, from
http://www.edsource.org/glo.cfm
EdSource (2007). Glossary of terms. Retrieved April 1, 2007, from http:www.ed-
data.k12.ca.us/Glossary.asp
Education Trust. (2004). Key education facts and figures. Education Watch, Re-
trieved February 10, 2007, from http://www2.edtrust.org
Ferguson, R. (2001). A diagnostic analysis of Black-White GPA disparities in
Shaker Heights Ohio. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Fordham, S., & Ogbu, J. (1986). Black students’ school success: Coping with the
burden of “acting White.” Urban Review, 18, 176-206.
Gardiner, H., & Kosmitzki, C. (2005). Lives across cultures: Cross-cultural human
development. New York: Wiley.
Gardner, R., & Miranda, A. H. (2001). Improving outcomes for urban African
American students. Journal of Negro Education, 70, 255-263.
Gay, G. (2000). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research and practice.
New York: Teachers’ College Press.

197
Gill, S., & Reynolds, A. J. (1999). Educational expectations and school achieve-
ment of urban African American children. Journal of School Psychology,
37, 403-424.
Haycock, K., Barth, P., Jackson, H., Mora, K., Ruiz, P., Robinson, S., et al. (1999).
Dispelling the myth: High-poverty schools exceeding expectations. Wash-
ington, DC: Education Trust.
Hernstein, R., & Murray, C. (1994). The bell curve: Intelligence and class structure
in American life. New York: Free Press.
Hoover Institution. (1998). Policy review: A nation still at risk. Retrieved February
28, 2008, from http://www.hoover.org/publications/policyreview/
3563967.html
Irvine, J. J., & Armento, B. J. (2001). Culturally responsive teaching: Lesson plan-
ning for elementary and middle grades. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Irving, M. A., & Hudley, C. (2005). Cultural mistrust, academic outcome expecta-
tions and outcome values among African American adolescent men. Urban
Education, 40, 476-496.
Isaksen, J. L. (2005). From critical race theory to composition studies: Pedagogy
and theory building. Legal Studies Forum, 24, 695-711.
Izumi, L. (2002). They have overcome: High-performing schools in California. San
Francisco: Pacific Research Institute.
Johnson, R. S. (2002). Using data to close the achievement gap: How to measure
equity in our schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Kozol, J. (1991). Savage inequalities: Children in America’s schools. New York:
Crown.
Kozulin, A., Gindis, B., Ageyev, V., & Miller, S. (2003). Vygotsky’s educational
theory in cultural context. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African
American children. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy.
American Educational Research Journal, 35, 465-491.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1999a). Just what is critical race theory and what’s it doing in
a nice field like education. In L. Parker, D. Deyhle, & S. Villenas (Eds.),
Race is . . . race isn’t (pp. 7-30). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1999b). Preparing teachers for diverse student populations: A
critical race theory perspective. Review of Research in Education, 24, 211-
247.

198
Ladson-Billings, G. (2005). The evolving role of critical race theory in educational
scholarship. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 115-119.
Ladson-Billings, G., & Tate, W. F. (1995). Toward a critical race theory of educa-
tion. Teachers College Record, 97(1), 48-68.
Lareau, A., & Horvat, E. M. (1999). Moments of social inclusion and exclusion:
race, class and cultural capital in family-school relationships. Sociology of
Education, 72(1), 37-53.
Lassen, S. R., Steel, M. M., & Sailor, W. (2006). The relationship of school-wide
positive behavior support to academic achievement in an urban middle
school. Psychology in the Schools, 43, 701-712.
Lawrence, C.R. (1993). If he hollers, let him go: Regulating racist speech on
campus. In M. J. Matsuda, C. R. Lawrence, R. Delgado, & K. Crenshaw
(Eds), Words that wound: Critical race theory, assaultive speech and the
First Amendment (pp. 53-58). Boulder, CO, Westview Press.
Lawson, M. A. (2003). School-family relations in context: Parent and teacher per-
ceptions of parent involvement. Urban Education, 38(1), 77-133.
Lee, V., & Smith, J. (2001). High school restructuring and student achievement.
New York: Teachers College Press.
Levine, D. U. (1994). Instructional approaches and interventions that can improve
the academic performance of African American students. Journal of Negro
Education, 63, 46-63.
Levine, D. U., Cooper, E. J., & Hilliard, A. (2000). The school reform movement
and the education of African American youth: A retrospective update. Jour-
nal of Negro Education, 69, 305-322.
Levine, D. U., & Ornstein, A. (1993). School effectiveness and national reform.
Journal of Teacher Education, 44, 335-345.
Lopez, G. R. (2003). The (racially neutral) politics of education: A critical race
theory perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39(1), 68-94.
Lyman, L. L., & Villani, C. J. (2004). Best leadership practices for high-poverty
schools. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Education.
Lynn, M. (2006). Race, culture and the education of African Americans. Educa-
tional Theory, 56(1), 107-119.
Lynn, M., Yosso, T., Solórzano, D., & Parker, L. (2002). Critical race theory and
education: Qualitative research in the new millennium. Qualitative Inquiry,
8(1), 3-6.

199
Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into action.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Matsuda, M. (1995). Looking to the bottom: Critical legal studies and reparations.
In K. Crenshaw, N. Gotanda, G. Peller, & K. Thomas (Eds.), Critical race
theory: The key writings that formed the movement (pp. 63-79). New York:
New Press.
Matsuda, M., Lawrence, C., Delgado, R., & Crenshaw, K. (Eds.). (1993). Words
that wound: Critical race theory, assaultive speech, and the First Amend-
ment. Boulder, CO: Westview.
McCarty, T. (2004). Brown plus 50 and beyond: Anthropology and the ongoing
challenge of the great divide. Anthropology and Education Quarterly,
35(1), 3-7.
McGee, G. W. (2004). Closing the achievement gap: Lessons from Illinois’ golden
spike high-poverty high-performing schools. Journal of Education for Stu-
dents Placed at Risk, 9(2), 97-125.
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in educa-
tion. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mickelson, R. A. (2003). When are racial disparities in education the result of
racial discrimination? A social science perspective. Teachers College
Record, 105, 1052-1086.
Mitchell, R., & Mitchell, D. (2005). Student segregation and achievement: Track-
ing in year-round schools. Teachers College Record, 107, 562-585.
Monkman, K., Ronald, M., & Theraméné, F. D. (2005). Social and cultural capital
in an urban Latino school community. Urban Education, 40(1), 4-33.
Morris, J. E. (2004). Can anything good come from Nazareth? Race, class, and
African American schooling and community in the urban South and Mid-
west. American Educational Research Journal, 41(1), 69-112.
Muijs, D., & Reynolds, D. (2002). Teachers’ beliefs and behaviors: What really
matters? Journal of Classroom Interaction, 37(2), 3-15.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2005). The National Center for Educa-
tion Statistics. Retrieved March 5, 2007 from http://nces.ed.gov/
National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The
imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: Author.
National Research Council. (2002). Minority students in special and gifted educa-
tion. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

200
Ogbu, J. (1994). Understanding cultural diversity and learning. Journal for the
Education of the Gifted, 17, 355-383
Ogbu, J. (1995a). Cultural problems in minority education: Their interpretations
and consequences. Part 1: Theoretical background. Urban Review, 27(3),
189-205.
Ogbu, J. (1995b). Cultural problems in minority education: Their interpretations
and consequences. Part 2: Case studies. Urban Review, 27(4), 271-297.
Ogbu, J. (2004). Collective identity and the burden of “acting White” in Black his-
tory, community, and education. Urban Review, 36(1), 1-35.
Ogbu, J., & Simons, H. D. (1994). Cultural models of school achievement: A
quantitative test of Ogbu’s theory on cultural models of literacy—A com-
parative study, project 12. Berkeley, CA: National Center for the Study of
Writing and Literacy
Ormrod, J. E. (2006). Educational psychology: Developing learners (5th ed.).
Columbus, OH: Pearson-Merrill Prentiss Hall.
Outstanding Unified School District [pseudonym]. (2008). Student information
system. (Available from researcher)
Patillo-McCoy, M. (1999). Black picket fences: Privilege and peril among the
Black middle class. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Patton, J. M. (1998). The disproportionate representation of African Americans in
special education: Looking behind the curtain for understanding and solu-
tions. Journal of Special Education, 32(1), 25-31.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thou-
sand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research
and application (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill Prentiss Hall.
Pressley, M., Gaskins, I., Solic, K., & Collins, S. (2006). A portrait of a benchmark
school: How a school produces high achievement in students who previ-
ously failed. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 282-306.
Pressley, M., Raphael, L. Gallagher, D., & DiBella, J. (2004). Providence St. Mel
School: How a school that works for African American students works.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 216-235.
Prime, G. M., & Miranda, R. J. (2006). Urban public high school teachers’ beliefs
about science learner characteristics: Implications for curriculum. Urban
Education, 41, 506-532.

201
Rand Corporation. (2006). Improving educational outcomes through accountabil-
ity: Lessons from other sectors. Retrieved May 12, 2007, from
http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB8026/indexl.html
Ravitch, D. (2000). A different kind of education for Black children. Journal of
Blacks in Higher Education, 30, 98-106.
Ream, R. K. (2005). Toward understanding how social capital mediates the impact
of mobility on Mexican American achievement. Social Forces, 84, 201-224.
Reeves, D. B. (2004). Accountability in action: A blueprint for learning organiza-
tions (2nd. ed.). New York: Wiley.
Singham, M. (1998). The canary in the mine: The achievement gap between Black
and White students. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 9-12.
Singleton, G., & Linton, C. (2006). Courageous conversations about race. Thou-
sand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Skiba, R., Chung, C., Wu, T., Simmons, A., & St. John, E. (2000). Minority over-
representation in Indiana’s special education programs: A status report.
Bloomington: Indiana Educational Policy Center.
Skiba, R., Poloni-Staudinger, L., Gallini, S., Simmons, A. B., & Feggins-Azziz, R.,
(2006). Disparate access: The disproportionality of African American stu-
dents with disabilities across educational environments. Exceptional Chil-
dren, 72, 411-424.
Skiba, R., Poloni-Staudinger, L., Gallini, S., Simmons, A. B., Feggins-Azziz, R., &
Chung, C. (2005). Unproven links: Can poverty explain ethnic dispropor-
tionality in special education? Journal of Special Education, 39, 130-144.
Skiba, R., Simmons, A., Ritter, S., Kohler, K., Henderson, M., & Wu, T. (2006).
The context of minority disproportionality: Practitioner perspectives on
special education referral. Teachers College Record, 108, 1424-1459.
Skiba, R., Wu, T., Kohler, K., Chung, C., & Simmons, A. (2001). Disproportion-
ality and discipline among Indiana’s students with disabilities. Blooming-
ton: Indiana Education Policy Center.
Solórzano, D., Ceja, M., & Yosso, T. (2000). Critical race theory, racial microag-
gressions and campus racial climate: The experiences of African American
college students. Journal of Negro Education, 69(1/2), 60-73.
Solórzano, D., & Ornelas, A. (2004). Critical race theory analysis of Latina/o and
African American advanced placement enrollment in public high schools.
The High School Journal, 87(3), 15-26.

202
Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (1997). A social capital framework for understanding the
socialization of racial minority youth. Harvard Educational Review, 67(1),
1-40.
Stanton-Salazar, R. D., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1995). Social capital and the repro-
duction of inequality: Information networks among Mexican-origin high
school students. Sociology of Education, 68, 116-135.
Steele, C. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity
and performance. American Psychologist, 52, 613-629.
Tach, L., & Farkas, G. (2006). Learning related behaviors, cognitive skills and
ability grouping when schooling begins. Social Science Research, 35, 1048-
1079.
Tate, W. F. (1997). Critical race theory and education: History, theory and implica-
tions. Review of Research in Education, 22, 195-247.
Taylor, A. Z., & Graham, S. (2007). Examination of the relationship between
achievement values and perceptions of barriers among low-SES African
American and Latino students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(1),
52-64.
Teddlie, C., & Reynolds, D. (Eds.). (2000). The international handbook of school
effectiveness research. New York: Palmer Press.
Timperley, H. S., & Phillips, G. (2003). Changing and sustaining teachers’ expecta-
tions through professional development in literacy. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 19, 627-641.
Towns, D., Cole-Henderson, B., & Serpell, Z. (2001). The journey to school
success: Going the extra mile. Journal of Negro Education, 70(1/2), 4-18.
Tyson, K., Darity, W. J., & Castellino, D. R. (2005). It’s not “a Black thing”: Un-
derstanding the burden of acting White and other dilemmas of high
achievement. American Sociological Review, 70, 582-605.
University of California. (2008). Paths to admission. Retrieved April 28, 2008,
from http://universityofCalifornia.edu/admissions/undergrad.adm/
paths_to_adm/freshman/subhect.reg.html
Washington Learns. (2006). Successful district study final report. North Holly-
wood, CA: Lawrence O. Picus & Associates.
Weiner, B. (1992). Human motivation: Metaphors, theories and research. New-
bury Park, CA: Sage.
Weinstein, R. S., Gregory, A., & Strambler, M. J. (2004). Intractable self-fulfilling
prophecies: Fifty years after Brown v. Board of Education. American Psy-
chologist, 59, 511-510.

203
Willie, C. V., & Willie, S. D. (2005). Black, White and brown: The transformation
of public education in America. Teachers College Record, 37, 475-495.
Woodson, C. G. (1933). Mis-education of the Negro. Washington, DC: Associated
Publishers.
Zimmerman, B. J., Bandura, A., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1992). Self-motivation for
academic attainment: The role of self-efficacy beliefs and personal goal-
setting. American Educational Research Journal, 29, 663-676.

204
APPENDIX A

Interview Questions for Administrators

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

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

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

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

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

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

6. Describe your school wide discipline policy and how it impacts students of
color?
a. Does your discipline policy help students adopt behavior that
contributes to their learning?

205
APPENDIX B

Interview Questions for Teachers

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

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

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

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

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

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

7. Describe your school wide discipline policy and how it impacts students?

206
APPENDIX C
Interview Questions for Parents

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

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

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

4. How does the school address the needs of all sub-groups of students?

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

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

7. Describe the school’s discipline policy.
a. How does it support the learning of all students?
b. Do you consider the discipline policies fair to all children? Can you
give an example of its fairness?

207
APPENDIX D
Interview Questions for Classified Staff

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

8. Describe your school wide discipline policy and how it impacts students.
a. What happens when a student breaks a rule or makes a bad choice?
b. Does the discipline policy help students engage in behavior that
contributes to their academic success?

208
APPENDIX E

Classroom Observation Guide

Are there a range or variety of instructional practices /strategies used? Are they
appropriate for the content and students?
Examples of instructional practices/strategies:
• Cooperative grouping
• Use of time
• Differentiated instruction
• Feedback to students

What visuals, symbols and items posted in the classroom?
Examples of items:
• School wide discipline policy
• Images of people of color
• Classroom library

Physical Class Environment
Example of things to observe:
• Seating arrangement
• Teacher student interaction student
o discipline
• Student work posted
o Feedback/rubric
o Standard based
• Student Engagement

209
APPENDIX F

Professional Development Observation Guide

• Does collaboration occur during and after professional development?

• Is there engagement among the staff?

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

• How professional development is aligned to the vision?

• How are students discussed?

• If they teach master goal or performance?

• Is the professional development practical and adaptable?

• What are the expectation and implementation of the professional
development?

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

• Is an evaluation tool used for the professional development?

210
APPENDIX G

Leadership Meeting Observation Guide

1. To what extent was the meeting focused on the implementation of the
team's plan?

2. Does the staff analyze student achievement data in order to take informed
actions?

3. Did (or does) the staff discuss and plan for diversity-sensitive learning
environments?

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

5. Structure: Is the meeting for information or strategic planning?

6. Is the meeting operational or instructional in focus?

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This qualitative study focused on school organizational structures and systems in high-performing high-poverty urban schools with large concentrations of students of color. The focal group of the study was African American students in a comprehensive high school grades 9 through 12. The study began with an analysis of the historical achievement disparity between African American students and their White counterparts. The study addressed four research questions for which the overarching theoretical framework was sociocultural in nature. Operational definitions developed by a thematic dissertation group were provided for school structures and systems as a prelude to the line of inquiry and discussion about their effectiveness.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

School-wide implementation of systems and structures that lead to increased achievement among students of color: a case study of a high-performing, high-poverty urban school

PDF

School-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from a high-performing, high-poverty urban school

PDF

Overcoming a legacy of low achievement: systems and structures in a high-performing, high-poverty California elementary school

PDF

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

PDF

School-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lesson from a high performing high poverty urban elementary school

PDF

A study of academic success with students of color: what really matters? Lessons from high-performing, high-poverty urban schools

PDF

School-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from high-performing, high-poverty schools

PDF

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

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

Systems and structures at a high performing high poverty school: A case study using RTI to promote student achievement

PDF

School-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from a high-performing, high poverty urban school

PDF

School-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from high-performing, high-poverty urban schools

PDF

The impact of leadership on student achievement in high poverty schools

PDF

School-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from high-performing high-poverty urban schools

PDF

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

PDF

A case study: school-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from high-performing, high poverty urban schools

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

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

Asset Metadata

Creator Neal, Deborah Maryland (author)

Core Title Organizational structures and systems in high-performing, high-poverty urban schools: the construct of race and teacher expectations as mediating factors in student achievement

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

Publication Date 06/12/2008

Defense Date 04/21/2008

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

Tag educational psychology,high-performing,high-poverty urban schools,OAI-PMH Harvest,race and student achievement,school structures and systems,teacher expectations and student achievement

Language English

Advisor Stowe, Kathy (committee chair), Picus, Lawrence (committee member), Rousseau, Sylvia G. (committee member)

Creator Email dneal1155@aol.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m1269

Unique identifier UC1188832

Identifier etd-Neal-20080612 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-76892 (legacy record id),usctheses-m1269 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Neal-20080612.pdf

Dmrecord 76892

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Neal, Deborah Maryland

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