University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Writing across the curriculum: exploring promising practices in two California charter schools

(USC Thesis Other)

Writing across the curriculum: exploring promising practices in two California charter schools

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content WRITING ACROSS THE CURRICULUM: EXPLORING PROMISING PRACTICES IN TWO CALIFORNIA CHARTER SCHOOLS by Vithrel Searchwell ____________________________________________________ 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 Vithrel Searchwell ii DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to the memory of my father, Lloyd L. Searchwell, who encouraged me to pursue a doctorate degree as he lay dying. I also acknowledge the support and prayers of my family and friends. I am grateful to my mother for the many sacrifices that she made so that I could have the opportunities that were not afforded to her. Thank you for guiding me, encouraging me to trust in God, and helping me to reach my full potential. Many thanks to my sister, brother, and aunt for your encouragement throughout the dissertation process; and thank you to my best friend for believing in me and for just being there. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS “I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me” (Philippians 4:13). This dissertation could not have been completed without the grace of God. In addition, I acknowledge the support and assistance of my chair, Dr. Penny Wohlstetter, who helped me to develop my skills as a writer and researcher; my committee members, Dr. Gisele Ragusa, and Dr. Eugenia Mora-Flores; the members of my thematic dissertation group; and the administration and staff of Pacific Collegiate School and View Park Accelerated Preparatory Charter High School. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS DEDICATION ……………………………………………………………. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ………………………………………………… iii LIST OF TABLES ………………………………………………………… v ABSTRACT ………………………………………………………………. vi CHAPTER 1: Overview of the Study …………………………………….. 1 CHAPTER 2: Literature Review …………………………………………. 13 CHAPTER 3: Research Methods …………………………………………. 40 CHAPTER 4: Findings ……………………………………………………. 55 CHAPTER 5: Conclusions ……………………………………………….. 97 REFERENCES …………………………………………………………… 109 APPENDICES ……………………………………………………………. 116 v LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1: Data Collection Methods …………………………………………. 50 Table 3.2: Triangulation of Information Across Data Sources ………………. 52 Table 4.1: Profile of Charter School: View Park Preparatory Accelerated Charter High School ………………………………………………………….. 57 Table 4.2: Profile of Charter School: Pacific Collegiate School ……………... 76 Table 4.3: Strategies Used by View Park and Pacific Collegiate …………….. 95 vi ABSTRACT Writing is essential to success in school and has been linked to student achievement or the lack thereof. This study investigated the use of writing across the curriculum in two California charter schools that have had success using writing to improve student achievement. Writing across the curriculum has been identified in the literature as a promising practice that increases student achievement. A qualitative case study was conducted, in which two California charter schools implementing writing across the curriculum were examined. Data sources included the following: interviews with teachers and administrators, classroom observations, a review of archival documents, and observations of professional development specific to writing across the curriculum. The following four research questions were answered during the study: How do charter schools use writing across the curriculum to improve student achievement? How are resources used to implement writing across the curriculum? What challenges have charter schools faced in implementing writing across the curriculum successfully? What evidence exists that writing across the curriculum has resulted in positive educational outcomes? The findings illustrated that similar benefits and challenges were experienced at both schools. Consistent, on-going professional development, on the topic of writing across the curriculum, was found to be a critical component of implementation. Although both schools had extensive professional development, vii there was still a need for more. One school used a teachers-teaching-teachers model, while the other school used the English department as a resource. Certain classroom practices were found to be effective in implementing writing across the curriculum. Among those were class discussions, journal writing, and note-taking. The study revealed that students who engaged in writing across the curriculum had high test scores on standardized writing tests, Advanced Placement tests, and they passed college placement tests more frequently, eliminating the need to take a remedial writing class in college. The goal of this study was to disseminate implementation details of writing across the curriculum through USC’s Online Compendium of Promising Practices in order to assist other schools, districts, and policy makers who wish to improve student achievement through writing across the curriculum. 1 CHAPTER I Overview of the Study Introduction Writing is a form of expression often used in schools; however, students in the United States and in California lack the ability to write well. Specifically, students in middle school and high school are unprepared for college writing. Data obtained from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) indicates that less than 31% of students in the United States score at or above proficient in writing (National Center for Education Statistics, 2006). The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), also known as the nation’s report card, is administered every 5 years to students in Grades 4 and 8 throughout the country. The most recent test administration in 2002 indicated that only 23% of both fourth- and eighth-grade students were performing at or above proficient in writing in the state of California, while national numbers are slightly better, with 27% of fourth graders and 30% of eighth graders performing at or above proficient levels (NCES, 2007). The most recent data suggest that fourth- and eighth-grade students’ writing performance has, in recent years, improved only marginally across the state and the nation. The data indicate that 20% of eighth-grade students scored at or above proficient in writing on the NAEP writing assessment administered in 1998, while 23% of eighth- grade students scored at or above proficient on the 2002 administration of the test in the state of California. At the same time, 24% of the 2 nation’s eighth graders scored at or above proficient in 1998, with 30% of the nation’s eighth graders scoring at or above proficient in 2002 (NCES, 2007). There is widespread pressure from both the federal and state governments to improve student writing. The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 requires states to be accountable for closing the achievement gap by working to ensure that all students become academically proficient by the 2013 – 2014 school year (EdSource, 2007; U.S. Department of Education, 2007). The achievement gap is the gap that exists when certain groups of students continuously score well below students from other groups on standardized tests (EdSource, 2007). An achievement gap exists in many areas, including poor versus non-poor students from different ethnic backgrounds and English speakers versus non-English speakers. NCLB has federally mandated that schools be held accountable for closing the achievement gap. Under the act, schools must set academic achievement goals and standards that can be measured (U.S. Department of Education, 2007). As a way of measuring these standards, annual testing occurs for all students in Grades 3 through 8. The results indicate whether or not a school is making adequate yearly progress (AYP). The state of California also uses the California Standards Test (CST) to determine whether or not a school is making AYP. Each spring, students in Grades 4 and 7 take the writing section of the CST. This part of the CST, which is called the California Writing Standards Test, was first administered in 2001 (California Department of Education, 2002). Students are required to write an essay in response to a writing prompt. The scores from this prompt become part of their 3 overall score for the English-language arts section of the CST and are factored into the schools’ AYP (California Department of Education, 2007). Throughout the state of California, less than half of all fourth-grade students (49%) and seventh-grade students (43%) scored at the proficient or advanced level on the CST (California Department of Education, 2007). In addition to the federally mandated NCLB, the state of California has instituted the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE), which tests student achievement in the areas of English-language arts and math. A writing section is incorporated into the English-language arts section of the test. Students take the CAHSEE for the first time during the spring semester of the tenth grade. Those who are unsuccessful and fail the test are allowed three opportunities thereafter to retake the test. Students who do not pass both sections of the CAHSEE by the twelfth grade do not receive a high school diploma (California Department of Education, 2007). The 2006 pass rate for all students in Grades 10 through 12 in the state of California for English-language arts was 61% (California Department of Education, 2007). These results suggest that 39% of high school students in the state of California did not write sufficiently well to pass the CAHSEE. The College Board made the decision to add a writing component to the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) in 2005 due to a growing concern with the level of writing across the country in schools and in the business and policy-making communities (National Commission on Writing, 2003). The test is mostly multiple- choice; however, a 25 minute essay is now a part of the writing section of the SAT 4 (Mattern, Camara, & Kobin, 2007). While the SAT is an entrance exam designed to predict students’ success in college, the purpose of the writing section of the SAT is to measure a student’s ability to organize and articulate their ideas clearly, develop and support the central idea, and use suitable word choice and sentence formation (The College Board, 2007). In sum, writing is a major component of NAEP, the SAT, and the CAHSEE. With less than 31% of our nation’s children scoring at or above the proficient level in writing, the hope is that with more exposure to writing and greater accountability, students’ academic achievement will improve. Educators now are faced with the great challenge of improving writing instruction at all levels. Promise of Writing Across the Curriculum to Improve Student Achievement Evidence to date suggests a relationship between writing across the curriculum and higher student achievement. Writing across the curriculum is defined as “the strategic integration of carefully designed writing tasks in any content area to serve the ends of learning authentic communication, personal engagement, and reflective authorship” (Bangert-Drowns, cited in Brewster & Klump, 2004, p.7). By incorporating writing into other subject areas, students gain more exposure to writing and academic performance goes up (Bottoms, 1999). Content subject areas include reading, math, social science, science, foreign language, art, and physical education. The acquisition of writing is often neglected in schools even though writing assessments are prevalent (Juzwik, Curcic, Wolbers, Moxley, Dimling, & Shankland, 2006). 5 Teachers who are members of the National Writing Project have reported that students have become more engaged in writing across the curriculum as a result of the teachers’ use of different teaching strategies suggested by the National Writing Project. Seventy-nine percent of teachers have reported an increase in the students discussing their writing with each other and 66% reported students answering questions in writing (National Writing Project, 2002). According to Reed (2006), students are better able to comprehend and retain content by using writing across the curriculum and this should be the focus once students have mastered the fundamentals of print. Students are able to put deep thought into ideas and novel information through the use of writing across the curriculum (Peterson, Rochwerger, Brigman, & Wood, 2006). Cooney and Bottoms (2003) have found that writing across the curriculum has the potential to raise student achievement at all grade levels. The National Commission on Writing (2006) stated that in order for students to be successful in school and in life, writing skills need to be improved. If students are writing in the content areas, they will write more, receive more feedback, develop better writing skills, have greater exposure to a variety of writing styles, and improve their academic achievement. The National Commission on Writing (2006) agrees that the extensive use of writing across the curriculum will improve students’ writing performance, increase the amount of time spent in writing, and deepen their understanding of the subject-matter. Figure 1 graphically depicts the link between writing across the curriculum and increased student performance. 6 Figure 1. Theory of Action: How Writing Across the Curriculum Leads to Improved Student Performance Writing in content areas Students write more Students receive more feedback Better writing skills and broad exposure to writing styles Student achievement improves 7 The Role of Charter Schools Charter schools are in a position to promote interesting new teaching practices since they are deregulated schools that have increased autonomy. Since many state laws and regulations are also waived for charter schools, this provides them with more room to innovate (Bulkley & Fisler, 2003). In exchange for autonomy, charter schools are held accountable for their performance at the end of the charter contract, which is usually 3-5 years (Brewer & Wohlstetter, 2005; Crawford, 2001). A school’s contract is renewed unless it is violated or the school’s educational goals are not being met; in either of these cases, the charter can be rescinded (Bulkley & Fisler, 2003). As part of their accountability, charter schools must follow the mandates of No Child Left Behind to make AYP (Brewer & Wohlstetter, 2005) and they must also administer the same state accountability tests that all other public school students take. Charter school reformers suggest that the strong accountability mechanism also serves as a catalyst for innovation – if an educational practice is not improving student performance, then change it. Charter schools are prevalent in 40 states along with the District of Columbia, and currently serve over 1 million students (Brewer & Wohlstetter, 2005). California leads the way as the state with the most charter schools, having opened the first one in 1993 (EdSource, 2007). As of April 2007, the number of charter schools throughout the country ranged from 1 in Mississippi to 621 in California. Other states with a large number of charter schools include Michigan, Ohio, Florida, Texas, and Arizona (National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, 2007). 8 The autonomy of charter schools allows them to provide educational alternatives for students that would not otherwise have access to in traditional public schools (Bulkley & Fisler, 2003). Charter schools have the potential to increase student achievement due to the fact that they are self-governing (Wohlstetter, Griffin, & Chau, 2002) and because competition is a driving force for them (Crawford, 2001). They are, in a sense, laboratories for innovation (Brewer & Wohlstetter, 2005). The premise behind charter schools is that traditional public schools will compete with them and adapt their promising practices and principles in order to increase student achievement (Murphy & Shiffman, 2002). Chubb and Moe (cited in Wohlstetter, Wenning, and Briggs, 1995) agree that autonomy is important in determining the success of schools. The hope is that promising practices in charter schools will spread to traditional public schools (Brewer & Wohlstetter, 2005). Charter schools are schools of choice and must compete for teachers and families. As a result, charter schools may take on many different forms in order to attract people to the school. Instructional programs in charter schools can be more flexible and more innovative than in traditional public schools and, as a result, they may lead to an improvement in student performance (EdSource, 2007). Charter schools have many different foci, including back-to-basics, technology, the environment, and the arts (Carpenter, 2006). Parents have the option of enrolling their children in charter schools when traditional public schools fail to meet their needs. Due to the fact that charter schools are public schools, all students have access (Bulkley & Fisler, 2003). Moreover, charter schools are driven by their mission 9 statements (U.S. Department of Education, 2004) and have the capacity to attract students and teachers who share the same vision (EdSource, 2007). On the whole, charter schools tend to be smaller than traditional public schools and offer different configurations of grade levels (Bulkley & Fisler, 2003). Charter schools, especially those in California, have been shown to be more productive than district-run schools; in a sense then, charter schools get more “bang for their buck” (Charter Schools Indicators-USC, 2007). Compared to district-run schools that spend about the same amount per student, charter schools have more students performing at higher levels for less money. The learning environment of charter schools also tends to be more intimate than that of traditional public schools (Ziebarth, Celio, Lake, & Rainey, 2005), since charter schools often feature small learning communities. Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study is to investigate promising practices in charter schools that have increased student achievement through the use of writing across the curriculum. The results of the study will become part of the University of Southern California’s (USC) Compendium of Promising Practices and will be accessible by the public. The compendium allows innovations to be shared among both charter and traditional public schools. As outlined by its developers, the compendium is a searchable website with three goals: 1. To provide strategies which will improve schools and student performance. 10 2. To provide inspiration to educators who wish to reproduce promising strategies at their schools. 3. To share new knowledge and expertise about what works to improve the whole public school (Wohlstetter & Kuzin, 2006) Compendia are valuable because they showcase promising practices that can then be replicated or adapted to new contexts. The contents of compendia often showcase the effectiveness of the practice and details of implementation. Promising practices are sought through evaluation and selection, indicating the effectiveness of the practice and ease of implementation (Manela & Moxley, 2002). According to Grayson (2007), benchmarking best practices is an effective way to increase the rate of improvement in K – 12 education. An online compendium of promising practices has the ability to reach a variety of stakeholders (Bardach, 2003). The compendium will provide promising practices that may be used to improve student achievement. This study is being conducted as part of a thematic dissertation group. Eight areas of promising practices will be researched and added to USC’s Compendium of Promising Practices. In addition to writing across the curriculum, the following areas will be explored: adult mentoring of at-risk students, increasing redesignation rates of English-language learners, integrating academics into career/technical education, school leaders’ use of data for planning and school improvement, teacher evaluation, use of technology to increase parent involvement, and uses of school time. The USC Compendium currently contains promising practices in the following areas: arts- themed education, high school reform, integration of technology into math and 11 science, literacy for English-language learners, parent involvement, project-based learning, teacher leadership development, school-university partnerships, special education, and student discipline. The rationale for providing this information in a compendium is to share promising practices that charter schools have used to improve student achievement. The web-based compendium will be of value to a variety of stakeholders including parents and teachers at traditional public schools and other charter schools. Significance of the Study As noted earlier, the need for students to be able to write proficiently is currently a critical, widely felt concern. The increased focus on writing on both the SAT and the CAHSEE has created a need for studies like the current one. The writing section of the SAT was recently added in 2005 and is used to determine admission to college (Mattern, Camara, & Kobrin, 2007; National Commission on Writing, 2003). The CAHSEE became mandatory for all high school students in California beginning with the graduating class of 2006. The study of writing across the curriculum has the potential to benefit all schools – both charter and traditional public schools – by providing information to improve student and school performance. Charter schools are lighthouses of innovation (Brewer & Wohlstetter, 2005); however, the innovations developed by charters are often limited to the school where the promising practice originated. The Compendium of Promising Practices, which features an on-line searchable database, helps expand the dissemination of innovations and provides detailed information to 12 assist schools in adapting and implementing the promising practices in their own school sites (Wohlstetter & Kuzin, 2006). The compendium provides the goal of the promising practice, information on the school’s demographics, budget and staffing information, lessons learned, and evidence of the impact of the promising practice. The goal of the compendium is to spread new knowledge and innovation about promising practices to inspire educators to improve school performance. Organization of the Dissertation The dissertation is organized into five chapters. Chapter 1 provides an introduction to the study, which includes background information regarding writing performance in the United States and California. Chapter 2 consists of a review of the literature related to writing across the curriculum and closing the achievement gap. Chapter 3 introduces the research questions for this study and the research methods used. The findings are presented in chapter 4 and are based upon results from two high-performing charter schools that successfully used writing across the curriculum to increase student achievement. Chapter 5 brings the study to a close with a discussion of its conclusions and the implications for educators in the field and policymakers. 13 CHAPTER TWO Literature Review Introduction As explained in chapter 1, the purpose of the study was to uncover promising practices in writing across the curriculum in two California charter schools. The purpose of this chapter is to review the implementation research regarding these practices and their impact on student achievement in public middle and high schools. In order to identify relevant research, a variety of electronic databases were searched. Some of the resources were specific to education, whereas others were of general interest. The electronic databases included ERIC, Wilson Full Text, JSTOR, and Google Scholar. Examples of descriptors in the searches included “writing across the curriculum” and “content area writing.” Through database searches, published research including technical reports, peer-reviewed journal articles, conference presentations, government documents, and books was identified. While the focus of the search was limited to K – 12, the search also yielded several important articles specific to higher education. This chapter begins with the definition of writing across the curriculum, followed by its history. The next section reviews factors that influence the effective implementation of writing across the curriculum, including professional development, classroom practice, teacher collaboration, and consistency. 14 The Meaning of Writing Across the Curriculum Writing across the curriculum may not look the same at every single school site; it may even differ at schools within the same school district (Brewster & Klump, 2004). Pedagogy is what defines writing across the curriculum as it seeks “active student engagement with the material and with the genres of the discipline through writing, not just in English classes but in all classes” (McLeod & Miraglia, 2001, p. 5). In practice, this means that math and science teachers devote time to writing, just as do English and history teachers. For the purposes of this study, writing across the curriculum will be defined as “the strategic integration of carefully designed writing tasks in any content area to serve the ends of learning, authentic communication, personal engagement, and reflective authorship” (Brewster & Klump, 2004, p.7). In sum, students who experience writing across the curriculum will use writing as a tool for learning across many different content areas. For example, in a math class, students solve open-ended problems in which they explain their strategies and solution in writing (Baxter, Woodward, Olson, & Robyns, 2002). Writing across the curriculum is seen as learning through the use of writing, but it is not viewed only as the writing process, itself. Practices within the classroom are changed so that there is more time for writing in each class in all of the content areas and all teachers are made aware of the role that writing plays in learning (Bazerman, Little, Bethel, Chavkin, Fouquette, & Garufis, 2005). The role of the teacher is to write with the students, demonstrating how to write; and to provide an environment which stimulates writing (Smith, 1994). Through writing, students 15 develop a profound conceptual knowledge of the subject being taught (McConachie, Hall, Resnick, Ravi, Bill, Bintz, & Taylor, 2006). Students actually learn through their writing by using metacognitive skills, analyzing and synthesizing information, and communicating this knowledge through their writing. Writing becomes then “not simply a way for students to demonstrate what they know. It is a way to help them understand what they know” (The College Board, 2003, p. 13). History The 1960s to the mid-1970s The phenomenon of writing across the curriculum dates back to the 1960s, when it originated in England during the British Schools Council Project. Policymakers observed that students became more engaged in their math and science classes as a result of writing about what they were learning (Hall, 2001). British educator and researcher James Britton spearheaded the writing across the curriculum project in England to help students develop their writing in natural ways (Bazerman et al., 2005; Russell, 2002). Britton’s theory was that students were not being given an opportunity to write expressively; instead, they were used to what he termed transactional writing, a more public form of writing whose purpose was to communicate information. He, along with his colleagues, revamped Britain’s pedagogy to make it more student-centered. A more student-centered pedagogy meant that students developed personal, or expressive, writing skills before moving to transactional writing (Russell, 2002). 16 In the United States, the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s and the resultant desegregation of public schools meant that schools had more diverse student populations (Russell, 2002). Women, minority students, and the disadvantaged had little formal training or education in writing due to segregation laws, and were now enrolling in institutions traditionally prepared to serve the elite. More higher education institutions were offering open admissions, which opened the door to a broader, more diverse group of students (Bazerman et al., 2005). Thus, students entering higher education in the United States were writing at different levels and lacked the skills to be academically successful. In response to this development, writing instruction at colleges and universities became more remedial in order to meet the needs of these students (Russell, 2002). Along with this came the need to effectively measure students’ writing ability. The Education Commission of the States introduced the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) writing test in 1969. As indicated in chapter 1, the NAEP is the nation’s report card and is administered every 5 years. NAEP is a continuous assessment of what the nation’s students know and are able to do in different subject areas. NAEP highlights the strengths and weaknesses in students’ writing and serves as a tool for educators to use to improve writing instruction in the curricular areas. By 1975, the crisis of illiteracy in writing surged nationwide as indicated by the results of the 1974 NAEP writing assessment, which showed a significant decline from the previous administration in 1969 (McLeod & Miraglia, 2001; Russell, 2002). 17 Mid-1970s to the Turn of the Century In an effort to respond to the writing crisis that schools were facing with students in America, James Moffet and Janet Emig – two of America’s leading researchers of writing development – adopted Britton’s theory of writing across the curriculum and introduced it into American schools circa 1975 (Russell, 2002). They merged Britton’s theory with the theories of early theorists Lev Vygotsky, Jean Piaget, and their own to create a theoretical basis for the writing across the curriculum movement (Russell, 2002). With Britton’s theory, which linked writing in the content areas to personal writing, and Piaget’s theory which examined linking learning to cognitive development in children, students’ writing would develop in natural ways as a result of classroom talk and personal and social growth (Bazerman et al., 2005; Russell, 2002). Out of the blending of these theories, writing reform in the United States had chartered its course and had begun to move. As noted earlier, writing across the curriculum was initially meant to focus on higher education, as writing became a challenge for colleges offering open admission with the influx of students having diverse and unequal educational backgrounds (Bazerman et al., 2005). At the college level, writing across the curriculum was often referred to as WAC. Students were struggling to write in all academic majors, which resulted in a freshmen writing proficiency requirement for students at nearly all colleges in the United States. In addition, seminars were conducted in which college professors in all disciplines were provided with strategies for implementing WAC. These strategies included workshops for faculty, course requirements focused on 18 writing, linking courses together, freshman seminar, and peer tutoring (Bazerman et al., 2005). While there was concern that students in higher education institutions were lacking the necessary writing skills, there was also concern for how students in secondary schools were being prepared for college (Bazerman et al.). The Bay Area Writing Project was developed to address the problem of top high school students requiring remedial writing classes upon entering the University of California, Berkeley (UC Berkeley) (Bazerman et al., 2005; Smith, 1996). James Gray, a former high school teacher, wanted to help teachers throughout the nation improve their teaching of writing (National Writing Project, 2002). The students who enrolled at UC Berkeley came from all over the country, hence the problem was national. This project was a collaboration between UC Berkeley and schools in the Bay area. It served as a model of professional development, which offered strategies for teaching writing (Bay Area Writing Project, 2007). This project allowed teachers to share their successful experiences of writing in the classroom with other teachers in an effort to improve writing in different content areas. The project was introduced into secondary schools and was adopted, in 1976, by the California Department of Education to be used as a model of professional development for teachers (Russell, 2002). The aim of this project was to train high school teachers to prepare students in California’s Bay area for college writing by having a structured writing program in high school to improve student achievement (Bay Area Writing Project, 2007; Russell, 2002). 19 Writing Across the Curriculum into the 21 st Century National Writing Project. The National Writing Project (NWP) grew out of the Bay Area Writing Project and, since its founding, has established projects in all 50 states, Puerto Rico, and the United States Virgin Islands. For example, the California Writing Project (CWP), which is the local NWP branch for California, began in 1976 and consists of 17 sites located on the University of California and California State University campuses (California Writing Project, 2007). The NWP is a professional development network designed to provide professional development in writing to teachers of all grade levels, kindergarten through college, throughout the nation. The goal of this program was to improve the writing achievement of students by improving the manner in which writing was taught in schools (National Writing Project, 2007). The NWP used a teachers-teaching-teachers model in which trained teachers provide their colleagues with useful strategies for teaching (Borko, 2004). This project helped fill a gap; teachers in content areas other than English had not received training in how to teach writing during their pre-service. The NWP conducted a summer institute each year at each of its 200 nationwide sites. Highly skilled writing teachers delivered training at the summer institute each year, at which they demonstrated their best practices of teaching writing. The teachers being trained and those delivering training took what they learned back to their home schools and focused their efforts on helping colleagues develop their own knowledge of teaching writing. The NWP provided teachers with concrete teaching strategies, current research and practice, assessment methods, and the ability to teach diverse students 20 while helping them meet state standards (National Writing Project, 2002). The writing workshops also provided writing experiences for teachers that would help to increase their self-efficacy as writers and teachers of writing (Bazerman et al., 2005). This training has helped empower teachers to return to their schools and empower their students to write. Further, research suggests that teachers who have been a part of the NWP spent more time on writing instruction than those who did not. NWP teachers were also more prone to assist their students with improving their writing performance (National Writing Project, 2002). Components of Effective Writing Across the Curriculum Programs The intention of writing across the curriculum is that all teachers within the same school have the same expectations of writing at each grade level and across various subject areas. Every classroom uses a style of writing, which is integrated and consistent. To implement writing across the curriculum, certain elements must be in place: professional development, shared classroom practices, consistency within each school, and collaboration among teachers. Professional Development Professional development is both the starting point and a critical implementation component of writing across the curriculum in schools (McLeod & Maimon, 2000). Professional development has the ability to yield improvements in both instructional practices and student learning (Borko, 2004). Professional development topics have included: using writing for learning in different content areas and across the curriculum, engaging students in writing, and adapting teaching 21 methods for writing to fit the learning styles of students (Cooney & Bottoms, 2003). Professional development topics have also been recommended by the National Writing Project (Reed, 2006). Sessions have included topics to address writing in the social studies classroom and “Using America’s Great Speeches to Teach Composition” (Cramer, 2002). In order to improve writing in all subject areas, teachers need to be provided with the resources that will enable them to implement writing across the curriculum (Newell, Koukis, & Boster, 2007). Professional development is particularly important, especially professional development that provides teachers with the skills that they require to teach writing in the content areas. There are a number of attributes that characterize good professional development for writing across the curriculum. In order for professional development to be effective, there must be a school-wide commitment to professional development in the area of writing and professional development must be on-going and collaborative. Professional development in writing across the curriculum should be school- wide and open to all teachers (Anderson, 2003; Berryman & Russell, 2001; NWP, 2006; Reed, 2006; Younker, 2003; Zimmet, 2000). For example, a study of ongoing, school-wide professional development focused on improving student achievement through writing was conducted by Reed (2006) at Western Oaks Middle School in Oklahoma. The expectation at this school was that all teachers would incorporate writing into their curriculum, which was also aligned to the state standards. This school used a collaborative model, which was adopted from the Southwest 22 Educational Laboratory and which consisted of a Professional Teaching and Learning Cycle (PTLC) where teachers met by grade levels and were trained on how to incorporate writing in the content areas. Meetings were held weekly and were facilitated by a literacy specialist. Teams were organized according to grade level or by department. The teams used time during the school day to incorporate the state standards into their writing instruction. The role of the literacy specialist, during the meetings, was to instruct the teachers on how to guide students in their writing as well as how to assess writing. Additionally, the literacy specialist provided strategies that were created for that particular grade level or content area with which he/she was meeting. By meeting on a weekly basis, teachers had the opportunity to go back to their classrooms, use what they learned, and report back to the group. The results of this study demonstrated that students’ comprehension of content improved. Moreover, the students at Western Oaks Middle School showed an increase in the passing rate on their state accountability test compared to other middle schools in the district. Western Oaks Middle School began with an academic performance index (API) of 1005 in 2003, as compared with an average API of 1007 for middle schools in the entire state during the same year. After the Southwest Educational Development Laboratory was established and teachers learned how to incorporate writing in each content area at different grade levels, Western Oaks’ API jumped to 1276 as compared with an average API of 1194 across the state (Reed, 2006). 23 Having a school-wide commitment to professional development in writing means that the entire school is committed to learning strategies for implementing writing across the curriculum. Another benefit of the school-wide commitment is that teachers are available to support one another in the classroom if they need assistance with implementation (Fisher, 2001). Schools that are committed to professional development in writing create a culture of continuous improvement within their schools. According to Lent (2006), planning for professional development should be as deliberate as planning for school leadership team meetings; likewise, creating a culture of writing must be a deliberate process. With a commitment to professional development in place, teachers become accustomed to meeting and collaborating with each other, and a culture begins to develop within the school. To begin this process, Lent suggests that each staff member, including administrators, be provided with a professional writing journal at the start of each school year to promote the practice of writing. A writing coach would give the staff a writing prompt at the beginning of each staff meeting, which they would then address in their journals and discuss in writing groups. This gives teachers a chance to practice what they learn. Research on professional development suggests that staff should meet at least once a month to discuss critical issues and topics relevant to their school and to their students (Younker, 2003). In this way, teachers learn from one another by sharing effective classroom practice. Their commitment to professional development on writing across the curriculum, then, becomes a part of the school’s culture. 24 On-going, collaborative professional development allows for growth in knowledge across the various content areas (Fisher et al., 2001). One afternoon or one day of professional development will not suffice. Schools that participate in professional development for more than 1 year tend to have higher student achievement than those that do not (Fisher, 2001; Fisher, Frey, & Williams, 2002). Younker (2003) indicated that a 3-year on-going professional development conducted by the National Council of Teachers of English Reading Initiative proved powerful in improving writing achievement, as was evidenced by an increase in test scores. Younker suggests that all teachers begin implementing what they have learned at the end of each session, immediately upon their return to the classroom. After implementing what has been learned, teachers were able to determine whether or not they needed to spend more time perfecting that teaching strategy or whether they needed to alter it to fit their students, or try something new altogether. The research did not indicate how to get all teachers to commit to participating in professional development for writing, nor does it indicate how to get all teachers committed to teaching writing across different content areas. Classroom Practices According to past research, certain classroom practices have been known to increase student engagement through writing (Fisher, et al., 2002; National Writing Project, 2002; Reed, 2006). These include Cornell notes, journal writing, discussions, peer-evaluation, and individual feedback. Such classroom practices help facilitate student engagement in writing across the curriculum. 25 Cornell notes. Note-taking indicates the depth of student understanding about a topic or concept and leads to intense student engagement (Fisher et al., 2002). Schools that use structured note-taking take writing to a deeper level. Cornell notes are one popular form of note-taking used to improve writing across the curriculum. Cornell notes, adopted from the practices at Cornell Law School, consist of a vertical line one third of the way from the left edge of a sheet of paper, with main ideas and key words written on the left hand side, details on the right, and a summary at the bottom of the page (Fisher et al., 2002; Knipper & Duggan, 2006). Cornell notes are written similar to a legal brief, where only the major points are written down and any important details are included. This process of structured note-taking forces students to think for themselves. They have to separate what is important from what is not important and must then summarize and analyze their own writing. This type of note-taking is a learning experience in itself; further, it allows the student to take ownership of what they have written (Gilbert & Kotelman, 2005). This form of note taking is used in one high school in San Diego, California (Fisher et al., 2002). Students there were initially taught how to take structured notes using Cornell notes to help improve their study habits. Teachers realized that students did not know how to record information from textbooks or lectures, so they had to teach them how to record information in a structured manner. The technique worked so well that teachers shared their successes with one another during their discussion groups, encouraging other teachers to use Cornell notes (Fisher, 2001). With this technique in place throughout the school, teachers were able to delve right 26 into the lesson without having to teach students how to take good notes (Fisher, 2001; Fisher et al., 2002). Journal writing. Journal writing offers another way to incorporate writing across the curriculum. Students are usually given the first 5 to 10 minutes at the beginning of class to write to a prompt (Baxter et al., 2002). Journal writing is a form of personal writing that illuminates students’ thought processes. It is not as formal as essay writing (Benjamin, 2005). Journal writing may be used during whole-class discussions or in lessons directed by the teacher. Teachers merge journal writing into their teaching to get students to interact with the ideas that are presented to them (Calkins, 1994). Journal writing provides students with a method for integrating classroom experiences. Students may use journal writing to think their way through math problems (Benjamin, 2005). For example, students write to journal prompts in math and science classes to solve problems and explain hypotheses, giving students and teachers an opportunity to interact with one another in writing. Students also write for self-discovery of their own ideas and self-expression (Newell, Koukis, & Boster, 2007). This is one way for teachers and students to interact (Baxter, Woodward, Olson, & Robyns, 2002) and it informs the teacher as to what the students’ thought processes are. With such information, teachers can identify whether classroom instruction needs to be modified for particular students. Teachers also model writing for students through journal writing. Teachers sometimes have their own journals in which they write, sharing what they have written with students. By modeling good journal writing, teachers provide students with the tools they need 27 to practice, make mistakes, and correct their own mistakes (Knipper & Duggan, 2006). Another type of journal writing used to help students develop understanding is double-entry journals. Students learn through writing when they use double-entry journals to make representations of information as opposed to simply reciting someone else’s information (Calkins, 1994). In a double-entry journal, students use one column to write what happens and the other column for their own representations of what happened. In this manner, students are not merely recalling information, but they have processed the information and are able to give their own interpretation. According to Piaget’s constructivist view of learning, “we develop rather than acquire ideas” (Calkins, 1994, p. 487). Journal writing done across the curriculum gives students more practice with writing. Allowing students time to write on a regular basis helps to make them better at writing and they are more likely to achieve the clarity, logic, voice, and grace of good writing” (Atwell, 1987, p. 55). Small group discussions. Discussions among students in small groups helps facilitate writing across the curriculum as well. One study by Zimmet (2000) found that student discussions opened the door for whole class discussions, engaging all students in the learning process whether they were outspoken or timid. One version of this technique has students complete their assignment at home the night before, and then discuss their writing with peers in small groups before presenting their ideas to the entire class. In another version, students listen to lectures by the teacher, take notes, and then discuss what they wrote. For example, high school students listened 28 to a lecture on extinction given by a university geologist and took notes as they listened. At the end of the lecture, students shared their comments with each other and engaged in small group discussions (Zimmet). Class discussions. Class discussions offer students the opportunity to challenge their learning both prior to and after engaging in writing. Students construct meaning for their writing through class discussions (Fisher & Ivey, 2005) and as a result, students become more engaged and more motivated. For example, a physical education teacher at one high school used an aerobics lesson to incorporate writing through class discussions. The teacher first read an article on aerobics to his class, after which students performed various aerobic activities. Following the aerobics exercises, students wrote in response to an open-ended writing prompt and discussed the concept of aerobics (Fisher & Ivey, 2005). At an urban high school in San Diego, California, Fisher (2001) observed classes using discussion as a precursor to writing. The teacher in one class had discussions concerning a book the class had read and asked the class to make predictions about various characters based on what they read. This discussion formed the basis for their writing assignment. The classroom discussions allowed the teacher to assess the students’ depth of understanding prior to writing. According to Calkins (1994), students become engaged by asking questions and making connections, which lead them to use writing as a tool for learning. In a study by Peterson et al. (2006), science teachers expanded students’ writing beyond the customary laboratory report by using class discussions to 29 facilitate writing. One eighth grade science teacher read a science fiction story to students prior to giving them a writing assignment. In the story, a system of pulleys and other mechanisms were used by one of the characters. There was a class discussion on the types of science elements used in the story and the contexts in which the characters used them. Students used information gained from the discussions, along with a writing rubric given by the teacher, to plan and draft their writing. Students creatively incorporated levers and pulleys into their stories to demonstrate understanding of the science concepts discussed. The teacher allowed students to choose their own genre for writing their stories, which students felt enhanced their understanding of the science concepts. In addition to the discussions, students used peer editing to evaluate each others writing. Students’ learning was reinforced as they taught themselves through writing and discussion. Peer evaluation. Students can also use peer evaluation as a form of collaboration in their writing. Students demonstrate an understanding of the subject matter when they evaluate one another’s writing. Zimmet (2000) suggested that instead of teachers responding to students’ writing, students should offer one another suggestions for revisions. By writing back and forth to one another, the students’ thought processes are revealed and learning is more evident to both the student and the teacher. Students show growth in their writing, which would most likely not be present if there were no collaboration among the students (Zimmet). The students’ comments to each other become more meaningful than the teacher simply writing a grade on a paper with a comment or two. Peer evaluation exposes students to 30 feedback and helps them to consider their peers’ perspectives on their writing (Saddler & Andrade, 2004). It also helps students reflect on their own writing. This technique places students in a position where they are the teachers. This helps them become accountable for their learning and develop their writing. Types of feedback from the teacher. Whether feedback is written or oral, students need more frequent feedback. Feedback from the teacher needs to be immediate for the students to benefit from it (Atwell, 1987). According to Atwell (1987), students benefit more when comments are given in person, while the writing is taking place as opposed to written comments at the end. By providing feedback, students have the opportunity to make decisions about their writing and they get more practice. Nancie Atwell (1987) looks directly in each student’s face and talks to them about their writing piece instead of reading their drafts. This way, she can focus on the meaning of what is being written instead of the grammatical mistakes that may be present. She asks probing questions and questions of clarification to ensure that the meaning is clear to both the student and the audience before actually reading the draft. The student has an opportunity to deliberate and reflect before turning in a final draft of their writing (Atwell, 1987). In the study described earlier (Peterson et al., 2006), the science teacher gave students feedback on their first draft of writing, then allowed them to revise their writing with assistance from their peers who gave them additional feedback. In a study by Pugalee (2004), ninth grade algebra students engaged in both written and oral descriptions of math problems where they received feedback from 31 the teacher. Students solved algebra problems by writing down what they were thinking as they worked through algebra problems. Students who explained their problem solving processes in writing were able to give a more detailed explanation of their thought processes, with respect to the math problem they were solving. In addition, the teacher’s feedback to their writing encouraged them to elaborate on their descriptions. The findings of the study indicated that students who explained the process of solving problems in writing gave the correct answers at a statistically higher degree than students who solved problems orally. Feedback provided by the teacher helped students to develop their writing. Another type of feedback is through modeling. Teachers think out loud while they write, sharing their thought processes with students so that it is more like a conversation (Stone, 2007). Teachers demonstrate to the students that they engage in the same types of writing assignments, whether it is journal writing, essay writing, or note-taking (Au, 1997). Collaboration Among Teachers Collaboration among teachers from different content areas is necessary to incorporate writing across the curriculum, since the essence of writing across the curriculum is to change classroom practices and increase the amount of time and attention spent on writing (Bazerman, et al., 2005). Collaboration is a necessary component of writing across the curriculum because it allows teachers to share writing strategies across content areas. Several ways in which collaboration can be realized are discussed in the following sections. 32 Study groups. Study groups are one strategy used to help teachers collaborate in writing across the curriculum. Within the study groups, teachers can reflect on the challenges they face in the classroom and offer support to one another. According to Gilbert and Kotelman (2005), teachers at Miller Elementary School in Tucson, Arizona held study groups to share what they learned about writing across the curriculum, as well as strategies that had worked for them. In the study groups, they wrote in notebooks about their classroom successes and challenges, and they then made the notebooks available to their colleagues in an effort to build upon one another’s accomplishments. The notebooks became a form of communication for teachers. Each teacher knew what the others were doing in their classrooms and they also knew what was working, and what was not, by reading one another’s notebook entries. In the study groups, teachers were able to share strategies that worked best and they experienced how different strategies gave them insight into their students’ thinking. Videotapes. The use of videotaping can also assist teachers in collaborating. One version of this involves videotaping teachers teaching writing in different content areas. The videotapes are then shared and discussed with other teachers. Videotapes have been used to illuminate teachers’ use of writing strategies within their classrooms. In one urban high school, videotapes of teachers teaching writing were shared with the staff as a form of collaboration (Fisher et al. 2002). This gave them a better view of what the writing strategies looked like when applied in different classrooms (Fisher et al.). The value in this type of collaboration is that 33 teachers are constantly provided with valuable strategies and resources to better service students in writing in all of the content areas. Moreover, they are able to weed out the strategies that are not working and try new ones offered by colleagues. Student portfolios. Teachers across different content areas work together to create the elements of the portfolio and to assess its contents. The teacher acts like more of a coach, providing feedback to students, while allowing them to retain ownership of their writing (Kiefer & Neufeld, 2002). Each school in the state of Kentucky, requires teachers to use portfolios both to improve the quality of students’ writing and to assess writing across the curriculum. One Kentucky school saw the benefits of the portfolio as a means of encouraging and embracing writing across the curriculum. For example, instead of having students simply submit a writing piece from each subject area for English teachers to grade, teachers in all subject areas were accountable for creating writing assignments, improving writing in their own subject areas, and assessing the writing collaboratively. These portfolio assessments involved the entire school, and brought members of different departments together (Berryman & Russell, 2001). Departments were driven to create portfolio assessments and to grade them once they were complete. When students were required to include writing pieces from different content areas other than English into their portfolios, it required the teachers to collaborate between different subject areas to analyze and assess the students’ work (Berryman & Russell). Collaboration had to be ongoing to ensure that students were meeting the standards for all of the content areas. 34 Using a literacy specialist as a bridge across subject areas. Reed (2006) conducted a study wherein a literacy specialist worked with and supported all subject area teachers, assisting them with strategies to incorporate writing instruction into their lessons. In addition to the literacy specialist, English teachers planned with teachers in other core areas. Writing instruction was integrated with content instruction (Berryman & Russell, 2001; Reed, 2006). Writing standards were combined with content area standards to build lessons that would help improve student achievement in all areas. As a result of working with the literacy specialist, teachers had a variety of strategies for writing across the curriculum and were able to choose strategies that worked best for them to help them meet the needs of their students. The results were that teachers in content areas other than English became more competent and more motivated to teach writing to their students. Consistency of Use in Five Schools As noted earlier, there is no one correct way to teach writing and no one system for implementing writing across the curriculum; however, there are a variety of specific strategies for teaching writing. The core of any writing across the curriculum program is that there must be consistency across subject areas and grade levels. Teachers teach writing in a consistent manner and follow practices that have been established at the school (Newell et al., 2007). The following four schools provide examples of such consistency across subject areas and grade levels. Although the strategies and classroom practices differed at each school, they were consistent in their implementation. 35 View Park Preparatory Charter School View Park Preparatory Charter School, a South Los Angeles charter school, has one quantifiable goal: by the time their students graduate, they will be able to write a “500-word sustained argument free of mechanical error, reflecting his or her ability to reason” (Hernandez, Kaplan, & Schwartz, 2006, p. 48). This objective drives instruction in every class within the school. This school begins by introducing ninth graders to high academic standards in literacy. This literacy program is school- wide and consists of three fundamental practices. They all use personal reflection, Socratic discussion, and essential questions. The school has adopted Stephen Toulmin’s Model of Argumentation, which is used throughout all grade levels in the school. By using the same model in all classes, both students and teachers know what is expected and they are able to perfect their writing as they advance through the school year, as well as when students advance to the next grade level. This consistency allows for the use of a common language so that students are better able to discuss their way of thinking in all classes and all content areas (Hernandez et al., 2006). School of Human Services at Springfield College Another school that has deployed a writing across the curriculum approach is the School of Human Services at Springfield College in Massachusetts. Richard Andersen (2003), a professor of writing and literature at Springfield College, conducted a study that aimed to create a set of writing standards to be used in all courses at the college level. The entire faculty at Springfield College utilizes a 36 writing guide, written by the Writing Across the Curriculum Committee. Each professor, as well as each student, in the college has a copy of the guide. All writing is taught and graded using the same standards no matter what the subject. This consistency enables students to hone in on their writing skills and focus on learning content rather than perfecting form and grammar. For instance, the guide offers a range of options for evaluating and responding to student writing. It provides suggestions as well as strategies for improvement in students’ writing. One chapter in the book is entitled “Responding to Style” and offers suggestions for professors to assess a student’s style of writing, while giving students examples of what is expected (Andersen, 2003). Western Oaks Middle School Western Oaks Middle School trains all its teachers to use the same strategies for writing in the classroom and utilizes weekly meetings to collaborate, measure progress, and discuss challenges. Western Oaks Middle School uses a six phase cycle for reading and writing, which all teachers in the school follow. Teachers are consistent in their use of this strategy. Teachers meet by grade level or departments on a weekly basis during the school day, where they collaborate by studying the standards, selecting research-based literacy, and plan engaging lessons. Teachers implement these plans, analyze student work, and adjust future instruction to meet the needs of the students (Reed, 2006). This cycle was implemented to make writing easier for the student so that there are guidelines for each teacher to follow. 37 Herbert Hoover High School This high-poverty school had a school-wide commitment to writing, where each teacher used the same “seven defensible strategies” (Fisher, 2001; Fisher et al., 2002). Shared reading, also known as read-alouds, occurred on a daily basis to provide students with background knowledge of the subject under study. KWL charts were used to chart what students knew before a lesson (K), what they wanted to know (W), and what they learned (L) after a lesson. Graphic organizers, or concept maps, were used by students to make connections with what they already knew and what they were learning (Fisher, 2001). Vocabulary instruction was provided during lessons, in which students used structured note-taking and reciprocal teaching. In reciprocal teaching, students worked in small groups; after which, they taught the content they acquired to the remaining group members. Posters with school-wide writing strategies were placed in all classrooms within the school to reinforce the strategies that students have been using to write (Fisher et al., 2002). The strategies were considered defensible because they were sound and have been linked to student achievement. Kentucky Public Schools A final example of consistency is from the Kentucky public school system. The components of their writing across the curriculum program span every school in the entire state. As noted previously, each student was required to create a portfolio with writing throughout the content areas. The schools partnered with a local university to create guidelines and offer teaching strategies for this writing project. 38 Students in grades 4, 8, and 12 were required to complete a writing portfolio. Their portfolios had to include a “table of contents, a letter to the reviewer, a personal experience piece, a literary (creative writing) piece, and two ‘transactive’ pieces, writing to communicate with a real-world audience” (Berryman & Russell, 2001, p. 76 – 77). Among these writing pieces, two of them needed to be from a different content area besides English. Each school in the state followed the same guidelines and generated portfolio scores based on how well the student stuck to the guidelines. Professional development was initially conducted in the summer for a period of 12 hours, with participation from the entire staff (Berryman & Russell). Teachers collaborated with each other and with the university to improve instruction. Conclusion As explained in this chapter, the existing research on writing across the curriculum has emphasized effective strategies. The literature indicates that professional development is the key to a successful writing across the curriculum program. Different classroom practices have been used for writing across the curriculum; there is no one correct method or practice. The goal of writing across the curriculum is for teachers to have an awareness of what their students have learned and how well they are able to articulate their thoughts through writing. Writing lets the teacher know whether or not the student has learned anything and the depth of that learning. Teachers have used a variety of strategies to incorporate writing into the curriculum (Duke, 2001). However, little is known about the implementation of these strategies. This study helps fill a gap in the research by investigating the 39 implementation of how high-performing charter schools use writing across the curriculum to increase student achievement. In the chapter that follows, the study’s research design and data collection instruments will be described. 40 CHAPTER THREE Research Methods Introduction The purpose of the study was to investigate promising practices in writing across the curriculum in California charter schools. In this chapter, the research methods for the investigation are described. First, the chapter will explain and justify the research design. Next, the research design and sample selection process will be presented. Finally, the data collection and analysis will be explained. Research Design and Research Questions The study was designed to investigate the use of writing across the curriculum and the unit of analysis for the study was the promising practice. The investigation was guided by the following four research questions: 1. How do charter schools use writing across the curriculum to improve student achievement? 2. How are resources used to implement writing across the curriculum successfully? 3. What challenges have charter schools faced in implementing writing across the curriculum and how were they addressed? 4. What evidence exists that writing across the curriculum has resulted in positive educational outcomes? The research questions were intended to collectively investigate and describe the writing across the curriculum implementation process. This study was intended to 41 collect and disseminate information on how to implement this promising practice from charter schools that have had success. A descriptive case study design was employed to examine the research questions. A descriptive case study is “one that presents a detailed account of the phenomenon under study” (Merriam, 1998, p. 38). A case study is also naturalistic and focuses on meaning (McEwan & McEwan, 2003). In the present study, the idea was to present a detailed account of writing across the curriculum in two charter schools. According to Merriam (1998), the case study is appropriate “when the objective of an evaluation is to develop a better understanding of the dynamics of a program” (p. 39). Since the purpose of this study was to understand the benefits, challenges, and impact of implementing writing across the curriculum, the case study design was especially appropriate. Case studies consist of direct observations in natural settings and tend to have a broad focus (Bromley as cited in Merriam, 1998). The case study will be conducted to explain in detail the practice of writing across the curriculum, so that users of USC’s Compendium of Promising Practices would be able to consider the innovation for their own sites. Strengths and Limitations of the Research Design While the case study method was the most appropriate design for this study, there are strengths and limitations to any case study research design. For instance, the case study offers a rich description of processes and phenomenon; however, lack of time and money may limit the researcher’s efforts (Merriam, 1998). Another strength of the case study design is that it offers insight and clarifies meaning to 42 develop the reader’s experiences (Merriam). Case studies are anchored in real-life scenarios. One of its limitations is that a case study design does not have tightly controlled conditions, which limits predictability of behavior to other settings (Merriam). The fact that case studies are conducted in natural settings and that participants are not selected randomly may have an impact on the reliability, validity, and generalizability of the study. On the other hand, the researcher has the opportunity to probe deeper into the inquiry and to pursue topics of inquiry that were not anticipated. The case study design may be more prone to biases as the researcher has no guidelines to follow when creating the final report. “The investigator is left to rely on his or her own instincts and abilities throughout most of this research effort” (Merriam, 1998, p. 42). While the case study allows the researcher to offer insight and intuition, the reader is left to rely on the interpretations of the researcher, which may include biases. Although there are limitations, the strengths of a case study usually outweigh them (Merriam, 1998). Reliability, Validity, & Generalizability Reliability. If the findings of the study can be replicated, reliability exists. Reliability in a case study may be problematic due to the fact that case studies are conducted in a natural setting and deal with human subjects, whose behavior may vary from context to context (Merriam, 1998). In a qualitative case study, exact results are not sought; instead, the question becomes “not whether findings will be found again but whether the results are consistent with the data collected” (Merriam, 1998, p. 206). To aid with the consistency of data in this case study, triangulation 43 methods were used. Triangulation uses multiple data collection methods across multiple information sources (McEwan & McEwan, 2003). This case study employs a variety of data sources to enhance reliability, validity, and generalizability. The purpose of triangulation is not to prove that different sources of data produce the same result; but its purpose is to test for consistency, as different types of data and different types of sources may yield slightly different results due to the types of inquiry and individual perspectives (Patton, 2002). Validity. Internal validity is based on our construction of reality and is thus a strength of qualitative research (Merriam, 1998). The researcher, in this type of qualitative case study, is the instrument; therefore, the credibility of the methods used depends upon the competence and skill of the researcher (Patton, 2002). Triangulation enhances internal validity by using multiple sources of data to confirm findings (Merriam, 1998). As noted previously, a variety of data collection sources as well as data collection methods were used in this case study. Interviews were conducted with a variety of people, classroom and professional development observations were made, and documents were analyzed. The interviews provided detailed information on the history of writing across the curriculum, the details of implementation, and the benefits and challenges. A variety of documents were analyzed to compare the goals of the program with the actual classroom practices and teachers’ perceptions. The main point to be addressed when dealing with validity is how closely the research findings compare with reality (Merriam, 1998). 44 Generalizability. Generalizability refers to the degree to which the results of one study can be applied to other settings (Merriam, 1998). In each of the schools studied, writing across the curriculum was used; however, resources at the school site, the population of the school, as well as the experience of the teaching staff, among other things, are not representative of every school in California. As such, the findings from this study may not be generalizable to all schools. Providing a detailed description will enable others to determine whether or not the results are generalizable and can be transferred to their situation. When the settings and conditions in which studies have taken place differ, extrapolations rather than generalizations are more likely to result. Extrapolations are “modest speculations on the likely applicability of findings to other situations under similar, but not identical, conditions” (Patton, 2002, p. 584). While the study may not be generalizable to school sites beyond those studied, extrapolations may be made to enhance the possibility of transferability. Data Collection Process and Procedures This study was part of a thematic dissertation group, which investigated promising practices of charter schools in eight different content areas. It was a collaborative inquiry process with shared data collection instruments. The first thematic group, organized in 2005, developed the original research and data collection instruments, which the current group has since refined and updated. As stated in chapter 1, the results from the present study will contribute to USC’s Compendium of Promising Practices. The contents of the compendium, 45 therefore, guided data collection. The Contents of the Compendium: Types of Data to be Collected document led to the development of the instruments (see Appendix A), which, in turn guided data collection during the site visits to schools. For instance, the resource requirements suggested that study participants be asked questions about budget, staffing, and professional development needed to effectively implement writing across the curriculum. Selection of Study Participants Nomination process. In an effort to identify charter schools in California with promising practices in the areas of interest to dissertation group members, a one-page advertisement was posted on the Center on Educational Governance’s website with a hotlink for schools to self-nominate (see Appendix B). In addition, the ad was sent out to the listservs of the two major statewide charter school organizations: the California Charter Schools Association and the Charter Schools Development Center. The California Charter Schools Association is the professional association for California’s charter schools whose mission is to “increase student achievement by supporting and expanding California’s quality charter public school movement” (available from http://www.myschool.org). The California Charter Schools Association currently has approximately 500 members statewide. The Charter Schools Development Center, which is located in Sacramento at California State University, is a statewide resource center for charter schools in California. In addition to distributing the advertisement, charter school leaders in the state of California were contacted by members of the dissertation group to nominate schools 46 for the compendium. These individuals included researchers and officials from the California Department of Education. Referrals were also sought by members of the dissertation group based on their own research. A total of seven nominations in the area of writing across the curriculum were received. Selection criteria and screening process. In order to narrow the number of schools to two, a screening process took place. The final selection of sites was based on the following criteria: • Demonstration of innovative practice • Evidence of positive change • Potential to transfer and be useful to other schools In addition to information from the nomination form, the school’s websites were reviewed and relevant documents were downloaded using the Document Checklist as a guide (see Appendix C). For most of the schools nominated, the researcher was able to obtain the relevant charter and program reports from the web. Each school’s demographic and achievement data were obtained from the California Department of Education’s website. As a result of the screening process, the seven nominations were narrowed down to two California schools. During the selection process, more weight was given to schools with urban characteristics: minority student populations and high poverty families. An application was filed by the researcher with USC’s Institutional Review Board to conduct research in the field and approval was obtained from Institutional Review Board before data collection began in the fall of 2007. 47 Site Visits The site visit to each California charter school was conducted over a 2-day period during the fall of 2007. The two schools visited were View Park Preparatory Accelerated Charter High School and Pacific Collegiate School. The rationale for the site visits was to collect details of how writing across the curriculum was implemented at each school site. Information was obtained from the following people: the principal, the promising practice lead, and classroom teachers. Interviews were conducted one-on-one and were tape-recorded by the researcher. Interviews are one of the most important aspects of gathering information in a case study (Yin, 2003). In addition to the interviews, classroom observations were made for a sample of the teachers interviewed. The data collection instruments, which are described below, helped increase the reliability of the study and guided the data collection (Yin, 2003). Principal pre-site and on-site interviews. Prior to the site visit, presite telephone interviews were conducted with each school principal. As shown in Appendix D, the main purpose of the presite interview with the principal was to introduce the study and to discuss the scheduling and logistics for the 2-day site visit. To assist with the site visit, principals were asked to nominate, for interviews, individuals involved in the promising practice. After the telephone interview was completed, a scheduling grid (see Appendix E) was faxed or emailed to the principal, and the principal was then asked to complete the schedule and return it to the 48 researcher prior to the site visit. The presite telephone interviews with the principals at each of the school sites lasted approximately 10 minutes. During the two-day site visit, principals were interviewed for a second time using the on-site principal interview protocol (see Appendix F). The primary purpose of this interview was to get information about the history of writing across the curriculum at their school sites and the details of implementation, including the benefits and challenges. Each on-site principal interview lasted approximately 1 hour. Interviews with promising practice leads. The purpose of the interviews with the promising practice leads was to understand their roles with respect to implementing writing across the curriculum as well as the resources required to effectively implement the promising practice. Lessons learned were also obtained during the interview. The promising practice lead interview protocol was used to conduct each interview (see Appendix G). The promising practice lead interviews lasted for approximately 1 hour at each of the school sites. Classroom teacher interviews. Interviews were conducted with three to four classroom teachers in different subject areas at each of the school sites. The purpose of the classroom teacher interviews was to gain insight into the challenges and benefits of the promising practice in the classroom. As shown in Appendix H, the interviews with the teachers focused on challenges, impact of implementation, benefits, and sustainability. The purpose of interviewing teachers in different subject areas was to get their perceptions of writing across the curriculum in their specific 49 subject areas and its impact on student learning. The classroom teacher interview protocol was used to conduct these interviews (see Appendix H). Each interview lasted approximately 30 minutes. Classroom observations. In addition to interviewing teachers, classroom observations were conducted. Observations were conducted in approximately four classrooms at each school site. The classrooms observed were those of the teachers interviewed. The use of a variety of data sources strengthens the study. Visiting a variety of classrooms gave a better view of actual classroom practices compared to the teacher interviews (Patton, 2002). Classroom observations were made in addition to the interviews to compare what was reported by the teachers to their actual classroom practice. Teachers from the following disciplines were observed: English, math, history, and science. Classroom observations took place after the teachers were interviewed and lasted for approximately 20 minutes. The observations were conducted using the classroom observation instrument (see Appendix I). Professional development observations. In addition to the classroom observations, the researcher observed one professional development meeting at each school site that offered training specifically related to the promising practice. The professional development observation instrument was used to conduct the observations (see Appendix J). 50 The table below summarizes the methods used to collect data at each school site. Table 3.1 Data Collection Methods School Classroom Teachers Principal Promising Practice Lead Observations View Park Preparatory Accelerated Charter High School English, History, Science (3) X X English (2 classes), History Pacific Collegiate School History, Math, Science, Study Skills (4) X X History, Math, Science, Study Skills Data Analysis The data collection methods focused on obtaining information related to the research questions and drew upon interviews, observations, and document analysis. As noted earlier, the interviews were taped and transcribed by the researcher. The information from the interviews and other document collection instruments was then coded by research question and by topic. As many researchers have pointed out, “predetermined questions and specific procedures for coding and analysis enhances the generalizability of findings” (Merriam, 1998). The coding process, which enhanced the study’s consistency and reliability, was guided by the study’s research questions and predetermined topics, and was used by the entire thematic dissertation 51 group. A list of the research questions and related topics are given in Table 3.2 on the following pages. 52 Archival Documents X X X X PD Observation X Classroom Observation X Teacher Interview Promising Practice Lead Interview X X X X X X X X X X Principal On-site Interview X X X X X X X N/A X X Principal Pre- site Interview X X Data Sources Nomination Form X X X Research Questions and Types of Data 1. How do charter schools use writing across the curriculum to improve student achievement? Description of Promising Practice Goal Theory of Action History 2. How are resources used to implement writing across the curriculum? Time Budget Staffing Technology Needs Facilities/Space Professional Development Table 3.2 Triangulation of Information Across Data Sources 53 Archival Documents X X X X PD Observation X Classroom Observation X Teacher Interview Promising Practice Lead Interview X X X X X X X X X X Principal On-site Interview X X X X X X X N/A X X Principal Pre-site Interview X X Data Sources Nomination Form X X X Research Questions and Types of Data 1. How do charter schools use writing across the curriculum to improve student achievement? Description of Promising Practice Goal Theory of Action History 2. How are resources used to implement writing across the curriculum? Time Budget Staffing Technology Needs Facilities/Space Professional Development Table 3.2 Triangulation of Information Across Data Sources (Continued) 54 As discussed earlier, data for this study were collected from multiple sources. The use of a variety of data sources increased the reliability and validity of the study (Patton, 2002). The triangulation table, shown above, illustrates the multiple data sources used in this research to collect relevant data. For example, as shown in the table, information on the evidence of impact of the promising practice was collected from multiple sources including the nomination form, the principal interviews, the interview with the promising practice lead, and the interviews with the classroom teachers. Table 3.1 explains the relationship between the research questions and each data collection instrument. Summary of Chapter A qualitative case study of two California schools that have promising practices in the area of writing across the curriculum was conducted. Data were collected through site visits to the two schools. The schools were nominated through a statewide nomination process. During the 2-day site visit, interviews with teachers and administrators were conducted and classrooms and a professional development session related to the promising practice were observed. The information gathered about each school in the area of writing across the curriculum was analyzed and will ultimately be added to USC’s Compendium of Promising Practices, which is maintained on the CEG Web site. In the following chapter, the findings for the two schools are presented. An in-depth analysis of how the promising practice of writing across the curriculum has been implemented will be offered. 55 CHAPTER FOUR FINDINGS Introduction The purpose of the present study was to investigate the implementation of promising practices related to writing across the curriculum in two California charter schools. A qualitative case study of two charter schools in California was conducted at schools that implement writing across the curriculum. Each site was visited over a two-day period in November and December 2007. The purpose of the chapter is to share details of implementing writing across the curriculum at Pacific Collegiate School and View Park Preparatory Accelerated Charter High School. The findings in this chapter were drawn primarily from interviews, the school’s charter document, and the school’s Web site. Interviews for View Park were conducted on November 27-28, 2007 and interviews for Pacific Collegiate School were conducted on November 1-2, 2007. At each school, the principal/director, the promising practice lead, and teachers were interviewed. The promising practice lead is the individual at the school site who is in charge of leading writing across the curriculum. In the case of View Park, the promising practice lead was a veteran English teacher who initially brought the program to View Park and at Pacific Collegiate, the promising practice lead was the English department chair. The chapter is divided into two major sections describing the findings from Pacific Collegiate School (PCS) and View Park Preparatory Accelerated Charter High School (VP). First, the promising practice from VP will be described, followed by PCS. 56 View Park Preparatory Accelerated Charter High School Introduction to the School VP is a start-up charter which was founded by a group of six teachers. The charter was approved by the Los Angeles Unified School District in 2003 and the school opened in September 2003. The school began with ninth grade, and then expanded one grade level each year. The school now serves grades 9-12 and graduated its first class in June 2007. The mission of the school is, “All students will attend and compete academically at the best colleges and universities in the nation” (VP Charter Document). The founding teachers believe that in order for students to do well in college, they needed to be able to write argumentative papers in all disciplines. VP is a member of the Inner City Education Foundation (ICEF) charter management organization. Within that organization, there are nine schools. The findings reported here are only for VP. Presently, VP serves 400 students in grades 9-12. The demographics of the student body is 98% African American and 2% Hispanic. Of these students, 65% receive free and reduced lunch and 10% have special needs. There are currently no English language learners. A complete summary of the school demographics and the charter status of VP is presented in Table 4.1. 57 Table 4.1 Profile of View Park Preparatory Accelerated Charter High School: Summary of School Demographics and Charter Status ___________________________________________________________________ Variable Value ___________________________________________________________________ Charter Status Start-up Charter Authorizer Los Angeles Unified School District Year chartered 2003 Year opened for operation with students 2003 Grades served: 9-12 Students served: 400 Student population Ethnicity African American: 98% (392) Asian: 0% (0) Hispanic: 2% (8) White: 0% (0) Native American: 0% (0) Pacific Islander: 0% (0) Filipino: 0% (0) Multiple/No Response: 0% (0) Special Populations Free/Reduced-Price Lunch: 65% (260) Special needs: 10% (40) English Language Learners: 0% (0) Number of full-time administrators 2.5 (+ 3 office staff) Number of teachers 21 full-time, 7 part time Teachers in a collective bargaining unit No Per-pupil spending $8,532 School address 5701 S. Crenshaw Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90043 Type of school Site-based Contact information Director: Melissa Kaplan (323) 290-6975 mkaplan@viewparkprep.org Web site www.viewparkprep.org ____________________________________________________________________ 58 Description of the Promising Practice: Argumentative Writing Across the Curriculum Argumentative writing across the curriculum at VP uses the Toulmin model of argumentation. The Toulmin model is used in all disciplines and is the sole form of formal writing at VP (director, personal communication, November 27, 2007). This model of argumentation is a particular type of writing that requires a deep understanding of the subject being studied. This model is also used as a framework by VP to evaluate reading, which develops students’ critical thinking skills as well (promising practice lead, personal communication, November 27, 2007). The four major parts of the model are: claim, clarification, evidence, and warrant. A claim refers to the statement or the conclusion; clarification defines terms that are unclear; evidence provides facts in support of the claim; and warrant is the reasoning leading the evidence to the claim. These terms are taught to students beginning in their ninth grade year and they are used throughout all disciplines and across all grade levels, putting a structure in place so that each teacher can focus on the content of the curriculum and not so much on the format of the writing (science teacher, personal communication, November 27, 2007) (See Appendix K). Before students begin writing, a Socratic discussion takes place, of which each student is an active participant. An essential question is presented by the teacher which then drives the discussion. Each student then makes a claim, taking what was learned in the discussion to formulate an argumentative essay using the Toulmin model. “The essays are always a follow-up to an in-depth discussion” (promising 59 practice lead, personal communication, November 27, 2007). For example, after reading Lorraine Hansberry’s A Raisin in the Sun and watching the first two scenes of the video, ninth grade English students were presented with the essential question: “Is Walter Lee a disgrace to his father’s memory?” A Socratic discussion took place, then students used the Toulmin model to set up their claims and clarifications for their argumentative essay which would address the essential question. An example of a claim offered by one student: “Walter was not a disgrace to his father’s memory because he, too, wanted what was best for his family just as his father did. Walter just went about it differently.” After a classroom discussion, the teacher tested students to see if they really understood what they had discussed. This is where writing comes in: “Writing becomes the confirmation of students’ learning” (promising practice lead, personal communication, November 27, 2007). Goal and Theory of Action of the Promising Practice The goal of argumentative writing across the curriculum, which supports the school’s mission, is to enable students to compete academically at the best colleges and universities in the nation (director, personal communication, November 27, 2007). Both the director and the promising practice lead agreed that the Toulmin model of argumentative writing across the curriculum equips students to write original claims so that they are able to write any type of paper assigned to them, including those assigned by college professors. By the time students leave VP, the goal is that they will be able to write an essay in which they “make a sustained case, free of mechanical error, in a readable style” (promising practice lead, personal 60 communication, November 27, 2007). There was general consensus among all parties interviewed that the more students practice writing, the better they get. According to the science teacher, “Students need to be able to write in college to be successful; therefore the most logical way to achieve this goal is by having students write in all subjects” (personal communication, November 27, 2007). He further went on to add that it is the cumulative impact of writing across the curriculum that will increase student achievement. Implementation of the Promising Practice History Writing has been a critical part of the school’s curriculum from the moment the school opened in 2003. Prior to the school’s opening, all six founding teachers were in support of focusing on writing. The basis for a focus on writing came from a document published by the California Community Colleges, the California State University, and the University of California. This document, Academic Literacy: A Statement of Competencies Expected of Students Entering California’s Public Colleges and Universities, highlights the findings of a study of college faculty on the type of writing that will be required in college and what students will need to know in order to write the types of essays required in college (2002). According to the VP director, the study indicates that students need to be able to critically analyze the arguments and ideas of others, synthesize ideas from different sources, and summarize ideas from a text. In order to do this, students will need to be able to “generate an effective thesis; develop it convincingly with well-chosen examples, 61 good reasons, and logical arguments; and structure their writing so that it moves beyond formulaic patterns that discourage critical examination of the topic and issues” (Kaplan, Powerpoint, December 5, 2007). In light of what was found about expectations for college freshmen, a veteran teacher from Harvard-Westlake School was brought to VP to implement the Toulmin model, which had been used at Harvard-Westlake for thirty-five years. The main reason for bringing this teacher to VP was to keep the focus on writing and to support the school’s mission. Harvard-Westlake School, a college preparatory school in Southern California, had a writing program that had been successful, as was evidenced by student test scores. The veteran teacher, who is also one of the founding teachers at VP, spent twenty-five years developing the writing program at Harvard-Westlake and was successful at getting the fundamentals of that program passed on to departments beyond English. According to the promising practice lead, teachers need to teach students how to write the essays specific to their discipline, following the same rules of grammar that are expected in an English class as there is a standard of writing that cuts across all disciplines. There was a consensus among those interviewed that if argumentative writing across the curriculum worked for rich, white students at a private school like Harvard-Westlake, it can work for students anywhere and it can accelerate their learning. Planning Time A goal-oriented approach was used to design the curriculum. The promising practice lead and the director began working together in March 2003, which was 62 approximately six months prior to the school’s opening. They looked at what students needed to be able to do by their twelfth grade year; then they scaled it down to figure out what students needed to know in ninth grade. The entire summer of 2003 was spent creating the ninth grade curriculum for English and history. The school opened that September with only the ninth grade curriculum planned. To better prepare the director to teach argumentative writing across the curriculum, the promising practice lead and the director both read the Odyssey during the summer prior to the school’s opening. As the director struggled through the reading due to a lack of interest in the book, the promising practice lead asked an “essential question” about a scene in the book where a husband and wife are interacting: “Are the husband and wife really reconciled?” The director and the promising practice lead talked for almost two hours about that one scene. This demonstration showed the director how to move from reading, to creating a driving question, to a discussion, to a piece of argumentative writing. This lesson and the discussions that took place during the summer prepared the director to better teach argumentative writing across the curriculum (promising practice lead, personal communication, November 27, 2007). The tenth grade curriculum was planned the following summer; and each summer thereafter, the next grade level’s curriculum was planned, ending with the twelfth grade. The promising practice lead and the director were in constant communication through different mediums. They were able to meet on a daily basis during the first year. The promising practice lead thought it was important that they meet to talk about the lesson that they taught that day and to remind each other what 63 their ultimate goal was and where they were trying to take students in terms of writing. They discussed implementation of the Toulmin model of argumentation over lunch, through phone calls, and through email. Argumentative writing across the curriculum was first implemented in the two subject areas of English and history. Then it was implemented in science, followed by math. The campus was small when the school first began, which made implementation easier due to a small staff size. According to the promising practice lead, student test scores really shot up that first year, suggesting that consistent practice with writing across disciplines improved the students’ achievement (promising practice lead, personal communication, November 27, 2007). Lessons Learned: Benefits According to the director and the staff at VP, students, staff, and parents experience a variety of benefits as a result of implementing argumentative writing across the curriculum. Students. All of the staff interviewed agreed that, “students’ writing becomes stronger because they are writing across the curriculum and they learn the same key language in all disciplines: claim, clarification, evidence, and warrant” (personal communication, November 27, 2007). This language is used in students’ Socratic dialogues, giving students constant reinforcement. The students have a routine that is the same across the curriculum even though the subject matter is different (promising practice lead, November 27, 2007). By the end of their ninth grade year, students are 64 confident in their writing abilities because of the practice that they get across subject areas (teacher, personal communication, November 28, 2007). Staff. A valuable lesson learned by all staff is that the goal of writing needs to be made clear to the students, its relevance needs to be made clear, and students need to build upon it. According to the director, “when students know what is expected of them and what type of paper they are expected to write, they have a framework to follow and they better understand the point to their writing” (See Appendix L) (personal communication, November 27, 2007). Two of the three teachers interviewed agree that a lot less time is spent editing student papers for English standards and more time is allotted to focus on the content (personal communication, November 27, 2007). The teachers also felt that they benefit from talking with teachers from other disciplines, sharing student essays across subjects, and discussing what they do with their students (personal communication, November 28, 2007). “The biggest benefit for teachers is that students are prepared to write in college and to think through and logically argue their points in multiple disciplines” (teacher, personal communication, November 27, 2007). For the teachers, they have something important in common regardless of the subject they teach. Parents. According to one of the teachers interviewed, “By having the same system of writing in place, the parents can help the students when they are assigned an essay because parents are familiar with the writing model” (teacher, personal communication, November 27, 2007). Teachers also feel that parents gain confidence from helping their children with writing. While there is no formal 65 training for parents on the Toulmin model of argumentation, teachers use Back-to- School nights and parent conferences to explain the steps of the Toulmin model to parents so that they are able to assist students. Lessons Learned: Challenges Several challenges of implementing argumentative writing across the curriculum were reported by those interviewed. Time was one of the greatest challenges to implementing the writing program. The director found that balancing rigorous thinking and writing, and covering content standards required considerable time (personal communication, November 27, 2007). In addition, the teachers interviewed were in agreement that there was not enough time for refresher courses in professional development once the school year began. According to the promising practice lead, more time was needed to train teachers to use the writing model; as only he and the director were training teachers, and he had to balance his time between teaching students and training teachers (personal communication, November 27, 2007). Another challenge reported by the director and the teachers was finding the confidence to teach students to write argumentative essays and being confident in one’s own writing to model it for the students. “One of the challenges was doing the writing assignment first to figure out the pitfalls before assigning it to the students” (science teacher, personal communication, November 27, 2007). According to the director, “a teacher has to be really competent in their ability to reason something out, so students know that there is no right or wrong answer; and they need to have 66 the ability to distinguish between a sound argument and an argument that is not sound” (personal communication, November 27, 2007). In addition to facing the challenge of competence in their own writing, teachers faced the challenge of getting the students excited about argumentative writing in subjects other than English. According to the director, “students hate it in their ninth grade year, but by the time they get to tenth grade, they really enjoy writing” (director, personal communication, November 27, 2007). Students begin to realize they are using the same model of writing in all subjects and see themselves getting better at writing (director, personal communication, November 27, 2007). The fact that the school accepts students at all grade levels, 9-12, poses another challenge in that students may enter VP during their eleventh grade year and thus would have missed the first two years in which they would have learned to write argumentative essays. According to the director, interventions such as after-school tutoring have been put in place to assist those students who start after their ninth grade year (director, personal communication, November 27, 2007). Teacher turnover has been another challenge. While the English and the history departments have had more stability with regard to staff, the science and math departments have not. Some teachers have taken on leadership roles and are no longer in the classroom. The science department is almost entirely composed of new staff. The math department, on the other hand, in terms of staffing and curriculum, is being rebuilt. According to the director, “Due to low math scores on the California Standards Test, the entire math program has been torn down and is being rebuilt, so 67 argumentative writing is not currently happening in math” (personal communication, November 27, 2007). 46% of all ninth graders and 58% of all tenth graders tested scored at the below basic and far below basic level on the 2007 CST in Algebra I (California Department of Education, 2008). Evidence of Impact Although VP has experienced challenges implementing argumentative writing across the curriculum, the school has experienced considerable success with the promising practice. The promising practice lead, who brought the program from Harvard-Westlake, was able to benchmark where students at VP were compared to students at Harvard-Westlake just by the level of student writing, as there was no formal assessment in place (teacher, personal communication, November 27, 2007). Impact on students. In June of 2007, VP graduated its first class with “all students completing A-G requirements 1 ” (director, personal communication, November 27, 2007). In addition, “75% went on to four-year universities and the remaining 25% went to junior colleges” (director, personal communication, November 27, 2007). Several students have returned to VP, since graduating, to share their stories of success in college. “These are not just the students who were in the top 10% of their class, but also those who were in the bottom half” (teacher, personal communication, November 27, 2007). Several students have returned to VP to report that they passed their writing placement tests for college entrance. One 1 A pattern of study for high school students used to satisfy college entrance requirements (see www.universityofcalifornia.edu/admissions/undergrad_adm/paths_to_adm/freshman/subject_reqs.htm l). 68 student, for example, shared that she had passed the reading and writing placement test at California State University, Dominguez Hills and was placed directly into English 101. According to the director, “this particular student was so far behind when she started at VP in ninth grade that she was reading at a fourth grade level” (personal communication, November 27, 2007). Another student who had behavior problems at VP and who struggled right to the very end of her twelfth grade year, came back to VP and reported that she took the composition placement exam at Santa Monica College and received the highest score in her cohort (promising practice lead, personal communication, November 27, 2007). Another student, who applied to the Tuskegee Institute, reported that they were impressed by her essay. According to the promising practice lead, “If this student had only had one good course in writing at VP, it would not have been enough for her. She needed all four years and if VP had not consistently taught writing across all subjects, this student would not have made it” (personal communication, November 27, 2007). According to the director, the average student ends up writing three paragraphs by the end of ninth grade; but instead of writing a sloppy paragraph, they are able to write “an air-tight argument where they write about one specific thing, proving their point through inductive reasoning” (director, personal communication, November 27, 2007). In an example of argumentative writing, a student disputes the claim by an author, Garrett Hardin, that uncontrolled immigration is a result of rich countries of the world continuously helping poor countries (See Appendix M). The teachers have noticed that “students can see the importance of writing and they 69 understand that writing is not just reserved for English classes” (teacher, personal communication, November 28, 2007). The school’s mission statement is posted in every classroom and in every office in the school, as a reminder to students and staff that academic success in college is the ultimate goal. Impact on faculty. Teachers agree that they are always on the same page with regard to the way writing is taught at VP. They “all have adopted the same mission, and know exactly what their aim is” (director, personal communication, November 27, 2007). All of the teachers interviewed agreed that they were forced to write more as teachers and so have learned to “structure their arguments within the Toulmin model and provide the evidence to support their opinions” (teacher, personal communication, November 28, 2007). Argumentative writing across the curriculum also gives teachers clarity and focus (teacher, personal communication, November 27, 2007). With the addition of a new class of students each school year, teachers are constantly teaching and re-teaching the writing model. By the thirteenth week of school, one teacher reported growth in some students’ writing, although many are still struggling; but the teacher’s confidence grows along with the students’ as they learn to back up their arguments with evidence (teacher, personal communication, November 28, 2007). Impact on parents. The impact of argumentative writing across the curriculum was well evident at the graduation ceremony of the first graduating class as well as other events such as Back-to-School Night. Many parents voiced their satisfaction and excitement that their children had become better writers. As an 70 example, a parent approached the director and the principal at graduation and expressed her joy at what a great writer her daughter has become as a result of having it reinforced in all classes (teacher, personal communication, November 27, 2007). According to the English and history teachers interviewed, parents have become familiar with the language used in the Toulmin model and are able to communicate with teachers at parent conferences and Back-to-School night to discuss their child’s progress with writing (teacher, personal communication, November 28, 2007). Resource Requirements Budget The school’s budget is controlled by the school’s CMO, ICEF. According to the principal, $8,532 is spent on each student. Training for argumentative writing across the curriculum is done by a staff member who is paid quarter time (salary plus benefits), about $25,000. $4,000 is spent on release time for teachers and $4,000 is spent on the materials for argumentative writing across the curriculum. Release time for teachers is spent doing classroom observations of master teachers or attending the Toulmin leadership trainings on Wednesday afternoons (director, personal communication, November 27, 2007). There is no additional cost for the after-school tutoring provided for students entering after the ninth grade. According to the director, each teacher holds office hours one day a week after school and students may receive tutoring from any teacher from the English department, whether or not it 71 is their English teacher (personal communication, November 27, 2007). The CMO makes sure that the funds are available to support writing across the curriculum. Staffing “When you are hired to work for any ICEF school, you are told that argumentative writing across the curriculum is a non-negotiable” (director, personal communication, November 27, 2007). The staff is told up front that the Toulmin model is used to teach writing. “The school is comprised of a staff which shares the same philosophy and have embraced the idea that argumentative writing will be used in all subject areas” (science teacher, personal communication, November 27, 2007). Teacher turnover has contributed to staffing problems at VP. According to the director, escalating housing prices and the cost of living has led to an exodus of teachers from California, leaving vacancies in many of the teaching positions. The sudden passing of one of VP’s science teachers also left a vacancy. “The former principal was also a science teacher and was really good at using argumentative writing across the curriculum in science” (director, personal communication, November 27, 2007). As a result, many of the teachers are new, especially in the math and science departments. All parties interviewed agree that the English and history departments have the most stability as well as the most expertise with regard to the promising practice. According to the promising practice lead, who initially brought the Toulmin model of argumentative writing across the curriculum to VP, his job is “to always remind the staff what the goal is” (promising practice lead, personal communication, November 27, 2007). He also has discussions with teachers 72 about writing assignments and he presents to teachers during professional development (see section in professional development, below). Facilities No special facilities were required to implement writing across the curriculum. All that was necessary to implement the promising practice was regular classrooms. A laptop computer and an LCD projector would be helpful for teachers to model writing and editing for the students. Classroom sizes are kept small, creating a ratio of approximately twenty students to one teacher. Professional development is held in one of the classrooms, so no special facility is needed to conduct professional development either. Professional Development All of the professional development for argumentative writing across the curriculum is done by the director of instruction at VP. The director of VP also does the professional development for all of the other ICEF middle and high schools where the Toulmin model of argumentative writing across the curriculum has been implemented. In addition, she was the lead writing consultant for the Leadership Public Schools in northern California, of which there are six, where the Toulmin model is also used for argumentative writing across the curriculum. Professional development for all teachers is on-going. All new teachers at VP are trained in the Toulmin model for one week when they are first hired. This is referred to as “Toulmin boot camp” because of its intensity (director, personal communication, November 27, 2007). They receive follow-up training as the school year progresses. 73 In addition, during the summer professional development, two full days are devoted to argumentative writing across the curriculum. Professional development on the Toulmin model of argumentative writing occurs twice per week during the regular school year, which amounts to approximately eight to ten hours per month, and has collaboration time for all departments built into it in order to maintain a sense of collegiality; however, the director thought more time was important (director, personal communication, November 27, 2007). The director is currently the only one providing professional development in argumentative writing across the curriculum at VP, the other ICEF schools, and the Leadership Public Schools. In an effort to expand the number of trainers, a principal- in-training institute was set up in which administrators would be trained to become trainers of the Toulmin model. This was a ten-week professional development session for VP and the other ICEF schools. Participants included teachers and assistant directors from ICEF’s middle and high school. The first meeting began with the philosophy of the Toulmin model of argumentation and ended ten weeks later with all participants creating an action plan for implementing the model in their classrooms. The ICEF Unit Template, outlining the professional development goals, skills, and timelines is found in Appendix N. Recommended Resources Documents which support argumentative writing across the curriculum are contained in the appendices as follows: (a) the First Four Steps of the Toulmin Model, Appendix K; (b) Disgrace Essay, Appendix L; (c) Sample Student Essay, 74 Appendix M; (d) ICEF Unit Template, Appendix N; (e) template for the Toulmin Model of Writing, Appendix O; (f) ICEF Writing Goals by High School Grade Level, Appendix P; and (g) article from Educational Leadership about argumentative writing across the curriculum, Appendix Q. The following books and articles related to argumentative writing across the curriculum were recommended by staff at VP: • Brown, R. W. (1915). How the French boy learns to write: A study in the teaching of the mother tongue. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. • Intersegmental Committee of the Academic Senates of the California Community Colleges, the California State University, and the University of California. (2002, Spring). Academic literacy: A statement of competencies expected of students entering California’s public colleges and universities. Retrieved December 5, 2007, from http://www.academicsenate.cc.ca.us/icas.html. • Toulmin, S. E. (2003). The uses of argument. New York: Cambridge University Press. (note, first published in U.K. in 1958) 262 pages. • Whitehead, A. N. (1929). The aims of education: and other essays. The Macmillan Company. (Published by Macmillan in 1967). The following Websites related to argumentative writing across the curriculum were recommended by staff at VP: • The College Board (n.d.). http://www.collegeboard.com 75 • Williams, J. & McEnerney, L. (1995). Writing in college: A short guide to college writing. Retrieved December 5, 2007, from University of Chicago, Humanities Collegiate Division Website: http://writing- program.uchicagoledu/resources/collegewriting/index.htm Pacific Collegiate School Introduction to the School History PCS is a start-up charter founded by a group of teachers. The charter was approved by the Santa Cruz County Office of Education in 1999 and PCS was opened in September 1999. The school began with seventh grade, and then expanded to grade twelve with one grade level added each year. The school now serves grades 7-12. The school’s mission is, “to provide exemplary, standards-based college preparatory and fine arts education for public middle and high school students of Santa Cruz county and bordering areas” (PCS Charter, p. 3). In addition, “PCS graduates will be prepared to enter and thrive at the world’s finest colleges and universities” (PCS Charter, p. 3) Presently, PCS serves 410 students in grades 7-12 and plans to increase its size to 480 over a three year period, beginning in 2008. The demographics of the student body is 2% African American, 10% Asian, 9% Hispanic, and 75% White. Of these students, 5% receive free and reduced lunch, 7% have special needs, and 2% 76 are English language learners. A complete summary of the school demographics and the charter status of PCS are presented in Table 4.2. Table 4.2 Profile of Pacific Collegiate School: Summary of School Demographics and Charter Status ___________________________________________________________________ Variable Value ___________________________________________________________________ Charter Status Start-up Charter Authorizer Santa Cruz County Office of Education Year chartered 1999 Year opened for operation with students 1999 Grades served: 7-12 Students served: (current) 410 Students served: (projected) 480 Student population Ethnicity African American: 2% (8) Asian: 10% (41) Hispanic: 9% (37) White: 75% (307) Native American: 0% (0) Pacific Islander: 0% (0) Filipino: 0% (0) Multiple/No Response: 0% (0) Special Populations Free/Reduced-Price Lunch: 5% (20) Special needs: 7% (27) English Language Learners: 2% (8) Number of full-time administrators 1.6 (+ 3 office staff) Number of teachers 20 full-time, 9 part time Teachers in a collective bargaining unit No Per-pupil spending $9,000 School address 255 Swift Street Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Type of school Site-based Contact information Principal: Andrew Goldenkranz (831) 479-7785 andrew.goldenkranz@pcsed.org Web site www.pacificcollegiate.com ___________________________________________________________________ 77 Description of Promising Practice: Writing Across the Curriculum Writing across the curriculum at PCS consists of a variety of components which include journal writing, essay writing, class discussions, and the use of graphic organizers. Students write in all of their classes at PCS. Journal writing is done in all classes (promising practice lead, personal communication, November 1, 2007). Journal writing may take on different forms, such as: writing to a specific prompt, description of a character’s development, or a summary of a reading passage. The Modern Language Association 2 (MLA) format has been adopted by the school and is used in all classes beginning in seventh grade. This prepares students for the type of formal writing that they will do in college (promising practice lead, personal communication, November 1, 2007). In addition, students work with Advanced Placement (AP) rubrics beginning in tenth grade; and by the eleventh grade, they are working with the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) rubric. For example, as part of their curriculum, students in the tenth grade AP World History class read Jared Diamond’s Guns, Germs, & Steel, and write a three to six page analytical review, which includes a discussion and an analysis of the author’s argument. Students are graded using a rubric based on the same criteria for the advanced placement writing test (see Appendix R) Students are graded on content, style, organization, category, and corrections just as they would be graded on the AP test. In the AP US History class, students also answer a 2 MLA is a style of writing which focuses on writing mechanics and documentation of sources and is used by high school and undergraduate students, as well as professional writers (http://www.mla.org/style). 78 document based question, in writing, as this is one of the essay types on the AP test. In this essay, students construct a logical historical argument, using primary sources as evidence. An example of a document based question that students are assigned is, “To what extent did the American Revolution fundamentally change American society?” During the twelfth grade year, writing is geared toward the college essay and college writing. Students write to the prompt on the college application for one of the colleges to which they are applying, or they write to the University of California (UC) or the Stanford University prompt (principal, personal communication, November 1, 2007). An example of the University of California’s personal statement prompt for the fall 2008 follows: “Describe the world you come from – for example, your family, community, or school – and tell us how your world has shaped your dreams and aspirations” (from http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/admissions/undergrad_adm/apply/how_apply/ personal_statement.html). The essay on the college writing prompt must be within the specified word or page limit, it must have a clear purpose, and the thesis or topic must answer the prompt and be clearly stated. Students use a writing checklist which guides them to edit for MLA style, punctuation, grammar, style and usage, and analysis (see Appendix S). According to the principal, the school has adopted rubrics from organizations where students have an incentive to do well. Students are exposed to good writing from the time they begin at PCS in seventh grade (principal, personal communication, November 1, 2007). For example, students read Op Ed articles from the local newspaper to become familiar with good expository writing. 79 According to the principal, students also do analytical writing in which they become immersed in a situation in order to rationalize an answer and in some cases, to retell a story. For example, in math, students write about the strategies that they use to solve different problems and in history, they write to illustrate different points of view. “Instead of asking students to tell what happened in the Hundred Years War, students are asked to write a letter from the general king describing how they needed to change their strategies” (principal, personal communication, November 1, 2007). The discussions which take place during the lesson helps to guide the students’ writing. In the AP World History class, students read an article about bananas then held a discussion about the biological, political, economic, and cultural change both locally and globally that bananas brought. They used a graphic organizer to take notes from the reading and the discussion, which became their springboard into writing about the effect that the spread of bananas had from Southeast Asia to Africa. Regardless of what type of writing students are doing, all parties interviewed agree that students receive constant feedback on their writing. Goal and Theory of Action of the Promising Practice The goal of writing across the curriculum is to “have students ready to write at an advanced college level upon entry into college” (principal, personal communication, November 1, 2007). The promising practice lead believes that the driving force behind writing across the curriculum at PCS is that writing occurs in all classes, not just English classes and that students learn through writing (promising practice lead, personal communication, November 1, 2007). “The more students 80 write, the better chance they have of processing the things that they are learning in a meaningful way; and the more practice they get with writing, the more confident they become and the better prepared they are for college” (promising practice lead, personal communication, November 1, 2007). Implementation of the Promising Practice History All parties interviewed agree that writing has been an emphasis of the school since the school opened in 1999. The core faculty organized the school’s curriculum around the humanities, creating both a vertical alignment and a horizontal alignment between English and history. Horizontal alignment occurs when teachers of the same grade level coordinate instruction across subject areas. An example of the horizontal alignment is the manner in which the English and history classes are arranged. The period that is being studied in history correlates with the literature studied in English at each grade level except for twelfth grade, where the focus of the English class is more on college essay writing (personal communication, promising practice lead, November 1, 2007). With vertical alignment, subjects are connected across grade levels. For example, the classes in each subject have similar formats in that there are lectures, discussions, student presentations, and writing assignments. The expectation of the founding teachers was that students be able to write in all subjects, not just English. Being able to write at a college level was incorporated into the school from the very beginning by one of the founding history teachers. The founding principal was also a history teacher. 81 Writing across the curriculum first began at PCS in English and history, which were horizontally aligned, before branching out into the other subjects. For example, in seventh grade, students take Introduction to American Literature and Introduction to American History and in eighth grade they take Ancient World Literature and Ancient World History. As stated above, the English course for each grade level coordinates with the history course for that grade level. Units are oftentimes correlated between English and history within the same grade level. An example of the eleventh grade course of study for AP English and AP U.S. History would include a unit that focuses on reform during the Civil Rights Movement. The English class will write an annotative commentary of functional analysis about the schemes and tropes of Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream Speech,” while the AP U.S. History class explores the theme of reform and rebellion in the turbulent sixties, writing an essay related to a free-response question posed by the teacher. Planning Time Because writing across the curriculum at PCS first began with the English and history departments by English and history teachers, planning time included only two full in-service days prior to the beginning of the school year (principal, personal communication, November 1, 2007). English and history have always been horizontally aligned. They have always planned together and have always included writing as a large part of the curriculum; therefore, planning time at the beginning of the school was kept to a minimum. 82 Lessons Learned: Benefits Numerous benefits were experienced by PCS students, staff, and parents as a result of writing across the curriculum. Students. Writing across the curriculum has many benefits for students. Writing across the curriculum helps students think more clearly, organize information, and present it effectively (principal, personal communication, November 1, 2007). Students understand the larger context of math by using writing across the curriculum (math teacher, personal communication, November 2, 2007). Another benefit for students is that there is consistency (study skills teacher, personal communication, November 2, 2007). Students know what each teacher expects because their prior teachers and future teachers have the same expectations as far as writing goes. According to the promising practice lead, students are encouraged to write and to understand the value of writing by teachers across all disciplines (personal communication, November 1, 2007). Students learn how to write clearly and in an impressive way across all disciplines (history teacher, personal communication, November 2, 2007). Writing across the curriculum prepares students to succeed in college (promising practice lead, personal communication, November 1, 2007). Staff. All four of the teachers interviewed found value in teaching writing across the curriculum. “Writing across the curriculum is so rewarding: The true motivation is the encouragement for continued independent education for the teachers themselves to essentially be a perennial student” (math teacher, personal 83 communication, November 2, 2007). Teachers understand the importance of writing and are able to impart that understanding to the students (history teacher). According to the math teacher, writing across the curriculum allows him to bring a lot more reality to the class in a much more concrete way and he has become much more attuned to where math shows up in society as a result. Another benefit to teachers is getting a better understanding of the students’ thought processes and being able to identify students who are having difficulties understanding the subject matter (science teacher, personal communication, November 2, 2007). “What students say through their writing and how they say it has been a big clue to teachers across the disciplines that a student has either grasped a concept or may need help beyond the standard classroom” (science teacher, personal communication, November 2, 2007). Parents. Although the parents are not directly involved with writing across the curriculum at PCS, they have experienced the benefits. Writing across the curriculum provides consistent expectations for the parents in that parents know that students will write in every class (study skills teacher, personal communication, November 2, 2007). Parents are very involved with the school and lines of communication are kept open with the teachers, so parents know what students are studying in their classes as well as what they are writing about. The parents at PCS have bought into the idea that writing is a big component of college preparation (principal, personal communication, November 1, 2007). According to the promising practice lead, parents are very involved in the school and they know the value of writing and its importance in the learning process, as many parents are university 84 professors at nearby University of California, Santa Cruz (personal communication, November 1, 2007). Lessons Learned: Challenges Several challenges were encountered while implementing writing across the curriculum. One of the biggest challenges reported by those interviewed was time. There is a lot of writing to both read and grade. Grading writing assignments for multiple classes of students required a lot of time both during the school day and beyond. Three of the four teachers reported that they spent countless non-paid hours of their own time grading writing assignments (personal communication, November 1, 2007). In addition to the tremendous amount of grading that had to be done, nearly all the teachers interviewed agreed that grading writing assignments became challenging at times. They did not have the expertise that an English teacher does about writing style, mechanics, or grammar. Teachers of subjects other than English “fear that they may not grade the students’ writing as an English teacher would” (history teacher, personal communication, November 2, 2007). In addition, teachers are lacking in grammatical training and are unclear on the precise kinds of feedback to give to students on their writing assignments (history teacher, personal communication, November 2, 2007). The science teachers are great with helping students write good science lab reports and science fair summaries, but the English and history teachers have more expertise with essay writing (principal, personal communication, November 1, 2007). The English and history teachers place a high 85 standard on writing. Writing done in history is graded by the same standards as an English essay. The AP World History teachers has a minor in English and puts in a lot of work trying to hold students accountable for writing as if they were in an English class (history teacher, personal communication, November 1, 2007). According to the promising practice lead, teachers of other subjects can do smaller writing assignments such as journal writing and essays instead of large term papers (personal communication, November 1, 2007). Teachers who need assistance with grading student writing get support from the English department during in-services and on an as-needed basis. To make grading writing easier for other teachers, the promising practice lead proposed creating a writing handbook which would include sample essays for each subject area and rules of grammar, as well as a section on technical writing and scientific writing. A grant would be written for this and it would be made available to teachers, students, and parents (personal communication, November 1, 2007). English teachers currently assist other teachers with things like bibliographies and MLA style (promising practice lead, personal communication, November 1, 2007). Teacher buy-in was also seen as a challenge to implementing writing across the curriculum. According to the promising practice lead, teachers of subjects other than English have complained about having to teach writing, which they feel is the English teacher’s job (personal communication, November 1, 2007). A part of the school’s mission is that graduates of PCS “will be prepared to enter and thrive at the world’s finest colleges and universities” (PCS Charter, 2006). Teachers are aware of 86 the mission of the school when they are hired and writing has been written into the school’s charter. One of the student outcomes that has been written into the school’s charter is that students will “establish and defend a thesis or argument; as evidenced via internal and external writing rubrics” (PCS Charter, 2006). Although writing is not specifically written in the school’s charter for math and science, the goal of the school is to have writing incorporated in all subject areas; however, committing to teaching writing across the curriculum is not currently a condition for employment with PCS. Another challenge that makes it difficult to maintain a comprehensive writing across the curriculum program is teacher retention. A lot of the teachers are new and some have left the school due to retirement or for personal reasons. According to the promising practice lead, “Every time that a teacher leaves the school, it interrupts the flow of writing across the curriculum.” Most of the turnover is in the lower grades, while those with longevity at the school teach the higher grade levels (principal, personal communication, November 1, 2007). Currently, there are no monetary incentives to retain teachers; however, there are longevity incentives. Teachers benefit from having smaller class sizes and students who are motivated (principal, personal communication, November 1, 2007). All parties interviewed agreed that not all students enter PCS with good writing skills. Students come to PCS at different academic levels and need to be brought up to grade level in their writing. One of the ways that the school addresses this is through the use of the study skills class. This class is designed as an academic 87 support system for struggling students. The study skills teacher works with students on an individual basis and sometimes works in the classroom with the teacher to support the writing that students are doing. Students write using graphic organizers to guide them. One type of graphic organizer used in the study skills class to support writing across the curriculum is the Inspiration software. The study skills class is equipped with computers for each student. Students use the Inspiration program as a tool to help them organize their ideas. This program helps students to first visually organize their notes and develop their topic. Then, it creates an outline for students (study skills teacher, personal communication, November 2, 2007). A full day of study hall is also provided for students who need extra support. Study hall is held daily in a common room, which is open all day long for students’ use. Students attending study hall may either go voluntarily or they are referred by a teacher or administrator with a specific assignment to complete. A supervisor is there to assist students whose grade point average (G.P.A.) is less than 3.0, while students with a G.P.A. higher than a 3.0 may work independently (principal, personal communication, November 1, 2007). In addition, all teachers hold office hours and after-school tutoring is provided (study skills teacher, personal communication, November 2, 2007; PCS Charter Document, p. 6). Tutoring is held Mondays through Thursdays from the hours of 3:00 pm to 4:00 pm and, like the study hall, students either voluntarily attend or they are assigned to after-school tutoring by a teacher as a remediation strategy (principal, personal communication, November 1, 2007). 88 Evidence of Impact PCS has experienced challenges implementing writing across the curriculum; however, they have demonstrated success on standardized tests. The evidence of impact of this program is evident in students’ test scores and testimonials. Impact on students. The main indication that writing across the curriculum has an impact on students is the triad of Advanced Placement (AP) test scores, Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores, and college admissions information (principal, personal communication, November 1, 2007). In school year 2006-2007, 158 students in eleventh and twelfth grades took AP exams: 96 exams had a score of 5, 107 exams had a score of 4, 84 exams had a score of 3 3 (California Department of Education, 2008). Of these students, 85% of current seniors received scores of a 3, 4, or 5. In addition, a total of 55 PCS students took the SAT for school year 2006-2007, with a writing average of 646, while the state’s writing average on the SAT was 491 (California Department of Education, 2008). PCS seniors who took the SAT writing test had an average of 628, while the state’s average was 497. Additional statistics on student performance are included in Appendix T. As noted earlier, student writing in their classes is graded using essay rubrics from the SAT and AP exams (principal, personal communication, November 1, 2007). Furthermore, students are aware that teachers “place a very high premium on writing at PCS” (promising practice lead, personal communication, November 1, 2007). 3 A score of 3 or higher on the Advanced Placement test generally qualifies for one college credit (http://www.collegeboard.com). 89 The school also gets reports back from student transcripts that they are doing well with writing in college. In addition, students have returned and told of their college success with regards to writing (principal, personal communication, November 1, 2007). Students at PCS have also been observed talking in one class about things that they learned in other classes, relating one subject to another in terms of writing (math teacher, personal communication, November 2, 2007). Students have more opportunities to write, which impacts how well they write. Impact on faculty. Teachers of different subjects have expressed their excitement at teaching writing across the curriculum. Teachers interviewed reported a feeling of success in their teaching of writing based on their observations of the improvement in students’ writing between the time that they arrive at PCS and when they leave for college (personal communication, November 2, 2007). Teachers give students constant feedback on their writing and have seen improvements in the students’ writing as a result (history teacher, personal communication, November 2, 2007). The math teacher has been asked to speak on numerous occasions on behalf of the math program and its goal in building students who are able to approach the world and its problems from a mathematical standpoint through writing. A Pre- Calculus reader is used by students to help them better understand the history behind numbers and the role that math plays in society. For example, the reader contains articles and chapters from books such as: Euclid’s Window, “How Did We Acquire the Ability for Abstract Mathematical Thinking?” and “The Numerical Pattern that 90 Plants Weave?” Some of the questions addressed in the Pre-Calculus class through short writing assignments are: • What has been the major problem in travel over the years? • What was the perception of time in the 14 th century? Was time uniform across Europe? • What is mathematically astonishing about the growth of seeds on a seed head? • What did it mean to be in the dark ages, not knowing where you really are, from a mathematical standpoint? The math teacher shares information from the course with parents, staff, and other stakeholders. According to the study skills teacher who works with all subjects, the teachers are very supportive of one another and they all work together to support the students (personal communication, November 2, 2007). Impact on parents. Writing across the curriculum has also had an impact on parents. According to the history teacher, parents tend to be generally happy with the writing program and the writing instruction that students receive (personal communication, November 2, 2008). Parents have given feedback to teachers about how much they appreciate the writing that is done in subjects other than English. They have also mentioned talking to their children about their writing assignments and finding it interesting (math teacher, personal communication, November 2, 2007). 91 Resource Requirements Budget According to the principal, $9,000 is spent on each student. Approximately 25% of the school’s budget, which amounts to about $50,000, is spent on instructional materials and supplies that support writing. The professional development that is held at the beginning of the school year for writing across the curriculum, costs about $10,000 per day; therefore, the two full days of professional development total approximately $20,000. One class section of the after-school tutoring program is about $16,000. In addition, teachers hold office hours as part of their professional responsibility. There is no additional pay for teachers’ office hours. Staffing The level of expertise with respect to writing across the curriculum varies at PCS; however, the staff is highly educated. At least three of the teachers have doctorate degrees, sixteen have masters degrees, and the teachers of foreign language classes are native speakers of the language they teach (See School Profile, Appendix T & WASC Midterm Progress Report, 2006, available online at http://www.pacificcollegiate.com/dcpage.cfm). The promising practice lead, who is also the English department chair and one of the founding teachers of PCS, has a Doctor of Philosophy in English, with expertise in Renaissance literature. She also has experience as a professor of freshman writing and a lecturer in the English department at the University of California Santa Cruz, so she knows firsthand what type of writing is expected of students when they enter college and she knows how to 92 prepare them for it (promising practice lead, personal communication, November 1, 2007). The study skills teacher focuses mostly on seventh grade students who enter PCS testing below grade level or below standards level. She helps to build a strong writing foundation for these students, with the use of graphic organizers and different types of writing prompts. She also helps the students to organize their thoughts prior to writing by teaching them to use Cornell notes 4 . The promising practice lead has been at the school since its opening in 1999 and the principal has been there for three years. The principal also shares the responsibility of teaching by teaching a course entitled Science and Society. While the teachers’ level of expertise with writing varies across subjects, they have advanced degrees in the core subjects that they teach and they have the benefit of the professional development sessions to support their teaching of writing across the curriculum. Facilities No special facilities were required to implement writing across the curriculum. Regular classrooms were sufficient to implement the program. One thing that is in the planning to enhance writing across the curriculum at PCS is a writing lab. The promising practice lead and the principal plan to open a writing lab in the near future where students can go to work on writing assignments and writing projects (personal communication, November 1, 2007). This writing lab will be staffed with a full-time English teacher and will cost approximately $50,000 per 4 A system of structured note-taking adopted from the practices at Cornell Law School. 93 year, which would be the cost of a full time teaching position (personal communication, November 1, 2007). There would also be additional costs for staff attending conferences and in-services to get the writing lab off of the ground, but that cost has not yet been determined (promising practice lead, personal communication, November 1, 2007). Professional Development The principal is responsible for organizing the professional development for the school. At the beginning of every school year, two full in-service days are devoted to writing across the curriculum. Teachers are then given the opportunity to work for an additional five days, per diem, on a project of their choice either individually or in small groups. For the 2006-2007 school year, the English and history teachers decided to use their five days to really focus on writing across English and history, while one of the math teachers used his five-day option to develop his course reader, connecting math to history through reading and writing (principal, personal communication, November 1, 2007). Approximately two to three hours each month is spent on professional development for writing across the curriculum. Teachers also collaborate with each other when planning their writing assignments so as not to duplicate writing assignments across subjects and so that they know what types of writing exposure students have already received. They also collaborate in setting expectations for the students and come to a consensus as to what type of writing they expect for that school year. 94 At the beginning of the 2007-2008 school year, one of the full-service professional development days, which was dedicated to writing across the curriculum, was used to create a Writing Across the Curriculum Course by Course Guide. Teachers had the task of creating a master list, within their departments and with the assistance of the promising practice lead, of the writing assignments that would be taught for that year in their subject area (promising practice lead, personal communication, November 1, 2007). The Writing Across the Curriculum Course by Course Guide, includes detailed descriptions of the writing assignments done across the curriculum and across grade levels. For example, the Introduction to American Literature course for seventh graders lists all of the writing for the year, with guidelines for each assignment. These include: essay packets, a summer journal, an author study project, in-class writing journals, timed 3-paragraph essays, peer reviews for all essays, a portfolio, a vignette book based on The House on Mango Street, a poetry project, and a final exam. This guide will be made available to all teachers once it has been completed. Recommended Resources Documents which support argumentative writing across the curriculum are contained in the appendices as follows: (a) the 2007-2008 School Profile, Appendix T; (b) MLA Template, Appendix U; (c) Cornell Notes Template, Appendix V. The following books and articles related to argumentative writing across the curriculum were recommended by staff at PCS: 95 • Diamond, J. (1999). Guns, germs, and steel: The fates of human society. New York: Norton & Company. 480 pages. • Mlodinow, L. (2001). Euclid’s Window: The story of geometry from parallel lines to hyperspace. New York: Free Press. 320 pages. The following Web sites support writing across the curriculum at PCS: the Modern Language Association Web site found at http://www.mla.org and the College Board Web site found at www.collegeboard.com. Synthesis In looking at these two charter schools, each has taken a different approach to writing across the curriculum. VP focused on argumentative writing, while PCS used a variety of writing styles, which included analytical writing. VP adopted a specific writing program which was used consistently across grade levels and subjects, while PCS used a collection of strategies. The table that follows gives a snapshot of the instructional strategies used by each school. Most are the same in spite of the fact that the schools approached writing across the curriculum differently. Table 4.3. Strategies Used by VP and PCS Strategy View Park Pacific Collegiate Class Discussion X X Journal Writing X Note-taking X X Peer Evaluation X X Teacher Feedback X X 96 In addition to the strategies employed by the two schools, professional development was a critical element to implementing writing across the curriculum. Although the two schools spent an extensive amount of time on professional development dedicated to writing across the curriculum, the staff at both VP and PCS felt that there was a need for more professional development. A culture had been created at the schools where teachers depended on professional development sessions to provide on-going support. A teachers-training-teachers model was used at VP, while the staff at PCS sought out the promising practice lead and the English department for support. Chapter Five, which follows, is organized around the four original research questions, presenting how findings from this study compare to the research presented in Chapter Two. 97 CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSIONS Introduction The purpose of this study was to investigate promising practices in two California charter schools that used writing across the curriculum to increase student achievement. While View Park Preparatory Accelerated Charter High School (VP) and Pacific Collegiate School (PCS) used different strategies, both schools faced challenges and benefits similar to those reported in the literature in Chapter Two. The results from this study will be disseminated through USC’s online promising practices compendium, under the auspices of the Center on Educational Governance. This chapter is organized by the four original research questions, presented in Chapter Three, and under each section, findings from VP and PCS are compared to the literature on writing across the curriculum, presented in Chapter Two. The chapter concludes with implications of this study for policy and practice. Connections to Prior Research Research Question One: How do charter schools use writing across the curriculum to improve student achievement? High school students who gain acceptance into four-year colleges tend to be the students who earn good grades and who do well on tests, in other words, the “achievers.” In California, the Academic Performance Index (API) is an indication of student achievement. This score, based on the California Standards Test (CST), tells how well students have mastered state standards. In addition, Advanced Placement 98 (AP) test scores, California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE) scores, and Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores have been used to measure student achievement. The experiences at both VP and PCS reflect the conclusions of previous research that writing across the curriculum is an effective method of improving student achievement. According to past research, students’ thought processes are revealed through writing; thus writing offers an accurate indication of student learning (McConachie et al., 2006; The College Board, 2003). Both VP and PCS adopted writing across the curriculum because of their values: The educators viewed writing as a critical assessment of learning, and both schools valued raising college-going rates. Educators at both schools believed that an increase in the amount of writing that students engaged in would improve student achievement. Prior research suggests that students often lacked the writing skills necessary for college (Bazerman et al., 2005). Based on this finding, VP and PCS implemented writing in all subject areas as a means of improving student achievement and getting students prepared for the rigors of college writing. Although writing across the curriculum looks differently at both schools, some of the strategies that they used were similar. Past research identified specific strategies among those were class discussion warm-ups, journal writing, and note- taking (Fisher et al., 2002, National Writing Project, 2002; Reed, 2006). Class discussions were used as a precursor to writing at the two schools. According to the research, class discussions are effective in helping students to 99 construct meaning for their writing (Fisher & Ivey, 2005). Teachers at VP engaged students in discussions, using the Socratic method, prior to written assignments. Students were given an essential question to answer, which tested the depth of their understanding of the subject matter. At PCS, students also engaged in classroom discussions, after which students wrote responses to data-based questions, which were formatted similarly to AP tests. In sum, both schools held class discussions prior to administering formal writing assignments. The discussion indicated the direction of the students’ thinking, while written assignments solidified the extent of their learning. Journal writing was another strategy discussed in the literature. Although journal writing was used at both schools, it was more extensive at PCS. Based on the site visits, there was no evidence that either of the schools used double-entry journals, cited in the literature as writing that allows students to make representations of information they have processed by writing their own interpretation of what they have learned or summarizing the meaning of an issue (Calkins, 1994). Instead, most of the journal writing employed at PCS used open-ended prompts. Note-taking was used at both schools as students prepared to write. PCS students used Cornell notes to organize their thoughts before writing. This type of structured note-taking, which was referenced in the literature review, teaches students to record major points and important details, separating what is important from what is not important so that they stay on topic in their writing (Fisher et al., 2002; Knipper & Duggan, 2006). Students at VP took notes after class discussions, 100 prior to writing. For instance, after watching a scene from A Raisin in the Sun and discussing the play in class, students took notes using the template for the Toulmin model of writing (Appendix O), beginning with a claim. Their notes became the springboard for writing their argumentative essay. A key factor affecting implementation of writing across the curriculum, emphasized throughout the literature, was professional development which has been shown to yield improvements in instructional practices and student learning (Borko, 2004 & National Writing Project, 2007).According to past research, consistent, on- going professional development was an important component to the success of any writing across the curriculum program (McLeod & Maimon, 2000). Both VP and PCS used extensive professional development to train teachers how to use writing in all subject areas. VP had professional development for teachers at least once per week which focused solely on writing across the curriculum, while PCS dedicated two to three hours each month to professional development on writing across the curriculum. Professional development, according to previous research, is effective when it is done school-wide and involves all teachers (Anderson, 2003; Berryman & Russell, 2001; NWP, 2006; Reed, 2006; Younker, 2003; Zimmett, 2000). Teaching writing across the curriculum was a condition of employment with VP; in this way, there were no resistors. Everyone was expected to teach writing across the curriculum and the approach was mentioned in the school’s charter school petition which was used to recruit faculty (director, personal communication, November 27, 101 2007). At PCS, writing across the curriculum was also expected of all teachers, even though it was not specifically written into the school’s charter. According to the principal, it has been an easy sell, since teachers recognize the value of writing and its positive impact on student achievement. Research Question Two: How are resources used to implement writing across the curriculum successfully? In terms of staffing resources, the director of VP was responsible for the school’s professional development in the area of writing across the curriculum, including leading the training sessions. Professional development typically was held in a vacant classroom after school. The same was true of PCS, whose professional development was scheduled by the principal and conducted by the chair of the English Department. Costs, associated with writing across the curriculum, were kept to a minimum at both schools. The majority of money was spent on hiring additional staff. As was mentioned in Chapter Four, VP pays a staff member approximately $25,000 per year to train teachers on writing across the curriculum, while $4,000 is spent on release time for teachers to attend the trainings. PCS has plans to open a writing lab which will cost about $50,000, which will be used to pay a teacher to manage the writing lab (promising practice lead, personal communication, November 1, 2007). In addition, the chair of the English Department at PCS is in the process of developing Writing Across the Curriculum Course by Course Guide that will include descriptions of writing assignments in all subject areas and grade levels. This 102 document will be made available to teachers, students, and parents and will be posted on the school’s website so as not to incur any additional costs. The director at VP created a leadership training guide for teacher leaders to use as a reference once they have gone through a ten-week training session on the Toulmin model. At each session, teacher leaders were provided with handouts pertaining to that week’s topic which they placed in their manual for future reference. The first section of the manual covered the philosophy of the model and the final section contained the action plan created by the teacher leader. Minimal costs were incurred for photocopies of the handouts. Research Question Three: What challenges have charter schools faced in implementing writing across the curriculum and how were they addressed? Although both schools experienced benefits using writing across the curriculum, a few implementation challenges were mentioned during interviews. For example, time for professional development was a huge factor for both VP and PCS. Teachers agreed that there was not enough time for follow-up sessions of professional development after the school year began. This challenge was confirmed by the promising practice leads. To alleviate some of the pressure on the director of VP, who trains the teachers as well as staff in all of the other schools in the charter management organization (CMO), a series of ten professional development sessions were targeted at teacher leaders who would become trainers of the Toulmin model of argumentation. In this way, there will be an additional trainer at VP, as well as at each of the other CMO sites, to conduct professional development on writing across 103 the curriculum. In addition, the teacher leader would serve as a coach or literacy resource specialist for teachers. Such staff was mentioned in the literature as critical for instructing teachers on how to guide and assess student writing (Reed, 2006). Another time issue, identified by teachers at PCS, was the lack of time to grade all of students’ writing assignments. To relieve some of the pressure on classroom teachers, the teachers sometimes had students peer edit each others’ writing during class (promising practice lead, November 1, 2007). This strategy not only helped teachers, but allowed students to learn from each other and become more cognizant of their mistakes. Peer evaluation was also cited in the literature as important to writing across the curriculum: it allowed students to demonstrate an understanding of the subject matter and often comments offered by one student to another became more meaningful than written comments by the teacher (Zimmet, 2000). Aside from time, teachers’ lack of confidence in their own writing skills was a challenge at both schools. Since VP focused on argumentative writing across the curriculum, teachers needed to have confidence in their abilities to distinguish a sound argument from an argument that was not sound in order to guide students (director, personal communication, November 27, 2007). To address this challenge, VP held professional development sessions once each week to provide teachers with the support needed to become confident writers. The professional development sessions often were modeled as classroom lessons. Teachers were given literature to read, after which they were given a writing assignment in which they used the 104 Toulmin model of argumentation to write an argument and provide the evidence to support it (director, personal communication, November 27, 2007). Teachers received feedback from other teachers and from the director. According to the English teacher, the practice sessions have given teachers confidence in their own writing and reasoning abilities (English teacher, personal communication, November 28, 2007). This strategy of professional development was modeled after the “teachers-teaching-teachers” model used by the National Writing Project which was developed to increase teachers’ self-efficacy in their writing abilities (Bazerman, et al., 2005; Borko, 2007; National Writing Project, 2002). At PCS, teachers also reported they did not have the required expertise to grade student writing the way that an English teacher would. In response to this problem, the English Department serves as a resource to teachers, and a section on grammar will be included in the WAC Course by Course Guide (promising practice lead, personal communication, November 1, 2007). Research Question Four: What evidence exists that writing across the curriculum has resulted in positive educational outcomes? Test scores at the two California charter schools revealed that writing across the curriculum had a positive impact on student achievement. As noted in previous studies, when students wrote across the curriculum, they developed profound conceptual knowledge of the subject matter being taught (McConachie et al., 2006). Writing across the curriculum also was found to help students with metacognition (The College Board, 2003). Both VP and PCS have evidence of success on 105 standardized achievement measures. For example, the findings in Chapter Four discussed the difference in test scores between PCS students and students across the state of California, where PCS students scored 155 points higher than students across the state of California on the writing section of the SAT. The number of students obtaining a score of three or higher on AP exams was also significant at PCS. Although VP’s math test scores were low, with 58% of tenth graders scoring at “below basic” and “far below basic” levels, nevertheless there was some evidence of student achievement. Acceptance into college and English placement results revealed that writing across the curriculum was having an impact on students’ writing at VP; as stated earlier, 75% of VP’s seniors went on to four-year colleges and passed the college placement tests for writing. The remaining 25% went to junior colleges. Staff at both schools commented that students have grown in their writing abilities since beginning as a freshman. As indicated by the site visits, both VP and PCS stressed writing in all subject areas, and experienced growth and success in student achievement. Implications for Policy and Practice: Lessons Learned Based on the findings of this study, students at both VP and PCS experienced benefits from using writing across the curriculum. Prior research found that students across the state of California have fallen short on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) writing assessment, the writing section of the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE), and the California Writing Standards Test (CDE, 2007; NCES, 2003). Implications of this study are important: they 106 confirm the importance of teaching writing across the curriculum to improve student achievement. Both VP and PCS stressed the importance of using writing to improve student achievement. Both schools prepared their students to enter top universities and to write at the college level. Although the two schools demonstrated some evidence of student achievement, this finding takes on additional meaning in considering the VP context which is in an urban area with a student population that is 98% African-American Class scheduling implications for school principals Writing across the curriculum would be very difficult to implement with an existing faculty. The Toulmin model of writing used at VP for their writing across the curriculum was a part of the school’s curriculum from the very beginning of the school. The promising practice lead brought this particular writing model to VP prior to the school’s opening. At VP, teachers were hired knowing they would be using the Toulmin model to implement writing across the curriculum. It was not something that was negotiable. Teachers who accepted a position with the school, agreed to teach writing with the Toulmin model. PCS, which has an interdisciplinary slant in its charter, began by merging the English and history departments; thus, the school did not begin implementing writing across the curriculum in all subject areas. PCS had training and collaborative planning between the English and history departments from the time the school opened but there had to be a commitment from the other departments. The chair of the English department was instrumental in getting other departments on board by providing professional development on writing across the 107 curriculum and involving all departments in creating the Writing Across the Curriculum Course by Course Guide. Other departments, such as the math department, saw the benefits of using writing to enhance student learning. Teachers also benefited by having motivated students. There had to be buy-in from the teachers, unlike VP where it was a part of the hiring process. Principals need to reinforce the importance of on-going professional development opportunities. Teachers in all subjects need to be trained to teach writing across the curriculum and professional development needs to be on-going throughout the school year. This strategy will help teachers gain more confidence in their own writing and the ability to teach writing. Prior to the opening of VP, all teachers went through a five-day training on how to teach writing across the curriculum using the Toulmin model of argumentation. This was affectionately known as “Toulmin boot camp.” Every year thereafter, prior to the beginning of the school year, newly hired teachers go through the five-day Toulmin boot camp. Professional development during the school year occurred once per week after the regular school day ended. Professional development at both VP and PCS was on- going throughout the school year and focused specifically on writing across the curriculum. High schools typically offer professional development by departments but for writing across the curriculum to be effective, principals need to set aside time for school-wide professional development as VP and PCS did. In addition, the two schools trained teachers from different subject areas together. At PCS, they used 108 horizontal alignment. The time periods for English and history were aligned horizontally so they were aligned at each grade level. Policy makers Implementing writing across the curriculum in middle and high schools has the potential to narrow the achievement gap. As noted earlier, the two California charter schools in this study had completely opposite demographics, and were located in areas of California that were economically and environmentally on two different ends of the spectrum. With the deadline of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) looming, policy makers ought to consider incentives to encourage schools to implement writing across the curriculum. VP’s Toulmin model and the strategies used by PCS offer promising practices. NCLB states that by the 2013 – 2014 school year, all students must be academically proficient (U. S. Department of Education, 2007). Having more schools implement writing across the curriculum, might help close the achievement gap, in addition to achieving the goal of having all students proficient by the end of the 2014 school year. The results of VP and PCS suggest this promising practice can be effectively implemented with different ethnic groups and in various locales – poor or wealthy. However, the results also point out the importance of full implementation – on-going professional development for teachers and a school commitment to writing in all subject areas. 109 REFERENCES Andersen, R. (2003). Curriculum connections: Achieving consistency in writing across the curriculum. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 39(4), 186 – 187. Atwell, N. (1987). In the middle: Writing, reading, and learning with adolescents. New Jersey: Boynton/Cook Publishers, Inc. Au, K. (1997). Literacy for all students: Ten steps toward making a difference. The Reading Teacher, 51(3), 186-194. Bardach, E. (2003). Creating compendia of best practice. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 22(4), 661 – 665. Baxter, J. A., Woodward, J., Olson, D., & Robyns, J. (2002). Blueprint for writing in middle school mathematics. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 8(1), 52 – 56. Bay Area Writing Project. (2007). http://www.bayareawritingproject.org/about Bazerman, C., Little, J., Bethel, L., Chavkin, T., Fouquette, D., & Garufis, J. (2005). Reference guide to writing across the curriculum. West Lafayette, IN: Parlor Press. Benjamin, A. (2005). Writing in the content areas (2 nd ed.). New York: Eye on Education. Berryman, L. & Russell, D. R. (2001). Portfolios across the curriculum: Whole school assessment in Kentucky. The English Journal, 90(6), 76-83. Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3-15. Bottoms, G. (1999). Outstanding practices, 1998: Raising student achievement by focusing on the 10 key practices. High Schools That Work. Retrieved January 26, 2007, from http://www.sreb.org. Brewer, D. & Wohlstetter, P. (2005, Fall/Winter). Charter schools come of age. USC Urban Ed, Los Angeles, CA: Rossier School of Education. http://www.usc.edu/dept/education/news/urbanedfall_winter 110 Brewster, C. & Klump, J. (2004, December). Writing to learn, learning to write: Revisiting writing across the curriculum in northwest secondary schools. Retrieved January 26, 2007, from http://www.nwrel.org/request. Bulkley, K. & Fisler, J. (2003). A decade of charter schools: From theory to practice. Educational Policy, 17(3), 317-342. California Charter Schools Association. (n.d.). Retrieved July 23, 2007 from http://www.myschool.org. California Department of Education. (n.d.). No child left behind. Retrieved January 26, 2007, from http://www.cde.ca.gov/nclb/index.asp California Department of Education. (2002, May). California standards tests: Teacher guide for the California writing standards tests at grades 4 and 7. Retrieved January 26, 2007, from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sr/documents/cst47teacher.pdf California Department of Education. (n.d.). California standardized testing and reporting. Retrieved December 15, 2007, from http://star.cde.ca.gov/star2007/viewreport.asp California Writing Project. (2007). http://www.californiawritingproject.org Calkins, L. (1994). The art of teaching writing. New Hampshire: Neinemann. Carpenter, D.M. (2006). Playing to type? Mapping the charter school landscape. http://www.edxcellence.net/doc/Carpenter%20ProjectV2.pdf Center on Educational Governance. (2007). Charter schools indicators: A report from the Center on Educational Governance University of Southern California. Cooney, S. & Bottoms, G. (2003). What works to improve student achievement in the middle grades: A making middle grades work research report. Atlanta: Southern Regional Education Board. Cramer, J. (2002). Writing workshop and contest for students and teachers helps site achieve goals. The Voice, 7(3), 20-21. Crawford, J.R. (2001). Teacher autonomy and accountability in charter schools. Education and Urban Society, 33(2), 186-200. 111 Duke, C. R. & Sanchez, R. (2001). Strategies for stimulating informal writing to learn. In Assessing writing across the curriculum (pp. 1-14). Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press. EdSource. (2007). California’s charter schools: Measuring their performance. Annual Report. Fisher, D. (2001). “We’re moving on up”: Creating a schoolwide literacy effort in an urban high school. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 45(2), 92-101). Fisher, D. & Ivey, G. (2005). Literacy and language learning in content-area classes: A departure from “Every teacher a teacher of reading.” Action in Teacher Education, 27(2), 3-11. Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Williams, D. (2002). Seven literacy strategies that work. Educational Leadership, 60(3), 70-73. Gilbert, J. & Kotelman, M. (2005). Five good reasons to use science notebooks. Science and Children, 43(3), 28-32. Grayson Jr., C. J. (2007). Benchmarking: What it is, how it works, and why educators desperately need it. Education Week, 26(21), 33-34. Hall, A. (2001). Math and science in my English class? Why not? In H. A. Scarborough (Ed.), Writing across the curriculum in secondary classrooms: Teaching from a diverse perspective (pp. 17-32). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Hernandez, A., Kaplan, M.A., & Schwartz, R. (2006). For the sake of argument. Educational Leadership, 64(2), 48-52. Inner City Education Foundation. (n.d.). View Park Preparatory Accelerated Charter High School Charter Document. Juzwik, M. M., Curcic, S., Wolbers, K., Moxley, K. D., Dimling, L. M., & Shankland, R. K. (2006). Writing into the 21 st century: An overview of research on writing 1999-2004. Written Communication 23, 451-477. Kaplan, M. (2007). Powerpoint. Kiefer, K. & Neufeld, J. (2002). Making the most of response: Reconciling coaching and evaluating roles for teachers across the curriculum. Colorado State University.http://aw.colostate.edu/articles/kiefer_neufeld_2002.htm 112 Knipper, K. J., & Duggan, T. J. (2006). Writing to learn across the curriculum: Tools for comprehension in content area classes. The Reading Teacher, 59(5), 462- 470. Lent, R. C. (2006). Creating a culture for writers. National Staff Development Council, 27(3), 47-50. Manela, R. W. & Moxley, D. P. (2002). Best practices as agency-based knowledge in social welfare. Administration in Social Work, 26(4). http://www.haworthpressinc.com/store/E-Text/FilesU/J147v26n04_01.pdf Mattern, K., Camara, W., & Kobrin, J.L. (2007). SAT writing: An overview of research and psychometrics to date (College Board Research Rep. No. 32). New York: The College Board. McConachie, S., Hall, M., Resnick, L., Ravi, A. K., Bill, V. L., Bintz, J., & Taylor, J. A. (2006). Task, text, and literacy for all subjects. Educational Leadership, 64(2), 8-14. McEwan, E. K. & McEwan, P. J. (2003). Making sense of research: What’s good, what’s not, and how to tell the difference. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press. McLeod, S. H. & Miraglia, E. (2001). Writing across the curriculum in a time of change. In S. H. McLeod, E. Miraglia, M. Soven, & C. Thaiss (Eds.), WAC for the new millennium: Strategies for continuing writing-across-the- curriculum programs (pp. 1-27). Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Murphy, J. & Shiffman, C.D. (2002). The embedded logic of charter schools. In J. Murphy & C.D. Shiffman, Understanding and assessing the charter school movement (pp. 125-148). New York: Teachers College Press. National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. (2007). Number of charter schools and students in the 2006-07 school year. Retrieved June 28, 2007, from http://www.publiccharters.org National Center for Education Statistics. (2003). Snapshot report: Writing. Retrieved January 26, 2007, from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/writing. 113 National Center for Education Statistics. (2006). http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/writing National Writing Project. (2002). Improving student writing through effective classroom practices. National Writing Project in Brief. National Writing Project. (n.d.). Retrieved January 26, 2007, from http://www.nwp.org Newell, G. E., Koukis, S., & Boster, S. (2007). Best practices in developing a writing across the curriculum program in a secondary school. In S. Graham, C. A. MacArthur, & J. Fitzgerals (Eds.), Best practices in writing instruction (pp. 74-98). New York: The Guilford Press. Pacific Collegiate School. (2006). Pacific Collegiate School Charter Document. Pacific Collegiate School. (2006). WASC midterm progress report. Available at http://www.pacificcollegiate.com/dcpage.cfm. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3 rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications. Peterson, S. S., Rochwerger, L., Brigman, J., & Wood, K. (2006). Cross-curricular literacy: Writing for learning in a science program. Voices from the Middle, 14(2), 31-37. Pugalee, D. K. (2004). A comparison of verbal and written descriptions of students’ problem solving processes. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 55(1), 27- 47. Reed, D. K. (2006). Time’s up. National Staff Development Council, 27(3), 36-42. Russell, D. R. (2002). Writing in the academic disciplines: A curricular history (2 nd ed.). Southern Illinois University Press. Saddler, B. & Andrade, H. (2004). The writing rubric. Educational Leadership, 62(2), 48-52. Smith, F. (1994). Writing and the writer. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Smith, M. A. (1996). The national writing project after 22 years. Phi Delta Kappan, 77(10), 688-692. 114 Stone, R. (2007). Best practices for teaching writing: What award-winning classroom teachers do. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press, Inc. The College Board. (2003). The neglected “r:” The need for a writing revolution. Report of the National Commission on Writing in America’s Schools and Colleges. The College Board. (2007). SAT: The writing section. http://www.collegeboard.com The National Commission on Writing in America’s Schools and Colleges. (2003, April). The neglected “R:” The need for a writing revolution. Retrieved February 27, 2007, from www.writingcommission.org/prod_downloads/writingcom/neglectedr.pdf The National Commission on Writing in America’s Schools and Colleges. (2006, May). Writing and school reform: Including the neglected “R.” Retrieved February 27, 2007, from http://www.writingcommission.org/report.html University of California. (n.d.). Consider your personal statement: The personal statement. Retrieved December 15, 2007 from University of California, Undergraduate Admissions Web site: http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/admissions/undergrad_adm/apply/how _apply/personal_statement.html U.S. Department of Education. (n.d.). No child left behind. Retrieved January 26, 2007, from http://www.ed.gov/nclb/accountability/index.html U.S. Department of Education, Office of Innovation and Improvement. (2004). Innovations in education: Successful charter schools. Washington, D.C. http://www.ed.gov/admins/comm/choice/charter/report.pdf Wohlstetter, P., Griffin, N.C., & Chau, D. (2002). Charter schools in California: A bruising campaign for public school choice. In S. Vergari (Ed.), The charter school landscape (pp. 33-53). Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press. Wohlstetter, P., & Kuzin, C.A. (2006). USC’s compendium of promising practices: Innovations in charter schools. Retrieved June 26, 2007, from http://www.usc.edu/dept/education/cegov/exec_summary.pdf Wohlstetter, P., Wenning, R., & Briggs, K. L. (1995). Charter schools in the United States: The question of autonomy. Educational Policy, 9(4), 331-357. 115 Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3 rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications. Younker, K. (2003). From the secondary section: Facilitating the NCTE reading initiative across the high school curriculum. The English Journal,92(3),18- 20. Ziebarth, T., Celio, M.B., Lake, R.J., & Rainey, L. (2005). The charter schools landscape in 2005. In R.J. Lake & P.T. Hill (Ed.). Hopes fears, & reality (pp. 1-20). Seattle: University of Washington. http://www.ncsrp.org/downloads/HopesandFears2005_report.pdf Zimmet, N. (2000). Engaging the disaffected: Collaborative writing across the curriculum projects. The English Journal, 90(1), 102-106. 116 APPENDIX A CONTENT OF THE COMPENDIUM Content of Compendium: Types of Data to be Collected Goal of PP Description of PP Theory of Action for PP Implementation Details:  History  Time (start-up/planning time; time PP has been in place)  Lessons learned (benefits, challenges, next steps for sustainability)  Evidence of impact Resource Requirements:  Budget information  Staffing (level and type of staff expertise needed)  Facility/space  Professional development/training  Other (e.g., technology) Supporting Documents and Materials (printable in PDF format):  Lessons plans  Parent contracts  Video to support PP  Staff development manuals  Evaluation reports (data demonstrating results of PP) Recommended Resources for Additional Information:  Books  Articles  Web sites  Sources of technical assistance  Potential funding sources 117 APPENDIX B NOMINATION AD CENTER ON Educat ional Governance CENTER ON Educat ional Governance Do you know of a charter school implementing an innovative policy, practice or program that should be widely disseminated Acknowledge exemplary California charter schools by nominating them to USC’s Compendium of Promising Practices USC’s Compendium of Promising Practices The Center on Educational Governance is adding to USC’s online Compendium of Promising Practices, recognizing high-performing charter schools in California that demonstrate innovation and excellence in education. CEG is requesting nominations of charter schools that have made distinct contributions in one of the following 8 areas: • Adult mentoring of at-risk students • Increasing redesignation rates of English-language learners • Integrating academics into career/technical education • School leaders’ use of data for planning and school improvement • Teacher evaluation • Use of technology to increase parent involvement • Uses of school time • Writing across the curriculum Nominations are Now Open Selection Criteria • Demonstration of innovative practice • Evidence of positive change • Potential to transfer and be useful to other schools ? 118 Benefits • Recognition at annual CCSA conference • Publicity (press releases and radio spots) • Framed certificate for display at the school How To Nominate • Visit http://www.usc.edu/dept/education/cegov o Submit your nomination online OR o Download a nomination form and fax to: Priscilla Wohlstetter, Project Director USC Center on Educational Governance FAX: (213) 743-2707 For more information about USC’s Compendium, please visit www.usc.edu/dept/education/cegov/ 119 APPENDIX C DOCUMENT CHECKLIST School Name: _______________ Date of Scheduled Site Visit: ____________ Promising Practice: ________________________________________________ Researcher: _______________________________________________________ Document Type Document Title Retrieval Date Charter (Petition): Renewal Petition Policy Documents Related to Promising Practice (e.g., parent handbook) Handbook (Faculty, Staff, Student, Parent) Program Evaluations (Related to Promising Practice) Other Assessment Data (Related to Promising Practice) Other Documents (Related to Promising Practice) 120 APPENDIX D PRE-SITE TELEPHONE INTERVIEW PROTOCOL School Name: ___________________________ Date:_______________ Name of Interview Subject:______________________________________ Researcher: ___________________________________________________ Start Time: ______ End Time: _______ Total Time (minutes): ________ [Introduction] I am working with the University of Southern California’s Rossier School of Education. We are studying promising practices in California charter schools. Through a nomination process, your school was selected as having success in/with [promising practice]. The purpose of this interview is to learn more about [promising practice] at your school and to schedule a site visit at a time this fall when it is convenient for you. The information from this research will be incorporated into a Web-based compendium of promising practices. The website is hosted by USC’s Center on Educational Governance. The goal of the compendium is to spread new knowledge and innovation about promising practices to inspire educators to improve school performance. By participating in this study, your school will get recognition at the annual California Charter Schools Association conference; a certificate to display at your school; and publicity in the media, including statewide and local press releases. This preliminary interview should take only around 5-10 minutes. Is now a good time? (If not – when would a better time be to talk with you?) Do you have any questions for me before we begin? A. Background-Laying the Foundation 1. How long have you been the principal at this school? 2. Would you tell me about your background and previous experience in education? 3. How long has this school been using the [promising practice]? 121 4. Who else on campus is involved with the [promising practice]? [Probe for lead teachers, teachers, parents] B. Scheduling and Logistics 5. We are planning to visit schools some time this fall, in October or November. The visit will last no more than two days and I would like to speak with you again, along with the other people you mentioned who are involved with [promising practice]? If possible, I also would like to observe a professional development session related to [promising practice] [and to visit a few classrooms]. a. What month and days are best to visit your school? b. Will it be possible to attend a professional development session related to [promising practice] during the visit? c. [Will I be able to observe a few classrooms during my visit?] 6. Who should I speak with about arranging the visit and scheduling the interviews? I can [send, fax, or email] a list of people I would like to interview during my visit, along with a scheduling grid. For future contacts, is it best to communicate with you by phone, or do you prefer fax or email? FAX:________________________ TEL:________________________ EMAIL:______________________ [Closing] Thank you very much for your time. I will send the scheduling grid to [PERSON] in the next day or two, and if it can be returned to me by [DATE], that would be very helpful. I look forward to visiting your school on __________, and will plan to contact you the week before to confirm the visit and interview schedule. Again, thank you for participating in USC’s Compendium. 122 APPENDIX E SCHEDULING GRID School Site Visit: Interview and Observation Schedule for [insert school name] I would like your help in scheduling interviews for my site visit on [insert dates]. Here are a few guidelines to help with scheduling. • I can begin as early as [insert time] and stay throughout the day. • Interviews and observations can be in any order. • Please allow for at least 15 minutes between interviews. • Please feel free to contact [insert your name] at [insert contact information] with questions or concerns. Position Length of Interview Date & Time Name of Person(s) to be Interviewed or Activity to be Observed [Insert date] [Insert date] 1. Interview w/Principal 60 min. 2. Interview w/[Promising Practice Lead] 60 min. 3. Interview w/Teacher #1 [insert details] 45 min. 4. Classroom Observation #1 [insert details] 20-30 min. 5. Interview w/Teacher #2 [insert details] 45 min. 6. Classroom Observation #2 [insert details] 20-30 min. 7. Interview w/Teacher #3 [insert details] 45 min. 8. Classroom Observation #4 [insert details] 20-30 min. 9. Professional Development Session Please send me the completed scheduling grid by [insert date]. You may fax it to me at: 213-749-2707 Or, you may email it to me at: [insert USC email address] 123 APPENDIX F ON-SITE PRINCIPAL INTERVIEW PROTOCOL School Name: _____________________ Date:___________________ Name of Interview Subject:____________________________________ Researcher: _________________________________________________ Start Time: ______ End Time: _______ Total Time (minutes): ______ [Introduction] Thank you for agreeing to meet with me. I am working with the University of Southern California’s Rossier School of Education. We are studying promising practices in California charter schools. Through a nomination process, your school was selected as having success in/with [promising practice]. The purpose of this interview is to learn more about [promising practice] at your school. The information from this research will be incorporated into a Web-based compendium of promising practices. The website is hosted by USC’s Center on Educational Governance. The goal of the compendium is to spread new knowledge and innovation about promising practices to inspire educators to improve school performance. By participating in this study, your school will get recognition at the annual California Charter Schools Association conference; a certificate to display at your school; and publicity in the media, including statewide and local press releases. This interview should take around 60 minutes. Do you have any questions for me before we begin? A. Theory of Action and History 1. Can you briefly describe [promising practice] at your school? 2. What is the goal of [promising practice]? 3. Please tell me about the history of [promising practice] at your school. (Probe: How/why did it get started, who were the people initially involved in developing the practice?) 124 4. Can you tell me a little about your role as principal with respect to [promising practice]? 5. Who have been the main people involved with the planning and implementation of [promising practice]? 6. In your opinion, what factors have contributed to the successful implementation of [promising practice]? 7. How do you think that [promising practice] will lead to school improvement and higher student achievement? B. Implementation Details 8. How long has [promising practice] been in place? 9. How much start up/planning time was needed to implement [promising practice]? 10. How much planning or collaboration time on a monthly basis is needed to maintain implementation of [promising practice]? 11. What do you see as the next steps for ensuring sustainability of the [promising practice]? 12. How do you know [promising practice] is making a difference? [What is the evidence of impact?] 13. What are the benefits of implementing [promising practice]? (Probes: Benefits for students, staff, administrators, parents) 14. What are the challenges of implementing [promising practice]? (Probes: Challenges for students, staff, administrators, parents) 15. What lessons have you learned by implementing [promising practice]? C. Resource Requirements 16. How much of your budget is spent on [promising practice]? 17. What is the level of staff expertise required with respect to [promising practice]? 125 18. What facilities are needed to carry out [promising practice]? 19. How much professional development time has been devoted to implementing [promising practice]? 20. Do you think the training/professional development that has been conducted meets the needs for people to implement [promising practice] effectively? (Probe: What other types of PD do you think would be helpful to effectively implement promising practice?) D. Recommended Resources for Additional Information 21. Are there any books that have been helpful to you in implementing [promising practice]? 22. Are there any articles that have been helpful to you in implementing [promising practice]? 23. Are there any websites that have been helpful to you in learning about [promising practice]? 24. Are there any sources of technical assistance that have been helpful to you in implementing [promising practice]? 25. Additional comments: [Closing] Thank you very much for your time. Your comments and insights are invaluable for our research. 126 APPENDIX G ON-SITE PP LEAD INTERVIEW PROTOCOL School Name: _____________________ Date:__________________ Name of Interview Subject:___________________________________ Position:___________________________________________________ Researcher: ________________________________________________ Start Time: _________ End Time: _______ Total Time (minutes): ______ [Introduction] Thank you for agreeing to meet with me. I am working with the University of Southern California’s Rossier School of Education. We are studying promising practices in California charter schools. Through a nomination process, your school was selected as having success in/with [promising practice]. The purpose of this interview is to learn more about [promising practice] at your school. The information from this research will be incorporated into a Web-based compendium of promising practices. The website is hosted by USC’s Center on Educational Governance. The goal of the compendium is to spread new knowledge and innovation about promising practices to inspire educators to improve school performance. By participating in this study, your school will get recognition at the annual California Charter Schools Association conference; a certificate to display at your school; and publicity in the media, including statewide and local press releases. This interview should take around 60 minutes. Do you have any questions for me before we begin? A. Theory of Action and History 1. Can you briefly describe [promising practice] at your school? 2. What is the goal of [promising practice]? 3. Please tell me about the history of [promising practice] at your school. (Probe: How/why did it get started, who were the people initially involved in developing the practice?) 127 4. Can you tell me a little about your role as lead teacher with respect to [promising practice]? 5. Who have been the main people involved with the planning and implementation of [promising practice]? 6. In your opinion, what factors have contributed to the successful implementation of [promising practice]? 7. How do you think that [promising practice] will lead to school improvement and higher student achievement? B. Implementation Details 8. How long has [promising practice] been in place? 9. How much start up/planning time was needed to implement [promising practice]? 10. How much planning or collaboration time on a monthly basis is needed to maintain implementation of [promising practice]? 11. What do you see as the next steps for ensuring sustainability of the [promising practice]? 12. How do you know [promising practice] is making a difference? [What is the evidence of impact?] 13. What are the benefits of implementing [promising practice]? (Probes: Benefits for students, staff, administrators, parents) 14. What are the challenges of implementing [promising practice]? (Probes: Challenges for students, staff, administrators, parents) 15. What lessons have you learned by implementing [promising practice]? C. Resource Requirements 16. How much of your budget is spent on [promising practice]? 17. What is the level of staff expertise required with respect to [promising practice]? 128 18. What facilities/technology are needed to carry out [promising practice]? 19. How much professional development time has been devoted to implementing [promising practice]? 20. Do you think the training/professional development that has been conducted meets the needs for people to implement [promising practice] effectively? (Probe: What other types of PD do you think would be helpful to implement promising practice effectively?) D. Recommended Resources for Additional Information 21. Are there any books that have been helpful to you in implementing [promising practice]? 22. Are there any articles that have been helpful to you in implementing [promising practice]? 23. Are there any websites that have been helpful to you in learning about [promising practice]? 24. Are there any sources of technical assistance that have been helpful to you in implementing [promising practice]? 25. Additional comments: [Closing] Thank you very much for your time. Your comments and insights are invaluable for our research. 129 APPENDIX H ON-SITE TEACHER INTERVIEW PROTOCOL School Name: ___________________ Date:_________________ Name of Interview Subject:__________________________________ Position:__________________________________________________ Researcher: _______________________________________________ Start Time: ______ End Time: _______ Total Time (minutes): ________ [Introduction] Thank you for agreeing to meet with me. I am working with the University of Southern California’s Rossier School of Education. We are studying promising practices in California charter schools. Through a nomination process, your school was selected as having success in/with [promising practice]. The purpose of this interview is to learn more about [promising practice] at your school. The information from this research will be incorporated into a Web-based compendium of promising practices. The website is hosted by USC’s Center on Educational Governance. The goal of the compendium is to spread new knowledge and innovation about promising practices to inspire educators to improve school performance. By participating in this study, your school will get recognition at the annual California Charter Schools Association conference; a certificate to display at your school; and publicity in the media, including statewide and local press releases. This interview should only take 30-40 minutes. Do you have any questions for me before we begin? A. Evidence of Impact 1. What has been the impact of [promising practice] on students? (Probe: How do you know?) 2. What has been the impact of [promising practice] on parents? (Probe: How do you know?) 130 3. What has been the impact of [promising practice] on teachers? (Probe: How do you know?) 4. What has been the impact of [promising practice] on other constituents/stakeholders (e.g., investors, community groups etc.)? (Probe: How do you know?) 5. Was any system for measuring the success of [promising practice] adopted during the planning stages? 6. Are you aware of any research studies that confirm the impact of [promising practice] on student achievement? If yes, may we please have copies? B. Lessons Learned 7. What benefits have you experienced as a result of implementing [promising practice]? (Probes: Benefits for students, staff, administrators, parents) 8. What challenges have you experienced while implementing the [promising practice]? (Probes: Challenges for students, staff, administrators, parents) 9. Have there been any efforts to improve the effectiveness of [promising practice]? If yes, explain. 10. What efforts have been made to help sustain [promising practice] at your school? 11. What future steps are needed to ensure the sustainability of [promising practice]? 12. What recommendations would you make to other educators that are thinking about adopting [promising practice]? C. Recommended Resources for Additional Information 13. Are there any books that have been helpful to you in implementing [promising practice]? 14. Are there any articles that have been helpful to you in implementing [promising practice]? 131 15. Are there any websites that have been helpful to you in learning about [promising practice]? 16. Are there any sources of technical assistance that have been helpful to you in implementing [promising practice]? 17. Additional comments: [Closing] Thank you very much for your time. Your comments and insights are invaluable for our research. 132 APPENDIX I CLASSROOM OBSERVATION PROTOCOL School Name: ________________________ Date: __________________ Teacher’s Name: _____________________ Observer: ______________ Type of Class: ________________________ Grade Level: ___________ Time Started: _____ Time Ended: _____ Total Time (minutes):____ Number of Students Observed: __________________ Lesson Topic (e.g., volcanoes, verbs): ________________________________ Instructional Goal (e.g., word recognition, comprehension): ________________________________________________________________ Indicate Language(s) Used for Activity: English □ Spanish □ Eng/Span. Combo □ Other □ _______________ A. Classroom Environment 1. How does the arrangement of the room support [promising practice]? (seating, learning centers, bulletin boards, display of student work, etc.) 2. What resources in the classroom support [promising practice]? (presence of aids/parents, technology, books, learning manipulatives, etc.) B. Academic Lesson 3. What is the intended purpose of the lesson? (as written or stated by teacher-consider related standards) 4. What is the structure of the lesson? (whole group, small group, pairs-consider instructional time spent) 5. Explain the sequence of events and distribution of time during the lesson as it relates to [promising practice]. 133 6. Describe the Teacher-Student interactions observed. 7. Describe the Student-Student interactions observed. 8. List (and collect copies) of pertinent resources from the lesson. (lesson plans, handouts, teacher’s guide) 9 Additional notes 134 APPENDIX J PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OBSERVATION PROTOCOL School Name: _____________________ Date: __________________ Professional Development Topic: _______________________________ Researcher: __________________ Activity Location: ______________ Time Started: ____ Time Ended: ____ Total Time (minutes): ____ Number of Participants: _________ A. Professional Development Leadership Who led training (check all that apply)? Teacher (from the school site) Administrator (from the school site) Teacher from another school Administrator from another school University faculty member Outside consultant (describe) Other (describe) 1. List the names and positions of professional development session leaders: B. Professional Development Session: 2. Describe the intended purpose of the professional development session. 3. List the agenda items for the professional development session. (include a printed copy of the agenda, if available) 135 C. Structure of Activities during Professional Development Session Structure (lecture, small group, whole group, etc.) Intended Purpose 4. Describe the content of the professional development session in detail: (Probes: Key terms, theories and implementation issues related to promising practice) 5. List materials used for the professional development session [Note: Collect all that are available] Type of Material Description of Material 6. Additional comments: 136 APPENDIX K FIRST FOUR STEPS OF THE TOULMIN MODEL In Language for Adults: Issue: The fundamental problem to be solved 1. Claim: An Arguable statement. Thesis. 2. Clarification: This defines the terms argument of the argument, if necessary. Also, defines the scope of the argument, acknowledging limitations or contingencies. 3. Evidence: In the case of literature, provides a quotation that supports the claim. In the case of history, provides a piece of research. 4. Warrant: Explains the evidence and its implications. Uses inductive reasoning to fully explain how and why the evidence proves the claim, drawing strength from logical or understood backing. Articulates the transition from thought to thought, clearly showing the connections. In Language for Students: Issue: The essential question 1. Claim: The position or side of the essential question that you plan to argue 2. Clarification: Explanation of any unclear terms used in the claim. “In other words…” “By that, I mean…” “That is…” 3. Evidence: Cites a piece of evidence from the text that proves the claim. (Provides context leading to the claim). 4. Warrant: A) Explains the quotation and its significance. B) Step by step, explains how the evidence proves the claim. 137 APPENDIX L SAMPLE STUDENT WRITING – DISGRACE ESSAY DISGRACE ESSAY CORRECTION LESSON Claim: In the play “Raisin in the Sun:” Walter wasn’t being a disgrace to his father’s memory. Clarification: By disgrace I mean, something that brings dishonor, disrespect, or disfavor. Big Walter stood for family matters. He didn’t care about money he just wanted happiness for his kids to grow up to do more things in their lives that he didn’t get to do. I don’t believe that Walter Jr. was a disgrace to his fathers memory. Not all children have to be raised the way their parents want them to be. Parents sometimes want their kids to be what they never got to be when they were growing up, so they push their children to become that. But not all children want to follow their parents’ dreams. SHOULD SHE SAY MORE ABOUT WALTER HERE? DOES ALL OF THIS INFORMATION BELONG IN THE CLARIFICATION, OR IS SOME OF IT GO IN THE WARRANT? 138 Evidence: Page 70 “Walter: Did it come? (10,000) Page 74 “Mama: Son – how come you talk so much ‘bout money?” “Walter: Because it is life, Mama!” Pg. 75: “Mama: I’m waiting to see you stand up and look like your daddy and say we done give up one baby to poverty and that we ain’t going to give up nary another…I’m waiting.” Walter: Ruth – (He can say nothing). Warrant: The evidence I chose told a lot of differences that Big Walter and Walter Jr. have. Walter Jr. thinks that money is life. Mama thinks that before money, freedom was life. My other evidence that was chosen was about Ruth getting rid of the baby. Mama feels like Big Walter would never let that happen. He would have kept the child and let it all work out. But Ruth doesn’t want the baby because of financial problems. But Mama says money problems don’t matter: you shouldn’t kill one of God’s creations. So, she tells Walter Jr. that he needs to stop his wife from having an abortion, but he doesn’t. In fact, the narrator tells us that Walter “can say nothing.” That’s when Mama calls Walter a disgrace. Mama wants Walter Jr. to follow in the footsteps of his father. However, he does not. He cannot. Still, Walter Jr…. 139 THE STUDENT PRETTY MUCH STOPPED HERE. SINCE HER ARGUMENT IS THAT WALTER JR. IS NOT A DISGRACE, WHAT DOES SHE NEED TO TELL US ABOUT WALTER JR.? IN OTHER WORDS, IF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WHAT BIG WALTER STOOD FOR, WHAT DO WE NEED TO WRITE ABOUT WALTER TO MAKE THIS ARGUMENT STRONGER? 140 APPENDIX M SAMPLE STUDENT ESSAY Every year, 15 million children die of hunger, and one-twelfth of the world’s population is malnourished. But, to the average American, as an inhabitant of one of the richest countries in the world, such issues of poverty are unfathomable. 46% of poor families in the US own their own homes, and, out of those, only 6% of the poor households are overcrowded. Even when compared to the average individual in all cities throughout Europe, the average poor American has more living space. In such a country as the US, in which our “poor” are living – for the most part – better than average, it is understood that we can do something in further solving the world’s poverty. Many would see that helping the world’s poor is a matter of ethics, giving what we can to save dying children. But Garrett Hardin sees the issue differently. In Garrett Hardin’s 1974 Today article “Lifeboat Ethics: The Case Against Helping the Poor,” he argues that the case of helping the poor is that of the survival of both the rich and poor countries of the world. He likens the world’s rich countries to a lifeboat with a capacity of sixty, holding fifty passengers. Surrounding the lifeboat is the world’s poor, represented by 100 people adrift at sea. In this case the world can let another ten onto the lifeboat, which Hardin compares to letting immigration continue uncontrolled. Letting ten of those adrift as sea would fill the lifeboat to capacity and would compromise the security factor of the lifeboat. Similarly, he believes that uncontrolled immigration would cause immigrants to exhaust all of our resources, and we’d face complete catastrophe when the first 141 problem arises. Of course, the other option is to help all of the poor countries of the world by letting all of those adrift at sea onto the lifeboat. Hardin feels this is similar to efforts such as the World Food Bank, where the poor countries become dependant on the rich countries and grow uncontrolled in population. Both cases result in “complete catastrophe” for the rich and the poor countries. Thus, Hardin concludes with the point that the rich countries cannot afford to help the poor countries, and therefore, should not. I disagree with Hardin on the matter of whether or not to help the poor. His argument over exaggerates the issue by claiming that the rich counties of the world would not be able to sustain the poor countries of the world because of hteir uncontrolled populaton growth that would be aided by foreign assistance. But what Hardin fails to realize is that the basis of his argument, uncontrolled population growth in poor countries, will not be an issue if poor countries receive assistance and food. The main reason for substantial population growth in poor countries is the fact that mothers have more children to increase their chances of having children that will survive childbirth and the early stages of life, and the infant mortality rate is closely linked to inadequate nutrition. If we, as the rich countries, begin to solve the problem of hunger, mothers would have a greater chance of having infants that survive. If this were the case, they’d have no reason to have so many children as to caue substantial population growth. Hardin’s argument is based on the condition “if” population of poor countries continues to grow uncontrolled. But, if the poor counties receive aid from the rich, 142 their population level would no longer grow uncontrollably because the main reason for doing so – malnutrition – would no longer be an issue. Therefore, Hardin’s argument and analogy of the lifeboat is not viable. 143 APPENDIX N ICEF UNIT TEMPLATE 144 145 APPENDIX O TEMPLATE FOR THE TOULMIN MODEL OF WRITING THE TOULMIN MODEL OF WRITING CLAIM: The position or side of the issue that you plan to argue. Your answer to the essential question. ____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ CLARIFICATION: Explanation of any unclear terms used in the claim. “In other words…” “By that, I mean…” “That is…” ____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ EVIDENCE: Cites a piece of evidence from the text that proves the claim. ____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ 146 WARRANT: A) Explains the quotation and its significance. B) Step by step, explains how the evidence proves the claim. ____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ 147 APPENDIX P ICEF WRITING GOALS BY HIGH SCHOOL GRADE LEVEL Grade 9 Grade 10 Grade 11 Grade 12 Product Goals Students claim, clarification, evidence, and warrant to structure written arguments of up to three paragraphs. Students claim, clarification, evidence, and warrant to structure written arguments of five to seven paragraphs. Students claim, clarification, evidence, and warrant to structure written arguments of approximately 750 words. By the end of the year, students are responsible for creating their rubrics. Students use Toulmin Model to structure written arguments of at least 1000 words. Process & Structural Focus Students explicitly label all parts of the argument on rough drafts. Students explicitly label all parts of the argument on rough drafts. Students are encouraged not to label final drafts. Students add a one to three sentence introduction before claim and clarification. Subclaims (premises) are introduced and used where appropriate. Students add a three to five sentence introduction to claim and clarification. All students should move away from explicitly labeling final drafts. Students use the following process to write position papers: 1. Explanation of problem 2. Position 3. Premise 4. Objection 5. Reply Repeat steps 2-5 indefinitely before 6. Conclusion ELA Focus In ELA classes, Toulmin focuses on literary analysis. In ELA classes, Toulmin focuses on literary analysis. Narrative writing, in an argumentative format is practiced on a limited basis. (e.g. personal narratives) ELA classes focus on integrating evidence and quotations naturally into the argument. Students begin using premises. Students outline and critique college level arguments on current and historical events. Toulmin Instructional Focus Major instructional focus is on analyzing language in warrants and showing the reasoning that their analysis supports the claim. Instructional focus is on tying together more complex ideas from a larger work or from multiple works, and on expanding clarifications to define the scope of an argument. Instructional focus is on fostering student independence and confidence in applying the model to complex issues. Students understand how to use premises and to tie together multiple pieces of evidence. Students refine stylistic elements of arguments. Students use outside sources to support their arguments. 148 APPENDIX Q EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP ARTICLE October 2006 | Volume 64 | Number 2 Reading, Writing, Thinking Pages 48-52 For the Sake of Argument Students excel in response to this urban high school's philosophy: The heart of good writing is good thinking. Alex Hernandez, Melissa Aul Kaplan, and Robert Schwartz Teachers who try to put critical thinking at the forefront of high school literacy instruction often find that students respond with blank stares, half- hearted responses, and plagiarized papers. Even on those special days when students passionately discuss ideas, it can be challenging for them to translate their discourse into rigorous writing. When so many students read and write below grade level, how can teachers promote critical thinking in literacy? Our experience at View Park Preparatory High School, a charter school in South Los Angeles, suggests that schools do not have to choose between remediation and acceleration. View Park Prep enrolls 375 students in grades 9–12. Ninety-eight percent are African American, and half are eligible for free or reduced-price lunch. View Park's literacy program has a single, measurable goal: By graduation, every student will be able to write a 500-word sustained argument free of mechanical error, reflecting his or her ability to reason. The decision to emphasize argumentation reflects View Park's philosophy that the heart of good writing is good thinking. Other approaches often teach writing as a process or as a series of discrete skills. Isolated from the larger tapestry of reading and thinking, the ability to write becomes meaningless. Students may dazzle us with their word choice and sentence structure, but they often have nothing compelling to say. In contrast, at View Park, we treat writing not as an end in itself but as a means to an end as students learn effective argumentation and the type of analytical reasoning necessary for college success. The View Park Approach in Action Setting the Stage On the first day of 9th grade English, View Park students are greeted with a writing assignment: Describe a moment in your life that you consider special. Although some groan, others get right to work. Most of the students put little thought into the assignment. Personal reflections are easy enough to fudge, after all. Students are surprised, however, by Ms. Klein's 1 persistent questioning. One student, James, chooses to write about a family trip to the South. Ms. Klein repeatedly questions him about why he deems the trip “special.” Other students volunteer suggestions: because it's fun, because it's exciting, because it's out of the ordinary. After much discussion, the class agrees on a definition of “special.” 149 As this classroom exercise shows, the process of introducing high literacy standards in urban schools often has humble, if not downright messy, beginnings. But the class's opening discussion of what makes an experience “special” has laid the groundwork for introducing an essential question for the students' first exercise in literary argumentation later that week: What makes the moment in Etheridge Knight's “Haiku III” so special? In addition, the teacher has systematically introduced several key practices of the school's literacy program: • Personal reflections help students connect their personal experiences to literary texts as they reflect on a simplified version of an essential question. • Socratic discussion develops students' critical-thinking skills as they are pushed to define terms and extend their reasoning. The class deepens its thinking about the essential question long before students put pencil to paper. Writing, when it happens, will be an extension of student thought and discussion. • Essential questions provide a lens for literary interpretation, set the parameters for student arguments, and define the culminating writing assignment. Reading for Understanding To begin the class's study of “Haiku III,” Ms. Klein asks students to read the poem and identify the poem's five Ws (Who, What, When, Where, and Why) and one H (How): Eastern guard tower glints in sunset; convicts rest like lizards on rocks. —Etheridge Knight, 1968. Reprinted with permission. The students quickly identify the first four Ws but struggle to find the Why. Ms. Klein draws attention to the punctuation, asking the class about the purpose of the semicolon. No one recalls the purpose of this particular mark. Ms. Klein reminds them that a semicolon connects two complete sentences and sometimes signifies a cause-and-effect relationship. Keisha cries out in frustration, “Yeah, but how could the sunset cause the convicts to rest on rocks?” Ms. Klein asks students to sketch the scene. Almost immediately, Rochelle bursts out with pride, “The sun is blinding the guards!” Text selection is crucial to the success of the program, and “Haiku III” is appealing for several reasons. First, the brevity of a haiku makes it accessible to nearly all students in the class, most of whom have limited reading comprehension skills. Second, the haiku, in spite of its brevity, contains powerful ideas worthy of Socratic discussion, making the text suitable for argumentation. These ideas hold the interest of advanced students but also respect the critical-thinking skills of students with academic deficiencies. A 14-year-old with 5th grade reading skills can still discuss the concept of “special moments.” Finally, students connect with the African American author and his personal story of redemption, which Ms. Klein has shared with them. Although we do not advocate using only African American authors with African American students, creatively connecting students to texts is important, especially for 9th graders who may resist reading and writing. Making the Argument “OK, class! By saying that this moment is special, you are making a claim.” Still focused on the text, Ms. Klein asks the students to take several minutes to write a claim answering the essential question, What makes the moment in Etheridge Knight's “Haiku III” so special? This first draft of the unit's culminating assignment builds 150 on the class discussion, illustrating for students that writing is an extension of thinking. After a few minutes, Ms. Klein writes several student answers on the board: Keisha: This moment is special because the guards can't see the prisoners. James: The moment is special because the guards are blinded. Rochelle: The moment is special because the prisoners have a moment of freedom. Ms. Klein points out that all three answers contain some truth according to the class's interpretation of the poem, and then she asks the students to compare the answers. The students conclude that both James and Keisha gave factual answers, but Rochelle used facts to interpret the events. As Ms. Klein explains, Rochelle's is the only answer that contains an arguable claim. View Park students never begin a formal writing assignment until they map out their arguments and refine their reasoning through Socratic discussion. In this example, the class's discussion about why the moment in “Haiku III” is so special leads to a claim, which becomes the starting point for the written assignment, to write a complete argument using evidence from the haiku. A Model of Argumentation This example from Ms. Klein's 9th grade class illustrates how students are introduced to the concept of a claim, the first of four elements of an argument included in Stephen Toulmin's (1958) Model of Argumentation. View Park bases its literacy instruction throughout the grades on this model. Students devote most of their 9th grade year to learning the four elements of an argument: claim (the position); clarification (qualifiers limiting the claim); evidence (support for the claim); and warrant (the reasoning that connects the evidence to the claim). The central goal of 9th grade English is for students to learn to use the model and write one good argument. This argument may only be a paragraph in length, although some students produce longer and more complex arguments by the end of the first year. We require 9th and 10th grade students to be explicit in their argument by formally labeling the four elements. Struggling writers benefit from the model's clear structure because it tells them how to navigate through an assignment, avoiding the “I don't know where to start” syndrome. Because the writing assignment relies on students' ability to express their reasoning, plagiarism becomes virtually impossible. On each writing assignment, students receive feedback in two areas: strength of argument and mechanical accuracy. Teachers assess strength of argument using a rubric emphasizing the four key elements. They assess mechanics only in terms of their effect on the argument. For example, a teacher might write, “This is a run-on sentence. Would shorter sentences with transition words better illustrate your point?” Although teachers highlight every error in a student's piece of writing, they often do so on a separate copy of the paper. Students are less discouraged by marked papers replete with errors because they see that the purpose of improving mechanics is to strengthen their argument. View Park does not use any grammar texts or prewritten grammar exercises for high school students. Students learn writing mechanics within the context of their writing goals. In 10th grade, students gain facility in using the model. They start to write with more purpose and elevate the quality of the Socratic discussions. By the middle of 10th grade, teachers often observe their lowest-achieving students showing sparks of great thinking. Socratic discussions become more student driven as students recognize weaknesses in other people's arguments and offer rebuttals. Most students can sustain arguments roughly one page long by the end of 10th grade. By then, approximately 60 percent of the students are prepared to leave the formal structure of the Toulmin model. 151 Accelerating Student Achievement The training wheels come off in 11th grade, and students write without explicitly labeling the components of their arguments. Students still generally use the Toulmin model in their notes and drafts to organize increasingly sophisticated arguments, adding sub-claims, expanded clarifications, and rebuttals when appropriate. Teachers promote this acceleration by posing more challenging essential questions, using texts that support multiple interpretations, and choosing larger passages from which students analyze and select evidence. By the end of four years, we expect every student to be able to sustain an argument in response to college-level material. For example, 11th graders explore Nathaniel Hawthorne's “Young Goodman Brown” using the question, Does this short story assume that humankind is inherently good or inherently wicked? They study Ken Kesey's One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest using the question, Does R. P. McMurphy serve to liberate or further imprison his fellow patients on the ward? Twelfth graders read Shakespeare's Antony and Cleopatra and consider the question, As illustrated in this drama, does passion degrade or beautify the human experience? View Park uses the Toulmin model as a writing-across-the-curriculum program. For example, 11th grade history students study Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s “Letter from Birmingham Jail” and develop arguments addressing the question, Is civil disobedience ever justified? In chemistry, 10th grade students are asked to make a written argument about the primary causes of fish kills in a local river, using data on water temperature, pH levels, and ion concentration as evidence. This essential question requires students to use higher-order thinking skills to interpret technical data and determine causal relationships among observable phenomena. In math, 9th grade students use the Toulmin framework to argue whether two different shapes can have the same area. Students analyze two shapes on a grid to create the evidence that will support their arguments. The exercise helps guide students toward investigation and justification and away from rote application of algorithms. The Toulmin model provides a common language for students to discuss their reasoning in all classrooms. Moreover, by saving individual teachers the time required to develop and implement norms for writing and classroom discussion, this common framework increases instructional time. Challenging Tradition Our experience suggests that high school literacy programs that focus on critical thinking can produce powerful results for urban students. In 2005, View Park students had the highest test scores among African American high school students in California (California Department of Education API, 2005). In addition, our African American students posted higher proficiency rates on the California English Language Arts exam than their white peers in the district did (California Department of Education STAR, 2005). The success of a critical-thinking framework like the Toulmin model depends on a student-centered school in which all teachers agree on a common approach to accelerating improvement in literacy. With students entering high school so far behind, no teacher can single-handedly prepare them for college. Accelerated learning requires a sustained, collaborative effort in which all teachers reinforce the same set of critical-thinking skills. Strong instruction becomes the link that holds this teaching model together. Basing adolescent literacy on critical thinking represents a radical departure from tradition, particularly for students performing below grade level. But the urgent need to improve the success rates of low-income students in high school and college demands radical changes in our expectations and in the way we support these students. At View Park, we have found that students rise to the challenge. 152 Endnote 1 Teacher and student names are pseudonyms. References California Department of Education Academic Performance Index (API). (2005). Available: http://api.cde.ca.gov California Department of Education Standardized Testing And Reporting (STAR) Program. (2005). Available: http://star.cde.ca.gov/star2005/viewreport.asp Knight, E. (1968). Poems from Prison. Detroit, MI: Broadside Press. Toulmin, S. (1958). The Uses of Argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Alex Hernandez is the Director of School Improvement at Portland Public Schools and a former teacher and administrator at View Park Preparatory High School; alexh@stanfordalumni.org. Melissa Aul Kaplan is Chairperson of the English department at View Park Preparatory High School; melissa.kaplan@yahoo.com. Robert Schwartz is the founding Principal of View Park Preparatory High School; rschwartz@viewparkprep.org. Copyright © 2006 by Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) 1703 N. Beauregard Street, Alexandria, VA 22311 USA • 1-800-933-2723 • 1-703-578-9600 Copyright © ASCD, All Rights Reserved 153 APPENDIX R GUNS, GERMS, & STEEL RUBRIC 154 155 APPENDIX S WRITING CHECKLIST Name:________________________________________________________________ CHECKLIST (pertains to entire assignment, including Cover Sheet) Circle one for each category, below, where: 1 =D 2 =C 3 =B 4 =A Proof-Reading ("Edit") 1 2 3 4  0 errors = 4  1-4 errors = 3  4-8 errors = 2  8 or more = 1 MLA Style ("Formatting") 1 2 3 4  Double-spacing (everything)  12-point font , Times New Roman  1" margins  Heading and/or page numbering conform to MLA  Paragraphs indented 1 tab (=5 spaces)  Block quotes indented 2 tabs (=10 spaces)  Works Cited page, and parenthetical citations comply exactly with MLA Punctuation 1 2 3 4  Any missing? (i.e., are comma clauses "closed"?)  Appropriate? (i.e., colon vs. semi-colon)  In the right place? (i.e., no punctuation before parentheses) Grammar 1 2 3 4  Sentences: Complete? Controlled?  Subject & Verb: Do they agree?  Subject & Pronoun: Do they agree?  Verb tense problem: Consistent? Appropriate? (present tense required when writing about literature)  Transitions: Precise, clear, appropriate, logical?  Pronouns: Repetitious? Vague?  Spelling: Is it correct? Style & Usage 1 2 3 4  Diction: Is it apposite? Fresh? Varied? (this last applies also to names)  Concision: Is writing wordy? Is it repetitious?  Clarity: Does writing make sense? Is it awkward / "clunky"?  Idiom /Voice: Suited to topic, purpose, and audience? [College Essay: Genuine? Honest? Not "braggy"?]  Passive voice (makes writing weak and vague--avoid it)  Periodic sentences make your point more forceful 156 Analysis / Argument 1 2 3 4  Title: Do you have one? Is it interesting? Pertinent ?  Thesis: Do you have one? Is it clear? Focused? Engaging?  Topic sentences: Do you have them? Are they clear? Are they pertinent?  Analysis/argument/story: Cohesive? Engaging? Deep? Pertinent ?  Engagement with secondary sources: Pertinent? Sufficient?  Snippets: Pertinent? Sufficient? Blended? Cited?  Block quotes: Pertinent? Sufficient? Cited? Assignment 1 2 3 4  Is it stapled? Are all parts and pages in the proper order? Is any part missing?  Have you followed instructions exactly? Complied with page/line/word limit? 157 APPENDIX T 2007-2008 SCHOOL PROFILE Pacific Collegiate School (831) 479-7785 ext. 3106 P.O. Box 1701 (831) 427-5254 (fax) Santa Cruz, California 95061-1701 www.pacificcollegiate.com CEEB code 053270 Andrew Goldenkranz, Principal/Superintendent Ellen Masten, Academic Counselor School Profile 2007-2008 SCHOOL Founded in 1999, Pacific Collegiate School is a college preparatory public charter school for grades 7-12 located in Santa Cruz, California, and accredited by the Western Association of Schools and Colleges. We attract a highly motivated group of students who flourish in the school’s academically challenging environment. We are confident that our graduates will be prepared to enter and thrive at the world’s best colleges and universities. Current enrollment is 420 in grades 7-12. Admission is non-selective, by lottery. There are 62 seniors. The average student/teacher ratio is 17.5:1. • Pacific Collegiate School was named among America’s “Public Elite” in Newsweek’s list of top American High Schools, May 2006 and 2007. • California Charter School Association’s “Charter School of the Year” 2006. Pacific Collegiate School students scored highest of those in non-selective admissions schools in standardized Academic Performance Index tests. • One of the top ten high schools in California as measured by California API scores: 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007. • 100% College Bound. PCS students are currently thriving on 138 different college campuses throughout the United States, as well as Canada, Italy, Germany and England. • California Distinguished School, 2007. MISSION Pacific Collegiate School’s mission is to provide exemplary, standards-based college preparatory and fine arts education for public school students in a small school setting. Central to our program is a rigorous and integrated core curriculum characterized by emphasis on academic and scientific inquiry, dynamic engagement in the fine arts and foreign language, and international awareness. Our broader goal is to foster in our students the skills and knowledge to succeed at the college and beyond, a lifelong love of learning, and respect for humankind. COMMUNITY Santa Cruz is located on California’s central coast, about 65 miles south of San Francisco and 30 miles southwest of Silicon Valley. County population is 255,000. Local colleges and universities include University of California Santa Cruz and Cabrillo Community College. Our parents are highly educated: 88% have Bachelors degrees and 53% have education beyond a Bachelor’s degree. 158 HIGHLY EDUCATED FACULTY The faculty numbers thirty-two, sixteen of whom hold M.A. or M.S. degrees, three hold Ph.D.’s. Department Chairs: Dr. Sarah Whittier, English Department Chair, Sarah.Whittier@pcsed.org Ms. Dee Vlasak, Fine Arts Department Chair, Dee.Vlasak@pcsed.org Ms. Annie Marshall, Foreign Language Department Chair, Annie.Marshall@pcsed.org Ms. Tara Firenzi, History Department Chair, Tara.Firenzi@pcsed.org Mr. David Levy, Math Department Chair, David.Levy@pcsed.org Mr. Darrell Steely, Science Department Chair, Darrell.Steely@pcsed.org GRADUATION REQUIREMENTS English ……………………………4 years (40 units) Math……………………………….3 years (30 units) Laboratory Science……………..…3 years (30 units) History……………………….….…3 years (30 units) Foreign Language……….…………3 years (30 units) Fine Arts………………………...…3 years (30 units) College Prep Electives……………..3 years (30 units) Community Service…………………..20 hours/year 220 units in grades 9-12 are required for graduation, with a minimum of 5 AP courses. CLASS RANK AND WEIGHTING Grade point average is calculated using a four-point scale. Because of the rigor of the curriculum and the size of the senior class Pacific Collegiate School does not rank students or weight grades. STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT SAT Results for Current Seniors Pacific Collegiate 640 Critical Reading 629 Math 628 Writing 1897 Combined National Average 503 Critical Reading 518 Math 497 Writing 1518 Combined SAT Subject Tests average scores: Biology 700 Literature 623 Math 1 628 Math II 678 Spanish 617 US History 649 World History 632 National Merit Results Class of ’08 ( Seniors) 4 Semifinalists 8 Commended Students Class of ’07 (64 Seniors) 8 Semifinalists 8 Commended Students Class of ’06 (50 Seniors) 8 Semifinalists 7 Commended Students Advanced Placement Examinations The members of the class of 2008 have taken a total of 223 AP tests, which equates to an average of 3.75 tests per student. Of the total scores reported, 85% were a 3, 4, or 5. 159 STUDENT ACTIVITIES Student activities in 2007-2008 include 23 active clubs including Junior Statesman of America Club, Asian Language and Culture Club, Mock Trial Competition, Thespian Club and Science Olympiad. P.E. is not required for graduation, but students participate in at least eleven Interscholastic Sports as well as Club Sports. HIGH SCHOOL COURSE OFFERINGS (not all advanced level courses offered every year) English English 9, Medieval World Literature English 10, Modern World Literature *AP English Language, 11 th *AP English Literature, 12 th Rhetoric and Oratory Journalism/Creative Writing History History 9, Medieval World History *AP World History *AP U. S. History, 11 th AP U.S. Government AP Comparative Politics Theater Arts Drama 1 – Beginning Drama 2 – Intermediate Drama 3 – Advanced Video Production Dance Studies Science Conceptual Physics Chemistry Biology *AP Biology AP Physics AP Chemistry AP Environmental Science Science and Society Languages French 1, 2, 3, 4, AP Japanese 1, 2, 3, 4, 5-Honors Latin 1, 2, 3, AP Spanish 1, 2, 3, AP Visual Arts Art 1, 2, 3 AP Art History Studio Art Graphic Design Computer Art 160 Music Music 1 – Beginning Instrumental Music 2 – Advanced Instrumental Music 3 – Performance/Symphonic Music 3 – Performance/Jazz AP Music Theory Chorus Advanced Chorus Mathematics Algebra I Algebra II Geometry Trigonometry and Pre-Calculus AP BC Calculus AP Statistics Special Programs for Course Credit Focus Project Independent Study Student Government Literary Magazine * denotes required course for graduation 161 APPENDIX U MLA TEMPLATE Your First and Last Name Instructor’s Title and Last Name Course Department and Number 13 June 2008 Title: Subtitle To use this template, please select “Print Layout” from View on the standard toolbar. If you wish, you can return it to “Normal” once you are finished altering the template. The MLA style guidelines provide rules for scholarly writing. This template provides a basic layout for a term paper using these guidelines. Three typical elements of MLA term papers are provided as examples in this template: citations, quotations, and block quotations. Citations Per MLA guidelines, all sources must be cited on the Works Cited page, located at the end of the paper. Within the body of the paper, a pointer containing the author’s last name and a page range within parentheses (Erickson 24-67) indicates the cited text. The author’s last name corresponds with the entry on the Works Cited page, allowing readers to look up the source of the citation. 162 Quotations Guidelines for quotations are based upon the length of the quote. Quotes with fewer than four lines of prose or three lines of verse are quoted directly in the sentence. According to the MLA, include this type of quote “directly in the sentence and enclose it within quotation marks” (Erickson 33). Block Quotations Quotes longer than four lines of prose or three lines of verse follow different guidelines. Introduce these quotations and use appropriate punctuation (no punctuation, comma, semicolon, or colon): Start long quotes on a new line. Indent the quote one inch from the left margin. Also, double-space the lines and omit quotation marks. The Long Quote style in this Word template is provided for formatting. (Erickson 150-51) If you quote more than one paragraph, indent the first line of each paragraph an additional quarter inch. When quoting verse, maintain line breaks from the original work. Include a pointer after the closing punctuation, such as the one that follows (Erickson 34). For additional examples and comprehensive style guidelines, refer to the MLA Web site (http://www.mla.org) or the resources section of the course website. 163 Works Cited Author’s Name. Title of Book. City: Publisher, Year. Author’s Name. “Title of Article.” Title of Publication Date Published: Pages. Author’s Name. “Title of Online Article.” Title of Online Publication Version (Year Published): Pages. Date Accessed <Web address>. “Title of Article.” Title of Media. CD-ROM. City: Publisher, Year.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Writing is essential to success in school and has been linked to student achievement or the lack thereof. This study investigated the use of writing across the curriculum in two California charter schools that have had success using writing to improve student achievement. Writing across the curriculum has been identified in the literature as a promising practice that increases student achievement.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Investigating the promising practice of teacher evaluation in two California charter schools

PDF

Through the eyes of art: uncovering promising practices in arts-themed learning in California charter elementary schools

PDF

Creating connections: an implementation study of promising practices for mentoring in California charter schools

PDF

Investigating promising school leadership practices in two California charter schools

PDF

Exploring the promise of multicultural literature: a case study exploring the impact of the use of mulitucultural literature on the engagement of students from diverse backgrounds

PDF

School leaders' use of data-driven decision-making for school improvement: a study of promising practices in two California charter schools

PDF

A study of promising practices in two California charter schools: using technology to increase parent involvement

PDF

The effects of a series of after school family writing workshops on students' writing achievement and attitudes

PDF

Homework beliefs and practices of middle school teachers in relation to structure-based standards for the English language development content area

PDF

English-learner representation in special education: impact of pre-referral interventions and assessment practices

PDF

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

PDF

Critical features for teaching the five-paragraph essay to middle school Chinese speaking English learners

PDF

A case study of promising leadership practices employed by principals of Knowledge Is Power Program Los Angeles (KIPP LA) charter school to improve student achievement

PDF

Supporting administrators in successful online co-curriculum development: a promising practices study of contributing factors

PDF

The effects of a multi-linguistic diagnostic spelling intervention on the writing achievement and writing self-perception beliefs of secondary students: phonology, orthography, and morphology

PDF

A community struggling to create a charter school: a rural case study

PDF

The integration of academics into career-technical education in two California charter schools

PDF

Parent compacts in urban charter schools: an exploration of contents and processes

PDF

Superintendents and Latino student achievement: promising practices that superintendents use to influence the instruction and increase the achievement of Latino students in urban school districts

PDF

Understanding measures of school success: a study of a Wisconsin charter school

Asset Metadata

Creator Searchwell, Vithrel (author)

Core Title Writing across the curriculum: exploring promising practices in two California charter schools

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 06/13/2008

Defense Date 05/12/2008

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

Tag OAI-PMH Harvest,Writing,writing across the curriculum

Language English

Advisor Wohlstetter, Priscilla (committee chair), Mora-Flores, Eugenia (committee member), Ragusa, Gisele (committee member)

Creator Email searchwe@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m1271

Unique identifier UC1195227

Identifier etd-Searchwell-20080613 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-74387 (legacy record id),usctheses-m1271 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Searchwell-20080613.pdf

Dmrecord 74387

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Searchwell, Vithrel

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