University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Leading instructional shifts in emergent bilingual education: a principal's role

(USC Thesis Other)

Leading instructional shifts in emergent bilingual education: a principal's role

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: A PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 1
LEADING INSTRUCTIONAL SHIFTS IN EMERGENT BILINGUAL EDUCATION:
A PRINCIPAL’S ROLE

by

Nicole Deanna Chávez

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

August 2019

Copyright 2019 Nicole Chávez

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 2
DEDICATION
This dissertation is dedicated to the individuals that sacrificed daily to help me go far,
whose compassionate actions helped me to rise against the status quo and break through the 2%
to join the few Latina women that obtain their doctorate. This dissertation is not just a reflection
of my perseverance, but of those few that surround me and say, “you can go further,” “Rise!”
and “we’ll take care of that, go write.” Thank you Jason, Debra, Alma and Juan Chávez for your
unwavering love, support and understanding. I am a better person because of this process, and I
completed this process because of each of you.
Jason, you emulate the type of human being that I am reminded I can be daily- kind, just,
innovative, forward thinking and an advocate for humanity. For twenty-one years, you have
shown me not only what is, but what could be. Thank you for being with me every step of the
way, for never giving up on me, for helping me soar and for our love! Debra, the joy and
thoughtfulness you sustained while life was interfered with because of my studies was the
greatest gift. To know that when everything might seem as if it was falling apart, I could entrust
you to keep it together meant everything. Thank you for being my rock, my shield and the truest
of companions. You have shown me what it means to be a strong and fearless woman, thank
you. Mom and Dad, Karla and JC, you all were the foundation of what made all of this possible.
The family structure that was built laid firmly on the values of service, love, faith and advocacy,
thank you. Though our paths frequently mean time away from each other, we know we engage
in what we do for a common goal- peace on earth . Thank you for who you all are, were, will
be, and most importantly, have made me become. Gracias.
Lastly, I dedicate this dissertation to all my ancestors before me who made this possible.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 3
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
“If I have seen further than others, it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants.” –Isaac Newton
To my dissertation committee, Dr. Jenifer Crawford, Dr. Cathy Krop, and Dr. Helena
Seli, your guidance during class and throughout the dissertation process was met with kindness,
possibility and perspective. Thank you. To Dr. Crawford, your enthusiasm for emergent
bilingual students and unwavering energy to see greater access for marginalized students
motivated me to engage in this process with both heart and a critical lens. Thank you Dr. Mark
Robison and Dr. Robert Filbeck for the ingenuity to craft such a needed and transformative
program, it will continue to mold the future educational leaders of tomorrow. Thank you Dr.
Sabrina Chong, for your endless support and unwavering encouragement. You are appreciated.
Many thanks to my Orange County Department of Education leaders that not only
encouraged me to engage in this program but sat, discussed and debriefed my learnings. Your
leadership and cultivation of my own learning, experiences, and belief in my ability to create
change in our own system pushes me to continue to strive for excellence in our work. Thank you
Dr. Al Mijares, Dr. Christine Olmstead and Dr. Jeff Hittenberger for leading the way.
To C6, you are my gems. I am a different person, a better person, because of the
interactions we have had, because of the windows and doors you have opened to new ideas,
ideals, experiences and life. You have pushed me in the best of ways. Quite literally, this
dissertation would not be possible without each of you. The late night calls, the pushing to get
things done, the encouragement to go deeper, or take a moment to do nothing. These micro-
events have had cataclysmic impacts on my development and I am so appreciative for you.
From classmates to family. We will always fighton.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication 2
Acknowledgments 3
List of Tables 7
List of Figures 9
Abstract 10
Chapter One: Introduction 12
Background of the Problem 15
Importance of Addressing the Problem 17
Organizational Context and Mission 19
Organizational Goal 21
Description of Stakeholder Groups 24
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals 25
Stakeholder Group for the Study 26
Purpose of the Project and Questions 27
Conceptual and Methodological Framework 28
Definitions 30
Organization of the Project 31
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature 33
Opportunity and Achievement Gaps Experienced by Emergent Bilingual Students 33
Language Policy in the United States 34
Current and Future Trends 38
Opportunity and Achievement Gaps 42
Educating Emergent Bilingual Students 46
Culturally and Linguistically Sustaining Practices 47
Pedagogy 50
English Language Development 53
Instructional Leadership: A Principal’s Role 60
Instructional Leadership 60
Andragogy 62
Professional Learning and Coaching 64
OCDE Project GLAD® (Guided Language Acquisition Design) 65
Instructional Leaders’ Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences 67
Knowledge and Skills 68
Motivation 76
Organizational Influences 80
Participating Stakeholders 90
Interview Sampling 92
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale 92
Data Collection and Instrumentation 94
Interviews 95
Document Analysis 98
Data Analysis 99
Credibility and Trustworthiness 101
Ethics 105
Limitations and Delimitations 107
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 5
Chapter Four: Results and Findings 109
Results and Findings for Knowledge and Skills Influences 111
Conceptual Knowledge Gaps 113
Metacognitive Knowledge Gaps 136
Synthesis of Results and Findings for Knowledge Influences 139
Results and Findings for Motivation Influences 141
Self-Efficacy Motivation Gaps 142
Utility Value Motivation Gaps 149
Synthesis of Results and Findings for Motivation Influences 153
Results and Findings for Organizational Influences 156
Cultural Model Organization Gaps 157
Cultural Setting Organization Gaps 162
Synthesis of Results and Findings for Organizational Influences 165
Conclusion 167
Chapter Five: Recommendations, Implementation, and Evaluation 171
Goal of the Stakeholder Group for the Study 172
Purpose of the Project and Questions 172
Findings 173
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences 175
Knowledge Recommendations 177
Motivation Recommendations 183
Organization Recommendations 186
Key Implementation Action Steps 191
Strategies to Implement 191
Strategy Implementation Steps 193
Key Performance Indicators of Successful Policy Implementation 196
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan 200
Implementation and Evaluation Framework 200
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations 201
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators 203
Level 3: Behavior 210
Level 2: Learning 215
Level 1: Reaction 219
Data Analysis and Reporting 222
Limitations and Delimitations 223
Future Research 224
Conclusion 225
References 227
Appendix A: Interview and Document Analysis 237
Appendix B: Interview Protocol- Interview #1 243
Appendix C: Interview Protocol- Interview #2 245
Appendix D: Information Sheet 247
Appendix E: Professional Learning Communities: Aligning to Emergent Bilingual Students’
Needs 249
Appendix F: How Adults Learn 250
Appendix G: OCDE Project GLAD® Implementation 252
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 6
Appendix H: Reaction Sheet for Online Program 254
Appendix I: Reaction Sheet for Leadership Ensemble 256

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 7
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Organizational Mission, Global Goal and Stakeholder Performance Goals 26
Table 2: Tenets of Andragogy 64
Table 3: English Learner Typologies 70
Table 4: Assumed Knowledge Influences 76
Table 5: Assumed Motivation Influences 80
Table 6: Assumed Organizational Influences 87
Table 7: Instructional Leaders’ Criteria Matrix 111
Table 8: Knowledge and Skill Influences as Assets, Gaps and New Influences 112
Table 9: Evaluated Assumed Conceptual Knowledge Influences 113
Table 10: Number of Participants Referencing Tenants of Andragogy (Knowles, 1984) 121
Table 11: Evaluated Assumed Procedural Knowledge Influences 126
Table 12: Number of Interviews and Documents Analyzed Referencing Implementation
Practices 128
Table 13: Time Spans for Professional Learning Cycles 133
Table 14: Evaluated Assumed Metacognitive Knowledge Influences 137
Table 15: Summary of Evaluated Assumed Knowledge Influences 139
Table 16: Motivational Assets, Gaps and New Influences 141
Table 17: Evaluated Assumed Self-Efficacy Motivation Influence 142
Table 18: Incentives Described in Interviews 147
Table 19: Evaluated Assumed Utility-Value Motivation Influence 150
Table 20: OCDE Project GLAD®’s Value and Impact 151
Table 21: Summary of Evaluated Assumed Motivation Influences 153
Table 22: Organizational Influences Validated, Not Validated and New Causes 156
Table 23: Evaluated Cultural Model Organization Influence 157
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 8
Table 24: Evaluating Cultural Setting Organization Influence 162
Table 25: Summary of Assumed Organizational Influences Validated 166
Table 26: Research Questions aligned to KMO Assets of CSESD 168
Table 27: Summary of Assumed Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences
Validated 176
Table 28: Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations 178
Table 29: Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations 184
Table 30: Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations 188
Table 31: Strategy Descriptions 192
Table 32: Alignment of Proposed Strategy Solutions and K, M, O Influences 194
Table 33 Proposed Solutions, Action Steps, Timelines and Key Performance Indicators 196
Table 34: Organizational Mission, Goal and Stakeholder Performance Goals (revisited) 203
Table 35: External Outcomes, Metrics and Indicators 204
Table 36: Internal Outcomes, Metrics and Indicators 208
Table 37: Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing 211
Table 38: Required Drivers to Support Instructional Leaders’ Critical Behaviors 213
Table 39: Components of Learning for the Program 218
Table 40: Components to Measure Reactions to the Program 220

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 9
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Gap analysis process (Clark & Estes, 2008). 29
Figure 2: Professional learning cycle. 125
Figure 3: Frequency of implementation practices referenced in interviews. 129
Figure 4: Organizational infrastructure of support in meeting the needs of emergent bilingual
students. 163

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 10
ABSTRACT
Emergent bilingual students often lack access to quality instructional practices and highly
qualified teachers and principals. The misunderstanding of the complexity of language
acquisition and the interwoven qualities of language and identity, perpetuate deficit-based
practices that fosters marginalized populations, such as EB’s, to fall deeper through the cracks.
Providing first best instruction, with differentiated linguistic supports for EB students must go
beyond compliance, requiring the knowledge and skills, motivation and organizational
infrastructure set by principals to provide rich, targeted language supports that will move the
needle on language proficiency and create gains in critical content analysis, ultimately providing
access to greater academic and career options. Failing, and we leave our nation’s largest
growing population fated to become foreclosed from the competitive marketplace. Applying a
gap analysis framework, this study examined six principals from Costa Sur Elementary School
District, evaluating the degree to which they meet the organizational goal of increasing effective
English language development instruction and examining the practices principals utilize to work
with their teachers. The purpose of this study is to evaluate principals’ knowledge and skills,
motivation and organizational influences as potential contributors to the performance seen by EB
students. A qualitative method was used, utilizing two semi-structured interview protocols and
document analysis. The six principals were first interviewed, followed by analyzing documents
used by principals in their professional learning and coaching of teachers to address the complex
needs of EB students. A second semi-structured interview was conducted to clarify and deepen
understanding of the answers shared and the documents analyzed. Results and findings of the
data collection and analysis are articulated in Chapter Four, followed by recommendations in
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 11
Chapter Five. Within this evaluation study, many promising practices surfaced on how
principals lead instructional shifts in emergent bilingual education.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 12
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Frequently, emergent bilingual (EB) students face opportunity gaps in inequitable
distribution of resources and opportunities to learn, resulting in achievement gaps or disparities
in performance in comparison to other students (Gándara, Rumberger, Maxwell-Jolly &
Callahan, 2003). The problem of practice addressed by this dissertation are the opportunity gaps
of EB students to culturally and linguistically sustaining teaching and learning practices by
highly qualified teachers and principals. For the purpose of this study, English language learners
(ELL), or English learners (EL), will be referenced as emergent bilingual (EB) students, for as
these students progress through school and build their English proficiency, they are becoming
bilingual, navigating the new language of the school and of English, while functioning in their
home language as well (Gándara et al., 2003). When a child’s bilingualism is not accounted for,
it perpetuates inequities within the child’s schooling and presumes that the child’s needs are the
same as a monolingual student, which they are not (Garcia, Kleifgan, & Falchi, 2008). This
shift in language from the commonly used ELL or EL to emergent bilingual (EB) student is an
asset-oriented and equity-based mindset that can refocus lenses to increasing opportunities.
One of the most misunderstood issues in Kindergarten (K) through twelfth grade
education in the United States is how to best instruct students who are not yet proficient in the
English language (National Education Association, [NEA], 2015). The National Assessment of
Educational Progress (NAEP) utilizes achievement levels, or performance standards, that
describe what students should be able to do. Results are reported in percentages of students
performing at or above the achievement levels of basic, proficient or advanced, with proficient
symbolizing academic competency and academic achievement in challenging subject matter.
According to NAEP Data, 4% of EB students in the eighth grade are proficient in reading
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 13
nationally, whereas 6% are in math, with 71% of EB students scoring basic on the eighth grade
NAEP reading and math tests (Batalova, Fix, & Murray, 2007). Additionally, EB students are
also not graduating proportionally to monolingual English speakers. A study by Hopstock and
Stephenson (2003) revealed that 50% of EB students fail their graduation tests, compared with
24% of English proficient students in the United States. The landmark case of Lau v. Nichols
(1974), was the first to ensure that EB students would receive linguistically appropriate
instruction, ruling that under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a California school district receiving
federal funds must provide non-English speaking students with instructional supports in English
to ensure that they receive an equal education. According to the Supreme Court, providing all
students with the same facilities and the same curriculum is not equal treatment nor an equal
education, for non-English speaking students “are effectively foreclosed from any meaningful
education” (Lau v. Nichols, 1974, para 7) if not provided equitable opportunities that attends to
their specific needs, setting urgency to closing the achievement and opportunity gaps for this
student population.
Possible performance gaps may be found in teachers’ and principals’ knowledge and
skills, motivation and organizational influences in attending to the needs of EB students. In one
study, only 27% of teachers in a National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) report being
very well prepared to support EB students in the classroom, and only 20% of rural teachers felt
very well prepared. Additionally, less than 3% of teachers have received formal preparation or
certification on how to teach EB students nationally (NEA, 2001), creating inadequately
prepared teachers to teach the most in need students. The quality of instruction is a major
determinant of whether EB students access and learn the curriculum and thus what future college
and career opportunities become available. This is critically problematic, given research has
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 14
shown that the two greatest factors of academic student success are the teacher and principal in
providing instructional practices that both provide access to rigorous grade-level content,
language proficiency, and the systematic pathways towards course access (Elfers & Strikus,
2014). Beyond the Administrative Credentialing program, principals need on-going coaching,
leadership development in implementation of best practices, measuring outcomes and andragogy
(adult learning theory), as well as professional learning communities in order to systematically,
effectively and pro-actively lead their schools towards developing the sought instructional shifts
for EB student success (Olsen, 2006). The success of EB students in schools requires a
commitment of leadership, political will, district and state level action.
Examining how principals train and support teachers in the implementation of culturally
and linguistically sustaining practices through modeling, mentoring, coaching and reflection can
change the academic and opportunity trajectory for EB students. When principals are not
attentive to the tenants of andragogy, and the conditions of teaching and learning, they can
inhibit the effectiveness of the learning process. This frequently evolves into a misalignment of
school policies or a disregard for school culture, exacerbating inequities and hindering
improvement (Darling-Hammond, Hyler, & Gardner, 2017). Attention to effective professional
learning implementation for general education teachers of EB students through effective
practices of andragogy by principals can close the opportunity and achievement gap by
increasing academic access and building linguistic proficiency, whether in public, private or
charter school settings (NEA, 2001).

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 15
Background of the Problem
Studies have suggested that the prevalence of EB students has increased dramatically in
the past decades within the United States. From 1995 to 2005 alone, the EB student population
doubled in 23 states (NCES, 2009). EB students have been the fastest growing student subgroup
in the United States for the past 20 years; their enrollment continues to increase by 10% annually
(Pew, 2008). However, the majority of EB students are not immigrants but are U.S. native born,
contrary to popular belief, and account for 84% of the population classified as English Learner in
the nation (NEA, 2011). A Pew Research Center (2008) report states that the number of EB
students in U.S. classrooms increased dramatically from 1 in 10 students in 1990, to 1 in 8 in
2005 and projects a rise to 1 in 4 students by 2020. Olsen’s (2010) report Reparable Harm
revealed that the vast majority of EB students currently in middle schools and high schools have
been enrolled in U.S. schools since Kindergarten, representing 18% of the total, and growing,
secondary school enrollment, with most born in the U.S. The existence of these Long-Term
English Learners (LTELs) is evidence that for many students, the school experience has been an
educational dead-end, versus the experience that should have propelled them towards academic
success and English proficiency (Olsen, 2010). In reality, the struggles faced by many LTELs
leave them academically unprepared, not fluent in either their primary language or English, and
they face the highest high school dropout rates of reported subgroups (homeless, foster youth,
special need, low socio-economic) (Olsen, 2010). These proportions are exasperated as some
LTELs are represented in more than one subgroup population. For many, the remedial or
unresponsive instruction in elementary schools leave them unable to access the needed courses in
high school to graduate, let alone pursue post-secondary schooling (Olsen, 2010). This
continued trend of not valuing the linguistic strengths of EB students and providing a deficit-
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 16
based educational experience is a prominent factor in the on-going opportunity and achievement
gaps, continuing to leave our nation’s largest growing population ill-prepared for the complex
demands of a competitive marketplace.
Though research continues to reinforce the urgent need to enhance teacher knowledge
and increase instructional responsiveness to academic and linguistic needs, EB students continue
to be disproportionately reported in the lowest quartiles of achievement (Olsen, 2014).
Furthermore, NCES data from 2000 shows that among teachers with EB students, only 12.5%
received more than eight hours of professional learning targeted to support their needs over a 3-
year period of time. Within another national survey, 57% of teachers stated that they either “very
much needed” or “somewhat needed” more information in supporting EB students in the
classroom (Alexander, 1999, p. 10).
Though the data shows the United States’ growing diversity of student populations in K-
12 school systems and the research to support the need for culturally and linguistically sustaining
practices, there are continuous rising adverse sentiments of attending to EB students’ needs
(Lucas, 2011). A movement began in California in the late 1990’s to legislate against bilingual
programs and often within them, an attention to culturally sensitive teaching practices.
Proposition 187 (1994), followed by Proposition 227 (1998), or the English for the Children
Initiative, as it was called by its supporters, claimed that the poor academic performance of
Spanish speakers was due to their placement in bilingual programs, and promised that these
students would have superior academic outcomes if placed in English-Only (EO) programs
where English was taught in isolation and absent of content, and/or where students were pulled-
out of the classroom to be taught in English with a focus on remediation. The initiative sought to
make EO instruction the default program throughout the state, and in 1998 it passed. The
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 17
supporters of Proposition 227 in California went on to pass a similar initiative in Arizona in
2000, and then in Massachusetts in 2002. As these policies came into fruition, what was found
was that the achievement gaps were not closing in any of the states that had passed the EO
legislation, but widening. There was evidence in Massachusetts that drop-out rates for EB
students had risen. Moreover, in Arizona, more EB students were being placed in special
education classes. These are two very negative outcomes (Cochran-Smith, Davis, & Fries,
2003). Despite these trends, and the annulment of Proposition 187 and 227 with Proposition 58
(Ed.G.E. Initiative) in California in 2017, a policy that embraces diversity as an asset and
primary language as a resource, some critics continue to debate the reasoning behind
instructional practices that meet the cultural and linguistic needs of students.
Classroom teachers in small towns, rural areas, urban areas or the suburbs across the
nation, whether prepared or not, are expected to teach all K-12 students, including those that
speak languages other than English in their homes and are at various levels of proficiency. All
teachers must therefore be prepared to educate in a multicultural setting and all principals must
be equipped to support teachers as they engage in complex teaching practices that meets the
needs of all students, particularly EB students (Lucas, 2011).
Importance of Addressing the Problem
The opportunity gaps of emergent bilingual (EB) students to culturally and linguistically
sustaining practices through highly qualified certified teachers is a problem that is important to
solve for a variety of reasons. While some EB students move quickly through English fluency
and academic mastery, many do not. Most EB students make progress in the primary grades (K-
2), but in third grade, when academic and cognitive demands require higher levels of
comprehension and engagement with text, the patterns change. The added rigor and language
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 18
demands found in current state standards are also bringing greater challenges to EB students in
accessing the content and demonstrating mastery, specifically without having received the
knowledge and skills to navigate these demands in the classroom (Santos, Darling-Hammond &
Cheuk, 2012). Many struggle to learn cognitive academic language proficiency (CALP) or
academic English to access grade-level curriculum, which is taught in a language they have not
yet mastered. NCES (2009) reported an estimated 4.6 million EB students in K-12 public school
classrooms in 2014-2015. That number continues to grow. The nation cannot afford to have EB
students with limited access to quality instruction, creating further limitations to reclassify as
Fluent English Proficient (RFEP). Reclassification increases options for learning in post-
secondary settings and enhances students’ engagement in the learning process (NCES, 2009).
Principals that assume the role of instructional leader must augment teachers’ knowledge
of EB students’ instruction through extensive and intentional professional learning opportunities,
professional learning communities, opportunities for practice, coaching and reflection that span
multiple years (Fillmore, 2000b). Leithwood and Snow (1994) has linked principal’s
instructional leadership to measures of improvement in teacher’s classroom behaviors, attitudes,
and effectiveness (i.e., student achievement), evidence of the importance of principal training
and preparation from the larger organizational construct. Thus, exploring instructional leaders’
impact on instructional shifts that impact EB students in classrooms plays a key role in building a
stronger educational system where all students have access to the instructional rigor they need to
engage fully in society, in the workforce and thrive in the United States and globally. With
targeted professional learning and on-going coaching by instructional leaders (principals),
teachers can support EB students in expanding their academic opportunities and future
employability (Kennedy, 2016). With properly trained instructional leaders, teachers, and
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 19
educational systems in place, that understand and value the diversity of their student population
and community, providing the instructional supports needed, they can impact the overall quality
of an EB students’ quality of life (Olsen, 2014). Examining instructional leaders’ knowledge and
skills, motivations and organizational influences can unveil the ingredients of effective
professional learning implementation supporting EB students, attending to the larger national
issues of equity and access for underserved populations. Not attending to this problem further
perpetuates systematic inequality and leads to a dead-end for the many underserved populations
in our educational system.
Organizational Context and Mission
Confronting this issue is Costa Sur Elementary School District (CSESD), where the
mission is to ignite every child’s imagination and passion (CSESD, 2018). Located in San Diego
County in California, CSESD serves 46 schools and more than 29,600 students within its K-6
public school structure. With schools serving diverse communities that represent a blend of
residential, recreational facilities, and industry, it is CSESD’s belief that in working
collaboratively across stakeholder groups, they can tap the collective intelligence rich in
innovation and spirit, and essential for students to enact social change for a more democratic and
just society.
Employing 1,634 certificated employees and 1,373 classified employees, CSESD works to
sustain their vision that, “every child is an individual of great worth” (CSESD, 2017, p.2).
Within CSESD’s 1,634 certificated population there are 46 principals, of which 61% are female,
and 39% are male. Of the 29,600 student population, 35% are classified as ELs and 51% qualify
for free-or reduced-price lunch. The ethno-racial demographics of the district is 68% Latino,
13% White, 11% Philippino, 4% African American, 3% Asian/Pacific Islander and 1% other.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 20
The diverse student population is supported with reduced class sizes in Transitional Kindergarten
(TK) through third grade classrooms containing 22 or less students, and in grades 4-6 containing
28 or less students. Additionally, 20 Dual Immersion programs operate throughout the district,
offering Spanish and English language development.
As a core instructional practice, teachers engage in implementing the National Training
Center’s (NTC) Orange County Department of Education (OCDE) Project GLAD® [Guided
Language Acquisition Design] model of professional learning, a model dedicated to building
academic language and literacy for all students, especially emergent bilingual (EB) students. For
over 30 years, the National Training Center for OCDE Project GLAD
®
has provided training for
teachers and principals both nationally and internationally, creating strides in students’ access to
quality instruction and higher-levels of academic and linguistic success. As a model designed to
be culturally and linguistically responsive, it enhances teachers’ design and delivery of
standards-based instruction through an integrated content and language approach, while
providing principals a framework of best instruction for EB students in which to guide teachers.
CSESD has been implementing the OCDE Project GLAD® model for over ten years, having
employed local active certified OCDE Project GLAD® consultants to support both principals
and teachers in understanding the model, its relevance and how to implement for optimal
positive impact on increasing EB student access to grade level curriculum and increasing English
proficiency. Over the past four years, CSESD has taken a more deliberate approach to the
implementation of the model by hiring the two consultants full time to engage in systemic
supports, targeting 20 cohorts of schools annually to deepen OCDE Project GLAD® practices of
integrated ELD throughout the content areas, and designated ELD aligned to specific language
domains. CSESD has trained nearly their entire teacher population in the preliminary
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 21
professional learning series, now deepening practices with on-going customized coaching and
mentoring supports for both teachers and principals. Classrooms in CSESD implementing the
model promote an environment that respects and honors each child’s voice, personal life
experiences, beliefs and values their culture and linguistic repertoire. The importance of this
model as a core instructional practice is made evident in the district’s articulation of use within
their Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP).
Organizational Goal
To ensure that CSESD nurtures every child’s imagination, intellect, and sense of inquiry,
five goals were articulated within the district’s 2017-2018 LCAP to meet that mission. The
LCAP is a California Department of Education (CDE) tool for local educational agencies to
focus on continuous improvement efforts, setting goals, planning action steps, and leveraging
resources to meet student outcomes through an articulated 3-year plan. The LCAP, reviewed and
approved by the district, county office of education and the state department of education, is a
valuable and reliable tool in analyzing the trajectory of a school district. Within CSESD’s
LCAP, two specific goals align to this dissertation’s problem of practice of evaluating the
opportunity gaps of EB students to culturally and linguistically sustaining practices (as is evident
in the OCDE Project GLAD® model’s implementation) through highly qualified teachers and
principals.
Goal Two outlined within CSESD’s LCAP states, “The district will ensure students
engage in relevant, personalized learning experiences that integrate critical thinking,
collaboration, creativity and the use of technology, ensuring that all students are using 21
st

Century fluencies, and experiencing a balanced educational program that encompasses each
curricular area, inclusive of English Language Development (ELD)” (CSESD, 2017, p. 14). One
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 22
measure used to ensure progress of EB students is the use of the English Language Proficiency
Assessment for California (ELPAC). The annual measureable outcomes states that a
“percentage of ELs who made annual progress towards English proficiency as measured by
ELPAC will be at 70% in 2018, growing by 5% annually through 2020” (CSESD, 2017, p. 14).
This organizational goal will be accomplished through the following identified actions: Training
resource teachers, administrators and instructional leadership teams in the English Language Arts
(ELA)/English Language Development (ELD) Framework, ELD Standards and ELPAC,
including best practices in curriculum and instruction. Additionally, providing professional
learning on high impact strategies to support language development in literacy and mathematics,
and in various curricular areas based on teacher need, as is referenced in CSESD’s LCAP. The
use of the OCDE Project GLAD® model has been identified as one professional learning
structure in meeting the high impact strategies to support language development needs.
Goal Five states, “Students in all grade levels (including all targets such as Low Income,
English Learners, and Foster Youth) will demonstrate increased proficiency on state and district
assessments” (CSESD, 2017, p. 35). Two measures to ensure progress of EB students for this
organizational goal is progress on the ELPAC and reclassification rates. The metric states that
“EL reclassification rates will increase from 21% to 23% in 2018 and will increase by 10%
annually through 2020” (CSESD, 2017, p.14). This organizational goal will be accomplished by
providing professional learning for teachers and administrators on supporting literacy in ELA
and ELD for all students.
Both federal and CA state law requires local educational agencies to administer a state
test of English language proficiency to eligible students in K-12. The ELPAC is CA’s
assessment to measure English language progress and a students’ English language proficiency
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 23
level. Reclassification of a student from EL to Reclassified Fluent English Proficient (RFEP)
can occur through a student passing California’s reclassification criteria. Therefore, using both
ELPAC and reclassification rates are two valid measures to support student’s access to rigorous
instructional practices that both attend to their academic and linguistic needs via effective teacher
delivery. Additional data points such as EL report cards, standardized national tests such as the
Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC), district assessments in reading and writing
and college and career indicators as reported on the California Dashboard (data) system assisted
in the decision-making of the identified organizational goals. The development of the LCAP is
dependent on input of stakeholders including staff, employee representative groups, parents,
students and community organizations. LCAP stakeholders had the following avenues to
participate in providing input: budget advisory meetings, ELAC/DELAC meetings, district
leadership meetings, LCAP advisory meetings, LCAP stakeholder community engagement
forums, ThoughtExchange Community Input (software), and meetings with the
superintendent and student council president. Through the use of the ThoughtExchange
software, 3,819 participants engaged in a feedback process on the LCAP and its identified
organizational goals. In using various data points and stakeholder input, it is CSESD’s belief
that through these organizational goals, the needs of EB students will show continuous progress
and improvement.
The importance of attending to the organizational goals of increasing EB students’
proficiency and receipt of personalized learning experiences will begin to bridge the opportunity
and achievement gaps plaguing this student population. The consequences of not preparing the
principals in engaging in effective professional learning supports and coaching, reflective of
andragogy, on teachers’ implementation of the OCDE Project GLAD® model’s strategies which
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 24
are reflective of cultural and linguistic pedagogical practices, can further widen the gap for a
frequently underserved population. As stated earlier, the nation cannot afford to have limited
access to quality instruction with a 4.6 million emergent bilingual student population and
growing.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
There are multiple stakeholder groups that are critical to a K-6 public school district’s
success, such as CSESD, and the extent of the external and internal stakeholder’s involvement
within the organization can vary from school to school. The distinction between internal and
external education stakeholders is important. When focusing on continuous improvement,
internal stakeholders have a greater capacity to produce positive and direct change in schools.
However, they do not always have all the leverage or power to sustain the changes. Thus,
external stakeholders can have a great effect on organizational performance over time. When
informed of the school’s effort to improve outcomes, they can assist in sustaining the district’s
focus over time (Paine, 2009).
The internal stakeholders involved in the daily operations of the CSESD school system in
supporting the needs of EB students include district office personnel, principals, teachers, staff,
students, and parents-while external stakeholders are those outside the day-to-day work of the
schools who have a vested interest in school outcomes but do not directly determine what goes
into producing those outcomes. External stakeholders include county offices, board members,
taxpayers, the business community and other community members (Paine & McCann, 2009).
With well-measured and delivered instructional practices that attend to EB students’ needs, the
community climate shifts and the possibilities for the local economy also grow. Parents increase
in pride and success, whereas taxpayers may see a good return on their investment, the business
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 25
community sees a viable work force ready to progress the mission of the business and
community forward, increasing community economics. Each stakeholder group plays a vital role
in the achievement of the organizational goals and are important to understand and analyze
(Istance, 2006).
Three critical stakeholders in CSESD that contribute to the achievement of the
organization’s performance goals are district personnel, principals and teachers. The district
supports in creating a shared vision, sets values and creates actionable strategic goals in how to
accomplish those goals. Through this strategic planning, appropriate resources and
accountabilities can be distributed across the schools within Costa Sur, establishing systematized
and sustainable avenues in best meeting the needs of EB students. This is then furthered by the
principal, operating as an instructional leader. The instructional leader guides and directs the
school to attain the goals with the teacher directly responsible for enacting best practices for EB
students into the classroom. Teachers obtain the needed supports to enact instructional shifts
from instructional leaders providing the OCDE Project GLAD® model and additional coaching
supports. It is through the collective involvement of all stakeholders that ultimately ensures that
organizational goals are tackled with sustainable structures to ensure continuous improvement
and progress.
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals
Table 1 presents the organizational mission, organizational performance goal and the
identified three key stakeholder’s performance goals.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 26
Table 1
Organizational Mission, Global Goal and Stakeholder Performance Goals
Organizational Mission
Costa Sur Elementary School District’s mission is to nurture every child’s imagination,
intellect, and sense of inquiry.
Organizational Performance Goal
By June 2018, CSESD, Principals and Teachers will provide the needed supports to increase
emergent bilingual (EB) students’ English proficiency, as measured on the ELPAC, from 67% to
70%, growing by 5% annually through 2020. Reclassification rates of EB students will increase
from 21% to 23%, growing by 10% annually through 2020.
CSESD’s Goal Principal’s Goal Teacher’s Goal
Sustain a vision and mission
that embraces diversity and
creates pathways for districts
to increase opportunities for
emergent bilinguals.
Principals will increase best
practices related to andragogy,
supporting teacher implementation
of the OCDE Project GLAD®
model for emergent bilingual
students by 5% annually.
[Insert 100% of teachers at the 20
identified schools will implement
research-based instructional
practices, OCDE Project GLAD®,
across all content areas by 2018.

Stakeholder Group for the Study
Although a complete analysis would involve all stakeholder groups, for practical purposes
the stakeholder group selected for the focus of this study are principals, or instructional leaders.
As research has shown, teachers and principals pose the greatest impact on student achievement
within a school setting. With ample research referencing teacher impact on student achievement,
the role of principal, particularly in meeting the needs of EB students, are minimal. An analysis
of the principal’s role in leading instructional shifts in EB education will be conducted,
evaluating what knowledge, skills, motivations, and organizational structures are used to support
teachers in their implementation of best language acquisition practices, like the OCDE Project
GLAD® model. This analysis will illuminate what gaps exist in EB students’ access to highly
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 27
qualified teachers that know how to best meet their cultural, linguistic, academic and personal
needs, and the principal’s role in leading instructional shifts in their schools.
The stakeholder group’s goal, established by the collaborative input of various LCAP
stakeholders, aims to meet the identified organizational goal. Understanding instructional
leaders’ knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational influences in providing
professional learning and coaching to teachers will be analyzed in support of the organizational
goal attainment. Analyzing student achievement, a potential effect of teacher instructional
practices, would be measured by reclassification rates and standardized testing. Analyzing the
instructional leaders’ role can begin to address the achievement gaps of EB students to culturally
and linguistically sustaining practices through highly qualified teachers. Failure to accomplish
this goal will perpetuate EB students’ achievement gaps, continuing inequitable distributions of
resources and opportunities, resulting in continued achievement gaps or disparities in
performance.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project is to evaluate the degree to which CSESD is meeting its goal
of increasing emergent bilingual (EB) students’ access to core curriculum and English
proficiency, as measured on the ELPAC, from 67% to 70%, growing by 5% annually through
2020 and reclassification rates of emergent bilinguals increasing from 21% to 23%, growing by
10% annually through 2020, by June 2018. An analysis of instructional leaders’ practices in
supporting teachers in instructional shifts to increase intentional instruction for EB students will
be evaluated. While a complete performance evaluation would focus on all stakeholders, for
practical purposes the stakeholder to be focused on in this analysis are instructional leaders
(principals) within CSESD.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 28
The following questions will guide the evaluation of this study and addresses the
knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational influences of CSESD instructional leaders
selected for this dissertation in achieving the organizational goals stated in Table 1.
1. What are the knowledge, skills and motivational influences of CSESD instructional
leaders related to andragogy, professional learning, coaching, feedback, and planning
in best meeting the needs of emergent bilingual students?
2. What knowledge, skills and motivational influences do instructional leaders use in
supporting teacher implementation of the OCDE Project GLAD® model in meeting
the needs of their emergent bilingual students?
3. What is the interaction between the district (organization) and instructional leaders in
the implementation of best practices for emergent bilingual students?
4. What recommendations in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational
resources may be appropriate for closing the opportunity and achievement gaps for
emergent bilingual students at another organization?
Conceptual and Methodological Framework
Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis is a conceptual framework that provides a problem
solving approach that allows for one to systematically analyze an organization’s performance
goals, the current achievement, the gap between the goals and the achievement and the potential
causes. As Figure 1 shows, causes are evaluated as knowledge (and skills), motivation and/or
organizational barriers or influences, determining the root cause of the performance gap.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 29

Figure 1. Gap analysis process (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Upon determining the root cause(s), solutions, recommendations for implementation to
close the gaps, and an evaluation is conducted. The process continues from evaluation back to
goals to close the gap analysis process.
This study will use Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis conceptual framework for this
evaluation study. The knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational influences of
instructional leaders of CSESD will be analyzed to determine the root cause(s) of the gaps seen
for EB students in accessing grade level content and building English proficiency and the
principal’s role in closing it. In validating or invalidating assumed influences, a refined focus on
solutions and an implementation plan can be evaluated in how to best support the organizational
performance goals of increasing EB students’ access to highly qualified teachers and instruction.
These assumed influences will be tested through engaging in a qualitative methodological
framework. The assumed knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational influences were
generated from an extensive literature review of the research and data. These influences will be
Goals
Current
Achievement
Gaps Causes
Knowledge,
Motivation,
Organization
Barriers
Root Causes Solutions Implement
Evaluate
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 30
investigated by using two sets of interviews and document analysis. Research-based solutions,
with an implementation plan and methods for evaluation will be recommended in a
comprehensive manner (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Definitions
Andragogy: The method, technique and practice of teaching adult learners (Knowles,
1984).
Emergent Bilingual (EB): This term is used as a way to reject the deficit-oriented
terminology of Limited English Proficient (LEP), English Language Learner (ELL), English
Learner (EL) or English as a Second Language student; these students are on the path to
balanced bilingualism or biliteracy (Garcia, 2008).
English Language Development (ELD): is a systematic instructional model designed
to develop the English language proficiency of English Learners (Division, 2015).
English Learner (EL): Is a formal educational classification given to students who are
unable to communicate fluently or learn effectively in English, who often come from non-
English-speaking homes and backgrounds, and who typically require specialized or modified
instruction in both the English language and in their academic courses (Division, 2015).
English Proficiency: Language competence and the accuracy and fluency of using
discourse strategies, reflected by mastering listening, speaking reading and writing in English
(Division, 2015).
Long-Term English Learner (LTEL): Is a formal educational classification given
to students who have been enrolled in American schools for more than six years, who are not
progressing toward English proficiency, and who are struggling academically due to their
limited English skills (Olsen, 2014).
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 31
OCDE Project GLAD® NTC: an acronym for Orange County Department of Education’s
Project GLAD® (Guided Language Acquisition Design) National Training Center; a registered
and trademarked model of professional learning and practices whose cornerstone is cultural
proficiency, infusing best practices for second language acquisition.
Pedagogy: the method and practice of teaching; often considered the science and art of
teaching children (Knowles, 1984).
Reclassification: The process through which students who have been identified and
classified as ELs are reclassified to Fluent English Proficient (RFEP) when they have
demonstrated that they are able to compete effectively with English-speaking peers in
mainstream classes.
Organization of the Project
Five chapters are used to organize this study. This chapter provided the reader with the
key concepts and terminology commonly found in a discussion about effective instructional
leadership, policy, pedagogy and professional learning for emergent bilingual students. The
organization’s mission, goals and stakeholders, along with the initial concepts of gap analysis
were introduced. Chapter Two provides a review of current literature surrounding the scope of
the study. Topics of EB student’s history, policy and typologies, teacher and principal
preparation, andragogy, and best pedagogy for emergent bilingual students will be addressed.
Additionally, the assumed knowledge and skills, motivation and organizational influences of
instructional leaders extracted from literature will be shared. Chapter Three details the assumed
influences for this study and the methodological processes conducted with the identified
stakeholder pool, the data collection and analysis. In Chapter Four, the data results and findings
are assessed and analyzed. The findings do represent the small sample size of the six (6)
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 32
principals or 1/3 of the possible sample size. The findings are not indicative of all the principals
from CSESD. In the evaluation of the six (6) principals’ K, M and O, many promising practices
were found. Chapter Five analyzes the findings and provides recommendations, an
implementation plan and methods for evaluation based on the data collected and analyzed.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 33
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Reviewed in this chapter are the opportunity and achievement gaps faced by emergent
bilingual (EB) students, in which language policy in the USA will be analyzed, how to best
educate EB students through culturally and linguistically sustaining practices, pedagogy and
ELD, as well as the role of instructional leaders (principals), andragogy, professional learning
and coaching. This chapter will also review learning and motivation theory, paying special
attention to knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational influences of instructional
leaders.
Opportunity and Achievement Gaps Experienced by Emergent Bilingual Students
Achievement gaps between EB students and English-only speaking students are deeply
rooted, pervasive, complex, and challenging. As a group, EB students face some of the most
pronounced achievement gaps of any student group. The 2013 NAEP test scores document large
EB student achievement gaps that have remained relatively unchanged over the preceding 10
years (NAEP, 2017). In 2013, emergent bilingual students demonstrated proficiency levels that
were 23 to 30% below their English-speaking peers, with only 3 to 4% of emergent bilingual
eighth graders demonstrating proficiency in math or reading. More than two thirds of emergent
bilingual eighth graders scored below basic in math (69%) and reading (70%). Almost half of EB
fourth graders scored below basic in math (41%) and more than two-thirds scored below basic in
reading (69%) (NAEP, 2017). While the graduation rate for EB students increased 4.1%
between 2010-11 and 2012-13, their graduation rate stood at only 61.1%—a full 20 points below
the national graduation rate of 81.4%, and 25 points below their White peers (86.6%).
According to data released by the NCES in March 2015, EB students graduate from high school
“at the lowest rate of all student subgroups” (NEA, 2015, p. 51). The achievement gaps for EB
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 34
students are so wide that it reflects the challenges of productivity for the national educational
system and the well-being of the nation’s economy (Gándara et al., 2003).
Language Policy in the United States
The U.S. has not had a national language policy, creating a chasm in decisions on how to
best educate EB students, and a source of continuous controversy and opinion. Crawford (2004)
articulated that the federal levels absence in guiding conversation on language policy, leaves no
official responsible for coordinating decisions, resources and research regarding language issues
that plague the nation and frequently divide Americans. With no national language policy, some
feel uncertain on the nation’s stance on multiliteracy and multiculturalism, let alone how this
may or may not be visible in the classroom or if its priority. Left to local control, various states
have adopted their own philosophies on EB students’ needs, how they are identified, measured
and how to best instruct them. Yet, local control also provides states the autonomy to better
understand their communities’ needs and be responsive to appropriate and robust programs. The
non-existence of a national language policy does not diminish the various historical events that
developed the language ideologies and attitudes that are seen today (Santa Ana, 2004).
Globally, efforts to attend to language issues take center stage; language planning and
policies regulate government operations, define civil rights, determine funding and sets
educational priorities. Canada’s policy of official bilingualism gives equal status to English and
French in government services, proceedings and employment, while maintaining other languages
and cultures. India has designated English and Hindi as official languages at the national level
and constitutionally recognizes 17 regional languages. South Africa has identified nine
indigenous languages in addition to English and Afrikaans for government, broadcasting, and
education. The European Union has devoted time and resources to language planning
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 35
(Crawford, 2004). While Australia aims to: “foster English for all, conserve and develop skills
in immigrant languages, prevent the extinction of Aboriginal tongues, and encourage English
speakers to learn one of 10 target languages” (Crawford, 2004, p. 57) that have been identified as
essential for diplomacy and trade.
It was within the American identity that immigrant roots were found, a promise of
upward mobility, and a new nation loyal to democratic ideals. For within the Declaration of
Independence (1776), it reports that “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are
created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among
those are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness” (para 2). Yet, these ideals were challenged
across various points in history for EB students. The 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo is the
first important legal document concerning EB students and Latinos. Anglo-Americans
disregarded the treaty in its entirety and deemed Mexican Americans as a conquered people to be
subjugated, rather than citizens to be accepted. It was in these behaviors, that “Greaser Laws”
(Santa Ana, 2004, p. 89) were passed in various states further marginalizing Mexicans and
institutionalizing inferior treatment of racial minorities within public education. In 1868, Indians
and Mexicans are excluded from the granting of “all citizens” the enjoyment of all rights,
including the right to vote. In 1896, Plessy v. Ferguson sanctions state-imposed segregation and
becomes the legal foundation of racial segregation in public schools (Santa Ana, 2004). By
1907, Anglo-Americans’ attitudes towards Spanish was one of hostility and disdain, mandating
English instruction of all educational content. This treatment was not isolated to Mexicans,
Puerto Ricans faced severe ramifications as well. Ideologies developed that to be a real U.S.
citizen required speaking English without a trace of a Spanish accent (Santa Ana, 2004).
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 36
In 1931, Alvarez v. Lemon Grove School District is the first successful desegregation
case won by Mexican Americans. Followed by the Mendez v. Westminster case in 1946, ruling
segregation illegal, the federal court deciding that segregating children serves no educational
purpose. Judge Frederick Aguirre, an American Judge of the Orange County Superior Court of
California, states “I think people have great tolerance in this country because we have every
ethnic group, religious group, racial group and cultural group represented in this great
experiment we call ‘America.’ It poses tremendous challenges, but I’m very confident we will
continue to be a better society and lead the world” (Aguirre, F., Bowman, K. L., Mendez, G.,
Mendez, S., Robbie, S. & Strum, P., 2014, p. 410). Mendez v. Westminster becomes the
foundational case for what is to come in 1954, Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka,
unanimously declaring that segregating elementary and secondary students by race violates black
(and all racialized) children’s constitutional right to equal protection. In 1968, the Bilingual
Education Act provided for a limited time a change in which EB students were taught in the
U.S., recognizing their needs and valuing their assets, promoting greater access to the curriculum
and training to teachers. In 1974, Lau v. Nichols U.S. Supreme Court rules that newcomers with
little or no English being placed in English-only instruction was a violation of their civil rights
(Crawford, 2004). These state and federal cases proved monumental in setting new ideals with
how diversity was received, cultures embraced and langauges valued.
However, in the late 20
th
century, early 21
st
century, linguistic nationalism began to
firmly take root in the United States again, in which ways of thinking and behaving towards
language occurred, developing language ideologies and belief systems. Crawford (2004)
references the following language ideologies prominent within the U.S.: Family legends that
convey that one’s immigrant families came to the U.S. not speaking any English and managed to
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 37
get by without bilingual support; conventional wisdom that to best teach English requires total
immersion given children can “pick up” language (Crawford, 2004, p. 16); political principles
referencing immigrants’ responsibility and obligation as new Americans to show patriotism and
speak “America’s language” (Crawford, 2004, p. 16); and ethnic paranoia in which fear of other
languages dominating is overbearing. These ideologies are so frequently deeply felt that they
have become national myths. Where in 1994, polls overwhelmingly approved the denial of
undocumented citizens’ range of social services, including public education under Proposition
187. This was then followed by the passing of Proposition 227 in 1998, restricting all bilingual
education and instruction in the native language in CA public schools in support of building
English and language proficiency. Over one million children were affected. In 2002, the
Bilingual Education Act is formally reversed by the passing of the No Child Left Behind Act
(Colon-Muniz & Lavadenz, 2016).
Existing today is a “bilingual double standard” (Crawford, 2004, p. 64), in which fluent
bilingualism in the U.S. is a largely ethnic phenomenon. For the majority of Americans,
monolingualism is the norm. Language attitudes in the U.S. tend to value bilingualism in certain
contexts and certain people, and to devalue it in others (Crawford, 2004). Individual bilingualism
is often seen as good and evidence of affluence, while group bilingualism is often ignored,
discouraged, or taken for granted of as associated with particular ethnic groups. Though polls
reflect Americans overwhelming agreement that immigrant children should learn English as
quickly as possible, the high levels of failure in foreign-language programs (often in high school)
are acceptable. Society finds it easy to blame the victims for their victimization, focusing on
their being culturally deprived and disadvantaged (Crawford, 2004). If the group was seen as
advantaged culturally for their bilingualism, then the reasons for its subordination would have to
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 38
be sought elsewhere, namely in political and economic spheres, something that the dominant
culture would encourage (Crawford, 2004). In 2017, Proposition 58, or the California Education
for a Global Economy (CA Ed.G.E.) Initiative, repaved the pathway for various districts to
engage in building biliteracy through Dual Immersion programs, coupled with the Seal of
Biliteracy being adopted. This was joined by the passing of CA’s new EL Roadmap, focused on
principles that highlights the assets of EB students (Santa Ana, 2004). The former California
State Superintendent of Schools Tom Torlakson’s passing of the Global CA 2030 Initiative in
May 2018, now supported by current California State Superintendent of Schools Tony
Thurmond, is a bold initiative to expand the teaching and learning of world languages and the
number of students proficient in more than one language within the next 12 years. These
historical contexts reveal the tumultuous and systemic mindsets regarding Latino population’s
development of language and the views they held of their value. Though more recent initiatives
are flourishing within niched states or communities, like California, systematic national shifts are
instrumental in reshaping the futures for EB students.
Current and Future Trends
Current trends. Current literature reveals EB students are the fastest growing student
population in the U.S. In the 2013-2014 school year, approximately 4.6 million public school
students, nearly one in ten in U.S. public schools, were EB students. In eight states, the EB
student population comprises 10% or more of the student population, with California having
22.4% or 2.7 million students. Most EB students born in the U. S. (79%) and in California (83%)
speak Spanish as their primary language (Education Commission of States, 2013). The second
largest language group in both California and the U.S. is Vietnamese. While Western states have
the largest concentration of EB students (Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Nevada, New
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 39
Mexico, Oregon and Texas), 28 states showed considerable gains throughout 2011-2012, with
the largest percentage growths of 100% and more in Kansas, Louisiana, Massachusetts,
Maryland, Michigan, South Carolina, and West Virginia (Education Commission of States,
2013).
Although most EB students are found at the elementary school level, a larger proportion
of EB students is found in secondary schools than commonly believed. More than 18% of
California’s secondary school students are EB students (Rumberger & Gándara, 2000).
Proportionately, the number of EB students in secondary schools has been growing at a faster
rate than the number in elementary schools. The increase in the population of these secondary
level EB students, presents a particular challenge for both the students and the schools that serve
them. This is principally due to older children having less time to acquire both English and the
academic skills to prepare for high school graduation and post-secondary options. Unfortunately,
the unique needs of these older EB students are often even more overlooked than those of their
younger peers (Gándara et al., 2003).
As a group, EB students continue to perform more poorly than English-speaking students
throughout their entire school career. This is clearly evident by the SAT 9 English reading scores
across grade levels, as reported in 2003. As expected, EB students who, by definition, are not
yet proficient in English, have low English reading scores across all grade levels. EB students
who enter school already proficient in English (Fluent English Proficient-FEP) start out
comparable to native English speakers, but by third grade they fall behind and often do not catch
up (Gándara et al., 2003). Students who enter the schools classified as an EL and who are
subsequently reclassified as proficient (RFEP), also start out comparable, but by 5th grade they
fall below native English speakers, and by 7th grade they fall even further behind these students.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 40
Such results challenge the belief that if EB students simply demonstrated proficiency in English,
as defined by early scores on the SAT 9 test, the achievement gap would disappear (Gándara et
al., 2003). The results show a sizeable achievement gap between English-only, monolingual
students and current/former EB students. Both groups show more achievement growth in the
early years than in the later years, which reflects the increasing difficulty of learning higher
levels of more academic English. In grade 5, when many students have completed elementary
school, emergent bilingual students are reading at the same level as English only students
between grades 3 and 4, a gap of about one and one-half years. By grade 8, when most students
have completed middle school, EB students are reading at the same level as English-only
students in grade 6, a gap of about 2 years. By grade 11, EB students are reading at the same
level as English-only students between grades 6 and 7, a gap of about 4 and one-half years
(Scarcella & Rumberger, 2000).
EB students are distributed throughout schools in the nation, from K-12
th
grade. There
are very few California schools that report having no EB students among their student
population. Today, the typical California school is composed of both EB students and English
speakers, and in many schools more than one-quarter of the student body is not fluent in English.
The diversity presents both an opportunity and a challenge for educators today. The challenges
are to provide instruction for each child and meet them where he or she is, access their prior
knowledge and experiences, and build relevance and purpose in listening, speaking, reading and
writing in pursuit of language fluency; ensuring each child is building their cognitive and
communicative skills to succeed. How best to educate EB students continues to be a highly
controversial topic and the source of considerable policy debate (Gándara et al., 2003).
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 41
Future trends. Research suggests that by 2020, the number of preschool-age children
using or exposed to a language other than English at home may outpace the number of their
peers who speak only English at home (Education Commission of States, 2013). With rapidly
changing demographics, it is predicted that EB students are expected to be a majority of U.S.
school-age students by 2030, and America’s schools are responsible for meeting the educational
needs of an increasingly diverse population (Collier & Thomas, 1999).
Demographic trends and projections related to race and ethnicity, EL status, and income
level suggest that in the coming years, America’s public schools will be called upon to educate
an increasingly diverse student body and an increasing number of students from demographic
groups that experience the largest achievement gaps. Some states are already confronting the
socioeconomic and diversity challenges that the nation will soon face. By as early as 2044, the
majority of the U.S. population will be comprised of people currently considered to be racial or
ethnic minorities (NEA, 2015). The growth in the number of minority children over time
illustrates the expected “superdiversification of America’s children” (NEA, 2015, p. 67) that
public schools will face in the coming decades: while 25% of American children were a racial or
ethnic minority in 1980, ethnic minority children are 46% today and are projected to be 57% in
2040 and 65% in 2060 (NEA, 2015). Even more immediately, between 2011 and 2022, White
student enrollment in public elementary and secondary schools is projected to decrease from
52% of all students enrolled in public schools to 45%, while students who are Hispanic will
increase from 24% to 30%, bringing the total enrollment of minority students in public schools to
more than half. Definitively, EB students represent a growing population in America’s public
schools.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 42
The achievement outcomes, demographic trends, and projected shifts in student
population described foreshadow the significant challenges that lie ahead for America’s public
schools. Beyond the moral imperative of fairness and equity, there are enormous economic
benefits to closing the achievement gaps, and significant economic costs if the nation fails (NEA,
2015).
Opportunity and Achievement Gaps
Within education, it is sought to provide all students with a high quality education that
highlights each students’ gifts. Yet, the challenge to do so is often met with systems that
perpetuate inequity, perceptions of teachers of limited academic abilities, and the challenge of
the EB student to learn grade-level content simultaneously while learning a new language with
high academic language (Colon-Muniz, A. & Lavadenz, M., 2016). One federally mandated
report revealed that EB students receive lower grades, are judged by teachers as having lower
academic abilities, and score lower on standardized tests then their peers. Additionally, EB
students have higher dropout rates and are more frequently placed in lower ability groups and
academic tracks than monolingual proficient students (Genesee, Lindholm-Leary, Saunders, &
Christian, 2006). Research on desegregation has established that minority students who are
schooled in desegregated settings tend to have better occupational outcomes and overall life
chances (Wells & Crain, 1994; Crain & Strauss, 1985). Sociologists often explain this
phenomenon as the impact of social capital on student outcomes (Stanton-Salazar, 2011). In
essence, as students and people have access to diverse populations, with experiences and skills
unlike one’s own, or bring additional value systems into an environment, a person’s range of
opportunities expand, often enriching personal and academic outcomes; broadening one’s own
frame of reference. Therefore, one reason to be concerned about racial, ethnic, or linguistic
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 43
isolation is the effect it has on limiting access to important social networks. However, a more
immediate impact of linguistic isolation is the lack of appropriate English language models,
which can result in both reduced opportunities to hear and interact with the language, and fewer
opportunities to understand the ways in which the language is used in social and academic
contexts, building CALP. Both are important features in the development of high levels of
linguistic skill. Researchers August and Hakuta (1997) argue that the concentration of EB
students in classrooms and schools in California compromises their opportunity to receive an
education that is comparable in quality and scope to that of their monolingual peers because: (a)
the lack of peer English language models limits the development of English, (b) the lack of
models of children who are achieving at high or even moderate levels inhibits academic
achievement, (c) the inequitable environmental conditions and resources of segregated
classrooms and schools, and (d) the lack of highly qualified, experienced, teachers in these
particular classrooms depress learning (August, D. & Hakuta, K., 1997). The opportunity and
achievement gaps are perpetuated by the lack of course access many EB students can enroll in,
widening the gap.
Lack of course access. A persistent gap in test scores is a major factor in the school
experience for most EB students, where tests are provided in a language they may not yet be
proficient at. Teachers and schools make judgments about students’ abilities and class placement
decisions based on the information available to them, including test scores. Moreover, when the
teacher does not speak the language of the child, cannot communicate with the child’s family,
and has little other information to rely on, test scores can take on even greater importance.
Students who score low on tests are likely to be placed in remedial education, even though such a
placement is unlikely to help students close the achievement gap with their mainstream peers
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 44
(Gándara, 2003). This is often due to a misunderstanding of language proficiency and
confounding Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS) and CALP, where some students
may be able to engage in social language conversations but struggle with academic English.
Many assuming that if the EB student can speak socially but struggle academically it is due to
special educational needs and not CALP (Cummins, 1999). There is a significant body of
research that shows a clear relationship between increased time engaged in academic tasks and
increased student achievement. This suggests that there is a relationship between time and
learning, and that learning increases when students are engaged in learning activities for greater
amounts of time (Fleischman & Hopstock, 1993). Notwithstanding the importance of time for
learning, there are many ways in which EB students experience less time on academic tasks than
other students. A common way that elementary schools organize instruction for EB students is
to take them out of their regular classes for ELD. This strategy has been demonstrated to create
further inequities in the education of students being pulled out, missing the regular classroom
instruction, access to rigorous grade level curriculum and often receive language isolation
lessons that are watered-down and out of context to the current content in the classroom
(Fleischman & Hopstock, 1993). Nevertheless, the practice continues to be relatively routine for
EB students nationally. There is generally no opportunity for students to acquire the instruction
they have missed during the pull out period. In secondary settings, EB students are often
assigned to multiple periods of ESL classes while other students are taking a full complement of
academic courses. Commonly, when not enough courses are available in either Specially
Designed Academic Instruction in English (SDAIE) or other formats, students are given
shortened day schedules, resulting in significantly less time devoted to academic instruction
(Olsen, 1998).
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 45
Role of teacher preparation in lack of access to quality teachers. Today’s teachers
need a thorough understanding of how language functions in education, and thus must receive a
systematic and intensive preparation in educational linguistics. A grounding in linguistics and
second language acquisition theory would support teachers’ overall undertakings, and in
particular in teaching literacy and ELD. This preparation would also support teacher
competencies, meaningful assessment, individualized instruction, and in respecting diversity
(Fillmore, 2000a). A 2007 state policy by the National Clearinghouse for English Language
Acquisition found a broad spectrum of pre-service requirements related to teaching EB students.
Four states, including Florida, where all classroom teachers must complete training in teaching
English as a second language (TESOL), fell on the strongest end, although as the Center for
American Progress commented that while these requirements are progress, they do not provide a
teacher with all that one needs to know how to serve EB students. On the weakest end of the
spectrum were 15 states that had no provisions requiring teacher certification candidates to have
expertise in working with EB students.
In a 2012 national evaluation of the Title III program, 73% of Title III district officials
surveyed indicated that the lack of expertise among mainstream teachers regarding ELs was a
moderate to major challenge (Education Commission of States, 2013). Regardless of teacher
training or instructional approaches, classroom teacher attitudes toward EB students can
significantly impact the instruction they receive. In one 2008 study, teachers who perceived that
it was primarily the specialist’s (ESL teacher’s) role to provide instruction to EB students took
no ownership for them in mainstream classrooms (Education Commission of States, 2013).
Moreover, EB students are more likely than any other children to be taught by teachers with an
emergency credential. There is reason for concern about the low percentage of teachers who are
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 46
qualified to teach these students. An increasingly large body of research has established that
teachers with good professional preparation make a difference in students' learning (Darling-
Hammond, 2002; Sanders & Horn, 1995; Sanders & Rivers, 1996). A recent study conducted in
Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) investigated the relationship between EB student
achievement gains and the credential held by the teachers who taught them in 29 schools and 177
classrooms with large numbers of EB students. Overall, the higher the concentration of EB
students in the classroom, the higher the proportion of teachers who held at least some
authorization to teach one (Sanders & Rivers, 1996). Yet, among classrooms where a majority of
students are EB students, only about half of the teachers held an appropriate credential. Using
data on the proportion of EB students in each type of classroom, it is estimated that only 53% of
all EB students enrolled in grades 1-4 in California in the 1999-2000 school year were taught by
a teacher with any specialized training to teach them effectively (Fillmore, 2000a).
Educating Emergent Bilingual Students
Over the past four decades, a solid body of research has been amassed on second
language acquisition, bilingual brain development, effective programs, pedagogy, best practices
and ELD lesson development. This research provides guidance to schools seeking to create
powerful programs in the education of emergent bilingual students. The first step in creating
effective programs in educating EB students is knowing who the students are and looking
beyond the single label of classification as EL to understand the very different needs of each
student that arrives at the school’s doors. Beyond the shared challenge of an English language
barrier, EB students differ in the languages they speak, the degree of fluency in English, in
cultures they come from, in the social status they hold, in the type of prior schooling they have
had as well as in the experiences of coming to the United States. Particularly relevant types
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 47
include under-schooled students, newly-arrived highly educated adolescents, and LTELs who
have been in U.S. schools for six years or more (Olsen, 2006). While there is no single program
model that fits all EB populations and local contexts, all EB students need a cognitively
complex, coherent, well-articulated and meaningful standards-based curriculum taught in a
comprehensible manner, and a program that will enable them to learn English quickly enough
and fluently enough to participate fully in grade-level academic curriculum while respecting their
culture, language and identity.
Culturally and Linguistically Sustaining Practices
In order to create truly equitable classrooms, schools, and districts, educators should
continuously strive for social justice, access, and equity. This requires educators to adopt a
stance of inquiry toward their practice and to engage in ongoing, collaborative discussions with
their colleagues about challenging issues, including race, culture, language, and equity.
Culturally and linguistically responsive teaching and equity-focused approaches emphasize
validating and valuing students’ cultural and linguistic heritage while also ensuring their full
development of academic English and their ability to engage meaningfully in a range of
academic contexts across the disciplines (McIntyre, Hulan, & Layne, 2011).
Culturally responsive practices in schools and classrooms have been shown to be an
effective means of addressing the achievement gap as well as the disproportionate representation
of EB students in programs serving students in gifted and talented educational (GATE) programs
and within secondary settings in Advanced Placement (AP) or college preparatory pathways
(Griner & Stewart, 2012). Many researchers posit that a major cause of the underachievement of
EB students, and the disproportionate representation of these students in these programs, is the
divide between home and school cultures. In a research study by Griner and Stewart (2012),
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 48
evidence revealed that schools and teachers who have adopted a culturally responsive pedagogy
have the ability to act as change agents in their schools to help bridge the divide and encourage
more equitable schooling experiences for EB students. Griner and Stewart use the work of Gay
(2000) to define culturally and linguistically responsive teaching as “using the cultural
knowledge, prior experiences, frames of reference, and performance styles of ethnically and
linguistically diverse students to make learning encounters more relevant to and effective for
them” (p. 589). Culturally responsive teaching has the following characteristics according to
Gay:
it acknowledges the legitimacy of the cultural heritages of different ethnic groups, both as
legacies that affect students’ dispositions, attitudes, and approaches to learning and as
worthy content to be taught in the formal curriculum; it builds bridges of meaningfulness
between home and school experiences as well as between academic abstractions and
lived sociocultural realities; it uses a wide variety of instructional strategies that are
connected to different learning styles; it teaches students to know and praise their own
and each other’s cultural heritages, and it incorporates multicultural information,
resources, and materials in all the subjects and skills routinely taught in schools (Gay,
2000, p. 589).
The absence of cultural and linguistic understandings of EB students has also led to an over-
representation of students in special needs classroom. Students who are inappropriately placed
in these programs may suffer many consequences. On identification for programs serving
students with special needs, it is likely this label will remain with students throughout their entire
education experience. Other consequences may follow: diminished expectations, unequal access
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 49
to the curriculum, lack of opportunities to connect with peers that have not been labeled, and the
continued within-school segregation (Griner & Stewart, 2012).
Additionally, one of every three students enrolled in either elementary or secondary
school is of racial, ethnic or language-minority backgrounds, while nearly 87% of the teachers
are White, female and monolingual, reports Griner and Stewart (2012). The lack of student–
teacher connections, led by the cultural divide between many schools and the communities in
which they are situated continues to overwhelm the educational community. This divide,
specifically between teachers and their students, can lead to devastating learning experiences for
students. Many EB students struggle to relate and connect with their classroom teachers, feeling
misunderstood and undervalued. This culture divide presents several barriers to EB students in
adapting to school processes and expectations, which impedes positive learning outcomes and
too often leads to inappropriate placement in programs serving students with special needs.
Teachers and schools that are armed with the tools to enact a culturally responsive
pedagogy are capable of effectively addressing the opportunity and achievement gap (Griner &
Stewart, 2012). Schools and teachers must adopt an asset-based stance toward the culture and
language of their students and an additive approach to their students’ language development by
enacting the following principles: self-educate, draw on and value students’ cultural
backgrounds, address language status, expand language awareness, support the development of
academic English, and promote pride in cultural and linguistic heritage (Griner & Stewart, 2012).
Paris (2012) refers to this stance as culturally sustaining pedagogy, requiring that pedagogies be
more than responsive of and or relevant to the cultural experiences of people, but that it requires
individuals to sustain the cultural and linguistic competence of their communities while
simultaneously offering access to dominant cultural competence. Thus, culturally sustaining
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 50
pedagogy seeks to foster “linguistic, literate and cultural pluralism” (Paris, 2012, p. 94),
supporting multilingualism and multiculturalism for both students and teachers (Paris, 2012).
This approach brings value to the whole child and the experiences and knowledge they bring into
the classroom, embracing all that they are and not expecting them to lose their language and
culture for the adding on of another culture and language.
Pedagogy
Pedagogy is the art (and science) of teaching. Using learning theories assists in shedding
light on different aspects of the learning process. Learning theories, such as behaviorism,
cognitivism, and socio-constructivism, are conceptual frameworks that describe how students
process knowledge while learning. Effective teachers recognize which conceptual frameworks
will yield the highest results for their student population. Effective teachers will use an array of
teaching strategies to obtain that goal. There is no single, universal approach that suits all
situations; different strategies used in different combinations with different groups of students to
improve their learning outcomes is a sign of a critically reflective teacher that understands
learning theory and pedagogy. In a study conducted by The Center for Research on Education,
Diversity and Excellence (CREDE), the importance of pedagogy was revealed and in particular
to the pivotal role of the teacher, underscoring the importance of instructional practice (Entz,
2007). Effective teaching practices are necessary for all children, but vital for EB students.
Each teacher has a vast array of pedagogical approaches and teaching techniques to draw from,
however, to imply that they are all equal and are effective in producing positive student
outcomes for all students is a fallacy (Entz, 2007).
To best attend to the needs of EB students, the teacher must have a mastery of the content
and curriculum. Moreover, teachers must have a mastery of learning theories, standards,
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 51
assessments, and have the ability to organize lesson designs. Furthermore, teachers should also
be able to engage students and develop the trust and relationship to make the most appropriate
instructional decisions. A skillful teacher ties all these features together using conceptual
frameworks and pedagogy, the science of teaching and learning. The ways a teacher interacts
with students and organizes instruction are critically important aspects of bridging the
opportunity and achievement gaps for EB students.
Within Entz’s (2007) study, CREDE researchers engaged in five years of extensive research
into pedagogy specific to students faced with systemic inequities. The examination revealed
various pedagogies that when implemented systematically, resulted in improved educational
outcomes, referenced as the Five Standards (Entz, 2007). These standards or principles, include
(a) joint productivity, (b) developing language and literacy skills across the content areas and
curriculum, (c) contextualization/making meaning and connecting lessons to student’s lives, (d)
cognitive challenge, and (e) instructional conversation. Joint productivity draws from the
apprenticeship system of learning, the working towards a common goal alongside an expert that
facilitates learning and processing of complex real problems (Entz, 2007). In this dynamic,
academic concepts are married with everyday life, embedding concepts and language into
meaningful activities where shared understandings can build future learning opportunities.
These understandings most reflect an underpinning of socio-constructivist and cognitivism.
Teachers can facilitate these joint productive activities of working together by designing
challenging activities that require teacher-student collaboration with a common goal to be
accomplished, with a focus on the process. Developing language and literacy skills across the
content areas and curriculum reflects Vygotsky’s (1978) reference of words as tools for thoughts.
The acquisition of language is vital for social interaction and thinking (Bialystok, E., 1991). The
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 52
research determined that all forms of language area necessary for school success, including
social language, cross-disciplinary vocabulary and disciplinary academic language, a reflection
of Isabel Beck’s reference to tiered leveled vocabulary. In which social language is referenced
as Tier I vocabulary, cross-disciplinary as Tier II vocabulary and III as disciplinary language
(Beck, 2002). All students need to be skillful in a variety of forms of discourse, including
listening to and answering questions, asking questions and challenging claims and using oral and
written representations to further individual understanding and to function in the community.
Thirdly, connecting lessons to students’ lives reflects viewing every student as an asset, holding
experiences, knowledge and language to build from. The focus of this standard is to help
students draw a connection to new information in a formal educational setting to the connections
they have already constructed. By connecting new ideas to the familiar, teachers expand
students’ understanding to include new information. At-risk students, often inclusive of EB
students who are subjected to systemic inequities, benefit greatly from a teacher who expects
them to learn and who positions tasks within the individual zones of proximal development
referenced by Vygotsky (1978). The teacher begins this process by understanding a students’
prior knowledge and then constructing lessons and activities based on their knowledge base.
Through carefully designed activities, questions and modeling, the teacher helps the student
understand, apply, analyze, evaluate and create based on what they are learning (constructivism).
CREDE research further revealed that the most effective ways to engage students in language
development, participate in more complex thinking and achieve positive academic outcomes is
through dialogue, questioning and sharing ideas (Entz, 2007).
Findings have revealed that in classrooms where these learning theories were understood
and pedagogies practiced, even more than academic success was present (Bhowik, Banerjee, &
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 53
Banerjee, 2013). These methodologies provide opportunities for all students to engage, to
receive close attention with the teacher and interaction, and to exist in a classroom where one’s
experiences, manners of speaking, and cultures are respected and integrated into the fabric of
learning. Each student is held to high expectations, each student holds themselves accountable,
and teachers have the standards of pedagogy to enhance learning. The data collected provides
evidence that student achievement is higher in classrooms where effective pedagogy via the Five
Standards is present (Entz, 2007).
English Language Development
EB students, in order to progress through the U.S. educational system, must acquire
English and yet are not able to access the English-taught curriculum without scaffolds and
supports. Highly skilled, knowledgeable and motivated instructional leaders and teachers must
engage in effective instructional practices and delivery of well-planned ELD lessons to bridge
the achievement and learning gaps for EB students. Olsen (2006) reported that a comprehensive
ELD program requires (a) actively developing all domains of language, (b) addressing varying
levels of English fluency, (c) developing academic English, (d) providing opportunities for
emergent bilingual students to engage with English proficient peer models, (e) a supportive
environment, and (f) recognizing the importance of primary language in transfer.
In 2006, the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth released
a long-awaited comprehensive synthesis of research on literacy attainment. It concluded that
approaches to reading and literacy that are effective with English-fluent students are not
sufficient for teaching language-minority students to read and write proficiently in English, and
that those approaches must be adjusted to have maximum benefit for language-minority students
(Olsen, 2006). EB students need a comprehensive ELD program, strategies to promote English
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 54
skills throughout the academic curriculum, and intentionally designed opportunities (Olsen,
2006).
In an effort to improve the educational achievement of EB students, California and its
school districts have adopted two major instructional policies; one is the adoption of the 2012
ELD standards and proficiency level descriptors (PLDs) and the other is the use of the ELA/ELD
Framework in 2014, to best provide instructional support in meeting the complex needs of EB
students. The California ELD Standards are to serve as a benchmark of progress towards
English language acquisition and proficiency in all four domains: listening, reading, speaking
and writing. The standards are also organized into three levels of fluency: emerging, expanding,
and bridging and operate as the PLDs (CDE, 2014). ELD standards and lesson designs amplify
disciplinary areas with intentional language use. EB students must have purpose for using
language (social function), know how to use it meaningfully (metalinguistic) and know how to
access resources to be knowledgeable of language in order to be precise with language use to
convey exact meaning. ELD focuses on the integration of listening, reading, speaking and
writing so that EB students can build proficiency in English. Intentional ELD lesson designs are
critical for accelerating students academically and linguistically. With the shift of the Common
Core State Standards, every teacher is called to be a teacher of language and literacies for all
students, including EB students, so that they can engage in disciplinary ways in their classes.
There is a pivotal role for educators working with EB students to develop their initial English
language skills, both social and academic, in “deep, generative, and accelerate ways” (CDE,
2014, p. 2).
Actively developing all domains of language. EB students need structured
opportunities to learn, engage, and use English in all four domains of language: listening,
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 55
reading, speaking and writing. A strong foundation and development in each domain strengthens
the others (Walqui, 2012). In order to become an effective communicator one needs to be
proficient in each of the four language skills. These four skills give learners opportunities to
create contexts in which to use the language for exchange of real information, evidence of proof
of learning and confidence. Listening and reading are receptive skills, they receive and
understand it. Whereas the productive skills are speaking and writing, given learners are
applying these skills in a need to produce language. When a teacher makes use of activities that
have been specially designed to incorporate several language skills simultaneously (such as
listening, reading, speaking and writing), they provide their students with situations that allow
for well-rounded development and progress in all areas of language learning (Sadiku, 2015).
With these four skills addressed while learning English, the learner will develop the needed
communication skills to thrive within today and tomorrow’s competitive world.
Addressing varying levels of English fluency. EB students vary in their mastery of
English. Some have had no prior exposure to English, while for others, the sounds, words and
communicative formats of English are truly foreign to them. Others may have been born in the
United States, exposed to English from an early age through family and have some fluency. All
are in the process of learning the language. Along the continuum from non-English proficiency
to fully English proficient, students have different needs. Quality ELD differentiates curriculum
and instruction by the English fluency level of the student, and provides students with the
specific skill development and scaffolding needed to move to the next level of English fluency
(CDE, 2014). Learning academic English is one reliable way, research has shown, of attaining
socio-economic success in the U.S. today. Therefore, addressing students’ progression of BICS
to CALP is important. Often, many second language learners may acquire the social language to
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 56
communicate with peers, but lack in their command of academic English. The variety of English
entails the complex features of English required for success in public schooling and career
advancement. It involves mastery of a writing system with particular academic conventions as
well as proficiency in the four domains. However, deliberate attention on developing academic
English has often been ignored or under-emphasized in instruction. Addressing the importance
of both BICS and CALP within school and community settings is a part of attending to the
developing levels of English proficiency and is an underpinning to future academic success
(Cummins, 1999).
Developing age-appropriate and context-appropriate language, with an
emphasis on academic English. The new standards, including Common Core State Standards
in ELA and Mathematics as well as Next Generation Science Standards, signal a fundamental
upward shift in the knowledge, skills, and abilities that students must develop in order to be
college- and career-ready in the 21st century. Nowhere is this shift more obvious than in the
sophisticated language competencies students will need. While previous standards were largely
silent on the kinds of language competencies students need to perform in academic subject areas,
the new standards make them explicit. The standards find a view of language proficiency far
beyond vocabulary, control of grammatical forms and native-like fluency. They call for high
levels of cognitive engagement, metacognitive skill, and academic discourse within the
disciplines. Just as these competencies cannot be developed using a traditional subject matter
transfer, neither can they be fostered with a language pedagogy that values accuracy and
correctness at the expense of meaning-making and communication (U.S. Department of
Education, 2014). Per the U.S. Department of Education (2014), language fluency is defined by
the purposes of communication and the context in which language is used. What is considered
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 57
English fluency for a 5-year-old on the playground is different from the English fluency expected
of a teenager in a history debate. ELD should be geared towards the grade and age level of the
student, and include an emphasis on academic English as well as social language. Students
cannot succeed in academic curriculum unless teachers integrate ELD strategies for reading,
writing, vocabulary, and discourse into the teaching of academic content. To do this, teachers
must be knowledgeable about the processes and practices of second language acquisition.
Teachers need to identify the language demands of the content they are teaching, identify key
vocabulary, define the kind of reading or writing skills or listening and speaking tasks that will
be required, and then systematically teach that academic language (Fillmore & Snow, 2000).
There are clear differences in acquisition and developmental patterns between
conversational language and academic language, or BICS and CALP. Mastering academic
language is a challenge for all students, and yet research shows that it is especially challenging
for students with limited exposure to that language outside of school. For emergent bilingual
students, under-developed CALP are largely responsible for poor reading comprehension, a
keystone in mastering any content, and it has been shown to be a major contributor to
achievement gaps between ELs and English-proficient students (Cummins, 1999).
Providing opportunities to engage with English proficient peer models. EB students
need to interact regularly with students and teachers who are good English-language role models,
so they hear the language used in daily life (August & Hakuta, 1997). If students have to use
English to work together for authentic learning tasks (as well as social interactions) they become
more motivated to learn the language. Attention must be paid both to the need to group students
by language fluency for targeted instruction, and to create time and mechanisms through which
EB students interact with English proficient peer models (Walqui, 2012).
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 58
A supportive learning environment for language learning. A safe, effective
environment in classrooms and on the school campus enables EB students to take risks to use
and develop their new language. EB students are commonly misunderstood, laughed at, or not
responded to because they speak English with an accent or incorrectly. These experiences exert a
powerful influence on how well and how quickly students learn English. Teachers need to
establish norms of inclusion and respect in the classroom, and use instructional strategies that
enable an EB student to participate. One example is to employ extended wait time after asking an
intentional question, giving an EB student an opportunity to find the words and construct their
response. Cooperative learning strategies support positive social interactions, a sense of
community in the classroom, and promote English use, as students communicate with each other
to complete their assignments (Kagan, 1989). While other scaffolds such as realia, picture file
cards, gestures, the chunking of information, the use of color-coding within instruction, and
patterns assist in making content comprehensible and ease in risk-taking in the language learning
process (Walqui, 2012). Additional scaffolds, such as language stems or frames and content or
language objectives supports meaningful interactions to occur. Krashen (1982) states that three
core elements are needed to learning a second language, (a) a comfortable learning environment
with a low threshold for anxiety, (b) meaningful tasks that purposely engaged in students to learn
how to listen, read, speak and write, and (c) engagement in tasks that are just a bit beyond the
students’ current ability. In a genuinely supportive learning environment, every student feels
valued, included, and empowered. Each student needs to know that their story matters. For
teachers and principals, this means listening and taking the time to learn about each student. A
supportive learning environment is more than the tangible environmental structures of a room,
but the belief systems and values that are exuded in what is prioritized, how students are
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 59
encouraged to take risks and create a low-affective filter, and encouraging productive
relationships to be developed (Kagan, 1989).
Providing opportunities to engage with English proficient peer models. EB students
need to interact regularly with students and teachers who are good English-language role models,
so they hear the language used in daily life (August & Hakuta, 1997). If students have to use
English to work together for authentic learning tasks (as well as social interactions) they become
more motivated to learn the language. Attention must be paid both to the need to group students
by language fluency for targeted instruction, and to create time and mechanisms through which
EB students interact with English proficient peer models (Walqui, 2012).
Recognizes the role of primary-language development. Literacy skills are not
language specific; they can be learned in one language and transferred to another language,
drawing upon a common cognitive base (Garcia, 2008). EB students enroll in schools with a
home language that should be developed and built upon as a foundation for literacy in English. It
is easier and more efficient to learn to read and write in one’s strongest language because the oral
foundation and vocabulary already exist. The National Literacy Panel on Language Minority
Children and Youth concluded that oral proficiency and literacy in the first language facilitates
literacy development in English (Walqui, 2012). James Cummins (1981), explored the effective
use of primary language in transference to reaching higher levels of English proficiency but also
the role primary language holds in perceptions of identity and value. The importance of primary
language has been linked to several important outcomes: (a) sustaining a child’s first language is
critical to their identity, (b) when the native language is not maintained, important links to family
and community are lost, (c) students who cultivate their primary language are connected to
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 60
higher academic achievement, and (d) have better employment opportunities (Cummins, 1981).
The role of primary language in students’ learning cannot be understated.
Instructional Leadership: A Principal’s Role
The educational field is increasingly clear that leaders play a key role in shaping and
improving learning. Questions remain about the size and nature of the effects of school leaders’
actions, but an empirical case has been made regarding the relationship between school
leadership and instruction (Elfers & Strikus, 2014). Inadequate teaching capacity along with
other schooling conditions creates serious equity challenges for leaders as they attempt to
provide direction and support for equitable and effective educational opportunities. Unless
schools can create a context where students are able to access grade-level content and engage in
learning environments that foster language learning, EB students’ prospects for advanced
schooling are extremely limited. Elfers and Strikus (2014) examined how leaders can create
systems of support for classroom teachers in their support of EB students. Through their
qualitative case study of four school districts serving emergent bilingual students, their findings
revealed that recent shifts in practice of instructional leaders point to the need for principals to be
focused on learning and their role in improved student achievement. The search for an
association between principal actions and student learning has shown that principals who focus
on instruction, foster community and trust through clear communication, have an understanding
of andragogy and develop structures of on-going instructional support can change instructional
practice (Elfers & Strikus, 2014).
Instructional Leadership
Principals, or site administrators, must take on diverse roles, and support themselves and
teachers with differing needs, developmental orientations, levels of experience, and preferences
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 61
to retain and support teachers under conditions of standards-based reform and increased
accountability. Principals must arrange K-12 teachers to prepare students to prosper in a global
knowledge economy. The demands of leading in the twenty-first century require important
changes across all levels of the school and district. There is a pressing need to support principals
in addressing these challenges so that they can cultivate schools to be learning focused. One
pathway to supporting principals is to develop how they might better support their teachers.
Nurturing principals as they enhance their capacities to be professional learning leaders, or adult
developers, holds great promise (Drago-Severson, 2007). Leadership supportive of adult
development makes schools better places of learning for children and youth, focusing on learning
as a priority.
This emphasis on learning and instruction has refocused the purpose of an instructional
leader and their impact on student outcomes. Instructional leadership differs from that of a
school principal or manager in a number of ways. Principals who pride themselves as
administrators usually are too preoccupied with managerial duties, while principals who are
instructional leaders involve themselves in setting clear goals, allocating resources to instruction,
managing the curriculum, monitoring lesson plans, and evaluating teachers (Jenkins, 2009). In
short, instructional leadership reflects those actions a principal takes to promote growth in
student learning. The instructional leader makes instructional quality the top priority of the
school and attempts to bring that vision into realization. Blasé and Blasé (2000) cite specific
behaviors of instructional leadership, such as making suggestions, giving feedback, modeling
effective instruction, soliciting opinions, supporting collaboration, providing professional
learning opportunities, and giving praise for effective teaching. Inherent in the concept of
instructional leadership is the notion that learning should be given top priority while everything
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 62
else revolves around the enhancement of learning. Instructional leaders need to know what is
going on in the classroom. Without this knowledge, they are unable to appreciate some of the
problems teachers and students encounter (Jenkins, 2009).
Within a study by Jenkins (2009), four skills surfaced as necessary for instructional
leaders in creating instructional change. Instructional leaders need to be instructional resources,
communicators, have a visible presence and have current knowledge and research-bases of
curriculum, instruction and assessment (Blase, 1999). Further research on the impacts of
instructional leaders on student outcomes through teacher development has been amplified by
Blasé and Blasé (1999). In having assessed 40 principals’ instructional effectiveness, those
noted as most effective had the qualities of an instructional leader.
Andragogy
One way to increase opportunity for EB students are for principals to build efficacy in
andragogy, adult learning theory, and work simultaneously at transformational and instructional
tasks. As an instructional leader, the principal seeks to elicit higher levels of commitment from
all school personnel and to develop organizational capacity for school improvement. As an
instructional leader, the administrator collaborates with teachers to accomplish organizational
goals for teaching and learning; engaging teachers in effective instructional practices through
professional learning and coaching (Marks & Printy, 2003). Such an orientation theoretically
encompasses everything an administrator does during the day to support the achievement of
students to learn and the ability of teachers to teach through learning best practices. Shifting the
focus of instruction from teaching to learning; forming collaborative structures and processes for
faculty to work together to improve instruction; and ensuring that professional learning is
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 63
ongoing and focused toward school goals are among the key tasks that principals must perform
to be effective instructional leaders (Lunenburg, 2010).
Knowles (1968) was the first to bring prominent attention to andragogy (adult learning
theory) and its role within education. In 1980, Knowles made five assumptions about
the characteristics of adult learners (andragogy) that are different from the assumptions about
child learners (pedagogy). Adult learners, Knowles (1968) postulated, hold the following
characteristics in the context of learning, they: (a) have a self-concept of being a self-directed
human being, (b) have accumulated a growing reservoir of experiences that operate as resources
for learning, (c) hold a readiness to learn that is associated with their social roles, (d) have an
orientation to learn that has shifted from subject-centered to problem-centered, and (e) have
developed internal motivation. Thus, the manner to which they learn and engage in meaningful
exchanges has shifted over time. Instructional leaders lead teachers in the development of their
instructional practices. However, many instructional leaders are unaware of the theories of
andragogy, and at times engage ineffectively in meeting the needs of their staff, employing
pedagogy versus the more appropriate methodologies of andragogy. Instructional leaders that
understand andragogy, apply these principles to adult professional learning and coaching.
Instructional leaders incorporate planning, reflection, and experience-based activities into their
professional learning, building relevancy through problem-based practices. Through an
understanding of the principles of andragogy, instructional leaders position themselves to have a
greater impact on student achievement through the work they engage in with their teachers
(Knowles, 1968). Table 2 reflects two researcher’s conceptualization of andragogy.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 64
Table 2
Tenets of Andragogy
Knowles (1984)

Arshavskiy (2013)
Adults need to be involved in the planning
and evaluation of their instruction.

Adults are internally motivated.
Experience (including mistakes) provides the
basis for learning activities.

Adults bring life experiences to new learning
situations.
Adults are most interested in learning subjects
that have immediate relevance and impact to
their job or personal life.

Adults are goal-oriented.
Adult learning is problem-centered rather than
content-oriented.
Adults are relevancy-oriented.
Adults are practical.

Adults like to be respected.

Professional Learning and Coaching
The most effective professional learning growth opportunities have topics that emerge
from teacher interests, require long-term commitments from all parties, and engage in clear
measurement and evaluation of goals and teaching targets (Knowles, 1968). Professional
learning is structured learning that results in changes in teacher practices and improvements in
student outcomes. Joyce and Showers (2003) revealed four key components of professional
learning within their studies. The first focuses on knowledge and consists of exploring the theory
or rationale for the new skills or strategies. Subsequently, they suggest, training needs to involve
modelling the new skills, ideally in a setting closely approximate to the workplace. The third
component is practice of the skill, estimating a substantial period of time (8-10 weeks, involving
25 trials) to ‘bring a teaching model of medium complexity under control.’ Finally, peer
coaching is the collaborative work of teachers in planning and developing the lessons and
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 65
materials to implement the training effectively (Joyce & Showers, 2003). Teachers learn to
acquire new skills through these steps and through persistence, acknowledgement of the transfer
problem, teaching new behaviors to students, understanding the importance of the underlying
theory, proactive and productive use of peers and flexibility (Joyce & Showers, 2003).
OCDE Project GLAD® (Guided Language Acquisition Design)
The OCDE (Orange County Department of Education) Project GLAD® (Guided
Language Acquisition Design) model began in the classrooms of educators in Fountain Valley
School District in Orange County in the 1980’s. Faced with increasing student diversity from
across the globe, many refugees, educators supporting EB students in Fountain Valley School
District were tasked to engage with the leading researchers of the time to develop a methodology
to attend to the needs of this diverse group and understand the nonlinear and complex nature of
language acquisition. Through studying Cummins, Krashen, Piaget, Lily Wong Fillmore, Kagan
and Collier & Thomas to name a few, a conceptual framework of how to teach rigorous content
with academic language for EB students emerged, Project GLAD. Absent of standardized
assessments for English proficiency and ELD standards at that time, the model became a
gateway for transformational practice for EB students in California. Having obtained success in
rapidly closing the linguistic gaps and building English proficiency through the content areas,
Fountain Valley SD’s Project GLAD model was recognized for the “Academic Excellence”
Award by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Bilingual Education and Minority
Language Affairs (OBEMLA) in 1998. This was followed by recognition as a model reform
program by California Department of Education (CDE), identified as a training model for
multiple Achieving Schools and Distinguished School award winners, recommended as a K-8
project by the California State Superintendent of Schools for teachers of English learners and
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 66
highlighted as a “Best Practices” program for Title III professional development by CDE. In
November 2017, the OCDE Project GLAD® model was also awarded the California School
Board Association (CSBA) Golden Bell Award. A state-wide testimony to the model’s impact
on closing the achievement gap for EB students. Having received both a national and state grant
to disseminate the model’s methodology, the National Training Center was formed at the Orange
County Department of Education (OCDE) to support that effort. Currently, OCDE owns the
trademarks and registrations for the model, supporting the national and local efforts to share this
work for systematized change within educational settings. Now, the model has reached 34 states
across the United States, has two Regional Training Centers in Washington and New Mexico,
and has over 500 trainers and growing, supporting this work nationally. Having recently
partnered with California Association of Bilingual Education (CABE), the model has now gone
international in efforts to support the students California shares with Mexico.
OCDE Project GLAD® is a rigorous professional learning model based on a collection of
research-based, effective classroom strategies designed to meet the needs of EB students. It
focuses on an integrated approach, aimed at supporting language acquisition and proficiency in
grade level content standards. The model is organized around six component areas: Focus and
Motivation, (Comprehensible) Input, Guided Oral Practice, Reading and Writing, Extended
Activities for Integration, and Assessment and Feedback, contextualized in culturally and
linguistically responsive teaching and learning (OCDE, 2015). The model’s design is based off
the research of the Joyce and Showers (2003) framework and builds the needed skills for
teachers and implementers to have depth in learning theory, the rationale of best instructional
practices for EB students and the strategies to know how to measure academic and linguistic
progress.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 67
For over 20 years, OCDE Project GLAD® NTC has provided exemplary training for
educators both nationally and now internationally resulting in students’ access to quality
instruction through intentional language instruction and high-levels of success. The model
enhances teachers’ design and delivery of standards-based instruction through an integrated
approach with the intent of building language proficiency and academic comprehension. OCDE
Project GLAD® classrooms promote an environment that respects and honors each child’s voice,
personal life experience, beliefs and values their culture. The goal of the NTC is to support
Local Educational Agencies (LEAs) in building sustainable implementation structures to meet
the needs of EB students through the development of trainers and systems of continuous
improvement through Regional Training Centers. Trainers from across the nation report
evidence of student impact from high levels of engagement, declining truancy, increased
reclassification rates, sustaining growth in SBAC scores, to teacher evidence of growth in self-
efficacy, knowledge and skills in how to best attend to the needs of EB students, and refined
integrated and designated ELD lessons. The NTC, focused on systems change and sustainability,
is responsible for research, development, refinement of the model, growth and educational
reform. The NTC is diligent in remaining responsive to the needs of students and school
systems.
Instructional Leaders’ Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences
The focus on knowledge and skills, motivation and organizational influences on
stakeholder and ultimately, organizational performance, derives from the work of Clark and
Estes (2008). Any gaps in knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational influences or
root causes of performance gaps can then be addressed by knowledge and skill modifications and
motivational adjustments. In increasing knowledge, skills and motivation, and focusing these
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 68
skills on organizational goals, performance gaps will be addressed and assets needed to attend to
EB students determined (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Instructional leaders’ ability to influence the academic progress of EB students through
supporting teachers’ implementation of high leverage strategies can close opportunity and
achievement gaps for these students as well. The knowledge, motivation and organizational
influences related to instructional leaders’ capacity to train and support teachers in best practices
to support universal access, like OCDE Project GLAD® model’s strategies will be examined.
Additionally, instructional leaders’ methods of professional learning, coaching, alongside their
skills in implementing adult learning theory (andragogy) will be evaluated.
Knowledge and Skills
In order to evaluate instructional leaders’ knowledge and skills related to increasing
opportunities and achievement for EB students, Krathwohl’s (2002) categorization of knowledge
will be used. Factual knowledge is basic knowledge of facts specific to domains, contexts or
disciplines. Krathwohl (2002) suggested that recalling, recognizing, and remembering are the
cognitive functions associated with factual knowledge. Knowledge of categories, principles,
theories, structures and generalizations is conceptual knowledge. Factual information is
foundational in building a macro-oriented perspective that conceptual knowledge fosters when
analyzing how complex systems work together, comparing and contrasting and forming higher-
order thinking skills. When procedural knowledge is cultivated, learners are able to apply their
knowledge in the context of practice. A critical knowledge type that is often overlooked is
metacognitive knowledge, which refers to a learner’s self-awareness of their own cognitive
learning processes and the skill to control and act upon it. According to Krathwohl (2002),
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 69
having metacognitive knowledge allows learners to consider contextual and conditional aspects
of given activities that can generate strategic behaviors in solving problems.
Instructional leaders, according to research, are the second most impactful influencer in
student achievement after teachers, and are a necessary stakeholder to study; they need to know
how to accomplish the performance goals of their organization and anticipate future needs.
Having the right knowledge and skill-set will assist in navigating through potential hurdles and
determining innovative solutions. However, the ramifications of instructional leaders having
gaps in knowledge and skills pertaining to meeting the needs of EB students have long-standing
consequences, from declining academics, students remaining classified an EL and progressing to
a LTEL status, to not gaining access to A-G subject requirements in High School representative
of obtaining a breadth of general knowledge for advanced study in University of California
systems. Understanding the OCDE Project GLAD® model’s research and theories on second
language acquisition, EL typologies, the role of cultural proficiency in instruction and the
manner to which intentional planning for effective strategies that meet the needs for EB students
is critical in closing the opportunity and achievement gaps faced by EB students. Yet, conceptual
knowledge of the model is but one factor, instructional leaders also must understand how to
provide procedural support for effective implementation, have the skills to implement adult
learning theory to support teachers and develop the metacognitive skills to reflect on the
effectiveness of these processes and adjust accordingly, supplying teachers with the skills of self-
reflection.
Knowledge of emergent bilingual student typologies. In order to provide teachers the
appropriate coaching on how to best support the various EL student typologies in one’s
classroom, an instructional leader must have a conceptual understanding of what these typologies
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 70
imply and build relationships with teachers, students and families. Seeking to understand an EB
students’ background and the experiences and potential tribulations they have faced, will best
support an instructional leader in determining what resources or services a teacher may need to
best instruct emergent bilingual students. Previous access to formal schooling, interrupted or
consecutive schooling, level of native/primary language literacy, and whether the student is a
newcomer, newcomer refugee or has been within U.S. schools for longer periods of time all
require a different skill-set in instructing and lesson delivery (Freeman, Freeman, & Mercuri,
2002). Table 3 represents the EL typologies and the definitions of each, per California
Department of Education’s (CDE’s) California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress
(CAASPP) Institute.
Table 3
English Learner Typologies
Typology Description
Native U.S.-born ELs ELs who are U.S. born citizens.

Foreign- born ELs ELs who are born outside of the U.S.

Newcomer ELs ELs who have been in the U.S. for 1 or 2 years

Highly-Schooled ELs ELs who have been in the U.S. for 1 to 2 years, but who
attained a high quality education in their primary language

Students with interrupted
formal schooling
Students who had limited to no access to school in their home
country or whose education was interrupted.

Transnational ELs ELs who frequently travel between the U.S. and their home
country.

Long-Term English
Learners (LTELs)
Students who remain classified as EL for 5 years or longer.

Reclassified Fluent English
Language Proficient
Learners (RFEP)

Former ELs who have met their state’s linguistic and academic
criteria to be reclassified as fluent English proficient and exited
from EL programs.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 71
As an instructional leader builds knowledge on the various profiles or typologies of EB
students, makes decisions on what professional learning experiences teachers should have
exposure (such as the implementation of the OCDE Project GLAD® model), or what books or
curriculum should be adopted that may best reflect a students’ culture, social emotional training
or trauma training to best support teachers in their support of refugee students, or how to
systematically increase academic language for LTELs in secondary settings. Within an
instructional leaders’ coaching, one could intentionally target the specific need of the typologies
present in the classroom and engage in coaching conversations that specifically attend to their
progress, analyzing improvement, determining gaps and modifying instruction using the OCDE
Project GLAD® strategies. In deepening one’s conceptual knowledge of the OCDE Project
GLAD® model and its strategies, instructional leaders would be more equipped to attend to the
complex and dynamic needs of EB students by equipping teachers through coaching and on-
going professional learning. In doing so, instructional leaders can begin to strategically attend to
closing the opportunity and achievement gaps and prevent systemic inequity.
Understanding the OCDE Project GLAD® model and strategies. Instructional
leaders’ understanding, of the OCDE Project GLAD® model and strategies for meeting the
needs of EB students can assist in the organizational goal of increasing their academic progress
and the rate of reclassification annually. As instructional leaders understand the conceptual
rationale and research behind each of the component areas within the model, they can support
their teachers in better designing lessons and tasks that meet the various EB student typologies
that may be present in their classrooms. Through a comprehensive understanding of this model,
recognizing the strategies and practices that best support EB students and expecting and
inspecting usage of these strategies, instructional leaders can support their teachers in meeting
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 72
the cognitive, linguistic and emotional needs of all students, providing universal access, which
are vital for EB student populations. This study will analyze how degrees of knowledge of the
model supports in instructional implementation of the strategies by teachers.
Understanding andragogy and knowing how to convert theory into practice. In
addition to the conceptual understanding of EB typologies and how to best support the distinct
needs of each typology using the OCDE Project GLAD® model, instructional leaders need to
know the concepts of andragogy, adult learning theory, to be able to best provide effective
professional learning, coaching, planning and assessment support for their teachers.
Implementing andragogy learning processes would support instructional leaders constructing
professional learning and coaching experiences that involve teachers in the planning and
evaluation of their instruction, building off their experiences (both positive and negative) in
learning activities, ensuring that the practices have immediate relevance and impact, and are
problem-centered versus content-centered (Knowles, 1984). In best understanding the concepts
of andragogy, instructional leaders could emphasize transfer of knowledge to instructional
practices more succinctly, using the self-concepts, readiness to learn, and motivation to learn
found within adult learners.
Coaching, per Joyce and Showers (2003), is critical in implementing innovations and
attaining the desired outcomes from andragogy. Evidence that coaching contributes to increased
implementation of strategies, intentional lesson design, and reflective practices by teachers is
seen in the following key outcomes: (a) practicing of new strategies more often and with greater
skill than uncoached educators with identical initial training, (b) adapting strategies more
appropriately to their own goals and context than did uncoached teachers who tended to practice
observed or demonstrated lessons, (c) retaining and increasing skill over time- uncoached
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 73
teachers did not, (d) are more likely to explain the new models of teaching to their students,
ensuring that students understood the purpose of their strategy and the behaviors expected of
them, and lastly (e) demonstrating a clearer understanding of the purposes and use of the new
strategies. Frequent coaching and peer discussions, including lessons and materials design,
enable educators to ‘think’ with the strategies in ways which uncoached teachers never showed,
reflective of the development of metacognitive knowledge (Joyce & Showers, 2003). Within the
OCDE Project GLAD® model are three phases of implementation to increase knowledge and
implementation of the strategies: a 2-Day Research and Theory Workshop, a 4-or 5-Day
Classroom Demonstration in which strategies are modeled with students while teachers receive
coaching while observing, and lastly on-going customized training and support, either by a
trainer in the model or instructional leader. This structure provides an opportunity for andragogy
within coaching to be applied. This study will probe into the degree to which understanding
andragogy by instructional leaders is a need and has shifted instructional practices of teachers to
better meet the needs of EB students through the use of the OCDE Project GLAD® model’s
strategies. In better understanding andragogy, instructional leaders will have the skills to better
engage in implementation of the OCDE Project GLAD® model and support teachers in building
the skill- sets to measure progress, develop timelines and criteria.
Ability to self-reflect and adjust implementation strategies. A culture of reflective
practice and critical reflection is essential for effective instructional leadership, improvement of
instructional practice by teachers and the sharing of power and responsibility (Blasé & Blasé,
1999). Supporting the needs of EB students involves strategic and intentional lesson designing,
utilizing scaffolds and understanding when to gradually release such supports to build students’
independent thought. Teaching involves complex choices about difficult problems, if left
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 74
unaddressed, can escalate or evolve into perpetuating or systemic inequities. Instructional
leaders, in return must utilize a different type of thinking to support teachers in addressing such
choices. Complex decisions require instructional leaders to engage in sophisticated reflection
and build this skill-set within each teacher. Expert teachers’ teaching is characterized by an
intentional competence that enables them to replicate best practices and strategies and avoid
ineffective but often habitual practices (Lambert, 2003). As instructional leaders operate as
mentors and guides, teachers can grow their ability to reflect, and know not only what to do, but
the rationale behind why strategies are effective in meeting the needs of EB students. In the
1970s, Lortie (1975) described how “failing to reflect on teaching decisions leads to teaching by
imitation rather than intentionality” (p.238). People who enter the teaching profession have
already gone through 16 years of “apprenticeship of observation” (p. 245) as students themselves
and have developed preconceived ideas of what teaching is through having watched others do it.
As students, they recall what teachers did instructionally but do not have a grasp on why they
chose to engage in such practices, and often repeat without comprehension.
Instructional leaders can support the development of reflective thinking within teachers to
effectively make decisions about instructional practices. Instructional leaders, within coaching
sessions, can model suspending judgement and avoid jumping to conclusions, and instead
develop the craft of posing questions that support data driven solutions, listen analytically and
focus on key information that helps clarify what needs to be explored. Instructional leaders need
the knowledge and skills to know how to pose questions that lead teachers in asking themselves
productive questions, consider all potential reasons of the dilemma at hand, and guide in teachers
generating their own solutions. Instructional leaders that are themselves reflective, and model
these skills, can structure collaborative opportunities or networks for teachers to engage in these
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 75
coaching sessions collaboratively, can support in drafting plans to implement change and
schedule follow-up sessions focused on teachers posing questions of themselves about their own
practice. Research (Danielson & McGreal, 2000; Glickman, 2002) validates the role of an
effective principal in developing teachers’ reflective skills as a part of their professional growth.
Self-reflection prompts deep, deliberate and dialectical thinking, offering instructional
leaders an opportunity to think about what works and why (Danielson, 2009). Using reflective
practices provides leaders an avenue to analyze and assess one’s own practice and focus on
effective practices that yield the desired outcomes. It is through this metacognitive practice of
thinking about one’s own thinking that performance gaps could be best attended. Being
metacognitively aware will enable instructional leaders to influence the academic progress of EB
students through supporting teachers’ implementation of high leverage strategies, reflecting and
adapting practice to close opportunity and achievement gaps (Constantino & De Lorenzo, 2001).
However, to break the systemic inequities found in educational settings, practicing critical
reflection (a sub-set of self-reflection) is also imperative. Larrivee (2000) speaks to the
importance of developing as a critically reflective teacher and leader encompasses both the
capacity for critical reflection and self-reflection. Critical reflection involves the conscious
consideration of the moral and ethical implications and consequences of classroom practices on
students, often analyzing where the power lies. Critical reflection involves examination of
personal and professional belief systems, as well as the deliberate consideration of the ethical
implications and impact of practices- posing whether or not one’s practices are furthering
inequities or breaking them down. As an instructional and transformative leader, one must
model critical reflection in efforts to address and break the widening achievement and
opportunity gaps (Larrivee, 2000).
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 76
Table 4 presents the assumed knowledge influences of instructional leaders supporting
the needs of EB students, categorized by the knowledge types below.
Table 4
Assumed Knowledge Influences
Knowledge Types Assumed Knowledge Influences
Conceptual Instructional leaders need to know the different typologies of EB
students.

Conceptual

Conceptual
Instructional leaders need to understand the OCDE Project
GLAD® model and strategies for meeting the needs of EB
students.

Instructional leaders need to comprehend concepts of andragogy
(building internal motivation, bridging life experiences, goal-
oriented, relevancy-oriented, respect and practicality) to be able to
provide effective professional learning experiences.

Procedural Instructional leaders need to know how to implement the OCDE
Project GLAD® model, using modeling, time for practice,
coaching, mentoring, reflection and feedback.

Metacognitive Instructional leaders need critical reflective practices to pose
questions regarding meeting the needs of emergent bilingual
students.

Motivation
In addition to the knowledge and skills required by instructional leaders to meet the needs
of EB students, analyzing and evaluating motivational factors provides a window into current
performance gaps, the root causes of these gaps and the assets needed to lead instructional shifts.
Motivation refers to the personal investment that an individual has in reaching a desired state or
outcome and is the product of the interaction between people and their environment (Clark &
Estes, 2008), while Pintrich (2003) refers to motivation as “the process whereby goal-directed
activity is instigated and sustained” (p. 667). Clark and Estes (2008) asserted that
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 77
motivation influences three very critical aspects of our work and private lives- first,
choosing to work towards a goal; second, persisting at it until it is achieved; and third,
how much mental effort we invest to get the job done. (p. 44)
These motivated behaviors are influenced by sociocultural, internal and environmental
factors, in which internal factors will be the focus of this section. Eccles (2007) explains
motivation in school achievement and the perceived value of learning to four factors: intrinsic,
utility, attainment value and the cost of engaging in the task, further explained below. These
psychological factors are important when analyzing the motivations of instructional leaders in
the pursuit of supporting EB students. Reviewing literature that focuses on motivation-related
influences relevant to instructional leaders’ value of bridging the opportunity and achievement
gaps for EB students through professional learning and coaching of teachers will provide insights
as to the reasons behind the gaps. This study will focus on the self-efficacy and values of the
instructional leaders providing professional learning and coaching.
Self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is the evaluation of one’s abilities or skills to successfully
complete specific tasks. Bandura and Adams (1977) shared that individuals derive task-specific
beliefs about self-efficacy from previous performance on a task, observing others perform the
same task, social messages received from others about one’s ability to do or not do a task, and
one’s psychological and emotional states. Rueda (2011) makes reference to individuals with
higher self-efficacy having a greater belief in their own competencies and thus, having higher
expectancies for more positive outcomes. Efficacious individuals will frequently be more
productive and motivated to engage in, persist at, and work harder at a task (Rueda, 2011).
Instructional leaders’ self-efficacy to train and coach teachers. Instructional leaders
need to believe they are capable of effectively training and coaching teachers using the tenants of
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 78
andragogy and to implement the OCDE Project GLAD® model. Additionally, instructional
leaders must have confidence in employing structures of support for sustaining practice, such as
professional learning communities, cycles of continuous improvement, and leadership teams.
Instructional leaders’ ability to respond to the social and academic needs of growing numbers of
culturally and linguistically diverse students is pressing and significant gaps exist between the
possible and current levels of achievement of EB students as well (Elfers & Stritikus, 2014).
Instructional leaders today are faced with an enormous responsibility to address the gaps and
strive to lead effectively in the context of multifaceted educational challenges. Research has
shown that principals often lack the confidence in knowing how to coach teachers in adapting to
the daily struggles of a changing classroom environment (Drago-Severson, 2007). Self-efficacy,
as Eccles (2007) describes, is a strong predictor of individual performance. In order for
instructional leaders to effectively engage in providing professional learning on high impact
strategies to support language development in various curricular areas and ultimately, to
increasing academic progress and reclassification annually for EB students, they need to feel
confident in their ability to do so.
Expectancy value theory. What one values, or the importance, usefulness or worth of
something, are strong motivators in performance. According to expectancy value theory (Eccles,
2007), value as a critical motivational factor, has four different dimensions: (a) intrinsic interest,
(b) attainment value, (c) utility value, and (d) the perceived cost of engaging in the activity.
Intrinsic interest is the enjoyment expected while engaging in a task, whereas attainment value is
the extent to which engaging in a task is consistent with an individual’s identity. Utility value
refers to the long range goals associated with the tasks, while the cost of a task refers to the
perception of whether the time and effort spent on the task is beneficial (Ambrose, Bridges, &
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 79
Lovett, 2010). Within utility value, one would see practitioners, with limited time and resources,
still preparing for universal access practices, differentiated instruction for EB students, and
creating an inclusive environment, as found within the OCDE Project GLAD® model. In the
context of this study, the value dimension that is most relevant is utility value.
Instructional leaders’ value for implementing best practices. In order for
instructional leaders to engage in professional learning and coaching for EB students well, they
need to see the value and urgency of teachers, in all content areas, in all grade levels,
intentionally implementing strategies within integrated and designated ELD lessons, using
language within the context of grade level content (OCDE Project GLAD®) versus teaching
language in isolation or not at all. It is imperative that instructional leaders recognize every
teacher as a teacher of language and responsible for meeting the needs of EB students for the
prevailing gaps to be remedied. Often, EB students do not have access to appropriate
curriculum, materials or teachers that intentionally utilize strategies and scaffolds to increase
comprehension and access to rigorous, relevant content and curriculum but instead gain access to
a watered-down curriculum unreflective of the expectations of one’s grade level (Elfers &
Stritikus, 2014). As a manifestation of utility value, instructional leaders need to fully language
instruction and the OCDE Project GLAD® model’s impact on EB students, prioritizing
professional learning and coaching of language development.
Table 5 presents the assumed motivational influences of instructional leaders.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 80
Table 5
Assumed Motivation Influences
Motivation Construct Assumed Motivation Influences

Self-Efficacy

Instructional leaders need to believe they can affect
instructional change in teachers.

Self-Efficacy Instructional leaders need to believe they are capable of
effectively supporting the implementation of the OCDE
Project GLAD® model in increasing achievement for
emergent bilingual students.

Expectancy Value Theory- Utility
Value
Instructional leaders need to see the value of teachers
implementing OCDE Project GLAD® strategies for
language development as a method of addressing the
prevalent opportunity and achievement gaps, in spite of
limited time and resources.

Organizational Influences
In addition to considering how knowledge and motivation gaps can impact performance
goals, it is necessary to look at the third component of Clark and Estes’ gap analysis,
organizational influences (Rueda, 2011). Individuals equipped with the requisite knowledge and
motivation need the support of the organization to achieve the organizational goals, in this
context, school site instructional leaders need the support of district instructional coaches to best
engage in supporting teachers in teaching EB students. Even for the most knowledgeable,
skillful and motivated individuals, inadequate processes and materials within an organization can
prevent the achievement of performance goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). When organizations
diagnose an organizational barrier as a root cause of a performance problem, it is typically a
work process, material resource, or a cultural issue. Within this study, organizational culture will
be closely analyzed to best understand instructional leaders’ role within CSESD and the ways in
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 81
which they sculpt opportunities for professional learning and coaching to enhance EB students’
educational experiences.
Rueda (2011) describes organizational culture through cultural models and cultural
settings. Cultural models are “the shared mental schemas or normative understandings of how
the world works, or ought to work” (p. 55), whereas cultural settings can be considered as the
visible aspects of an organization’s culture (Rueda, 2011). Organizations positioned for
sustainable performance improvement understand their organization’s cultural models and
settings and thus, why they need to improve their work processes. Having a strong feedback
loop to monitor the impact of improvement efforts builds understanding on what changes they
can implement to improve their processes. It is imperative to consider organizational influences
when analyzing the root causes of gaps in performance (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Organizational cultural models. Per Rueda (2011), cultural models can include group
norms, espoused values, shared meaning, linguistic paradigms, philosophies, embedded skills,
habits of thinking, rituals and celebrations, and symbols, to name a few. Particularly pertinent
within this study is how organizational cultural models are exhibited through the shared meaning
of who EB students are and the urgency in which to provide services, perceptions of EB
student’s capacities and where the responsibility lies in ensuring the closing of their opportunity
and achievement gaps. Cultural models are perceivably the most influential aspects of an
organization, but are frequently intangible and dynamic, changing over time as environmental
factors shift. CSESD’s role in cultivating an asset-based mindset and shared responsibility of all
instructional leaders at school sites in meeting the needs of EB students cannot be understated,
however, equally important is the development of systematic plans for instructional leadership
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 82
training and setting an explicit priority of utilizing the OCDE Project GLAD® model’s strategies
in attendance to the urgent need to bridge the gaps for these students.
Cultivation of asset-based mindsets. The district’s Instructional Services and Supports
Division, specifically the instructional coaches of the Language Acquisition and Development
Office, need to cultivate a culture reflective of an asset-based mindset regarding EB students. In
order to create equitable classrooms and schools, the district needs to continuously strive for
social justice, access, and equity, modeling the belief that all students are asset-rich and can
contribute to the district’s culture and the community. This requires District leaders to adopt a
stance of inquiry toward instruction and to engage in ongoing, collaborative discussions with
their district colleagues and school site instructional leaders about challenging issues, including
race, culture, language, and equity, holding the belief that all students come to the classrooms
with assets as opposed to with deficits. Culturally and linguistically sustaining practices and
equity-focused approaches emphasize validating and valuing students’ cultural and linguistic
heritage, and all other aspects of students’ identities, while also ensuring their full development
of academic English and their ability to engage meaningfully in a range of academic contexts
across the disciplines (McIntyre, et al., 2011). Evaluating the role of asset-based mindsets in
increasing EB students’ English proficiency and reclassification rates will provide meaningful
information on how the organizational performance goals of this district are obtained.
In cultivating an asset-based mindset throughout the district, and schools, an individual or
populous can begin to critically reflect, suspending judgement, on what might be at the root of
issues plaguing one’s environment. The development of an asset-based mindset could promote a
growth mindset that proves accepting of the deep analysis of root causes without placing blame.
This theory is known as double-loop learning, a learning process focusing on attention on root
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 83
causes and the changes that need to be made to the beliefs, values, attitudes, and practices of
individuals. This looking inward within an organization and its people creates a space to analyze
ways in which inequalities may surface. This is in contrast to single-loop learning that focuses
on re-establishing stability by enacting solutions, corrections or eliminating perceivable errors.
Single loop thinking solutions result in a focus on external factors influencing a situation, leaving
beliefs, values and norms intact, perpetuating further potential underlying issues (Bensimon,
2005).
Promotion of shared responsibility. In addition to fostering an asset-based mindset and
double-loop learning, the district also needs to develop a culture of shared responsibility in
attending to the needs of EB students and the systems to sustain it. The term shared
responsibility describes the mind-set that all educators must see themselves as equal stakeholders
who must strive to positively influence the education (Fenner, 2014) of EB students in
classrooms across the district. In many organizational settings, however, the perception is that
those identified as the ELD Coordinator, Director, or expert are ultimately responsible for
meeting the needs of the EB student versus the classroom teacher, relinquishing responsibility
and dismantling shared responsibility. All district stakeholders who impact EB students’ lives
have an influence on the education and trajectory of each student. An important focus in creating
shared responsibility is developing empathy for the EB student experience, bearing in mind that
they are not a monolithic group, and each EB student’s academic experience is different. District
personnel can promote the sense of shared responsibility by showing behaviors of caring,
outreach to both students and families, taking time to attend to and understand the families of EB
students and modeling empathy (Fenner, 2014).
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 84
Organizational cultural settings. Often, it is through the cultural settings, that one can
infer the cultural models and mores. It is in the cultural settings that the how, who, what, where,
when, and why of the routines that constitute everyday activities become visible, “while cultural
settings can impact behavior, cultural settings are also shaped by individuals and groups- who
operate with cultural models that impact their own behavior” (Rueda, 2011, p. 57). The districts’
role in establishing infrastructures that creates new norms of practice centered on learning,
designing systematic plans for instructional leadership training and creating the urgency to
change instruction will be analyzed, as well as the district’s prioritization of the use of the OCDE
Project GLAD® model’s strategies.
Establishing infrastructures that create new norms of practice. Tossing aside district
standard operating procedures and jolting the status quo are often needed steps in building
infrastructures for learning when systemic inequities have been present, identifying systemwide
instructional needs, aligning district resources, creating organizational structures and the policies
to support them. In many districts, the availability of resources to continue the status quo
typically determines priorities; and in most districts the status quo has evolved into little more
than an accumulation of programs and funding sources, leaving fragmented, unfocused district
systems in which instructional matters get lost (Meyer, Scott, & Strang, 1994). The district can
operate as the unit of change for systemic alterations to occur, building an organization oriented
around instruction that would increase student knowledge and achievement by investing
strategically in teachers’ work and utilizing instructional leaders, as the linchpin to coalesce
efforts. In training instructional leaders at school sites to provide the instructional support
teachers need to strengthen practices concerning EB students, sustainable change can occur.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 85
In the district placing a high premium on school site instructional leaders as the change
agents, a more conducive learning environment can be developed. Linda Darling-Hammond
(2015) referenced professional learning communities (PLCs), on-going network conferences or
meetings, and walkthroughs as important structures for site instructional leaders to engage in
meaningful learning exchanges and in shifting to an instructional focus. The professional
learning community model flows from the assumption that the core mission of formal education
is not simply to ensure that students are taught but to ensure that they learn. This shift, from a
focus on teaching to a focus on learning, has profound implications for schools and requires
shared responsibility in learning from peers and being trained by experts (DuFour & Eaker,
1998). Identifying talented site instructional leaders to become district-wide instructional leaders
and work in conjunction with the district to lead PLC’s across the district, where principals work
in heterogeneous work groups could coordinate better leading their school staff in high-quality
instructional practices using the OCDE Project GLAD® model. In addition to PLCs, devising
structures through which site instructional leaders could learn about exemplary instructional
practice and ways to support teacher and student learning from the wider network of principals
can occur through district hosted monthly meetings or conferences. Within this structure,
principals from across the district can jointly examine aggregated and disaggregated student
performance data to focus attention on EB students and the means of increasing their learning.
Walk-throughs, provides opportunities to analyze teachers’ practice and school and classroom
environments, as well as how site instructional leaders are incorporating what they have learned
in the monthly meetings through guided conversation with a district-wide instructional leader
focusing on EB student progress (Blasé, 1999). Within this study, an analysis on the degrees to
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 86
which PLCs, monthly site administrator network meetings, and walkthroughs having occurred
and its impact on EB students will be evaluated.
Developing systematic plans for instructional leadership training. The district’s
Instructional Services and Supports Division, with instructional coaches from the Language
Acquisition and Development Office, will need to develop a plan for instructional leadership
training on presenting, coaching and on-going professional learning to better meet the needs of
EB students using the OCDE Project GLAD® strategies. Aiming to increase understanding for
instructional leaders on what effective instruction for EB students should look like (OCDE
Project GLAD® strategies), reflective practices, and adult learning theory, the district’s plans
can create the needed accountability structures to support continuous improvement for EB
students. Establishing effective infrastructures for learning (such as PLCs, monthly meetings,
and walkthroughs) and providing training for instructional leadership has been linked to an
improvement in student achievement. Establishing systematic plans for continuous improvement
and learning through professional learning and coaching for instructional leaders operates as an
indicator of the values of the district and the expectations for instructional leaders and teacher
performance (Fenner, 2014). This study will probe into whether instructional leaders have
benefited from any training and will explore the effectiveness of the training from their
perspective.
Prioritization of implementing the OCDE Project GLAD® model. The district needs
to set an explicit priority of utilizing the OCDE Project GLAD® model and its strategies to
bridge the gaps of EB student performance. Having this articulated and shared vision of what is
expected in instructional practices is key to ensuring sustainable and on-going growth in use.
Research has shown (Blasé & Blasé, 1999; Constantino & Lorenzo, 2001; Danielson, 2009), that
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 87
given the numerous demands within a teachers’ day and the various decisions that need to be
made, it is common to default to old practices. Setting an explicit priority and developing
accountabilities on use, will begin to rebuild the instructional decision making of teachers on
what is needed to best support students, reinforced by site instructional leaders. This study will
analyze whether the OCDE Project GLAD® model has been identified as a district priority and
in what form it has been communicated.
Table 6 presents the assumed organizational influences of instructional leaders through
cultural models and settings.
Table 6
Assumed Organizational Influences
Organizational Constructs Assumed Organizational Influences

Cultural Model The district needs to cultivate a culture of asset-based mindsets
regarding EB students so that instructional leaders can better
support teachers in meeting their complex needs.

Cultural Model The district needs to have a culture of shared responsibility in
attending to the needs of EB students.

Cultural Setting The district needs to develop an infrastructure of support that
creates new norms of practice for instructional leaders that focuses
on EB students’ learning needs.

Cultural Setting The district needs to develop a plan for instructional leadership
training on professional learning, coaching, feedback, planning
and evaluation of practices structures.

Cultural Settings

The district needs to set an explicit priority of utilizing OCDE
Project GLAD® strategies.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 88
CHAPTER THREE: METHODS
The problem of practice addressed in this dissertation is the opportunity gaps of emergent
bilingual (EB) students to culturally and linguistically sustaining practices through highly
qualified certificated teachers. The purpose of this study is to examine instructional leaders’
practices in supporting teachers in instructional shifts to increase intentional instruction for EB
students, inclusive of the OCDE Project GLAD® model implementation. The mission in
CSESD is to nurture every child’s imagination, intellect and sense of inquiry through
experiencing a rigorous 21
st
century learning environment that is rooted in effective teaching
practices and high-quality instruction. A goal of CSESD is to “increase collaboration time to all
classroom teachers to ensure that students, and in particular, foster youth, English Learners, and
students of poverty, receive targeted intentional lessons in all content areas” (CSESD, 2017, p.1),
as reported in CSESD’s 2017-2018 LCAP. The instructional leadership team wants to ensure
that the teachers in CSESD receive coaching and support to become masterful in the delivery of
OCDE Project GLAD® instructional strategies in support of their EB population.
The gap analysis model (Clark & Estes, 2008) is used to establish and measure
quantifiable goals and indicators, assess gaps, and investigate and resolve, knowledge and skills,
motivation, and organizational issues. In essence, the gap analysis model is a diagnostic tool to
examine the knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational influences behind performance
gaps. The gap analysis process (Clark & Estes, 2008) is systematic and uses a problem solving
approach that improves performance and achieves organizational goals. The gap analysis
clarifies short-term and long-term organizational and individual goals, assesses these goals, and
describes gaps from actual levels of performance or the steps needed to achieve desired levels.
Rueda (2011) reported that the gap analysis model investigates and validates assumed causes of
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 89
gaps so that resources and solutions are directed toward important factors of gaps in
performance.
Using qualitative methods, the researcher sought to understand the social phenomena,
meaning and context in which the research design evolved. Within qualitative research the focus
is on process and meaning, within which the researcher is the primary instrument of data
collection and analysis. Through the analysis of the literature, assumed stakeholder influences
surfaced as assumed knowledge and skills, motivation and organizational influences. This prior
knowledge helped the researcher frame the study, while remaining disciplined in not allowing a
priori codes to impact the empirical data that emerged over the course of the data collection and
analysis. Though emerging themes were found, the qualitative research was based on assumed
influences and therefore relied on more deductive practices. Having worked with a small
purposeful sample provided a rich opportunity through a qualitative design to evaluate a small
principal sample group that could shed light on a principal’s role in leading instructional shifts
for EB students. Recognizing that a small group does not provide generalizability, the purpose
of the date collection is understanding the intricacies of the small principal group at a deep level
so that one might begin to know what to look for when engaging in future studies.
Using a semi-structured interview protocol with a small group of participants, followed
by the analysis of documents, brought understanding of the instructional leader’s knowledge and
skills, motivation and organizational influences used in professional learning and coaching in
support of EB education, and of the implementation of the OCDE Project GLAD® model. A
second round of semi-structured interviews followed the document analysis to elucidate this
small group of instructional leaders’ methods of supporting transfer of knowledge of best
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 90
instructional practices for EB students to classroom practices that create positive student
outcomes.
As such, the following questions guide the study:
1. What are the knowledge, skills and motivational influences of CSESD instructional
leaders related to andragogy, professional learning, coaching, feedback, and planning
in best meeting the needs of emergent bilingual students?
2. What knowledge, skills and motivational influences do instructional leaders use in
supporting teacher implementation of the OCDE Project GLAD® model in meeting
the needs of their emergent bilingual students?
3. What is the interaction between the district (organization) and instructional leaders in
the implementation of best practices for emergent bilingual students?
4. What recommendations in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational
resources may be appropriate for closing the opportunity and achievement gaps for
emergent bilingual students at another organization?
This chapter will detail the participating stakeholders, data collection and
instrumentation, data analysis, credibility and instrumentation, validity and reliability, ethics and
limitations using the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis model as a conceptual framework.
Participating Stakeholders
To best address the research questions, a nonprobability, purposeful participant sampling
was most conducive to this study. In avoiding random sampling, the researcher was able to
purposefully gain insight from a small group of individuals with the criteria being sought and the
experiences in place (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The participating stakeholders for this study are
instructional leaders (principals) within CSESD. As the largest K-6 school district in CA
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 91
providing services to 29,600 students, with 35% ELs, 51% free-or reduced-price lunch and a
myriad of ethnic populations and languages represented, this setting represents the growing
diversity and needs in urban public school settings in California. Of the 46 public schools and 5
dependent charter schools within CSESD, 20 schools have been intentionally identified by
district leadership and community input within CSESD’s 2017-2018 LCAP for continuous
improvement support through professional learning and coaching for instructional leaders and
teachers in the OCDE Project GLAD® model. Of these 20 identified schools, six schools with
instructional leaders that have been engaged in supporting professional learning and coaching of
teachers for EB students and using the OCDE Project GLAD® model were identified. The
population for the study included six instructional leaders from six different elementary school
sites across this large district. These six instructional leaders represent a unique sample group, in
which reflects the rare attributes or occurrences of the district’s efforts in attending to the needs
of EB students by enhancing the instructional leaders’ prowess to conduct professional learning
and coaching to their teachers.
As was shown within the literature review in Chapter Two, among school-related factors,
school leadership is second only to teaching in its potential influence on student learning.
Instructional leadership is a critical aspect of school and site leadership. The work of
instructional leaders is to ensure that every student receives the highest quality instruction each
day, even more critical for educators of EB students. Important to the study was the analysis of
patterns of implementation of the OCDE Project GLAD® model by these instructional leaders.
Evaluating to what degree instructional leaders were at a novice to expert level of understanding
regarding EB students, best practices and the OCDE Project GLAD® model was necessary. In
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 92
evaluating the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences needed by instructional
leaders to lead instructional shifts for EB students, many promising practices emerged.
Interview Sampling
Using a screener email and the support of district leadership, ten instructional leaders of
the targeted 20 schools were identified to have the articulated criteria. Six of the ten
instructional leaders identified volunteered to be a part of this study. An initial email
introduction by the Director of Instruction of the Language Acquisition and Development Office
was sent to the 10 schools to provide context. The email screener was then provided and
operated as an initial filter to the 10 schools to determine that the criteria established was met.
Individuals that responded to the screener email, were scheduled for the first of two interviews.
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Criterion 1. Instructional leaders have an Administrative Credential. Within the state of
California, an Administrative Credential allows one to evaluate instructional programs and
personnel, develop instructional programs and student support services, manage fiscal services,
and oversee school operations. An Administrative Credential permits one to serve as a school
site, district or county educational leader. Found within many Administrative programs is
curriculum centered on the development of andragogy. Andragogy, or adult learning theory, is
inclusive but not exclusive to professional learning practices, coaching, and mentoring structures
such as PLCs and walk-throughs. The Commission of California on Teacher Credentialing
updated the California Professional Standards for Education Leaders (CPSEL) standards in 2014
to necessitate instructional leadership and its practices, however, many site principals nationally
still struggle with concepts of how to best teach teachers, or adult learners, as was referenced in a
report by Northwest Center for Public Health Practice in 2012. In obtaining an Administrative
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 93
Credential, and understanding the principles of andragogy, instructional leaders will be more
greatly equipped to engage adult learners in meeting the complex needs of EB students within
CSESD (Knowles, 1984).
Criteria 2. Instructional leaders have three to five years, or more, of instructional
leadership experience as either an Assistant Principal or Principal, continuous placement at one
site for this duration of time was not necessary. This criterion is an important quality in having a
baseline of skills as a resource provider, being an instructional resource, having developed skills
as good communicators, and having created a visible presence within their school community.
Greater understandings of the time and complexity that is entailed in implementation science and
continuous improvement practices are more frequently found in instructional leaders that have
had greater time within their roles (Lunenberg, 2010; Marks & Printy, 2003).
Criteria 3. Instructional leaders have three to five years of experience with the OCDE
Project GLAD® model. Research by Hall and Hord (2011) has revealed that to bridge the
knowing-doing gap and integrate new ideas into practice, teachers vis-à-vis instructional leaders,
need three to five years of ongoing implementation support that includes opportunities to deepen
their understanding and address problems associated with practice (Hall & Hord, 2011). Three
to five years are indicators of greater transfer from pedagogy to application in effective
implementation models. In having a deeper understanding of the OCDE Project GLAD® model,
instructional leaders should have foundational understandings on concepts such as: culturally and
linguistically sustaining practices, language acquisition research, brain research, primary
language research, the role of motivation in learning, reading and writing research, and
assessment and evaluation fundamentals. These areas are critical in best attending to the
opportunity gaps many EB students face.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 94
Data Collection and Instrumentation
Understanding, discovery and insight is the primary rationale for conducting this study,
using the words of the sampled stakeholder group members to gain an interpretation and value of
their experiences. The focus of qualitative research is “on process, understanding, and meaning;
the researcher is the primary instrument of data collection and analysis; and the product is richly
descriptive” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 15). By engaging in this research study, the researcher
unveiled the kaleidoscope of interpretations on a single topic, understanding the world of
instructional leaders from an insider’s perspective. The researcher was able to generate a theory
based on the interviews and document analysis of stakeholders engaged in a world grappling to
meet the needs of EB students, rather than from a controlled or manipulated setting found within
quantitative research. In engaging in a qualitative approach, one is able to surface the intimate
and unique stories of instructional leaders and the research questions posed, seeking to
understand the rationale behind why an organization has chosen the steps they have to meet their
goal, or how instructional leaders perceive their knowledge and skill sets in creating systems,
policies, and accountability structures in their professional learning and coaching of teachers, or
how the organizational culture has influenced the performance goal associated to EB student
progress. It is through qualitative research methods that one gains the greatest promise of
making a difference in people’s lives and improving practice (Merriam and Tisdell, 2016).
As the primary research instrument in a qualitative study, the researcher’s eyes and ears
are the tools used to gather information and makes sense of what is occurring within the
organizational context. Given this role as the primary research instrument, and the goal of
understanding instructional leaders’ knowledge and skills, motivations and organizational
influences, one-on-one interviews and the examination of documents were an appropriate
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 95
approach given the time constraints associated to the data collection process; otherwise
observations of site instructional leaders’ behaviors would be added to further unearth these
influences. Having considered the unique qualities of the instructional leaders within this
district, examined their behaviors and generated a narrative from the interviews conducted, in
addition to the evidence of practice found in the documents they used and generated to engage as
instructional leaders knowledgeable of the OCDE Project GLAD® model presented unique
findings. These qualities are atypical in the national context of site principals supporting the
needs of EB students and provided insights into how to better provide services to this population.
Interviews
Within this study, six initial one-on-one interviews were conducted, one with each site
instructional leader. These six instructional leaders represented the unique qualities of
instructional leaders within this district, and were engaged in a semi-structured, informal
interview using an interview guide protocol, running approximately an hour to an hour and a half
per person. Total duration of time spent in first interviews was approximately eight hours. A
second one-on-one interview was conducted with the same six principals, clarifying questions
about knowledge and skills, motivation and organizational influence patterns that emerged as
additional assets and needs in both the interview and document analysis, posing new questions
based on new learnings. The second interviews ran approximately one-half hour to one hour in
duration per person. Total duration of time spent in second interviews was approximately eleven
hours. This data collection process operated sequentially, first engaging in a first round of
interviews, followed by document analysis and concluding with a culminating second interview;
this data collection process began in November 2018 and ended in January 2019, engaging in
data analysis simultaneous to collecting the data.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 96
The first round of interviews was conducted in-person at each instructional leaders’
school site, providing a common, familiar, and convenient location in which to meet. In meeting
at a location in which the interviewee felt comfortable, there was a greater likelihood of
attending the interview, building trust and relationship, engaging in more authentic conversation,
and having a lowered affective filter. Starting at one’s school site provided greater ease in
requesting documents and to evaluate accessibility of the documents, using cues and symbols as
a way to gauge level of priority to the instructional leader and school. which to analyze, given
the likelihood of the resources being at one’s site. The second round of interviews were
conducted via Zoom Video Conferencing with the same six instructional leaders, continuing to
build rapport and a relationship with the those being interviewed.
An interview guide was used for both interviews, as recommended by Patton (2002). The
interview guide was prepared in advance, listing the questions to be explored in the course of the
interview. Given the semi-structured nature of the interview guide, it provided the researcher the
opportunity to freely explore, probe and ask questions that would highlight the topic as needed
by tweaking order of words, questions or order of delivery based on the non-verbals of
interviewee. Therefore, the researcher had a preplanned guide on how to obtain high-quality
responses by having a set course with pre-determined questions, and the freedom to build upon
the conversation, re-word items more appropriately, and use probing questions to further clarify
certain responses. The effectiveness of the interview guide lay in its ability to, as Patton (2002)
stated, to “capture how those being interviewed, view their world, to learn their terminology and
judgements and to capture the complexities of their individual perceptions and experiences” (p.
348). The interview guides for both sets of individual interviews were developed based on the
assumed knowledge and skills, motivation and organizational influences of instructional leaders
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 97
training and supporting teachers in professional learning and coaching. Additionally, the job aide
allowed the researcher to more readily attend to the instructional leaders’ answers, monitoring
for saturation in the individual interviewing process. Lastly, both audio recordings of the
interviews and the scribing of field notes with memos were used in this process with permission
granted. The audio recording ensured that everything that was said was preserved for further
analysis, while the additional field notetaking allowed the researcher to capture the reactions of
the instructional leaders’ responses, the manner to which they responded, the pace, tone,
environmental factors and nonverbal cues used.
The interview guide for this study consisted of open-ended questions that attended to the
knowledge and skills, motivation and organizational assumed influences of the instructional
leaders, framed by the reviewed literature. Knowledge assumed influences encompasses
conceptual, procedural and metacognitive factors concerning both instructional leaders and
professional development based on the OCDE Project GLAD® model. Motivation questions
attempted to understand utility value and instructional leaders’ self-efficacy whereas
organizational assumed influences sought to comprehend the cultural models and settings of the
organization. Each influence assessment in the form of interview questions focused on the
evaluation of the performance goals being met, in which the questions were designed to inquire
about the instructional leader’s role or organization’s role in doing so. For the first set of
interviews, 17 open-ended questions were generated for the interview guide. The majority of the
interview questions were related to knowledge and skill influences, conceptual understandings
and motivation. The knowledge influence conceptual type most questioned was: Instructional
leaders know how to engage in andragogy through professional learning, coaching, planning
and evaluation. The second interview guide for the second set of interviews contained 20 open-
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 98
ended questions in which the majority of questions lay in both knowledge and organizational
influences. For knowledge influences, conceptual type questions were prominent whereas for
organizational influences, cultural settings were most evident. The same knowledge type
influence that was most prominently seen in interview set one is seen in interview set two, where
the organizational cultural setting question most evident in the second interviews was: The
district needs to develop a plan for instructional leadership training on presenting, coaching and
ongoing professional learning structures. Interview guides one and two can be found in
Appendix A.
Document Analysis
Documents are a part of the research setting and were valuable sources of triangulation in
this qualitative study. Documents frequently refer to the range of written, visual, digital and
physical material relevant to the study. Artifacts often are reflective of three dimensional objects
that communicate meaning within a setting, like a trophy or school symbol (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). Following the initial interview, mining for data from documents provided commenced.
The documents requested reflected the implementation processes from professional learning and
coaching of instructional leaders. Instructional leader’s calendars from both the district and site
level, PLC calendars, PLC agendas for collaboration time, professional learning cycles with
timelines, reflection documents, observation guides, rubrics and school messages or
announcements were collected and analyzed. Additional public documents that illuminated the
assumed knowledge and skills, motivational and organizational influences of the instructional
leaders were collected, such as: the LCAP, strategic plans, available ELPAC data and the
cohorts identified to engage in OCDE Project GLAD®. The analysis of these documents was
directly connected with the assumed influences, of which the majority of the document review
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 99
was aligned to the knowledge conceptual influence. The cultural models are often unseen within
the tangible context of the organization, where the analysis of documents provided a glimpse into
the cultural models taking tangible form in what was perceived as important. Analyzing the
documents that were generated and used provided insights into what was seen as valuable and
perceived as necessary to enhance professional learning and coaching.
Obtaining the documents was the second step in the research design process, following
initial interviews. The documents were obtained either in person or sent via email upon the
completion of the initial interview. Keeping an open mind about what was being reviewed was
necessary, checking the authenticity and origins of the documents became the next step.
Determining which of the items were constructed by the instructional leaders versus not and how
the document fits into the implementation of professional learning and coaching cycle for
instruction for EB students evaluated. Searching for patterns across the six instructional leaders’
documents was enacted, using similar coding practices as used in the initial interview, yet
remaining open to emerging influences.
Data Analysis
The goal of data analysis was making sense of the data, which “involves consolidating,
reducing, and interpreting what people have said and what the researcher has seen and read”
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 202), fully engaging in meaning making. For both interviews and
document analysis, data analysis began during data collection. Bogdan and Biklen (2011) offer
several suggestions for analyzing data, including reviewing field notes and adding analytic
memos after each interview. Writing observer’s comments during the interview stimulated
critical thinking about what was being seen, heard or understood. The researcher documented
their thoughts, concerns and initial conclusions, called reflective memos, about the data in
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 100
relation to the conceptual framework and research questions, keeping an additional field journal
as other ideas were sparked between data collection. As each interview concluded, recordings
were transcribed, and the researcher read and reread the data, making notes in the margins,
commenting on data, and making rudimentary codes (Corbin & Strauss, 2008).
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) shared that the process of data collection is dynamic and
recursive, entailing many phases. In the first phase of analysis, reading and listening intently
was critical. Listening to the interview tapes prior to transcription to begin a critical analysis and
read the interview transcripts and documents analyzed was a next step. As one listens, being
open to emerging codes that may lead to categories and themes was important. In this initial
process, beginning one’s open codes was essential, as well as looking for empirical codes and
applying a priori codes from the conceptual framework. A second phase of analysis was
conducted where empirical and a priori codes were aggregated into analytic/axial codes. In this
process, the coding comes from interpretation and reflection on meaning, going beyond
descriptive coding, similarities and differences and seeking to understand relationships. In the
third phase of data analysis, identification of pattern codes and themes emerged in relation to the
conceptual framework and study questions. As the researcher reached points close to saturation,
themes were refined and added to by searching through the data for better units of information, a
process that continued through the writing of the findings section, Chapter Four. These themes
or categories were labeled and data sorted as evidence, keeping the identities of the interviewed
anonymous. Throughout this analysis process, a reflection on one’s biases was necessary to
remain open to the process.
To best organize the data from both interviews and document analysis, electronic files
were created and named by coded interviewee names, saved in multiple places. Additionally,
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 101
use of a computer program called ATLAS.ti was critical for data organization and analysis. This
data management process was broken into three phases: preparation, identification and
manipulation (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Having already transcribed the notes and interviews,
this phase followed-uploading the transcription into the program and assigning codes to
segments of the interviews, documents and audio files. ATLAS.ti does not determine the codes,
however it does support in the construction of complex networks in developing categories or
themes and helps with faster retrieval of the codes and parts of the transcripts already coded. As
codes begin to be linked, clustered, and themed, analysis on meaning becomes more evident as
one can search through the code cluster for all similar items. These themes are in effect, the
responses to one’s research questions.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
The criteria for trusting a study is the manner in which the study was carefully designed,
applying standards that are accepted by the scientific community. This study is both
methodologically rigorous in how it applies methods and is rigorous within its interpretive
design. To ensure trustworthiness in the study, a researcher can specifically hone one’s
methodological rigor and discipline one’s subjectivity in the data collection and analysis process
(Maxwell, 2013). Equally critical in building credibility is the manner in which the researcher
exhibits integrity and honesty.
Maxwell (2013) describes eight validity checks to increase credibility and
trustworthiness, including: (a) intensive, long-term involvement, (b) rich data, (c) respondent
validation, (d) intervention, (e) searching for discrepant evidence and negative cases, (f)
triangulation, (g) numbers, and (h) comparison. For the purpose of this study, the specific
validity threats that were attended to through the use of Maxwell’s recommended strategies
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 102
increased methodological rigor and increased credibility and trustworthiness. One example was
employing an audit trail during the data collection and analysis process. Within the audit trail,
the researcher described one’s journey on how data was collected, the themes derived and the
decisions and inquiry that led one there. The use of a journal to document these steps occurred.
In exposing these details, or rich data, it provides consumers of this data the possibility to
determine if the methods of the study could be transferable within their own contexts.
Additionally, using multiple sources of data is evident within the study, having cross-checked the
data through follow-up interviews with the same purposeful sampling is an example of
respondent validation or member checking. The use of member checks occurred naturally within
the data collection process. Engaging in member checks was an important way of identifying
biases and misunderstandings of what had been heard and read. Another employed strategy used
was searching for discrepant evidence and negative cases as one engaged in data collection and
analysis. Given the positionality of the researcher as Manager to the National Training Center
that develops, assesses and proliferates the OCDE Project GLAD® model, having engaged in
purposefully seeking data that might disconfirm or challenge one’s expectations or emerging
findings would show a dedication to the truth of what the research questions were designed to
obtain, increasing credibility. The strategy of triangulation through multiple methods and
multiple sources of data increased internal validity within the research design and data collection.
In using multiple methods of data collection, such as the use of interviews checked by the
analysis of documents is evidence of triangulation and efforts to increase validity. Peer review in
the form of the dissertation committee is a product of engaging in the Global Executive
Doctorate of Education program as well, bringing an additional strategy to increase credibility
and trustworthiness during the data collection and analysis.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 103
When attending to credibility and trustworthiness, it is important to recognize the
plausibility of validity threats that could lead to invalid conclusions. Two broad types of validity
threats often raised in qualitative research designs are: researcher bias and reactivity, the effect of
the researcher on the individuals studied. As a researcher, one enters into a study or scenario
with preconceptions, values, existing theories, and goals that may inform what becomes visible
in one’s data. Understanding one’s biases helps discipline subjectivity throughout the research
design. As the current manager of the NTC’s OCDE Project GLAD® model, a former
Consultant, Trainer, and classroom practitioner of the model, the researcher has had numerous
experiences with the implementation of the OCDE Project GLAD® model. Some of these
experiences yielded better results than others, and the researcher recognizes their interest and
hopes in seeing the model thrive. Yet, given these interests and desire to see the model prosper,
urged the researcher to understand the truths of the role of instructional leaders in
implementation of professional learning and coaching, so that greater insights on how to better
develop the model to meet the needs of EB students and bridge opportunity gaps, could lead to
greater equity in the classroom. This study evaluated the strengths and areas of growth of how
instructional leaders navigate the dynamic and often complex needs of EB students through use
of a dynamic and often complex model. Therein lies another fundamental bias, a belief that this
model can indeed meet the needs of EB students in a way that bridges their opportunity and
achievement gaps and that instructional leaders hold a key to do so. Thus, it was of the greatest
urgencies that the researcher disciplined oneself, recognized their biases and held to the
structures of the methods that were designed within the study to ensure credibility and
trustworthiness.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 104
Additionally, as the Manager of the National Training Center (NTC) OCDE Project
GLAD®, the sole organization that trains and certifies educators in its implementation, the
researcher has oversight over all implementing trainers, including two trainers within the
CSESD. Trainers in the model are not employees of the National Training Center, but are
responsible for adhering to the NTC’s guidelines, principles and copyrights when implementing
the model’s design and strategies. It is a responsibility to ensure that participants understand that
the researcher is engaged in the study as a researcher and not as an evaluator of the two trainers
at the district office or of the model. Utilizing the interview guide assisted in avoiding leading
questions in interviews and pointed to the accountabilities ensured that participants’ views would
be heard.
Rubin and Rubin (2012) stated that “finding a role that is understood and accepted in the
interviewees’ world” (p. 74) provides grounding and trust in the data collection process. To
avoid confusion of the dual roles as manager of the model and researcher, the researcher used
terminology that was trusted by the instructional leaders, stating and restating their role as a
teacher first, an instructional leader second and then a researcher. This placed the researcher in a
position that instructional leaders could relate to and feel unthreatened by; most instructional
leaders seeing their primary role as a teacher and learner. Also taken into account was how the
researcher’s position as Manager of the NTC could influence the setting or instructional leaders
being interviewed, called reactivity.
The researchers’ experiences as a LatinX, emergent bilingual student and first generation
college graduate carries many biases when engaging in this study. As a young student, often
misunderstood, mislabeled, and unaccounted for, the researcher felt the lack of expectations of
the school systems enrolled. Often not having the strategies, comprehension, language, or
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 105
confidence to navigate one’s school environment well, the researcher fell into states of confusion
of one’s own personal value and value within the community. This frequently made the
researcher feel as if their culture, language and identity was not of worth. However, within the
tumultuous experiences of school, were great teachers and instructional leaders that helped the
researcher see beyond the immediate strife and failures faced, academically and personally.
These experiences and emotions run deep, and the researcher’s perceptions of what “school”
could and should be had left them compelled and purposed to attend to the inequities that exist
within the educational system. It is this commitment to ensure that no student is left to feel the
same way they had, their fortitude to social justice within education that holds a plethora of
biases within this study, yet it is also what compels the researcher to ensure that the fullest breath
of truthful collection and analysis occurs. One such bias, is that the researcher believes there are
inequities and social injustices within school systems. The researcher’s drive to ensure that what
is reported will create forward movement in instructional practices for often marginalized
students are the guard rails of the study. Triangulation, however, has fortified the integrity of the
study and ultimately helped create numerations of the patterns found within collection that will
offer a less biased lens. It is through the various strategies to ensure credibility and
trustworthiness, complemented by conscientiousness of the ethical issues that pervade the
research process that the researcher examines one’s own philosophical orientation and
commitment to a study that upholds integrity.
Ethics
The importance of ensuring that one engages in rigorous thinking regarding one’s
research design and methods reveals the rigor and trustworthiness of one’s study, grounded in
values and ethics. Though ethics goes beyond the methods and practices of one’s study’s design,
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 106
to the recognition of one’s impact on the relationships of those engaged in the study, the
treatment of participants as whole individuals rather than subjects to be exploited for data
(Merriam and Tisdell, 2016). Drawing upon the findings of the Belmont Report (1979), the
protection of “human subjects” for this study from harm was best attended by showing respect,
honoring promises, avoiding deceit, not pressuring, and doing no harm to the volunteers (Rubin
& Rubin, 2012). Employing the strategies of informed consent, voluntary participation and the
right to privacy in preparation of participants assisted in sustaining high ethical practices. In
self-reflection and addressing assumptions and biases supported greater ethical practices to be
maintained. When in the field, resolving ethical issues as they arise best ensures that participants
are protected and in good care throughout the study. In these ways, and through engaging in the
Institutional Review Board (IRB) process, one can ensure that ethical responsibilities are at the
forefront of how one engages with one’s participants and ensure their protection.
Within the information sheet, under “participant involvement” potential participants were
informed that participation was voluntary, that they can stop their participation at any time
without penalty, and if there is any aspect of the study that may affect their well-being that they
could stop the process (United States. National Commission for the Protection of Human
Subjects of Biomedical Behavioral Research, & United States. President's Commission for the
Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine Biomedical Behavioral Research, 1978). Participants
were informed and consent provided for audio recording as part of the interviewing processes
too. Participants that had consented for recording were reminded of being audio recorded prior
to both interviews. It is also within the information sheet that participants will note that no
compensation or payment will be provided in participating in this study. Articulated within the
confidentiality section of the information sheet states that any identifiable information obtained
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 107
in connection with this study will remain confidential and be kept in a secured, locked location.
At the completion of the study, direct identifiers were destroyed and the de-identified data may
be used for future research studies (Rubin & Rubin, 2012). It was also disclosed that members
of the research team and the University of Southern California’s Human Subjects Protection
Program (HSPP) may access the data collected from this study in an effort to protect the rights
and welfare of the research participants.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations are the influences that as the researcher, one cannot control. They are
shortcomings, conditions or influences that cannot be controlled and place restrictions on one’s
methodology and conclusions. Limitations included in this study were the nature of self-
reporting and time constraints. Given that individuals self-reported on their own knowledge and
skills, motivational and organizational influences within the interviews holds limitations in
responses, as they may not be accounting for their own biases and could either inflate or devalue
their experiences. Furthermore, the time limitations in collecting and analyzing data (two
months) constrained options in designing the study utilizing additional stakeholder groups such
as district leaders and teachers or engaging in other data collection methods that would require
more time to both schedule and execute, such as observations.
Delimitations are the choices, boundaries and parameters that one has set for their study,
including the data collection methods, the chosen stakeholder group to analyze, and the sampling
criteria. For the purpose of this study, observations were not chosen as a part of the data
collection process. Though observations would have yielded potentially more robust information
regarding the knowledge and skills, motivational influences and organizational influences of how
instructional leaders engage in professional learning and coaching, due to the limitation of time
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 108
constraints, this method was not chosen. Given another opportunity with more time, observing
instructional leaders engage in professional learning focused on EB students with their teachers
and observe coaching sessions evolve would be of benefit. Additionally, observing site
instructional leaders engaged in their own learning of the OCDE Project GLAD® model,
andragogy and reflective practices through their PLCs, monthly meetings or walk-throughs.
Another delimitation was not studying other internal stakeholders, such as district personnel,
teachers, students or family members that have a tremendous impact on emergent bilingual
students’ access to opportunities and achievement. Given the limited research on instructional
leaders’ roles in influencing EB students’ progress and the time constraints of this study,
choosing instructional leaders as the stakeholder group for this study was determined to be value
added to the body of literature in the educational field. Lastly, the sampling criteria was an
another delimitation. Focusing on instructional leaders that have had two to three years or more
within their role, limited newer leaders from partaking in the study, that may be skilled in
knowledge, motivation and organizational strategies related to being an instructional leader and
supporting instructional shifts. A related limitation is having criteria for sampling containing one
to three or more years’ experience implementing the OCDE Project GLAD® model. For the
same reasons stated above, these criteria may limit expertise found in other leaders that have not
yet met these criteria. This unique sampling poses challenges in the consumers’ interpretation of
relatability to their own contexts. However, in identifying these limitations and delimitations,
future studies can expand upon this study’s efforts and build a stronger body of knowledge in
support of closing the opportunity and achievement gaps for EB students.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 109
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
The purpose of this section it to report the results and findings of data collection.
Qualitative data was collected through two rounds of interviews and document analysis. Data
was coded, analyzed and triangulated to understand instructional leaders’ knowledge and skills,
motivation, and organizational influences in attending to the achievement gap seen with
emergent bilingual (EB) students. The results were then compared with the assumed influences
of the knowledge and skills, motivation and organizational influences articulated in Chapter 3, to
determine if the influence was a need or a gap and therefore inconclusive, or an asset that the
instructional leaders held. A KMO influence was determined to be an asset if participant
responses via interviews or documents scored 55% or more regarding the assumed influences
proposed, or if three or more of the six participants responded as having that asset. Given this is
a qualitative study, the findings for this small purposeful sampling is not generalizable. Given
the nature of participants self-reporting within interviews, findings also are reflective of the
perceptions of the participants. However, findings where the majority of instructional leaders
possess the determined influence as an asset provides insights to the principal’s roles in leading
instructional shifts for EB students. Recommendations will be provided for validated points,
whereas invalid points will be eliminated as the root cause of the underlying gap, described
further in Chapter 5.
This chapter is organized according to the KMO framework (Clark & Estes, 2008) and
consists of the following sections:
 Results and findings for knowledge and skills influences;
 Results and findings for motivation influences; and
 Results and findings for organizational influences
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 110
Each section highlights the assumed influences that have been determined to be an asset
principals held, as well as emerging assets, and those considered to be a gap. The chapter will
conclude with a summary of the influences determined to be assets held and how they support
the answering of the initial research questions posed in Chapter 1:
1. What are the knowledge, skills and motivational influences of CSESD instructional
leaders related to andragogy, professional learning, coaching, feedback, and planning in
best meeting the needs of emergent bilingual students?
2. What knowledge, skills and motivational influences do instructional leaders use in
supporting teacher implementation of the OCDE Project GLAD® model in meeting the
needs of their emergent bilingual students?
3. What is the interaction between the district (organization) and instructional leaders in the
implementation of best practices for emergent bilingual students?
4. What recommendations in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational
resources may be appropriate for closing the opportunity and achievement gaps for
emergent bilingual students at another organization?
Through the data collection and analysis process, the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis
framework was used, having determined the organizational performance goals, the current
achievement of CSESD in that performance goal, the gaps between the goal and the current
achievement, and the assumed causes or influences of the stakeholder group. The determined
stakeholder group of instructional leaders varied in their demographics. Table 7 represents the
instructional leaders that participated in this study in relation to the expected criteria established
in Chapter 3.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 111
Table 7
Instructional Leaders’ Criteria Matrix
Interviewee Criterion 1:
Administrative
Credential
Criteria 2:
3-5 years, or more,
of Administrative
Experience
Criteria 3:
3-5 years, or more,
of OCDE Project
GLAD®
implementation
Interviewee #1  6 years 10 years
Interviewee #2  4 years 8 years
Interviewee #3  2.5 years 1 year
Interviewee #4  6.5 years 10 years
Interviewee #5  3 years 5 years
Interviewee #6  7 years 5 years

Given the recent retirement plans enacted by CSESD, many seasoned instructional
leaders retired, prompting newer pools of principals. Given this reality, the three to five-year, or
more, expectation for Administrative experience and use of the OCDE Project GLAD® model,
proved challenging, and one outlier engaged in the study, Interviewee #3. The results and
findings from the KMO framework of these stakeholders will now be described.
Results and Findings for Knowledge and Skills Influences
There were five assumed knowledge influences. Table 8 shows that the four assumed
knowledge influences were evidenced within the principal group and determined to be an asset
held. One proposed influence was considered to be a gap and therefore inconclusive. There were
four emergent knowledge influences identified.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 112
Table 8
Knowledge and Skill Influences as Assets, Gaps and New Influences
Category Assumed Influences Assets Gaps
New
Influences
Conceptual Instructional leaders need to know the different
typologies of emergent bilingual students.


Conceptual
Instructional leaders need to understand the OCDE
Project GLAD® model and strategies for meeting
the needs of emergent bilingual students.


Conceptual
Instructional leaders need to comprehend concepts
of andragogy (involvement in planning and
evaluation, bridging life experiences, respect,
relevancy-oriented, and problem-oriented) to be able
to provide effective professional learning
experiences.


Conceptual
Instructional leaders need to know about
professional learning communities (focus on
learning, collaboration, and results-data).

√

Conceptual
Instructional leaders need to know concepts of
continuous improvement, such as professional
learning cycles as the steps within them.

√

Procedural
Instructional leaders need to know how to
implement the OCDE Project GLAD® model, using
modeling, time for practice, coaching, mentoring,
reflection and feedback.


Procedural
Instructional leaders need to know how to develop
and foster professional learning communities to
support instructional responsiveness.

√

Procedural
Instructional leaders need to know how to develop
and utilize a professional learning cycle as an
avenue for on-going implementation of the OCDE
Project GLAD® model.

√

Metacognitive
Instructional leaders need critical reflective
practices to pose questions regarding meeting the
needs of emergent bilingual students


PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 113
Utilizing Krathwohl’s (2002) organization of knowledge (factual, conceptual, procedural,
and metacognitive), findings have been grouped into three of the four knowledge types
articulated in the assumed knowledge influences: conceptual, procedural and metacognitive.
Conceptual Knowledge Gaps
According to the results summarized in Table 8, three assumed conceptual knowledge
influences were assets held, and two new influences emerged. Table 9 articulates how many
instructional leaders validated/ “know” the assumed conceptual knowledge influences
determined and which instruments were used to evaluate the principal held this as an asset.
Table 9
Evaluated Assumed Conceptual Knowledge Influences
Category Assumed Influences Instruments
Know
(Assets)
Don’t
Know

Conceptual Instructional leaders need to know the
different typologies of emergent bilingual
students.

Interviews 6 0
Conceptual Instructional leaders need to understand the
OCDE Project GLAD® model and strategies
for meeting the needs of emergent bilingual
students.

Interviews 5 1
Conceptual Instructional leaders need to comprehend
concepts of andragogy (involvement in
planning and evaluation, bridging life
experiences, respect, relevancy-oriented, and
problem-oriented) to be able to provide
effective professional learning experiences.

Interviews 6 0
Conceptual
(New)
Instructional leaders need to know about
professional learning communities (focus on
learning, collaboration, and results-data).
Interviews
Document
Analysis
4 2
Conceptual
(New)
Instructional leaders need to know concepts
of continuous improvement, such as
professional learning cycles.

Interviews
Document
Analysis
4 2

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 114
The first assumed conceptual influence, “instructional leaders need to know the different
typologies of emergent bilingual students,” was determined as a held asset through interviews
using the following questions: “How would you describe your English Learner population?” and
“What typologies/ types of English Learner students do you have at your school?” Each
instructional leader could speak to the data of their EB student population’s proficiency levels,
primary language use and percentages of newcomers or U.S. native born student populations.
Nuances of time spent in formal schooling or whether a student was at-risk of becoming a LTEL
was used by two of the six instructional leaders. Interviewee #4 shared, “27% of my students are
classified EL’s, however, 54% of them are at a Level 4 on the ELPAC, so they have language.
We have two Newcomers, but more or less have native born ELs that are proficient in social
language, but need support in their academic reading and writing. I am happy that our LTEL
population has decreased since being here.” Though instructional leaders could describe their
EB student population, four of the six needed prompting on the term “typology.” Five of the six
also described how understanding the data points of their EB student population also informed
their next steps on supporting teachers in implementing more intentional instructional practices
to bridge gaps due to understanding typologies and performance indicators from assessments.
Interviewee #5 stated, “Well, this year for example we're focused on the listening and speaking
standards because when we looked at our data for ELPAC and CELDT, we realized, okay, the
children really need more practice with speaking and listening. And I realized that when I started
helping the teachers myself administer the ELPAC. So I'd have the students sitting there and I'm
like, ‘Oh my God, these kids have high lifestyles but they can't articulate a sentence.’ And so I
sat with the teachers that also gave the administration and we talked to the ILT and we talked to
the whole staff and we said this is what's happening. What do you guys think? We've got these
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 115
kids that are scoring really well but they're not able to do this. Is that what you're seeing in the
classroom? Yes. Then what do we need to do?” Each instructional leader spoke to needing to
know their EB student population at a deeper level, and enacting practices of their teachers to
engage in relationship building.
One instructional leader recounted the intentional shift made with teachers, having them
not only be able to know who is classified an EL, but recognize the assets they bring to the
classroom.
They're not invisible. We've definitely moved past that now. Now it's a matter of getting
teachers to understand that having students that are ELs is actually a strength for the
student. That if we can support and provide what they need in English language and pair
that with the academic vocabulary or academic language, and then being able to say at
the same time, to families and to the students themselves, ‘The fact that you are an
emerging bilingual means you are an amazing kid and I know you can do this.’ So, that's
my goal, is to be able to have my teachers see English Learners as not a deficit model but
actually as a strength model. So that's a huge culture shift and it's gonna take some time
to get there but I think it's really important work for me to be able to just get that mindset
shift of, ‘Oh, they're labeled an EL,’ as opposed to, ‘Check this out, this kid's gonna be an
emergent bilingual.’ I mean, right now they have language, now we're going to make sure
they have another one that's just as strong. So that's where I'm at right now (Interviewee
#4).
This quote symbolizes the interconnectedness of having relationship, and knowing your students
deeply, impacts one’s mindset and one’s instructional practice. Interviewee #4’s ability to
recognize that for her teacher population, the label EL was interfering with what they believed
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 116
the students could do, and the assets they truly bring. The negative, is how this deficit mindset
has impacted the rigorous instruction either employed or not. This critical reflection was also
partnered with Interviewee #4’s recognition that mindset impacts instructional delivery and
expectations of learning. Realizing that shifting the mindset of what students could do by
teachers, and what strengths they do have, would perpetuate instructional change. Another
instructional leader shared, “These are our children. This is where they're coming from. Let's
look deeper than the surface" (Interviewee #5). In instructional leaders knowing their classified
EL students by name, developing relationships, and knowing the typologies and characteristics
they bring, can help a teacher investigate one’s own values and principles and see how it plays
into their instructional decision-making. In better understanding the various typologies, a teacher
begins to understand the why of what is happening with that student, and can then engage
differently in their instructional practices.
The second assumed conceptual influence, “instructional leaders need to understand the
OCDE Project GLAD® model and strategies for meeting the needs of EB students,” was also
determined to be an asset held by instructional interviews and through interviews. Of the six
interviewed, four were previously trained as teachers, one was trained for the first time while
being an administrator, one was retrained as an administrator, and one had some prior exposure
to the model. Five of the six referenced the philosophical and research base of the model and
could articulate strategies found in four of the six component areas of the model’s design: Focus
and Motivation, Comprehensible Input, Guided Oral Practice, Reading and Writing, Extended
Activities for Integration, and Assessment and Feedback. Understanding the model, provided
instructional leaders the foundations to understand how to best support EB students through best
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 117
instruction, but also how to guide and develop their teachers on the implementation of the
model’s design. One instructional leader shared the following sentiment,
Seeing that connection and being able to use those strategies myself with students, really
supported my understanding of language learning…And then, as a principal, now that I
have that lens, I know what I'm looking at when I walk into a classroom. So, it helps me
focus my lens. So, instead of going in and looking at a classroom environment saying,
‘This is quite a rich classroom environment,’ I can see the intentionality of what the
teacher's doing to support the development of language (Interviewee #4).
Interviewee #4’s sentiment shows the importance of an instructional leader having not only the
factual knowledge base of an initiative to be enacted, but the conceptual understandings of how it
operates and for what reasons. This trend reflects the value of having instructional leaders be
trained and have their own experiences with the initiative being implemented, to better support
their teachers in building meaning. Another instructional leader reflected, “Sitting through the
training myself (again) with the teachers, as an administrator, has also helped me give feedback.
If I'm not a part of that training, I don't know what I'm looking for. So I guess it helps me ... yes,
it has helped, because it has helped me know what I'm looking for” (Interviewee #1). In addition
to instructional leaders stating they know what to look for, in understanding the model, they too
can provide more intentional feedback and discern inadequate instruction for EB students. A
different instructional leader identified the following trend
So when a teacher is not GLAD® trained, their lessons tend to be very content-driven
where there aren't many visuals and there isn't much room for teaching language or the
functions of language, which is what our second language learners need in order to be
successful. Even me, being a second language learner, I know that when it was explicitly
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 118
taught to me the structures of the language, I became more successful with English. And
so with GLAD® you see that difference because you see the teachers a lot more focused
on the vocabulary, the visuals that go with it (Interview #1).
Instructional leaders that used the model in their own classrooms and know how to deliver
strategies and practices understand how to navigate the complex needs of EB students and also
how to guide their teachers in best instruction and what ineffective instruction for EB students
look likes. These individuals are also calling forward the reality that the same instruction for all
students, is not enough for EB students. The complexity of language acquisition needs deliberate
attention and understanding, as revealed by these instructional leaders.
Another facet of understanding the OCDE Project GLAD® model and how it supports
EB populations, is recognizing that this model is founded on principles and research that speaks
to language being integrated into and through all content areas. When interviewing instructional
leaders, five of the six recognized how the OCDE Project GLAD® model supports EB students
in gaining access to the core curriculum and how to build language proficiency in authentic,
relevant ways. One instructional leader spoke to their school’s journey of enhancing language
integration using OCDE Project GLAD® first within writing and then mathematics. Interviewee
#6 detailed the journey:
We started with GLAD®. Our focus was on writing, so we used GLAD® to be able to
build content and understanding that then students would be able to use it in their writing.
So then we decided to add GLAD® into Math. And how we did that was we sort of just
opened it up. We wanted to make sure that you know that it could be done in these
different areas. But I did not make that a mandate. People did not have to go do Math
GLAD® charts. ‘Okay, but we're still doing GLAD® charts in content areas but let's just
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 119
trickle into math.’ And my staff is very funny. If I had said you have to do it, it would
have been an uproar. I said ‘no, you don't have to do it,’ and we had 95% compliance. So
then when I start going ‘Oh, everyone has their Math charts,’ they go, ‘You said you
weren't going to monitor that.’ I go, ‘Well, I'm not necessarily monitoring it, I'm just
checking (Interviewee #6).
Interviewee #6 speaks to needing to ensure that there is collective buy-in on an area of need, this
started as writing, but then as writing strengthened, identifying another collective areas of need,
Mathematics. This instructional leader started with a content area where more support had
already been provided, adding in OCDE Project GLAD® enhanced their writing practices, but
also was the segue to teachers seeing it could be done in various content areas, even those
perceivably more challenging like Math. Additionally, what became apparent to this
instructional leader, was how the model supported not only the integration of content areas and
language but the integration of various student populations’ needs as well.
And one of the things that we really saw coming forth was ... This is for our English
Language Learners. And even though we had more (ELs) before, we didn't have that
many compared to other schools. So some teachers were like ‘Okay, I'm going to do all
this work and I only have three in my class? So am I only going to do it during my ELD
block?’ I always sort of describe it as ‘no, it's strategies that really will help our English
Language Learners but they're good teaching skills that will help all students.’ We have
around 30% gifted and GATE population as well, so when we started to implement
GLAD® and the teachers saw also their gifted students really thrive with the strategy,
that's what helped sell it. It wasn't just for these three students it actually was for all
students in that range. So that really helped… (Interviewee #6).
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 120
It is in this account, that in addition to making visible how the OCDE Project GLAD® model is
an integrated language approach, shows that through building language and content in an
integrated and relevant way, teachers are more inclined to feel confident in attending to the needs
of EB students and the linguistic demands found in other student groups. In addition, the
confidence built in lesson design decision making can also bridge into greater efficacy in one’s
knowledge and skills in attending to other students’ differentiated needs.
The third assumed conceptual influence, “instructional leaders need to comprehend
concepts of andragogy (involvement in planning and evaluation, bridging life experiences,
respect, relevancy-oriented, and problem-oriented) to be able to provide effective professional
learning experiences (that will shift learning for emergent bilingual students),” was determined
as an asset through interviews using interview questions such as: “Have you heard about
andragogy?,” “What are important tenants of andragogy?,” “Explain how your Administrative
Credentialing program integrated knowledge and skills of andragogy into the program, if any?,”
“In what ways have you used andragogy in your position as an instructional leader, if at all?,”
and “How has knowledge and skills of andragogy supported you in your role as instructional
leader of this school?” Though one of the six instructional leaders stated knowing the term
“andragogy,” when providing clarity on its meaning in interviews, each instructional leader
spoke to how to differently attend to the needs of adult learners versus the needs of young
learners through pedagogy, many being able to describe various tenants of andragogy based on
Knowles’s (1984) and Arshavskiy’s (2013) research. Table 10 reflects each instructional
leaders’ recognition of valuing the experiences that adults (teachers) bring to new learning
experiences and showing respect by building rapport, listening, and valuing ideas shared,
followed by understanding that adults need to be involved in the planning and evaluation of their
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 121
own instruction. “Adult learning is problem-centered rather than content-oriented” was the least
frequently discussed (one of six) of the tenants; a tenant that reflects the on-going need within
professional learning experiences to emphasize why a particular method, practice or strategy is
of value and what problem it helps resolve. Adults have been found to desire to be a part of the
solution, setting purpose to the learning. Thus, when presenting professional learning
experiences, presenting the content within the framework of “we have a problem to solve” can
increase practice and interest.
Table 10
Number of Participants Referencing Tenants of Andragogy (Knowles, 1984)
Tenants of Andragogy
Number of
Participants
Adults need to be involved in the planning and evaluation of their instruction.

Experience (including mistakes) provides the basis for learning activities; and
reflects being respected for the experiences they bring.

Adults are most interested in learning subjects that have immediate relevance
and impact to their job or personal life.

Adult learning is problem-centered rather than content-oriented.
5 of 6

6 of 6

3 of 6

1 of 6

Instructional leaders reflected on their practices of how to best support adult learners
(teachers) in their instructional practices. Table 10 shows an alignment between the tenants of
andragogy (Knowles, 1984) and what instructional leaders had to say about what is important
when working with adults.
Table 10 reveals that though instructional leaders may not have heard of andragogy nor
its tenants, evidence of their understanding of their teacher populations’ needs are known and
were held assets. Upon inquiry of whether their Administrative Credential supported
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 122
understanding adult learning, each stated this was not a concept explored. This understanding
that adults need to be involved in the planning and evaluation of their instruction, that experience
provides the basis for learning activities, adults are most interested in learning subjects that have
immediate relevance and impact to their job or personal life, and that adult learning is problem-
centered rather than content-oriented may have surfaced as needed knowledge through
instructional leaders’ years of administrative experience and the time spent in building
relationships with their teachers. Whether formally or informally acquired, the tenants of
andragogy represent a needed knowledge base to apply the skills of attending to adult learners’
needs. Absent of understanding these tenants, engaging one’s teaching staff, attempting to build
buy-in, engaging in a new initiative, professional learning or shift in instruction would be an
upward battle, ultimately causing delays in the needed change for the students one serves.
Knowing this information, arms an instructional leader with the knowledge and skills to pierce
through the barriers of mobilizing one’s teaching force.
The fourth influence, “instructional leaders need to know about professional learning
communities,” is a new conceptual influence that emerged in data collection and was and
determined to be an asset through interviews and document analysis. The researcher learned that
83% of instructional leaders were referencing “collaboration” as time for grade level teams and
instructional leadership team (ILT) members to discuss student learning, engage in systematic
processes to look at strategies, and engage in data dialogue. As a member of the instructional
leadership team, instructional leaders (principals) would circulate amongst groups during
“collaboration” and facilitate progress. In light of this study, instructional leaders showed
evidence through documents that time in “collaboration” integrated analyzing the needs of EB
students and the implementation of the OCDE Project GLAD® model. Documents used to
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 123
support a focused lens on EB students were Collaboration Agendas, EL Report Cards, and
calendars. This process of “collaboration” most reflects the theory of professional learning
communities presented by Richard DuFour (1998), in which three big ideas are stated:
1. Ensuring that students learn
a. What do we want students to learn?
b. How will we know when each student has learned it?
c. How will we respond when a student experiences difficulty in learning?
2. A culture of collaboration
3. A focus on results
Richard DuFour (1998) stated, “the powerful collaboration that characterizes professional
learning communities is a systematic process in which teachers work together to analyze and
improve their classroom practice” (p. 7). One instructional leader shared the value in
empowering instructional leadership team (ILT) members, as leaders, to direct grade level
collaboration time, keeping a focus on using OCDE Project GLAD® for teaching and learning,
“Grade levels collaborate every other week for three hours, and so during that collaboration time
during the day, the ILT member facilitates those meetings. So we make sure that GLAD is on
there” (Interviewee #6). Another instructional leader shares how they ‘focus on results’ using
the English Learner Proficiency Assessment for California (ELPAC) and the ELD Report Card,
I did some English Learner monitoring, student monitoring, with my teachers in
collaboration yesterday. We are looking through the ELPAC and then talking about the
ELD Report Card, that we use here in our district, and those scores and ratings, then the
data that they use to back it up, and then action plans. Because it looked like, just on the
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 124
surface data, that these students could reclassify. And that's a huge goal for all of us, is if
students reclassify, especially before they get to middle school (Interviewee #4).
The accounts shared reveal DuFour’s (1998) big ideas pertaining to PLC’s confirmed. The
structures of PLCs provide a framework for educators to engage in meaningful and systematic
change, but more so, to remain focused on the primary goal- learning; learning both for students
and the adults.
The fifth influence is a new conceptual influence that also emerged throughout data
collection. “Instructional leaders need to know concepts of continuous improvement, such as
professional learning cycles,” surfaced as paramount. Five of the six instructional leaders
referenced understanding professional learning cycles as a method to support implementation of
instructional practices and the same five of the six instructional leaders submitted documents
with professional learning cycles articulated. Though there were slight variations to the order
and steps to the professional learning cycle, the efforts to continuously improve and progress
were evident in the language used for the cycles. Instructional leaders had the following steps
delineated as part of the professional learning cycle: training, identify quality indicators,
collaboration, professional reading, safe practice, peer observation, peer feedback, reflection,
looking at student work and data, and implementation: monitory, measure and modify. In further
investigation, the following concepts were introduced by district personnel in a similar order,
however, provided the autonomy to engage in professional learning cycles, some augmented the
order or the time frames for the context of their own schools. The most common cycle used by
instructional leaders is seen in Figure 2.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 125

Figure 2. Professional learning cycle.
One instructional leader commented on the importance of the professional learning cycle, saying
I'm a big proponent of the professional learning cycle, seeing that to have some of the
greatest impacts of the schools that I've been at. So just really aligning it, like taking that
instructional time. Like we're going to do some PD on it, you're going to et some time to
be able to have some safe practice with it, we're going to do some peer observations with
it, we're going to come back and revisit and refine it so that it's best for our kids and
really getting teachers to understand that and open up their classroom practice in a
systematic way for them (Interviewee #2).
Professional learning cycles provide the conceptual framing for educators to understand the shift
from theory to application of practice. The process makes transparent the intended goals of the
instructional leaders and the community, setting a clear purpose and expectation. Engaging in a
professional learning cycle also ensures that the focus on learning built during PLCs is made
actionable through the cycle. Recognizing that instructional shifts reflecting language
Training
(Determine Quality
Indcators)
Collaboration
Professional Reading
Safe Practice
Opening Up
Classroom Practice
(Peer Observation &
Reflection)
Implementation:
Monitor, Measure,
Modify
(Analyze Studen Data)
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 126
acquisition can be a change some educators would be fearful of taking, provides a poised
expectation to engage.
Procedural Knowledge Gaps
According to the results summarized in Table 8, one assumed procedural knowledge
influence was determined as assets held and two new influences emerged. Table 11 represents
the validated assumed procedural knowledge influences, how it measured and what instruments
were used to validate.
Table 11
Evaluated Assumed Procedural Knowledge Influences
Category Assumed Influences (Validated) Instruments
Know
(Assets)
Don’t
Know
(Gap)
Procedural Instructional leaders need to know how to
implement the OCDE Project GLAD®
model, using modeling, time for practice,
coaching, mentoring, reflection and
feedback.

Interviews
Document
Analysis
6 0
Procedural
(New)

Instructional leaders need to know how to
develop, foster and utilize professional
learning communities to support instructional
responsiveness.

Interviews

4 2
Procedural
(New)
Instructional leaders need to know how to
develop and utilize a professional learning
cycle as an avenue for on-going
implementation of the OCDE Project
GLAD® model.

Interviews
Document
Analysis
4 2

The first assumed procedural influence, “that instructional leaders need to know how to
implement the OCDE Project GLAD® model, using modeling, time for practice, coaching,
mentoring, reflection and feedback,” was confirmed to be a needed asset through the interview
uestions: “What steps have you taken in the implementation of the OCDE Project GLAD®
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 127
strategies, if any?” “How do you approach creating professional learning?” “What coaching
protocols do you utilize, if at all?” “What role does reflection play, if at all?” This assumed
influence was also determined as an asset held by principals through documents provided, such
as professional learning cycles with embedded practice and rehearsal opportunities, calendars of
trainings showing demonstration and modeling of the OCDE Project GLAD® model,
“Walkthrough Forms” for feedback, “Guided Visit” documents that supported with coaching and
mentoring, and “Reflection Forms” (specifically after guided visits). Table 12 represents the
number of instructional leaders that noted demonstration/ modeling, practice during professional
learning cycles, coaching, mentoring, reflection and feedback as important in their
implementation of the OCDE Project GLAD® model in meeting the needs of their emergent
bilingual populations. Of the implementation practices referenced, “Rehearsal/Practice,”
“Coaching,” and “Feedback” were referenced by all instructional leaders. With each expected
implementation practice, instructional leaders had corresponding documents to support the
expectation, however “Rehearsal/Practice” was most evidenced in documentation by four of the
six of instructional leaders.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 128
Table 12
Number of Interviews and Documents Analyzed Referencing Implementation Practices
Implementation Practices Interviews Documents

Demonstration/Modeling 5 of 6 3 of 6

Rehearsal/Modeling 6 of 6 4 of 6

Coaching

6 of 6 3 of 6
Mentoring

1 of 6 3 of 6
Reflection

5 of 6 1 of 6
Feedback 6 of 6 2 of 6

The frequency of each instructional practice mentioned in interviews illuminates the
understanding of implementation of practices and what is enacted, as is seen in Figure 3. With
“Rehearsal/Practice,” “Coaching,” and “Feedback” having been referenced by all instructional
leaders in Table 12, we also can see in Figure 3 that the frequency of each of the implementation
of practices is also high, with “Feedback” referenced 107 times in interviews. Frequency could
be attributed with confidence of being able to execute and perceived urgency of the practice.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 129

Figure 3. Frequency of implementation practices referenced in interviews.
There is a connection between how many instructional leaders referenced these three
practices, the frequency of reference and what is seen in documents to support these practices.
Though feedback is considered a valuable practice (100% of participants noted the value), only
two of six instructional leaders have a physical document to facilitate the practice. Similarly,
five of six participants referenced reflection as a critical practice to support implementation,
however, only one of six instructional shared documents that are used in the process of reflecting
with teachers on best practices to support emergent bilingual students, such as the OCDE Project
GLAD® model. The four of six documents provided related to “Rehearsal/Practice” could be
attributed to the district-wide effort in incorporating professional learning cycles in which safe
practice is a step, this expectation could account for the higher percentages of visibility in
document form. One instructional leader communicated how modeling and coaching within
professional learning cycles has proved beneficial for practice, stating “We're doing observations
and modeling; we're doing side-by-side coaching. It has just been a process. And it has been
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Modeling Practice Coaching Mentoring Reflection Feedback
Implementation Practices
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 130
phenomenal; we've only been in school 16 weeks but already kids are moving and the way that
we are talking about children is changing; it's not deficit based, it's 'What do these kids need?'
And that serves all students” (Interviewee #3). Additionally, many instructional leaders made
reference to ensuring that teachers did not feel formatively evaluated in the process of feedback
and reflection and could also be a cause for smaller percentages of documents to support this
process, relying on dialogue as a primary method. This thought was reflected in the following
sentiment, “I think that getting them to be reflective, which requires just the questioning that you
utilize…you have to work your questioning around how you're getting them to self-reflect on
what they need to work on” (Interviewee #2). Whereas another instructional leader points out
the value of not appearing evaluative, “‘This is not going to be on your evaluation. This feedback
process is to help you. I want growth. I'm not here to say what I'm catching you doing wrong,
no.’ And so I've had to build that culture in” (Interviewee #1). Both accounts provide reasons for
not possibly having documentation, one, in an effort to not appear as if they teacher was being
evaluated but felt comfortable in the model and thus no formal appearing papers were provided,
and the latter being the district already formalized the process and there is no need for the
documentation due to being internalized.
The second influence is a new procedural knowledge influence that emerged throughout
the data collection process and was determined as a valuable asset through interviews and
document analysis. “Instructional leaders need to know how to develop, foster and utilize
professional learning communities to support instructional responsiveness,” building upon the
conceptual knowledge influence that emerged and was noted in Table 7. Within this emerging
theme, the researcher learned how instructional leaders used professional learning communities
as an avenue to build vision, set expectations, and develop shared leadership through an
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 131
instructional leadership team (ILT) to increase collective teacher efficacy on instructional
practices surrounding OCDE Project GLAD®. Having grade level collaborative teams choose
their grade level representative to partake in ILT operated as a mechanism to build voice and in
return provide a lens of how implementation would occur within each grade level, using the
group’s expertise with the ILT member as a guide. Four of the six instructional leaders showed
conceptual knowledge of professional learning communities as stated in Table 11 and four of the
six instructional leaders articulated how they develop, foster and utilize their professional
learning communities to transform instructional practices. The following account illuminates
one method
So we take that information, we come back and they chart it and then we all look at the
charts to determine, okay, what are our strengths and what do we need to work on. And
then based on what we need to work on, the ILT is now going to take that, and come up
with a plan. But everyone is seeing it, so it's not a surprise on how did that ILT come up
with that (Interviewee #1).
The building of collective teacher efficacy, as seen in this account, builds the needed trust and
communication of what is expected, keeping student needs at the center. In using this model, all
voices are heard and teachers feel invested in the process and following through on the plans
determined.
The third influence, “instructional leaders need to know how to develop and utilize a
professional learning cycle as an avenue for on-going implementation of the OCDE Project
GLAD® model,” is a new procedural knowledge that emerged throughout the data collection in
interviews and document analysis. Four of the six instructional leaders articulated having an
understanding of professional learning cycles in Table 11 and four of the six instructional leaders
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 132
provided document supports of the various stages of the professional learning cycle (training,
identify quality indicators, collaboration, professional reading, safe practice, peer observation,
peer feedback, reflection, looking at student work and data, and implementation: monitory,
measure and modify) being utilized to support the implementation of the OCDE Project GLAD®
model, refining practice and engaging in continuous improvement. The listed items within the
various stages of the professional learning cycle, such as monitor, measure and modify, is
reflective of the continuous improvement process. Upon engaging in a process, you monitor
progress, then measure impact and modify or adjust based on the data. Continuous improvement
is at the heart of both the model and the requirement to sustain responsiveness in meeting the
needs of EB students. Two of the six instructional leaders did not show evidence, whether in
interviews or documents of utilizing professional learning cycles to support the implementation
of the OCDE Project GLAD® model as a way to support increasing EB students access to
rigorous curricula and experiences. Of the four out of the six that utilize professional learning
cycles to support OCDE Project GLAD®, each instructional leader also incorporated time
frames, expressed pushing teachers beyond safe practice and needing to narrow the focus of
expected strategies to be implemented. For those utilizing the professional learning cycle to
support OCDE Project GLAD® implementation, cycles ran five to eight weeks with
approximately three to four cycles per year. Though the district provided training for principals
on how to engage in professional learning cycles and communities, instructional leaders have
modified or omitted the process in light of their school needs. Table 13 provides time frames for
the professional learning cycles submitted.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 133
Table 13
Time Spans for Professional Learning Cycles
Professional Learning Cycle Time Span Notes
Training 1 week

Determine Quality Indicators 1 week During week of training

Collaborative Planning 3 weeks Planning for implementation
during safe practice

3 weeks Looking at student work and
data following safe practice

Professional Reading On-Going During “collaboration”

Safe Practice 2-3 weeks

Peer Observation & Feedback 2-3 weeks

Reflection 2-3 weeks After each observation

Monitor, Measure, Modify 2 weeks Includes walkthroughs by
ILT and principal

Of the four of the six principals that utilize professional learning cycles to support
implementation of the OCDE Project GLAD® model, 100% stated that keeping safe practice or
open practice 2-3 weeks is a challenge, many teachers wanting more and more time. As an
instructional leader, each referenced needing to hold the expectation of transitioning from safe
practice and supporting teachers in progressing towards peer observations. One instructional
leader stated, “Yeah. And don’t allow them to be in safe practice for too long cause they’ll be
like, ‘No, another week, another week, another week. I’m not ready, I’m not ready’”
(Interviewee #2). Reflecting that the teachers were indeed ready and needed encouragement to
realize they could take the next steps. Whereas another instructional leader shared
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 134
I still have a problem with safe practice. But I understand it. I say that because teachers
always want four weeks or six weeks of safe practice and my big push now is safe
practice does not mean no practice. Because sometimes with the safe practice they go
‘Oh good, I really don’t have to get started right away.’ Where it’s like, ‘No, you still
need to get started.’ So that’s a piece I struggle with (Interviewee #6).
The process of safe practice surfaced frequently in interviews, where some teachers frequently
want to stay in a space where they are not taking risks and remain in safe practice. Instructional
leaders need to employ the tenants of andragogy to unearth what is at the root of why the risk out
of safe practice and into peer observation is such a hurdle. In considering how adults best learn,
the process to gain the confidence to engage in peer observation may need to be strengthened,
having teachers first engage in practice in a simulated setting, one similar to their own, but
potentially just with adults. This process can then be followed by a microteaching experience,
where educators are asked to model with a small group of students and peers. This process
begins to transform the process to where adults are scaffolded to success. Yet another
instructional leader proclaimed the following regarding the term safe practice impacting teacher
perception
Building confidence here was my number one goal overall, and so…in fact, even with
ILT work, the district uses a term called ‘safe practice.’ So we do something and we’re in
safe practice for two to three weeks then. I hate that term, and so I got rid of it and like;
there’s no ‘safe’ and then we to go ‘unsafe.’ So we call it ‘open practice,’ like if we are
going to be learners and we are learning alongside our students, we’re pushing our
pedagogy, then we are going to make mistakes along the way, and we have to be okay
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 135
with that without fear of anything. That helps me push teachers to keep moving forward
(Interviewee #3).
As interviewee #3 reports, the name safe practice can inadvertently cause some teachers to panic,
and wonder how possible reaching mastery can be.
Lastly, as instructional leaders reflected on how to best support in implementation of the
OCDE Project GLAD® model’s multitude of approaches and strategies, each instructional leader
stated the need to narrow the focus. As a complex conceptual framework, with 56 corresponding
strategies, analyzing one’s data and determining what were the greatest areas of needs, to then
chunk how implementation would occur, was shared to be the most effective method. Following
are two instructional leaders’ accounts:
We’ve been incorporating into our professional learning cycle in phases. Now, our
teachers are implementing one to five of the [OCDE Project GLAD®] strategies
regularly. If you walk through our classrooms, you'll see strong evidence of Observation
Charts, Cognitive Content Dictionary, and Pictorial Input Charts. We really started last
year, so some are now getting into Sentence Patterning Charts to kind of really break
down that language (Interviewee #4).
This idea of chunking the strategies deliberately has proven successful. To tackle the 56
strategies or the development of a full unit of study becomes overwhelming for both teachers and
instructional leaders to lead. The power of engaging deeply would be lost in the effort to know
and use the entirety of the model at once. Using thoughtful design thinking, these instructional
leaders are referring to using their data and student need to pave the path for what direction is
needed to engage in a few strategies, well and in sequence. Lastly, “I would say to start slow.
We just said when we first did it, we said ‘I just want to have one GLAD® chart. And really the
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 136
GLAD® chart is going to evolve over many lessons. And so we're just going to be focusing on
this one. You can bring in others but let's just focus on this one.’ Making sure that teachers are
clear on the different roles for student learning is in there as well” (Interviewee #6).
The results of the narrowed focus have proven beneficial from the instructional leaders’
reports. For one instructional leader shared, “I see huge improvements in instruction as far as the
strategies that the teachers are using, and I know they work for kids because I know it's research
based and I see the engagement. Like I see all the positives” (Interviewee #1); and “They're
implementing and they're implementing it the right way” (Interviewee #5). The value in being
able to engage deliberately in a few strategies well, supported by a system of colleagues and
instructional leaders gives weight to the importance of having procedural knowledge of how the
OCDE Project GLAD® model is implemented, professional learning communities operate and
professional learning cycles evolve.
The last knowledge gap analyzed is metacognitive knowledge, building from levels of
cognition into reflective practices.
Metacognitive Knowledge Gaps
According to the results in Table 7, one assumed metacognitive knowledge influence was
determined inconclusive. Table 14 represents the inconclusive influences, what instruments
were used to and to what degree.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 137
Table 14
Evaluated Assumed Metacognitive Knowledge Influences
Category Assumed Influences (Validated) Instruments
Know
(Assets)
Don’t
Know
(Gap)
Metacognitive Instructional leaders need critical
reflective practices to pose questions
regarding meeting the needs of emergent
bilingual students
Interviews

0 6

The first assumed metacognitive knowledge influence, that “instructional leaders need
critical reflective practices to pose questions regarding meeting the needs of emergent bilingual
students,” was investigated through the interview questions: “What processes do you engage in
to support your own reflection, if any?” and “What steps do you take in reflecting about
coaching?” Complex decisions require instructional leaders to engage in sophisticated reflection
and build this skill-set within each teacher, but equally within themselves. 100% of instructional
leaders reflected upon how reflection is a critical process for oneself, stating “And as an
administrator I question, ‘Am I being supportive? Am I giving them what they need? What else
needs to be done?’ But we have to do that” (Interviewee #1). However, comments did not
specifically target reflections on how they best support meeting the needs of EB students or how
they support their teachers in meeting the needs of this student population and did not bridge into
the processes of critical reflection. Reflections often reflected upon how to navigate thinking
differently about their teacher population, one example being:
So the challenging personalities are gonna continue to be challenging but I always try to
understand what the root cause and the core is as to why that's the case, and then try to
figure out a way to break through that. So that's my work that I really think about. There's
all this other stuff but I think that's super important because really when it comes back to
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 138
successful students and what's gonna happen- it's the teacher. And so I'm just there to
make sure that everybody does their best on behalf of the kids. That's how I see my job
(Interviewee #4).
Though all instructional leaders spoke to the critical importance of reflective practices,
the gap of critical reflection practices were not noted and thus is inclusive. Reflection and
critical reflection hold different outcomes. Critical reflection is more than just ‘thinking about’
or ‘thoughtful’ practice. It is a way of ‘critiquing’ practice in a systematic and rigorous way,
helping practioners to carefully consider what is good and what could be improved. If there is a
desire to create cultures that are more caring, this requires changes in individuals and teams.
Critical reflection is a key activity in creating caring cultures, for it can enable individuals to
develop greater self-awareness. Critical reflective practices would focus on the teaching
practices for the traditionally underserved populations and attends to the sociopolitical context,
the debate of power and issues of access and how that then is reflected in practice (Bensimone,
2005). Additionally, if critical reflective practices were present, an emphasis on why EB
students need additional instructional supports would be present, additionally, if the teaching
population is a representation of the students they serve, or the reasons why some students are
obtaining access over others. The process of engaging in critical reflection requires a deep
analysis of one’s own belief systems and values and how it may be in conflict with the dominant
culture that may exist in one’s educational system (Paris, 2017). This type of reflection is a
current gap for CSESD instructional leaders within this study. Though not currently an asset of
instructional leaders, a potentially powerful behavior that is needed to ensure that the closing of
the achievement and opportunity gap for EB students is present.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 139
Synthesis of Results and Findings for Knowledge Influences
The results and findings from the various sources of data showed that four of the five
assumed influences were assets held by instructional leaders plus four new influences. The
evaluated assets and new influences are illustrated in Table 15.
Table 15
Summary of Evaluated Assumed Knowledge Influences
Category Assumed Influences Assets
New
Influences
Conceptual Instructional leaders need to know the different
typologies of emergent bilingual students.


Conceptual Instructional leaders need to understand the OCDE
Project GLAD® model and strategies for meeting
the needs of emergent bilingual students.


Conceptual Instructional leaders need to comprehend concepts
of andragogy (involvement in planning and
evaluation, bridging life experiences, respect,
relevancy-oriented, and problem-oriented) to be able
to provide effective professional learning
experiences.


Conceptual Instructional leaders need to know about
professional learning communities (focus on
learning, collaboration, and results-data).

√

Conceptual Instructional leaders need to know concepts of
continuous improvement, such as professional
learning cycles and the steps within them.

√

Procedural Instructional leaders need to know how to
implement the OCDE Project GLAD® model, using
modeling, time for practice, coaching, mentoring,
reflection and feedback.


Procedural Instructional leaders need to know how to develop
and foster professional learning communities to
support instructional responsiveness.

√

Procedural Instructional leaders need to know how to develop
and utilize a professional learning cycle as an
avenue for on-going implementation of the OCDE
Project GLAD® model.
√

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 140
Triangulation of interview findings and document analysis revealed that instructional
leaders need to understand and have skills related to andragogy to best support instructional
shifts in meeting the needs of emergent bilingual students. Instructional leaders must know how
to differentiate support structures from how young learners learn (pedagogy) and how adults
learn best (andragogy) to shift instruction and create sustainable implementation structures.
Concepts associated with andragogy included recognizing that adults need to be involved in the
planning and evaluation of their instruction; experience (including mistakes) provides the basis
for learning activities and adults must feel respected for the experiences they bring; adults are
most interested in learning subjects that have immediate relevance and impact to their job or
personal life and are practical; and that adult learning is problem-centered rather than content-
centered, as well as are goal-oriented. In an understanding how adults learn best, instructional
leaders can support in instructional shifts. Additionally, instructional leaders need to incorporate
methods of how to support instructional changes, including engaging in modeling, opportunities
to rehearse and practice, coaching, mentoring, reflective practices, and feedback loops.
Applying these concepts into structures such as professional learning communities and through
professional learning cycles sets the structures for continuous improvement.
To ensure that these concepts, structures and practices are aligned to emergent bilingual
student needs, instructional leaders need to know their language learner populations (including
typologies) to best provide instruction to close the achievement and opportunity gap. When
instructional leaders have a deep knowledge base on typologies and language proficiency levels,
they can better navigate providing explicit instructional feedback and monitor progress.
Understanding models, such as the OCDE Project GLAD® model that embed culturally
responsive and sustaining practices, will supply instructional leaders the tools for how to
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 141
observe, provide coaching, and feedback on refining practices to enhance emergent bilingual
students’ academic and linguistic skill-sets.
Results and Findings for Motivation Influences
There were two assumed motivation influences. Table 16 shows that two assumed
motivation influences were evaluated as assets, and three new emergent influences arose as
assets of instructional leaders. No proposed influences were considered invalid.
Table 16
Motivational Assets, Gaps and New Influences
Category Assumed Influences Assets Gaps
New
Influences
Self-Efficacy

Self-Efficacy

Self-Efficacy

Self-Efficacy

Utility Value
Instructional leaders need to believe they
can affect instructional change in teachers.

Instructional leaders need to believe that
they can ask for help and employ experts
to support in instructional implementation.

Instructional leaders need to believe that
they can engage in teacher buy-in methods
in support of instructional shifts.

Instructional leaders need to believe they
can eliminate teacher barriers and
incentivize prioritizing emergent bilingual
student needs.

Instructional leaders need to see the value
of teachers implementing the OCDE
Project GLAD® strategies for language
development as a method of addressing the
prevalent opportunity and achievement
gaps.


√

√

√

√

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 142
Eccles (2007) explains motivation in school achievement and the perceived value of
learning to four factors: intrinsic, utility, attainment value and the cost of engaging in the task.
Findings were categorized into self-efficacy and utility value.
Self-Efficacy Motivation Gaps
According to the results summarized in Table 16, one assumed self-efficacy motivation
influence was evaluated to be an asset, whereas three new influences emerged as assets. Table
17 reflects the validated assumed self-efficacy motivation influences, instruments used to
validate and what percentage believe or did not believe the influence to be influential.
Table 17
Evaluated Assumed Self-Efficacy Motivation Influence
Category Assumed Influences Instruments
Believe
(Assets)
Don’t
Believe
(Gaps)
Self-
Efficacy

Self-
Efficacy
(New)

Self-
Efficacy
(New)
Self-
Efficacy
(New)
Instructional leaders need to believe they can
affect instructional change in teachers.

Instructional leaders need to believe that they
can ask for help and employ experts to
support in targeted instructional
implementation.

Instructional leaders need to believe that they
can engage in teacher buy-in methods in
support of instructional shifts.

Instructional leaders need to believe they can
eliminate teacher barriers and incentivize
prioritizing emergent bilingual student needs.

Interviews

Interviews
Document
Analysis

Interviews

Interviews
Document
Analysis
6

5

6

4
0

1

0

2

The assumed self-efficacy motivation influence, “instructional leaders need to believe
they can affect instructional change in teachers,” was evaluated as an asset by instructional
leaders through interview questions: “In what ways has your confidence changed from when you
first began supporting teachers in implementing the OCDE Project GLAD® model?” and “What
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 143
would you recommend to other instructional leaders in supporting instructional change?”
Instructional leaders expressed self-efficacy in the following ways: “I think instructional leaders
and instructional leadership can really move a school forward. I think over the years of
application in different roles I have developed a lot of tools in my tool belt, so to speak; I feel
well-prepared and equipped as a leader to support instruction. And so I think that, I try to keep
that at the forefront-the instructional piece” (Interviewee #2). This reflection reveals the
importance of instructional leadership believing they can create change in the systems they work
in, this motivated instructional leaders to engage and persevered with teachers, for students.
So I think that I need to be the example, and be able to make sure that I repeat what I
expect or what is possible. I think that for an instructional leader I need to be out there
spouting the impossible. What is achievable? What you think is impossible we can do.
Yes, we can raise this. I've struggled too, yes. I've been a teacher and I've raised grade
levels. It can happen... Students can grow two to three grade levels a year with good
instruction. It's about making sure that people are aware of what is possible, but then also
providing them the supports that they would need to make that possible. I think that my
work ... That's my big role. I'm the cheerleader, and I also have to make sure that I back
that up with the evidence. That’s what I hope to do, raise the bar…I just love my job
(Interviewee #6).
When instructional leaders feel that they have impact, they work harder to realize that
vision and will employ various skill sets to ensure the goal is attained.
Instructional leaders that showed self-efficacy in affecting change also believed in asking
for help and employing experts to support their vision, had methods for teacher buy-in and felt
confident in incentivizing their teachers. The second influence, “Instructional leaders need to
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 144
believe that they can ask for help and employ experts to support in targeted instructional
implementation,” is a new self-efficacy motivational influence that emerged in data collection
through interviews and document analysis. Though District LCAPs outlined the names of
schools within the District that were to receive District support regarding emergent bilingual
student populations (specifically through District OCDE Project GLAD® trainers’ support), five
of the six instructional leaders asked for additional supports and specifically targeted supports,
such as integrated ELD and Mathematics using OCDE Project GLAD® or OCDE Project
GLAD® in Writing. Instructional leaders recognized areas of need and were able to employ the
District trainers in aligning and articulating several themes as they worked to elevate emergent
bilingual students’ access to quality instruction. This willingness to ask for help and employ
experts reflects a motivation and belief that instructional leaders understood the gaps of
knowledge, skills and motivations of their teachers and their own gaps, that they could employ
the “experts” to support in bridging the gap. This was further evidenced when viewing school’s
professional learning calendars, noting the names of district experts being employed to support in
professional learning, coaching and feedback loops. Instructional leaders expressed that to be
able to obtain their vision, pulling in experts to support them on identified areas of need was
necessary, two stating: “I just did one of those things, I got on the phone and I said, ‘Look at
these scores, look at these trends, we're trying a bunch of different things, it's not working, I need
these ladies. I need to have my teachers who have the background knowledge of this, they just
need a refresh and a GLAD 2.0" (Interviewee #4). Following suit, “I know that even last year,
we weren't supposed to have the GLAD trainers come, but I pushed. I go, ‘Yes we've had so
much great success, we need to keep that going. We need them to come back one more time just
to make sure we're following through with all’” (Interviewee #6). This pervasive effort to get
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 145
what one needs to do what is needed for students is a behavior of highly self-efficacious
individuals. Instructional leaders employ the help of others to ensure one’s vision is being
attained, this is also reflective of highly self-efficacious individuals. They do not believe they
could or should do it all on their own, but instead work with other models and experts to support
the process.
The third influence, “instructional leaders need to believe that they can engage in teacher
buy-in methods in support of instructional shifts,” is a new conceptual influence that emerged in
data collection through interviews. 100% of instructional leaders expressed gaining teacher buy-
in as a part of affecting change in instruction. The methods in how they did so was expressed in
the following ways, “GLAD, it's for teachers, by teachers, the buy-in is huge. When I used to do
it the first two years, oh, God. It was like slings and arrows. If I did any training, it went on deaf
ears. Straight up. Straight up went on deaf ears. So very interesting, but I found that when I
developed that system with instructional leadership teams, and then I got really strong
instructional teachers that are also leaders with strong social capital in those teams… I would say
this year; it's just exploded because of it” (Interviewee #4). Within the same mindset that highly
efficacious instructional leaders ask for help, so do they realize that teachers have the greatest
impacts on student’s achievement and are needed to ensure that instructional shifts happen to
bridge the achievement gaps for EB students. Seeking teacher buy-in is thus necessary to create
the change one wants to see; avoiding force and coercion and instead insuring that teachers feel
valued, are a part of the shared vision, and have the resources they need to do what they need is a
part of that process. Another instructional leader shared a similar sentiment about developing a
shared vision,
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 146
I think it's really that shared vision and really having teacher input and buy in on what
happens with instruction. And the importance of that. I have a very compliant team,
which means that they will do whatever I ask them. But that's not how change happens,
so they have to be invested and they have to see the passions. I think it ... That was really
conveyed, is making sure that you have this shared vision of leadership and you are
transparent and you convey it to your team (Interviewee #3).
In addition to developing a shared vision and seeking teacher input, behaviors of listening and
making time came forward as other methods of developing teacher buy-in. “It's a lot of give and
take. It's a lot of listening, supporting, but yet it's a push and support. It's a push and support, and
push. But like I tell them, ‘I'll push you but providing you with the support that you need,’ in
giving them the time, to hear them out is key. And I think it's, it's really listening. Not that I have
to agree, but listening to what they have to say, I'm giving them that voice I think is critical and
then I see things change. I see them grow” (Interviewee #5).
The fourth influence, “instructional leaders need to believe they can eliminate teacher
barriers and incentivize prioritizing emergent bilingual student needs,” is a new conceptual
influence that emerged in data collection through interviews and document analysis. Table 18
shows the three types of incentives that were described by instructional leaders.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 147
Table 18
Incentives Described in Interviews
Incentive Type Description of Incentive Number Referenced
Time for Planning

Positive Praise

External Rewards
Time increase in grade level collaboration and/or in
independent planning time to prioritize emergent
bilingual students.
Public acknowledgement during individual
walkthroughs, during staff meetings or collaboration,
or via “Virtual Walkthroughs.”
Teacher prizes such as materials for their classroom
through earned Dojo Points
5 of 6

4 of 6

1 of 6

Five of six instructional leaders referenced that an “incentive” in affecting instructional
change and supported building teacher buy-in was providing time for planning. Of the five of
six instructional leaders, each spoke to recognizing a major concern by teachers was not having
enough time to implement and plan for OCDE Project GLAD® practices and differentiated
lessons for emergent bilingual students, so each of the five of six instructional leaders found
ways to remove that barrier, whether by obtaining funds for a Visual and Performing Arts
teacher and using that time for teachers to independently plan or re-arranging the Collaboration
Agendas to have more time to plan. Two instructional leaders stated the following: “Another
way is that I provide them time during collaboration. I give up my administrator time so they can
refine their practices of GLAD®, usually I encourage them to do walkthroughs” (Interviewee
#1). Sharing space and time represents to teachers that instructional leaders value them and will
displace their agenda for prioritizing teacher. “So it's about really listening to what they need
and supporting them. I know glad takes a long time. I know it does, but what, how can we help,
how can we support? I try to look for ways in our staff meetings to decrease my talking time and
increase their collaboration time” (Interviewee #5). The one remaining teacher not included in
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 148
the five of six instructional leaders also referenced the importance of time for planning as an
incentive, however, not specifically for prioritizing planning for EB students.
Another form of “incentive” that surfaced was positive praise, four of six instructional
leaders stating the value of acknowledging the work that was done in front of peers, either
virtually or in person, was important in maintaining motivation. “I'd say more the motivation
might be more about being called out in positive ways. We always start off our staff meetings
with celebrations and appreciations. And sometimes I even plan to say ‘Oh, I was in your room
today. Here's something you should share that you've done. Look this is really good. I saw how
this student would come up there.’ So that way the celebration is about how the student was
accessing content, was accessing it through the charts. So different teachers will be able to share
in there. So that way it's not about me recognizing them, but that they sort of come up and ... And
sometimes they'll even say ‘Well, (the principal) says I should share. Just because it was so
exciting’” (Interviewee #6). One principal developed the concept of Virtual Walkthroughs as a
mechanism for peer support, feedback and positive praise.
So the first time that I started virtual walkthroughs was two years ago, the whole campus
you could see it as soon as the email went out and I looked out my window, I could see
teachers running down the hallways asking each other for help, how do I do this, how do
I do that. They were helping each other and then someone said, ‘oh (principal), but if you
have them reply all and they see what everyone else is doing, they're going to go back
and they're going to change their chart or they're going to go back and they're going to
change their schedule.’ I'm like, ‘Great! They're learning from each other and making it
better.’ And if they want to change it and then send me the picture, fine. But I just created
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 149
a small opportunity for teachers to learn from each other and then to receive public
acknowledgement for the efforts made. Talk about motivation! (Interviewee #1)
The emphasis on positive praise and peer recognition is evidence that even adults want to
be affirmed for the work they are passionate about.
One of the six instructional leaders referenced using external prizes or rewards as a
method of incentivizing teacher instructional shifts, the use of Dojo points taking prominence in
their school, both for students and teachers. “I say, ‘The first five teachers to respond will get
five Dojo points on their account’ ... because I created a Dojo account for my teachers ... and
Dojo prizes will be given out at the end of the year. So I have like this big store that I do for my
teachers at the end of the year and, based on their Dojo points, they get to spend on high-ticket
items like electric staplers, Expo markers ... like big items. I spend a lot on teacher incentives”
(Interviewee #1). The small amount of external rewarding systems reveals, that or most, external
incentives are unnecessary, and instead, the focus of immediate feedback, praise and affirmation
provides individuals with the awareness that they are seen and that their actions are perceived as
valuable for the community.
Utility Value Motivation Gaps
According to the results summarized in Table 16, one assumed utility value motivation
influence was evaluated as a star. Within Table 19, validated assumed utility-value motivation
influences were articulated, with instruments used to validate and the percentage of those that
value and do not value the influence.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 150
Table 19
Evaluated Assumed Utility-Value Motivation Influence
Category Assumed Influences (Validated) Instruments Value
Don’t
Value
Utility
Value
Instructional leaders need to see the value of
teachers implementing the OCDE Project
GLAD® strategies for language development
as a method of addressing the prevalent
opportunity and achievement gaps.
Interviews 5 1

The assumed motivation influence, “instructional leaders need to see the value of
teachers implementing the OCDE Project GLAD® strategies for language development as a
method of addressing the prevalent opportunity and achievement gaps,” was determined through
the interview question, “How do you see the OCDE Project GLAD® model supporting your
school in meeting the needs of your English Learners?” Five of the six instructional leaders
responded stating that the model has had an impact on instruction and in meeting the needs of
their EB students. Table 20 represents some of the ways in which instructional leaders stated
how the OCDE Project GLAD® model has had an impact on students.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 151
Table 20
OCDE Project GLAD®’s Value and Impact
Student Impact Value
Builds Social Emotional
Learning
“And I think the most important thing is that students feel they can be
successful. Social-emotional learning is important for me too, and if
you don't have success built in, it's gonna be really hard to hit those
things that are challenging. So, I've always felt that that was the case
with GLAD” (Interviewee #4).

Access “As a principal or as an associate principal before, being able to go
into classrooms and have students be able to ...you know, when you
ask a student, ‘Hey, what is it that you're working on?’ Or, ‘What is it
that you're learning right now?’ Even if they couldn't maybe articulate
it to you, they can at least go, ‘Oh, yeah,’ pointing to a pictorial input
chart. And then, you can ask the question, ‘Okay, tell me more about
that. And then, they're able to access the information that they need”
(Interviewee #1).

Develops Critical Thinking
Skills
“I thought, ‘Oh my gosh, everybody should be doing GLAD in
everything and anything, that’s what we should do! It's access, it's
language, it's sequential, it's a process. And it develops critical
thinking skills’” (Interviewee #5).

Acquire Academic
Language
“I can also even talk about parents, because I also have like coffee
chats and things, and I tell them what we're doing, what our focus is,
what they should be able to see in the classroom. And when I brought
up Project GLAD, ‘Oh, have you seen GLAD charts?’ They're like
‘That's what's going on?’ Parents have noticed a big difference.
Because before they were asking their child, ‘Oh, so what did you
learn today?’ ‘Oh, we did some math,” or ‘nothing” ... And now,
‘What did you learn?’ ‘Oh, I learned all about the eyeball.’ And they
were then able to talk about the things that they learned and about the
eyeball and science and they're able to really have more rich
conversations about what they're learning with academic language and
how they're understanding” (Interviewee #6).

ELPAC “Of the 27% of the English Language Learners, we have about 54%
that are at the language proficiency level four in ELPAC” (Interviewee
#4).

Reclassification “Because it looked like, just on the surface data, that these students
could reclassify. And that's a huge goal for all of us, is if students
reclassify, especially before they get to middle school” (Interviewee
#4).

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 152
Instructional leaders’ value of the implementation of OCDE Project GLAD® is robust,
from the development of the whole child through social emotional well-being alignment, to how
the model provides access to rigorous grade level content, the development of critical thinking
skills and the acquisition of academic language as evidenced in increases in language proficiency
noted on the ELPAC and by the rates of reclassification. The sentiments shared by the
instructional leaders represents the multifaceted ways in which the model supports EB education.
Not merely a professional development model with strategies, the intent of the model’s design is
to support in building a systematic avenue to create transformation in school settings in support
of EB populations, closing the achievement gap and increasing the quality of instruction.
Both social skill development and academic and linguistic impact was distinguished as
valuable by instructional leaders, as noted above. In addition to student impact, instructional
leaders provided scenarios where teacher impact on instruction was evident, such as, “Not only
have I seen more confidence in teaching language but I've even seen more confidence, more
motivation with content. Like digging into the content deeper because what they're doing is
they're taking their benchmark program and the strategies that benchmark dictates to the teacher
and now they're extending it with GLAD®, so they're digging deeper!” (Interviewee #1) This
quote reveals the transformation and empowering nature of the model’s design; that with
increased confidence in meeting the needs of EB students, practioners are more willing to
continue to take on practices that will stretch them. Another instructional leader spoke with
admiration of the receipt of a prominent accolade, sharing “I also wanted to tell you one more
thing that I forgot and I just wrote a note. As for 2017, we earned the Spotlight on Literacy
Award and that's from Great Schools, and its highlighting schools that have closed the
achievement. We got the award for the Hispanic population! And that was awarded to only the
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 153
top two percent of the schools. Top two in the state for reducing achievement gap!” (Interviewee
#6). This instructional leader went on to further explain how the OCDE Project GLAD® model
has been a signature practice that continues to transform his school, for both teachers and
students. The model’s influence as a method for improving instructional practices that meets the
needs of all students has been made apparent, and will be further discussed in the synthesis of
results.
Synthesis of Results and Findings for Motivation Influences
The results and findings from the various sources of data showed that two of the two
assumed influences were determined as assets and three emerging influences arose. The
validated influences are illustrated in Table 21.
Table 21
Summary of Evaluated Assumed Motivation Influences
Category Assumed Influences Assets New Influences
Self-Efficacy

Self-Efficacy

Self-Efficacy

Self-Efficacy

Instructional leaders need to believe they can affect
instructional change in teachers.

Instructional leaders need to believe that they can
ask for help and employ experts to support in
instructional implementation.

Instructional leaders need to believe that they can
engage in teacher buy-in methods in support of
instructional shifts.

Instructional leaders need to believe they can
eliminate teacher barriers and incentivize
prioritizing emergent bilingual student needs.



√

√

√

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 154
Table 21, continued
Category Assumed Influences Assets
New
Influences
Utility Value Instructional leaders need to see the value of
teachers implementing the OCDE Project GLAD®
strategies for language development as a method of
addressing the prevalent opportunity and
achievement gaps
√

Triangulation of interview findings and document analysis revealed that instructional
leaders need to believe that they can have an impact on their teachers in best meeting the needs
of emergent bilingual students. Rueda (2011) makes reference to individuals with higher self-
efficacy having a greater belief in their own competencies and thus, having higher expectancies
for more positive outcomes. Efficacious individuals will frequently be more productive and
motivated to engage in, persist at, and work hard at a task (Rueda, 2011). When everyone in a
school believes that together they can make a difference, the impact on student attainment can be
almost quadrupled (Eells, 2011), perpetuated by an efficacious instructional leader. This notion
of collective efficacy across the school is a powerful precursor to student success. Visible
Learning researcher John Hattie (2009), references that combining this with having a collective
and collaborative focus on teachers evaluating their impact and the results on student attainment
can be even greater. Thus, instructional leaders recognizing their role as instructional models,
combined with the behaviors of engaging in teacher buy-in through listening, mutual respect and
opportunities to provide input, while providing incentives such as removing time constraints and
optimizing time to plan for emergent bilingual student success and praise, can create the
collective efficacy that Hattie (2009) references.
Eccles (2007) references that individuals’ placed worth are strong motivators of
performance; within utility value, an instructional leader can see the long term goals attained
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 155
through what they do. The evidence within this study reflects that value found by instructional
leaders on OCDE Project GLAD® for emergent bilingual students, ranges from the model’s
implementation having impact on students’ social emotional well-being, access to core
curriculum, increase in academic language, reading and writing, and evidenced in increases of
reclassification. Instructional leaders also saw the utility value of the model on an increase in
teacher efficacy on meeting the instructional needs of their emergent bilingual student
population.
Within this study, four of the six instructional leaders in this study had been trained in the
OCDE Project GLAD® model when in the classroom as teachers, and one while as an
administrator for the first time. Another instructional leader was trained both as a teacher and an
administrator, and one had only some minimal prior exposure to the model. Instructional leaders
spoke to their experiences from the classroom influencing their self-efficacy in providing
instructional support to their teachers in meeting the needs of emergent bilingual students,
proving to be a critical criterion. Thus, time spent as a classroom teacher utilizing the OCDE
Project GLAD® model can strengthen one’s role as an instructional leader bridging the
achievement gap for emergent bilingual students. In addition, however, instructional leaders
need to believe in the value of OCDE Project GLAD® in meeting the needs of emergent
bilingual students in closing the achievement gap. This too, built from the years of prior use of
the OCDE Project GLAD® and seeing the success as a teacher in meeting the needs of their
emergent bilingual student population. One might attribute the high self-efficacy and utility
value connected to time spent as a teacher, then as an instructional leader implementing the
OCDE Project GLAD® model as a powerful continuum in closing the achievement gap for
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 156
emergent bilingual students. Thus, both self-efficacy and utility value are motivational concepts
confirmed to be imperative in engaging in best practices that meet the needs of EB students.
Concluding the motivation influences, this section of Chapter Four concludes with the
data analysis of organizational influences, both cultural models and cultural settings.
Results and Findings for Organizational Influences
There were five assumed organizational influences. Table 22 shows that four assumed
organizational influences were determined as assets held by instructional leaders and one
assumed influence found inconclusive.
Table 22
Organizational Influences Validated, Not Validated and New Causes
Category Assumed Influences Validated
Not
Validated
New
Influences
Cultural Model
The district needs to cultivate a culture of
asset-based mindsets regarding emergent
bilingual students so that instructional leaders
can better support teachers in meeting their
complex needs.

√
Cultural Model
The district needs to have a culture of shared
responsibility in attending to the needs of
emergent bilingual students.


Cultural Setting
The district needs to develop an infrastructure
of support that creates new norms of practice
for instructional leaders that focuses on
emergent bilingual students’ learning needs.


Cultural Setting
The district needs to develop a plan for
instructional leadership training on
professional learning, coaching, feedback,
planning and evaluation of practices
structures.

√

Cultural Setting
The district needs to set an explicit priority of
utilizing OCDE Project GLAD® strategies.

√

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 157
Rueda (2011) describes organizational culture through cultural models and cultural
settings, findings will be categorized into these two themes.
Cultural Model Organization Gaps
According to the results in Table 22, one assumed cultural model organization influence
was an asset. Within Table 23, the one cultural model asset was articulated, with instruments
used and the number of instructional leaders that agreed or disagreed with the influence.
Table 23
Evaluated Cultural Model Organization Influence
Category Assumed Influences (Validated) Instruments Agreed Disagreed
Cultural
Model
The district needs to have a culture of shared
responsibility in attending to the needs of
emergent bilingual students.

Interviews
Document
Analysis
6 0

Each of the instructional leaders spoke to the importance of having the District office as a
support in helping them meet the needs of their emergent bilingual students, referring to shared
leadership as evidenced through the Instructional Leadership Teams (ILT) developed through the
District (similar to the infrastructure that is then built in schools), where the District works with
instructional site leaders in analyzing data, making decisions about best practices for meeting the
needs of emergent bilingual students, and the on-going conversations that are had with District
mentors (Executive Directors) on growth for emergent bilingual students. Instructional leaders
additionally referenced the importance of emergent bilingual student growth, and biliteracy, as a
part of the District’s culture.
Not only is this population made a priority through cultural models, but is made evident
as a priority through the mission, vision, publications, expectations, and frequency of time spent
discussing emergent bilingual student needs. Within the District’s website, you see listed
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 158
“Shared Vision” and “Shared Values.” The visibility of the term “shared” represents a
commitment by all to meet the needs of all students. Referenced within the “shared vision” we
see the following two points as evidence of “shared responsibility” for emergent bilingual
students:
 Our children are high-achieving innovative thinkers. They are multi-literate, self-reliant,
and confident. They have a lifelong love of learning and are socially responsible citizens.
The District takes pride in developing each child's full potential, while recognizing his or
her uniqueness.
 We value and find strength in our diversity. Learning is meaningful and relevant,
connected with each child's individual needs, ethics, culture, and experiences and is
linked with the world outside the classroom.
“Multi-literate,” “our diversity” and “culture” reflect the commitment and community
responsible for envisioning possibilities for emergent bilingual students, furthered in one of the
eight values also listed on the District’s website. It states, “Diversity: We seek, encourage, and
respect each individual's contributions and value a multicultural perspective” (CSESD, 2019).
One instructional leader stated the following regarding the District’s pervasive attention to
emergent bilingual students, “If it's not a part of my agenda, if it's not a part of our conversations
as a cohort, if it's not a part of the conversations at the district level, then it's forgotten. English
Learners are not forgotten” (Interviewee #1). Another site instructional leader shared, “So, a
couple of things that I get and I tap into like crazy is, we're such a large district that we have
Executive Directors that are part of the Cabinet with the Superintendent. And each one of those
Executive Directors has twelve schools that they support, and so first and foremost I made sure I
had a really good relationship with mine. And so, we do a once a month visit, so we talk about
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 159
data. We talk about EL specifically. We talk about the professional learning cycle we're in. We
talk about GLAD®, and then we take a walk through targeted classrooms, and we talk to
students” (Interviewee #4). Both these quotes represent two instructional leaders that feel the
support of the district in making EB students a priority, it’s evident in conversations, in agendas,
in informal or formal settings, EB students are an integrated and valued part of their culture, one
of which instructional leaders across systems have shared responsibility.
The culture and the cultivation of instructional leaders and teachers is important within
this district, developing a network of supports and shared responsibility; another instructional
leader commented, “But using the network we have in our district, you have a District leader and
a cohort of schools that come together that you work with regularly. So being able to ask them
ideas using colleagues that I know. I'm fortunate because I kind of, I like to say I grew up in the
district here, I taught here, I was a coach here, I was an AP here, and I'm a principal here. So
many of them, like my principal that allowed me the opportunity to start to run PDs, now is at
the district office” (Interviewee #2). The shared responsibility also was reflected in how
monetary supports were provided in meeting the needs of EB students, “I got the support of my
district by getting the certified GLAD trainers that we have that work for our district to be able to
come to our school site and it was really based on that data. And so I was able to get that district
paid for, I didn't have to pay it out of site budget,” (Interviewee #4) exclaimed another
instructional leader. Three of the six instructional leaders specifically noted their awareness that
ELs are an important population for the Superintendent, manifesting through cabinet decisions
and district behaviors.
The one assumed cultural model influence, “the district needs to have a culture of shared
responsibility in attending to the needs of emergent bilingual students,” was evaluated through
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 160
interviews. Instructional leaders spouted praise and appreciation of how the District engages in
supports with instructional leaders, one leader stating, “So they give us different topics and areas
for us to support. And then we also have executive director in our district, that someone who
works up at the district level than they're normally head of like a department, like special
education or technology. They are given a cohort of schools and they come out and visit every
few weeks and you can call them anytime for support if you have questions as well. But I would
definitely say very, very supportive central office for the district, especially for principals or any
leaderships that I've experienced” (Interviewee #2). Another declaring “I think that this district
is amazing. They do, just have the most amazing supports for their principals” (Interviewee #3).
The support that these two individuals expressed was genuine appreciation and pride for the
district taking the actions they do in making EB students a priority and continuously focusing
attention on continuous growth. Specific to supporting the implementation of OCDE Project
GLAD®, one instructional leader shares his interaction with the OCDE Project GLAD® District
trainers and EL support providers,
When I go to the district office, I see them. I always go talk to them, and they give big
hugs on all the celebrations and I share their GLAD charts here. And so I bring that
information back to the teachers and say, ‘Oh I was just talking to the GLAD trainers,
and this is what they saw in your charts that we're going to be sharing some of them.
They might've asked this question.’ That way even if they're not here, we're still talking
about it and making sure that goes forward. I know that even last year, we weren't
supposed to have them come, but I pushed. I go, ‘Yes we've had so much great success,
we need to keep that going’ (Interviewee #6).
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 161
The overwhelming joy that is expressed and conveyed in having a united mission to
ensure the success of EB students is a sentiment felt across the district. The pride and
enthusiasm in making strides in instructional practices for EB students, or the sharing of data all
reflect the shared responsibility this district has for the EB population.
One such behavior exhibiting the culture of shared responsibility is in the expectation for
instructional leaders, with the support of District leadership, to present their English Learner data
to Cabinet. Instructional leaders, in going through this process, must understand the nature of the
data and how it has come to be, articulating to Cabinet both reasons for growth, stagnancy or
decline, in which a plan of action needs to be communicated. Through the combined work with
District mentors, instructional leaders take ownership of their school’s narrative and that of their
emergent bilingual student population. In turn, this also reflects a culture of urgency with
Cabinet, and the shared responsibility they exhibit with their instructional leaders for accounting
for the progress of their emergent bilingual students.
Cultural model organization influences not validated. According to interviews
conducted, no instructional leader referenced the need to have their district cultivate a culture of
asset-based mindsets regarding EB students so that they could better support teachers. Two of
the six instructional leaders referenced themselves needing to have this perspective, and to model
this for their own school community. This was a striking find, yet, in reflection of where this
district may be in having cultivated this mindset already may be the cause for which it is not
referenced. Through the analysis of various cultural models, it has been made apparent that there
are a multitude of practices, systems, messages, and policies that imbue an asset-based
perspective that values the EB student population. For these reasons, this organizational
influence may be already established and not in need of additional growth at the moment.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 162
Cultural Setting Organization Gaps
According to the results in Table 22, three assumed cultural setting organization
influences were evaluated as videos. Within Table 24, three validated assumed cultural setting
influences are articulated, with instruments used to validate and the percentage of those that
agreed or disagreed with the influence.
Table 24
Evaluating Cultural Setting Organization Influence
Category Assumed Influenced (Validated) Instruments Agreed
(assets)
Disagreed
Cultural
Setting

The district needs to develop an
infrastructure of support that creates
new norms of practice for instructional
leaders that focuses on emergent
bilingual students’ learning needs.

Interviews 83% 17%
Cultural
Setting

The district needs to develop a plan for
instructional leadership training on
professional learning, coaching,
feedback, planning and evaluation of
practices structures.

Interviews 100% 0%
Cultural
Setting

The district needs to set an explicit
priority of utilizing OCDE Project
GLAD® strategies.
Interviews

Document
Analysis
67% 33%

The first organizational assumed influence validated was, “the district needs to develop
an infrastructure of support that creates new norms of practice for instructional leaders that
focuses on emergent bilingual students’ learning needs,” affirmed through interviews. As
reflected in the cultural settings above, an intricate infrastructure of support for continuous
improvement provides the construct for culturally responsive practices to be sustained. The
infrastructure developed contains multiple levels of support. The district utilizes hiring practices,
Executive Director mentoring, Instructional Leadership Teams and Principal’s Academies (for
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 163
new Administrators) to develop a focus on emergent bilingual students’ learning needs. Within
District Instructional Leadership Teams, instructional leaders learn and are provided with
professional learning on developing the structures of support at one’s school site: professional
learning communities, instructional leadership teams, and professional learning cycles.
Additionally, instructional leaders receive targeted support on specific areas of district focus, for
example academic conversations. These structures of support are then expected to be
implemented within each school site, monitored and reflected upon during mentorship sessions
between Executive Directors and site instructional leaders. Figure 4 represents the developed
infrastructure:

Figure 4. Organizational infrastructure of support in meeting the needs of emergent bilingual
students.

The second assumed cultural setting organizational influence, “the district needs to
develop a plan for instructional leadership training on professional learning, coaching, feedback,
planning and evaluation of practices structures,” was validated through the following interview
Cabinet Hiring Practices
Hires educators with
experience in meeting the
needs of emergent bilingual
students.
Executive Directors
(District)
Instructional
Leadereship Teams
(ILT)
Provide monthly/bimonthly
ILT meetings with cohorts
of 12 schools.
Train on continuous
improvement.
Mentor, visiting school
sites.
School Sites (Instructional
Leaders)
PLC
ILT
Professional Learning
Cycles
Develop a culture of shared
responsibility
Develop, monitor and
maintain infrastuctures
Focus on instruction and
learning
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 164
questions: “What type of ways are instructional leaders supported by the district in building
coaching skills?” “In what types of ways are instructional leaders assessed on progress made?”
Instructional leaders responded by saying,
I think that the work that our district has done this year and last year with the model of
training our ILTs has really increased our capacity as instructional leaders. So if you had
any principals that were more administrative than instructional, this model that we've
been using with Bonnie McGrath for the last two years has really built up my skills.
Why? Because it's not just a focus on best practices that we're bringing back to our sites.
It's also a focus on how are we going to bring it back to our staff, how are we going to
implement it and get buy-in from our teachers and roll it out. And it's beautiful because
it's being rolled out at every single school the exact same way (Interviewee #1).
Another leader shared, “Like my executive director comes out, we walk classrooms and
gives me feedback for the staff and asks me questions about things that are happening and I
provide him with information about what I'm doing and what I'm working on, and he coaches me
so to speak. So he asks me questions, pushes back, gives feedback, and asks what's going to
happen next time, what’ the action plan?” (Interviewee #2) Executive Directors operate with care
and empathy as they support principals in their aspirations for their school site, however, they
also ensure that the most prevalently in need student group remains a focus and is always a part
of the agenda.
The third assumed cultural setting organizational influence, “the district needs to set an
explicit priority of utilizing OCDE Project GLAD® strategies,” was validated through analyzing
the District’s LCAP and the following interview questions, “In what ways does the District
prioritize the use of the OCDE Project GLAD® model in meeting the needs of English
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 165
Learners?” One instructional leader said, “The district provided, they hired, two GLAD
resource teachers to support our language learners or emergent bilinguals with providing
supports to teachers at schools across the district in different GLAD strategies that support the
common core curriculum and the use of the GLAD strategies” (Interviewee #2). In having two
dedicated District trainers, instructional leaders such as the following, shared how more targeted
supports became possible, “This year the district selected our school to work with Project GLAD
at a deeper level and so we have brought them in to do extensive training with the teachers
during collaboration time” (Interviewee #1). “The data, the numbers itself as well as, I will say,
I mean the Executive Directors and District Level Language Acquisition Team, knowing
historically that our school has had some difficulties with academic performance with our ELs.
There was that discrepancy and that achievement gap that was continuing to occur. And so that
was one of the things that got us GLAD. And so I think I received just a ton of support from the
district in this level” (Interviewee #4).
CSESD organizational infrastructure is the image they portray in their LCAP, a
commitment to diversity, every child, and the stories, cultures and experiences they bring.
Synthesis of Results and Findings for Organizational Influences
The results and findings from the various sources of data showed that four of the five
assumed influences were validated. The validated influences are illustrated in Table 25.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 166
Table 25
Summary of Assumed Organizational Influences Validated
Category Assumed Influences Validated
New
Influences
Cultural Model
The district needs to have a culture of shared
responsibility in attending to the needs of emergent
bilingual students.


Cultural Setting
The district needs to develop an infrastructure of
support that creates new norms of practice for
instructional leaders that focuses on emergent
bilingual students’ learning needs.


Cultural Setting
The district needs to develop a plan for instructional
leadership training on professional learning,
coaching, feedback, planning and evaluation of
practices structures.

√

Cultural Setting
The district needs to set an explicit priority of
utilizing OCDE Project GLAD® strategies.

√

Even for the most knowledgeable, skillful and motivated individuals, inadequate
processes and materials within an organization can prevent the achievement of performance
goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). Triangulation of interview findings and document analysis in this
study revealed that instructional leaders agree, the need for the District to have a culture of
shared responsibility in meeting the needs of emergent bilingual students, and thus have a system
of support, or infrastructure is required in closing the achievement gap. Within the structures of
support, an intentional cycle of professional learning is needed, of which OCDE Project GLAD®
is made a priority in meeting the needs of emergent bilingual students. Engaging in various
accountability streams lays the precedence of meeting the needs of emergent bilingual students
and closing the achievement gap as a priority. Not needing to develop and cultivate an asset-
based mindset regarding meeting the needs of emergent bilingual students may be a reflection of
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 167
this already being a cultivated cultural model, and instructional leaders needing to model this
with their own teachers is a reflection of the on-going nature of it being a district expectation.
Conclusion
The findings presented in this chapter suggest that knowledge and skills, motivation, and
organizational influences assumed of instructional leaders are overwhelmingly evident as assets
in this small sampling of instructional leaders. The literature review in Chapter 2 provided the
landscape of research to apply into the context of instructional leadership and emergent bilingual
student populations. An instructional leader has the capacity and the responsibility to cultivate
and refine their knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational influences so that the
pursuit of closing the achievement gap for emergent bilingual students is made possible. In
evaluating this stakeholder population, what has been made evident are what knowledge and
skills, motivation, and organizational influences are most needed to create the needed
instructional change in the classroom for emergent bilingual students. The interactions and
systems that are integrated into the school setting, and are used in working with teachers on
instructional implementation, must be explicit and intentional in meeting the needs of emergent
bilingual students. The knowledge, motivation and organizational influences the instructional
leader employs creates the difference. The use of the OCDE Project GLAD® model holds
weight as a structure to utilize in transforming practice. In implementing the model, students can
gain access to highly qualified teachers who engage in culturally and linguistically sustaining
practices, closing the opportunity and achievement gap. Table 26, represents the knowledge and
skills, motivation and organizational influences that responded to the research questions of this
study.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 168
Table 26
Research Questions aligned to KMO Assets of CSESD
Research Questions KMO Validated Influences
What knowledge and skills,
and motivational factors of
CSESD instructional leaders is
related to andragogy,
professional learning,
coaching, feedback, planning
and evaluation in best meeting
the needs of emergent
bilingual students?
Instructional leaders need to know the different topologies of
emergent bilingual students. (Conceptual Knowledge)

Instructional leaders need to comprehend concepts of andragogy to
be able to provide effective professional learning, coaching,
feedback, planning and evaluation. (Conceptual Knowledge)

Instructional leaders need to believe they are capable of effectively
providing professional learning, coaching, feedback and evaluation
of practice with teachers. (Self-Efficacy Motivation)

Instructional leaders need to believe they can engage in teacher
buy-in methods in support of instructional shifts. (Self-Efficacy
Motivation)

Instructional leaders need to believe they can eliminate teacher
barriers and incentivize prioritizing emergent bilingual student
needs. (Self-Efficacy Motivation)
What knowledge and skills
and motivational factors do
instructional leaders use in
supporting teacher
implementation of the OCDE
Project GLAD® model in
meeting the needs of emergent
bilingual students?

Instructional leaders need to understand the OCDE Project
GLAD® model and strategies for meeting the needs of emergent
bilingual students. (Conceptual Knowledge)

Instructional leaders need to know about professional learning
communities. (Conceptual Knowledge)
Instructional leaders need to know concepts of continuous
improvement, such as professional learning cycles and the steps
within them. (Conceptual Knowledge)

Instructional leaders need to know how to implement the OCDE
Project GLAD® model and measure progress, developing timelines
and criteria. (Procedural Knowledge)

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 169
Table 26, continued
Research Questions KMO Validated Influences
What knowledge and skills
and motivational factors do
instructional leaders use in
supporting teacher
implementation of the OCDE
Project GLAD® model in
meeting the needs of emergent
bilingual students?
Instructional leaders need to know how to develop and foster
professional learning communities to support instructional
responsiveness. (Procedural Knowledge)

Instructional leaders need to know how to develop and utilize a
professional learning cycle as an avenue for on-going
implementation of the OCDE Project GLAD® model. (Procedural
Knowledge)

Instructional leaders need to believe they are capable of effectively
supporting the implementation of the OCDE Project GLAD®
model in increasing the achievement of emergent bilingual
students. (Self-Efficacy Motivation)

Instructional leaders need to believe they can ask for help and
employ experts to support in instructional implementation (Self-
Efficacy Motivation)

Instructional leaders need to see the value of teachers implementing
the OCDE Project GLAD® strategies for language development as
a method of addressing the prevalent opportunity and achievement
gaps. (Utility Value Motivation)
What is the interaction
between the District
(organization) and
instructional leaders in the
implementation of best
practices for emergent
bilingual students?
The District needs to have a culture of shared responsibility in
attending to the needs of emergent bilingual students. (Cultural
Model)

The District needs to develop an infrastructure of support that
creates new norms of practice for instructional leaders that focuses
on emergent bilingual student needs. (Cultural Model)

The District needs to develop a plan for instructional training on
professional learning, coaching, feedback, planning and evaluation
of practices. (Cultural Setting)

The District needs to set an explicit priority of utilizing the OCDE
Project GLAD® model for emergent bilingual students. (Cultural
Setting)

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 170
In analyzing the research questions posed and the results and findings of the study, one
could understand the principal’s role in leading instructional shifts for emergent bilingual
education. This study sought to better understand the knowledge and skills, motivation, and
organizational influences of the instructional leader in closing the achievement gap for EB
students to high quality instruction and educators. Evidenced through this study, are the
influences that matter, those to which are at the root of ensuring the trajectory changes for this
student body through the leadership of the principal.
Chapter 5 will examine ways to scale the identified practices through recommendations,
implementation plans and an evaluation and will further unpack the research questions that led
this study. Chapter 5 will explicitly seek to answer research question 4, What recommendations
in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational resources may be appropriate for
closing the opportunity and achievement gaps for emergent bilingual students at another
organization?

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 171
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS, IMPLEMENTATION, AND EVALUATION
The Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analysis model was used to evaluate instructional
leadership’s role in providing access to emergent bilingual (EB) students to highly qualified
practioners that utilize culturally and linguistically responsive and sustaining practices. In
evaluating the knowledge, skills, motivations and organizational influences, one could better
understand how to support in the closing of the achievement and opportunity gap. This analysis
identified and then validated assumed knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational
influences possessed by instructional leaders within CSESD that enables them to attain their
organizational goals. These assumed influences were initially identified based on the research
surrounding best practices (pedagogy) for EB students and the andragogical skills that
instructional leaders employ to support teachers in their classroom practices. The KMO assumed
influences were evaluated as assets, gaps or inconclusive through a qualitative research design
that utilized both interviews and document analysis.
Chapter 5 will explore the key validated influences that reveal what instructional leaders
must possess regarding KMO to close the achievement and opportunity gap for EB students.
Chapter 5 will focus on responding to research question four, “What recommendations in the
areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational resources may be appropriate for closing the
opportunity and achievement gaps for emergent bilingual students at another organization?”
This chapter is divided into four main sections. The first main section will recap the
organizational context and mission, organizational performance goals, a description of the
stakeholder group, the goal of the stakeholder group, and the purpose of the project and the
research questions posed. The second main section provides recommendations based on the
validated KMO influences, followed by section three, which provides an integrated
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 172
implementation and evaluation plan. The work of Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2006) Four
Levels of Evaluation was used in assessing and creating the plans. This section will be
compartmentalized by: Level 4- Results, Level 3-Behaviors, Level 2- Learning, and Level 1-
Reaction. The fourth main section discusses the strengths and weaknesses of the gap analysis
model and KMO framework, the limitations and delimitations of the study, future research to
consider and the conclusion.
Goal of the Stakeholder Group for the Study
It is imperative to the mission and organizational goal of CSESD that instructional
leaders have the knowledge, skills and motivation to support in instructional leadership to
transform classroom practice for EB students, using tenants of andragogy. In understanding the
OCDE Project GLAD® model, instructional leaders can intentionally engage within professional
learning communities and instructional cycles to focus on meeting the needs of EB students. The
following principal’s goal will help in meeting the organizational goal stated above: Principals
will increase best practices related to andragogy, supporting teacher implementation of the
OCDE Project GLAD® model for EB students by 5% annually. Using professional learning
communities, professional learning cycles and concepts of continuous improvement, principals
will aim to increase intentional implementation of quality instruction by prepared and qualified
teachers.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this study was to investigate and evaluate the KMO influences associated
with instructional leaders’ performance related to bridging the achievement and opportunity gap
for EB students, via supporting teachers in enhancing instructional practices. The questions
guiding this evaluation study were the following:
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 173
1. What are the knowledge, skills and motivational influences of CSESD instructional
leaders related to andragogy, professional learning, coaching, feedback, and planning
in best meeting the needs of emergent bilingual students?
2. What knowledge, skills and motivational influences do instructional leaders use in
supporting teacher implementation of the OCDE Project GLAD® model in meeting
the needs of their emergent bilingual students?
3. What is the interaction between the district (organization) and instructional leaders in
the implementation of best practices for emergent bilingual students?
4. What recommendations in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational
resources may be appropriate for closing the opportunity and achievement gaps for
emergent bilingual students at another organization?
Findings
The findings of this study revealed knowledge and skill, motivation and organizational
influences that instructional leaders need in order to support teacher implementation of targeted
instruction for EB students, closing the achievement and opportunity gap, but also supporting the
attainment of both the stakeholder performance goals and organizational goals. Through
interviews and document analysis, it was found that principals, operating as instructional leaders,
need to know the different typologies of EB students and how to refine instructional services to
differentiate instruction and ensure access to the core curriculum. Additionally, principals need
to understand the OCDE Project GLAD® model and its strategies, operating as a framework to
enhance implementation of instructional practices that were specifically designed to meet the
needs of EB students. Declarative and procedural knowledge of the model for EB students
brings greater clarity for a principal in knowing what instruction should look like and how to best
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 174
support teachers by using tenants of andragogy to increase implementation of these best
practices. The tenants of andragogy provide instructional leaders with the procedural knowledge
of how to navigate adult learning to optimize their performance, and understand how to better
motivate teachers to employ best practices. Using incentives of increased planning time and
positive affirmations increases motivation and the likelihood that teachers will sustain buy-in and
perseverance. Also, ensuring that principals build relevancy of the model as aligned to other
initiatives, content areas and student populations’ needs supports teachers in feeling as if their
work is interconnected and not requiring additional work. Principals’ declarative and procedural
knowledge of professional learning communities, continuous improvement and professional
learning cycles was another finding that was validated. These structures provide principals with
the systems to more greatly ensure sustainability in changes of instructional shifts. The built in
coaching, mentoring and reflective practices also further motivates teachers to continue in their
actions, to persevere through the errors and to build efficacy. Without the organizational
influences of cultural settings and models that CSESD employs, there is a high possibility that
instructional leaders would not have built their own school systems of support to engage in with
their teachers, given that for many principals, they have mimicked the structures that the district
employs with them in instructional leadership teams. Though having an asset-based mindset was
inconclusive as an influence, given the way in which principals spoke to the visibility of the
district setting EB students as a priority, and the vigor behind the policies they set regarding this
population, eludes to the possibility that this mindset has already been cultivated within the
district. Critical reflection however does not appear to be scaled across the district, with some
principals sharing that there is still work to be done by teachers in confronting their belief
systems regarding EB students. This eludes to a disconnect between the values and motivations
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 175
of the school district and a variance with teacher beliefs on the urgency or relevancy of focusing
on EB students. These findings have propelled the crafting of the recommendations that will be
discussed in the next sections.
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
When responding to Research Question 4, “What recommendations in the areas of
knowledge, motivation, and organizational resources may be appropriate for closing the
opportunity and achievement gaps for emergent bilingual students at another organization?” I
will utilize the findings and results from studying CSESD to provide recommendations. Upon
engaging in a KMO analysis of instructional leaders within this organization, instructional
leaders were determined to have 18 assumed influences validated. These validated influences
reflect both the organizations capacity and the instructional leaders’ capacity to employ best
practices in closing the achievement gap for EB students. View Table 27 for a full summary of
all validated assumed influences.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 176
Table 27
Summary of Assumed Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences Validated
Knowledge Motivation Organization
Instructional leaders need to
know the different typologies of
emergent bilingual students.
Instructional leaders need to
believe they can affect
instructional change in teachers.
The district needs to have a
culture of shared responsibility
in attending to the needs of
emergent bilingual students.

Instructional leaders need to
understand the OCDE Project
GLAD® model and strategies
for meeting the needs of
emergent bilingual students.
Instructional leaders need to
believe that they can ask for
help and employ experts to
support in instructional
implementation.
The district needs to develop an
infrastructure of support that
creates new norms of practice
for instructional leaders that
focuses on emergent bilingual
students’ learning needs.

Instructional leaders need to
comprehend concepts of
andragogy (involvement in
planning and evaluation,
bridging life experiences,
respect, relevancy-oriented, and
problem-oriented) to be able to
provide effective professional
learning experiences.

Instructional leaders need to
believe that they can engage in
teacher buy-in methods in
support of instructional shifts.

The district needs to develop a
plan for instructional leadership
training on professional
learning, coaching, feedback,
planning and evaluation of
practices structures.

Instructional leaders need to
know about professional
learning communities (focus on
learning, collaboration, and
results-data).
Instructional leaders need to
believe they can eliminate
teacher barriers and incentivize
prioritizing emergent bilingual
student needs.

The district needs to set an
explicit priority of utilizing
OCDE Project GLAD®
strategies.

Instructional leaders need to
know concepts of continuous
improvement, such as
professional learning cycles as
the steps within them.
Instructional leaders need to see
the value of teachers
implementing the OCDE Project
GLAD® strategies for language
development as a method of
addressing the prevalent
opportunity and achievement
gaps.

Instructional leaders need to
know how to implement the
OCDE Project GLAD® model,
using modeling, time for
practice, coaching, mentoring,
reflection and feedback.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 177
Table 27, continued
Knowledge Motivation Organization
Instructional leaders need to
know how to develop and foster
professional learning
communities to support
instructional responsiveness.

Instructional leaders need to
know how to develop and utilize
a professional learning cycle as
an avenue for on-going
implementation of the OCDE
Project GLAD® model.

Knowledge Recommendations
The results of the study show that eight assumed influences were validated, one was not.
The knowledge influences in Table 27 represents the complete list of assumed knowledge
influences based on an analysis of how instructional leaders demonstrated achieving the
organizational goals during interviews and document analysis and supported by the literature
review. Clark and Estes (2008), suggests that declarative (or conceptual) knowledge about a
topic is foundational to applying the concept in a procedural manner, as is the case with engaging
in the implementation of the OCDE Project GLAD® in best meeting the needs of emergent
bilingual students. Table 28 reflects assumed influences, prioritized for achieving the
stakeholders’ goals. Table 28 also shows the recommendations for influences based on
theoretical principles.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 178
Table 28
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Knowledge
Influence

Asset
Yes, No
(V, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Instructional leaders need
to know the different
typologies of emergent
bilingual students. (C)

V Y Procedural
knowledge builds
upon the conceptual
knowledge of
categories,
principles, theories,
structures and
generalizations
(Krathwohl, 2002).
Develop a cross-walk on
the various EL
typologies and how the
OCDE Project GLAD®
model can support each
typology, specifically
which strategies and for
what purpose.

The organization can
develop a cross-walk on
the alignment of the
ELD standards and how
the OCDE Project
GLAD® strategies
support with both
integrated and
designated ELD.

Instructional leaders need
to understand the OCDE
Project GLAD® model
and strategies for meeting
the needs of emergent
bilingual students. (C)

V Y Creating schemata
helps learners to
organize conceptual
knowledge into new
domains (Schraw,
Veldt, & Olafson,
2009).
Provide a job aid that
includes a clearly
structured chart of the
different Component
Areas of the OCDE
Project GLAD® model
and the various
strategies, the research
base and purpose of the
strategy.

Instructional leaders need
to comprehend concepts
of andragogy
(involvement in planning
and evaluation, bridging
life experiences, respect,
relevancy-oriented, and
problem-oriented) to be
able to provide effective
professional learning
experiences. (C)
V Y Procedural
knowledge increases
when conceptual
knowledge required
to perform the skill
is available or
known (Clark et al.,
2008).
Provide a job aid that
details the tenants of
andragogy and explains
how adult learners learn
best.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 179
Table 28, continued
Assumed Knowledge
Influence

Asset
Yes, No
(V, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Instructional leaders need
to know about
professional learning
communities (focus on
learning, collaboration,
and results-data). (C)

V Y Procedural
knowledge increases
when conceptual
knowledge required
to perform the skill
is available or
known (Clark et al.,
2008).
Provide a job aid that
details professional
learning communities
(PLC) and how to align
PLC’s to meeting the
needs of emergent
bilingual students.
Instructional leaders need
to know concepts of
continuous improvement,
such as professional
learning cycles and the
steps within them. (C)

V Y Acquiring skills for
expertise frequently
begins with learning
conceptual
knowledge about
individual
procedural steps
(Clark et al., 2008)

Learning is highly
dependent on “goal-
directed practice”
and “targeted
feedback”
(Ambrose, 2010).

Provide a job aid that
visually represents the
cycles of improvement
and implementation.

Provide professional
learning on the steps of
implementation.
Instructional leaders need
to know how to
implement the OCDE
Project GLAD® model,
using modeling, time for
practice, coaching,
mentoring, reflection and
feedback. (P)

V Y Learning is highly
dependent on “goal-
directed practice”
and “targeted
feedback”
(Ambrose, 2010).
Provide a job aid that
includes steps to
implementation with
time frames of expected
practice.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 180
Table 28, continued
Assumed Knowledge
Influence

Asset
Yes, No
(V, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Instructional leaders need
to know how to develop
and foster professional
learning communities to
support instructional
responsiveness. (P)

V Y Mastery requires
component skills
and the ability to
integrate them
successfully.
Transfer, which
supports
implementation,
does not happen
easily or
automatically. It is
important to “teach
for transfer”
(Ambrose, 2010).
Provide an
organizational model of
how to replicate
professional learning
communities from the
District level, mimicked
at the site level. Provide
professional learning on
PLCs.
Instructional leaders need
to know how to develop
and utilize a professional
learning cycle as an
avenue for on-going
implementation of the
OCDE Project GLAD®
model. (P)

V Y Learning is highly
dependent on “goal-
directed practice”
and “targeted
feedback”
(Ambrose, 2010).
Provide professional
learning on continuous
improvement. Develop a
learning cycle based on
student data. Provide a
job aid that includes the
steps to implement with
time frames of expected
practice.

Instructional leaders need
critical reflective
practices to pose
questions regarding
meeting the needs of
emergent bilingual
students. (M)
N Y Instructional leaders
engage in a variety
of processes to
monitor and control
their learning
(Ambrose, 2010).

Performance levels
increase and
completion times
decrease with
increased self-
regulation skills
(Clark & Estes,
2008).
Provide professional
learning in which
partners practice
engaging in critical
reflective practices
though participating in
cultural proficiency
training and critical race
theory training.

Conceptual knowledge solutions. Chapter 4 findings suggests that instructional leaders
closing the achievement and opportunity gaps for EB students have knowledge and skills around
EL typologies and the implications of classroom learning, tenants of andragogy, professional
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 181
learning communities, continuous improvement and the OCDE Project GLAD® model.
Acquiring skills for expertise frequently begins with learning conceptual knowledge about
individual procedural steps (Clark et al., 2008). Creating schemata helps learners to organize
conceptual knowledge into new domains, thus, providing job aids that define and classify
concepts of EL typologies, tenants of andragogy and how adult learners learn best, how
professional learning communities are designed, the flow of professional learning cycles, and
defining the OCDE Project GLAD® model with corresponding research-based strategies sets the
foundation for applications and procedures to commence (Schraw, Veldt, & Olafson, 2009). The
district providing professional learning to instructional leaders on these concepts and component
skills, creates common knowledge and expectations, and a platform to measure impact
systematically upon concepts being implemented.
Procedural knowledge solutions. Procedural knowledge builds upon the conceptual
knowledge of categories, principles, theories, structures and generalizations (Krathwohl, 2002).
The district, using a replicable structure, would have a system of gathering all principals
together, potentially through instructional leadership teams. This same structure could then be
employed by principals with their teachers. This replicable and consistent structure would
provide the space for continuous improvement practices to exist, such as professional learning
cycles. Embedded into these structures are mentoring, coaching and feedback loops, creating
opportunities for principals and teachers to refine their practices and ensure that quality
instruction is occurring. Learning is highly dependent on goal-directed practice and targeted
feedback (Ambrose, 2010). Brain research (Wolfe, 2001) reflects that chunking largely
conceptual and complex information into smaller “bites” provides a greater internalization of the
materials learned. This concept can also be applied to the implementation of new practices. The
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 182
OCDE Project GLAD® model is a highly complex conceptual framework of teaching and
learning strategies that amplify instructional opportunities for emergent bilingual students.
Implementing the model in phases, where over a year’s time, strategies are sequenced and built
over time, can enhance intentionality of the strategies being used and for specific learning
outcomes. Research (Saldana, 2014) has also shown that it takes three years for intentional and
deliberate practice of models, strategies or practices to transfer from novice practice to expert
practice. Providing job aides that imbed visuals with timelines for implementation of
professional learning cycles and how to meaningfully chunk the strategies found within OCDE
Project GLAD® will increase efficiency of implementation of best practices in meeting the
needs of EB students. Adjoining these job aides articulating implementation phases would be
corresponding rubrics for observation and self-reflection on progress, measuring from emerging
implementation to advance implementation. Mastery requires component skills and the ability to
integrate them successfully. Transfer, which supports implementation, does not happen easily or
automatically. It is important to teach for transfer; possible within this district mentorship
system and use of job aides on implementation (Ambrose, 2010).
Metacognitive knowledge solutions. Performance levels increase and completion times
decrease with increased self-regulation skills (Clark et al., 2008). One such skill is critical
reflection. Instructional leaders that engage in a variety of processes to monitor and control their
learning through critical reflection enhance performance levels, or implementation of best
practices (Ambrose, 2010) for the most marginalized and underserved populations. Providing
professional learning in which partners practice engaging in reflective practices though coaching
techniques would further develop metacognitive awareness and a focus on continuous
improvement. Though reflective practices surfaced as important to the practices of continuous
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 183
improvement within one’s instructional practices, critical reflective practices did not surface as a
validated behavior. Critical reflection would engage participants in deeply analyzing their own
belief systems, mindsets, biases, the choices made and determine whether their actions are
indeed meeting the needs of the populations one is actually intending to support. Considering
that the EB student population has been historically marginalized and underserved, engaging in
meaningful practices to close the gap of practices would be supportive in attending to the needs
of this population. Engaging in professional learning on topics of cultural proficiency and
critical race theory (Delgado, R. & Stefancic, J., 2013) could be avenues to support in the
bridging of better unearthing the reasons why certain practices are or are not in place for EB
students.
Motivation Recommendations
The motivation influences in Table 29 represent the complete list of assumed motivation
influences based on the analysis of instructional leaders’ demonstration of the motivational
influences that best achieved the stakeholders’ goal during interviews and document analysis,
supported by the literature review and the review of motivation theory. Five assumed motivation
influences were validated within the study. Clark and Estes (2008) suggest that there are three
motivational “indexes” that come into play in a work environment- choice, persistence and
mental effort. Choice is the difference between intention and actively pursuing a goal.
Persistence is continuing to pursue a goal in face of distractions, avoiding less important goals
and remaining resolute in one’s pursuit. Whereas, mental effort is how much mental effort one
might invest in achieving the goal after having chosen the goal and persisting at it in spite of
distractions. “Mental effort is determined, in large measure, by our confidence” [or self-
efficacy] (Clark et al., 2008, p. 81). The study affirms that instructional leaders that close the
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 184
achievement and opportunity gap choose, persist, and invest mental effort to provide professional
learning, modeling, practice, reflection, feedback, coaching and mentoring to teachers to provide
best instruction for emergent bilingual students. Table 29 shows the recommendations for these
influences based on theoretical principles.
Table 29
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Knowledge
Influence

Asset
Yes, No
(V, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation
Instructional leaders need
to believe they can affect
instructional change in
teachers. (SE)

V Y Effective observational
learning is achieved by first
organizing and rehearsing
modeled behaviors, then
enacting it overtly
(Ambrose, 2010).

Self-efficacy is increased as
individuals succeed in a task
(Bandura, 1997).

Provide professional
learning in which an
instructor models how
to observe a teacher
implementing OCDE
Project GLAD®, then
provides feedback, and
then measures
progress; increasing
implementation.

Instructional leaders need
to believe that they can
ask for help and employ
experts to support in
instructional
implementation. (SE)

V Y Individuals who do not
perceive any support in their
environment “tend to be
hopeless” (Ambrose, 2010).
Provide opportunities
for instructional
leaders and the District
mentor to assess
current school capacity
and brainstorm
additional expertise.
Instructional leaders need
to believe that they can
engage in teacher buy-in
methods in support of
instructional shifts. (SE)

V Y Giving people more control
over how they do their job
increases their feelings of
personal effectiveness
(Clark et al., 2008).
Provide widely
recognized and
respected peer models
during professional
learning to
demonstrate the
positive public impact
resulting from careful
planning and
monitoring; and within
the established
timeframes.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 185
Table 29, continued
Assumed Knowledge
Influence

Asset
Yes, No
(V, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation
Instructional leaders need
to believe they can
eliminate teacher barriers
and incentivize
prioritizing emergent
bilingual student needs.
(SE)

V Y To improve motivation,
your goal must be to
indirectly influence people’s
understanding of the
impressions they create on
others, about their own
ability to do a job, and their
beliefs about the personal or
group benefits of work
(Clark et al., 2008).

Provide a job aid that
outlines different
methods of increasing
teacher
implementation and
practice via time, and
minimizes extraneous
role responsibilities.
Instructional leaders need
to see the value of
teachers implementing the
OCDE Project GLAD®
strategies for language
development as a method
of addressing the
prevalent opportunity and
achievement gaps. (UV)
V Y Individuals are more likely
to engage in an activity
when it provides value to
them (Eccles, 2009).
Provide widely
recognized and
respected peer models
during professional
learning to
demonstrate the
positive public impact
resulting from careful
planning and
monitoring; and within
the established
timeframes.

Self-efficacy solutions. Self-efficacy increases within instructional leaders as the
develop the belief that they (as instructional leaders) can affect instructional change, can engage
in teacher buy-in methods, can eliminate teacher barriers, incentivize, and ask for help (Bandura,
1997). “Those who lack confidence tend not to invest much mental effort in a task” (Clark &
Estes, 2008, p. 81) and therefore is imperative instructional leaders build this belief. Engaging
with peer models that first organize and rehearse modeled behaviors of effective observational
protocols, and model how to provide feedback to teachers and ways to measure progress will
increase instructional leaders’ self-efficacy and the potential for enacting those behaviors
(Ambrose, 2010). Developing collective efficacy with district personnel and principal
instructional leadership teams will support efficacy development. These structures give
instructional leaders a plan and more control over how they engage in their position, increasing
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 186
feelings of personal effectiveness (Clark & Estes, 2008). This allows instructional leaders to
then build the skill sets in engaging in teacher buy-in methods and incentivizing for an increase
in quality instructional practices for emergent bilingual students. Lastly, individuals who do not
perceive any support in their environment tend to be hopeless (Ambrose, 2010). Providing
opportunities for instructional leaders and the district mentor to assess current school capacity
and brainstorm additional expertise when instructional leaders are seeking expert help, could
bridge the gap in leaders confidently asking for help.
Utility value solutions. Instructional leaders need to see the value of teachers
implementing the OCDE Project GLAD® strategies for language development as a method of
addressing the prevalent opportunity and achievement gaps. Individuals are more likely to
engage in an activity when it provides value to them (Eccles, 2009). One way to do so, is by
providing widely recognized and respected peer models during professional learning to
demonstrate the positive public impact resulting from careful planning and monitoring; and
within the established timeframes. Engaging in this practice will shift the degree to which the
task is perceived as useful within the context of one’s own goals, or that of the organization. If
the instructional leaders value OCDE Project GLAD® and believe they can master it, they are
more likely to use different strategies, try harder, and persist until the goal has been met (Dembo
& Seli, 2016).
Organization Recommendations
The organization influence in Table 30 represents the complete list of assumed
organization influences, investigated through interviews and document analysis of instructional
leaders focused on attaining the stakeholder’s goal. Four assumed organizational influences
were validated through the study, representing that organizations that have a culture of shared
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 187
responsibility regarding emergent bilingual students, has an infrastructure of support for
instructional leaders, has a plan for instructional leadership and prioritizes the implementation of
the OCDE Project GLAD® model closes the achievement and opportunity gap for emergent
bilingual students. One assumed influence was not validated as a current practice in meeting the
organizational goal but is pertinent to work associated to meeting the needs of EB students and
will be explored below.
Clark and Estes (2008) suggest that organization and stakeholder goals are often not
achieved due to a lack of resources, most often time and money, and stakeholder goals that are
not aligned with the organization’s mission and goals. Rueda (2011) describes organizational
culture through cultural models and cultural settings. Cultural models are “the shared mental
schemas or normative understandings of how the world works, or ought to work” (Rueda, 2011,
p. 55), whereas cultural settings can be considered as the visible aspects of an organization’s
culture (Rueda, 2011). Organizations positioned for sustainable performance improvement
understand their organization’s cultural models and settings and thus, why they need to improve
their work processes. Table 30 also shows the recommendations for these influences based on
theoretical principles.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 188
Table 30
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Organization
Influence
Asset
Yes, No
(V, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation
The district needs to
cultivate a culture of
asset-based mindsets
regarding emergent
bilingual students so that
instructional leaders can
better support teachers in
meeting their complex
needs (CM).
N Y Engage in
professional
learning that attends
to cultural
proficiency and
growth mindset.
The district needs to have
a culture of shared
responsibility in attending
to the needs of emergent
bilingual students. (CM)

V Y Job satisfaction increases
when all organization
stakeholders agree on
culture, mission, goals,
and resources required to
achieve goals (Clark &
Estes, 2008).

Cultivate a culture
of participation with
all stakeholders in
achieving
organization goals
by encouraging
feedback and
communication by
all stakeholders.
Engage in quarterly
meetings where this
is discussed.

The district needs to
develop an infrastructure
of support that creates
new norms of practice for
instructional leaders that
focuses on emergent
bilingual students’
learning needs. (CS)

V Y Organizational
performance increases
when processes and
resources are aligned with
goals established
collaboratively (Clark &
Estes, 2008).
Executive Directors
provide professional
learning on
emergent bilinguals,
infrastructures to
enhance
instructional
practices, on-site
mentorship and
accountability with
site instructional
leaders.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 189
Table 30, continued
Assumed Organization
Influence
Asset
Yes, No
(V, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation
The district needs to
develop a plan for
instructional leadership
training on professional
learning, coaching,
feedback, planning and
evaluation of practices
structures. (CS)

V Y Organizational
performance increases
when processes and
resources are aligned with
goals established
collaboratively (Clark &
Estes, 2008).
Executive Directors
develop cohorts of
principals,
instructional
leadership teams
(ILT), that they meet
with monthly.

The district needs to set
an explicit priority of
utilizing OCDE Project
GLAD® strategies. (CS)

V Y Organizational
performance increases
when top management is
continually involved in
the improvement process
(Clark & Estes, 2008).

Site level
instructional leaders
develop professional
learning cycles that
utilize OCDE
Project GLAD®
strategies,
incorporating in the
following
procedures: Practice
Experience,
Learning from
Action, and
Learning Mediated
Through Context.

Cultural models. Job satisfaction increases when all organization stakeholders agree on
culture, mission, goals, and resources required to achieve goals (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Furthermore, Clark and Estes (2008) shares that “the key elements for successful change are
found in connection between a compelling vision, a sound business process to reach that goal,
clear work goals accompanied by effective work procedures, and motivational support for
everyone” (Clark & Estes, 2008, p. 27). Thus, the district needs to have a culture of shared
responsibility in attending to the needs of EB students. To do so, would require the district
developing an infrastructure of support that prioritizes EB students via organizational meetings.
They must cultivate a culture of participation with all stakeholders in achieving organization
goals by encouraging feedback and communication by all stakeholders. A part of developing a
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 190
vision where all students are represented and attended to, followed by shared responsibility in
attending to all students’ needs, would require that a collective mindset of an asset-based
perspective of EB students would need to exist. Though this assumed influence was not
validated as an influence that supports the organizational goal by the instructional leaders, in
analyzing the visibility of this belief system within the district’s public documents and policies,
one could attest that this practice is needed in meeting the needs of EB students and may already
be a cultivated mindset by the majority and did not surface in the interviews and document
analysis. Therefore, the cultivation of this asset-based mindset regarding EB students would be
necessary so that an organization and its instructional leaders could impact EB students, made
possible by professional learning on cultural proficiency and growth mindset training.
Cultural settings. Organizational performance increases when processes and resources
are aligned with goals established collaboratively, a component of cultural settings (Clark &
Estes, 2008). In this alignment, the district would be more equipped to develop an infrastructure
of support that creates new norms of practice for instructional leaders that focuses on EB
students’ learning needs. Additionally, the district would develop a plan for instructional
leadership training on professional learning, coaching, feedback, planning and evaluation of
practices structures. The recommendation would include Executive Directors of the district
providing professional learning on emergent bilingual students, infrastructures to enhance
instructional practices, on-site mentorship and accountability with site instructional leaders.
Also, Executive Directors would develop cohorts of principals and instructional leadership teams
(ILT), that would meet monthly. Lastly, organizational performance increases when top
management is continually involved in the improvement process (Clark & Estes, 2008). As a
part of that instructional practices improvement process, would be the district setting an explicit
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 191
priority of utilizing OCDE Project GLAD® strategies. This would be accomplished by site level
instructional leaders developing professional learning cycles that utilize OCDE Project GLAD®
strategies, incorporating in the following procedures: Practice Experience, Learning from Action,
and Learning Mediated Through Context. Incorporating into professional learning cycles would
be an approach that district personnel would capture within the district-wide LCAP, formalizing
the priority and meeting the needs of the emergent bilingual populations. This articulation
within the LCAP, a public document, would signify to the community the importance of EB
students’ needs and the efforts being taken by the district to ensure that principals have the
supports and accountabilities in place to support teachers. Furthermore, that teachers not only
have the content knowledge to engage with this population, but have the skills to engage in
continuous improvement practices to consistently refine their practices. These additions to
public documents would provide the visible messaging that it is a priority to ensure that high
quality teachers and principals are being utilized to support the needs of EB students.
Key Implementation Action Steps
Strategies to Implement
Based on the above outlined organizational goal, and the assumed influences articulated
in Tables 28, 29 and 30, three strategies to support attaining the Organizational Goal and the
larger national issue of closing the achievement gap for EB students in their access to high
quality principals and teachers that utilize effective practices are: (a) districts can develop an
infrastructure of support that prioritizes EB students, (b) site level instructional leaders can
develop an infrastructure of support using the tenants of andragogy, and (d) develop across the
organization, a deep understanding of EL typologies’ needs and how the OCDE Project GLAD®
model can support. Table 31 further outlines the solutions’ three recommended strategies.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 192
Table 31
Strategy Descriptions
Strategy Individuals Involved Infrastructure
Districts can develop an
infrastructure of support that
prioritizes emergent bilingual
students
Cabinet and/or
Superintendent

District Executive Directors
(or equivalent)
Hiring practices reflect an emphasis on
hiring instructional leaders and
teachers that understand the needs of
emergent bilingual students.

District positions emphasize the
importance of instruction and learning.

Executive Directors develop cohorts of
principals, instructional leadership
teams (ILT), that they meet with
monthly.

Executive Directors provide
professional learning on emergent
bilinguals, infrastructures to enhance
instructional practices, on-site
mentorship and accountability with site
instructional leaders.

Site level instructional leaders
can develop an infrastructure
of support using the tenants of
andragogy to enhance best
practices for emergent
bilingual students.
Site level instructional leaders
(Assistant Principals and
Principals)
Site level instructional leaders develop
professional learning communities
focused on student learning,
specifically emphasizing emergent
bilingual student growth.

Site level instructional leaders develop
professional learning cycles that utilize
OCDE Project GLAD® strategies,
incorporating in the following
procedures: Practice Experience,
Learning from Action, and Learning
Mediated Through Context.

Site instructional leaders make each
phase of the cycle explicit of how to
implement the OCDE Project GLAD®
over time.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 193
Table 31, continued
Strategy Individuals Involved Infrastructure
Develop across the
organization, a deep
understanding of EL
typologies’ needs and how the
OCDE Project GLAD® model
can support
Cabinet and/or
Superintendent

District Personnel

Instructional Leaders

Teachers
The organization can develop a cross-
walk on the various EL typologies and
how the OCDE Project GLAD® model
can support each typology, specifically
which strategies and for what purpose.

The organization can develop a cross-
walk on the alignment of the ELD
standards and how the OCDE Project
GLAD® strategies support with both
integrated and designated ELD.

The organization can develop a cross-
walk on the alignment between
ELPAC tasks and how the OCDE
Project GLAD® strategies can support
in enhancing instruction to meet these
tasks.

With many of the above practices already in motion, execution of the proposed solutions
should operationalize quickly. Immediate attention through three years of implementation has
been determined based on the current organizational environment, resources, experience of
teachers and instructional leaders.
Strategy Implementation Steps
The first step in considering action steps to implement these three strategies to attend to
closing the achievement gap for emergent bilingual students, is taking inventory of the
knowledge and skills, motivations, and organizational influences aligned to each strategy. See
Table 32 for an alignment and articulation of strategies to influences.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 194
Table 32
Alignment of Proposed Strategy Solutions and K, M, O Influences
Strategy Knowledge Motivation Organization
Districts can
develop an
infrastructure of
support that
prioritizes
emergent
bilingual students

The district needs to
have a culture of shared
responsibility in
attending to the needs
of emergent bilingual
students.

The district needs to
develop an
infrastructure of
support that creates
new norms of practice
for instructional leaders
that focuses on
emergent bilingual
students’ learning
needs.

The district needs to
develop a plan for
instructional leadership
training on professional
learning, coaching,
feedback, planning and
evaluation of practices
structures.

Site level
instructional
leaders can
develop an
infrastructure of
support using the
tenants of
andragogy to
enhance best
practices for
emergent
bilingual
students.

Instructional leaders need to
comprehend concepts of
andragogy (involvement in
planning and evaluation,
bridging life experiences,
respect, relevancy-oriented, and
problem-oriented) to be able to
provide effective professional
learning experiences.

Instructional leaders need to
know about professional
learning communities (focus on
learning, collaboration, and
results-data).

Instructional leaders
need to believe they
can affect
instructional change
in teachers.

Instructional leaders
need to believe that
they can ask for help
and employ experts
to support in
instructional
implementation.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 195
Table 32, continued
Strategy Knowledge Motivation Organization
Instructional leaders need to
know concepts of continuous
improvement, such as
professional learning cycles as
the steps within them.

Instructional leaders need to
know how to develop and foster
professional learning
communities to support
instructional responsiveness.

Instructional leaders need to
know how to develop and utilize
a professional learning cycle as
an avenue for on-going
implementation of the OCDE
Project GLAD® model.

Instructional leaders need critical
reflective practices to pose
questions regarding meeting the
needs of emergent bilingual
students.

Instructional leaders
need to believe that
they can engage in
teacher buy-in
methods in support
of instructional
shifts.

Instructional leaders
need to believe they
can eliminate
teacher barriers and
incentivize
prioritizing
emergent bilingual
student needs.

Develop across
the organization,
a deep
understanding of
EL typologies’
needs and how
the OCDE
Project GLAD®
model can
support
Instructional leaders need to
know the different typologies of
emergent bilingual students.

Instructional leaders need to
understand the OCDE Project
GLAD® model and strategies
for meeting the needs of
emergent bilingual students.

Instructional leaders
need to see the value
of teachers
implementing the
OCDE Project
GLAD® strategies
for language
development as a
method of
addressing the
prevalent
opportunity and
achievement gaps.

The district needs to set
an explicit priority of
utilizing OCDE Project
GLAD® strategies.

In review of Table 32, there is confirmation of the district and instructional leaders’
capacity to attain the desired goals.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 196
Key Performance Indicators of Successful Policy Implementation
Key performance indicators (KPIs) of successful policy implementation related to closing
the achievement gap for EB students and attaining the organizational goal is noted in Table 33.
These KPIs begin to outline potential solutions to accomplish the attainment of the
organizational goal and support in the development of an integrated implementation plan.
Table 33
Proposed Solutions, Action Steps, Timelines and Key Performance Indicators
Proposed
Solution(s)
Action Steps Building Capacity
& Resource
Requirements
Timeline Indicators, Measures
& Constraints
Strategy 1:
District Develops
an Infrastructure
of Support
1. Investigate
one’s values and
biases concerning
emergent
bilingual students.
Hiring an outside
provider may be
necessary.
Engaging in
professional
learning through
cultural proficiency
or critical race
theory.
The cost of an
outside consultant
may be a resource
requirement.
On-going KPI: District
personnel know
where they are in
their continuum of
building their cultural
proficiencies and
their biases.
KPI: District
personnel have
critical reflective
practices to support
them in continued
growth.
KPI: District
personnel can lead
others in critically
reflective practices.
Constraint:
Engaging in these
practices requires
vulnerability and
time. The provider
would need to be
highly skilled in
working through
these processes. The
District would need
the patience and
funds to invest in this
over time.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 197
Table 33, continued
Proposed
Solution(s)
Action Steps Building Capacity
& Resource
Requirements
Timeline Indicators, Measures &
Constraints
2. Develop
shared
responsibility,
reflected in
District
publications of
LCAP, Vision,
Mission and
Values
Superintendent
would take the lead
on this initiative
and assign a staff
member to support
in publication
alignment.
Time to build
meaning of what is
stated as a District
and community
would be
necessary.
Immediate KPI: Messaging on
District publications
shows depth of
commitment to
emergent bilingual
students and continued
efforts being engaged
in
3. Develop
hiring practices in
which high
quality Principals
and Teachers
knowledgeable of
meeting the needs
of emergent
bilingual students
are hired
Cabinet, and the
Superintendent,
would continue to
lead this effort.
This protocol is
already in motion;
no additional time
should be needed.
Creating a common
vision of what is
expected of
applicants.
In
progress
KPI: Highly qualified
Instructional leaders
and classroom
practioners that
understand how to meet
the needs of emergent
bilingual students
would be hired
Constraint: Board
alignment with hiring
practices.
4. Create a
Mentorship
Network between
the District and
Site Instructional
Leaders
The Superintendent
would lead this
effort, executed by
Executive
Directors. This
structure is already
in place and should
require minimal
resources to
maintain.
Yet, refined work
on ensuring that all
Executive Directors
have an expert
knowledge base of
emergent bilingual
students may need
to occur.
In
progress
KPI: Emergent
bilingual students are
on every Network
agenda
KPI: Mentors and
instructional leaders
have instructional
conversations about
how various EL
Typologies’ need are
being met

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 198
Table 33, continued
Proposed
Solution(s)
Action Steps Building Capacity
& Resource
Requirements
Timeline Indicators, Measures &
Constraints
Strategy 2:
Instructional
Leaders Develop
an Infrastructure
of Support
1. Redefine and
develop
professional
learning
communities
Instructional
leaders lead this
effort.
Given the concept
of PLC’s are in
place, little time
should bee needed
in refining the lens.
No expected funds
should be needed.
1 year KPI: Teachers should
be talking more
intentionally on
student learning of
emergent bilingual
students
KPI: Refined
classroom practices
reflecting the needs of
emergent bilingual
students
2. Refine
professional
learning cycles to
more specifically
align to tenants of
andragogy
District personnel
would need to
support in added
knowledge
surrounding
andragogy.
Instructional
leaders lead this
effort at the site
level.
Given the concept
of PLC’s are in
place, incorporating
practice experience,
learning from
action, and learning
mediated through
context should take
little time to
implement.
No expected funds
should be needed.
1 year KPI: Teachers should
feel more confident in
executing OCDE
Project GLAD®
strategies
KPI: Teachers should
be able to more
deliberately employ
OCDE Project
GLAD® strategies
Constraint: Given
many instructional
leaders are not aware
of the tenants of
andragogy, time may
take longer than
expected to bridge
additional learning.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 199
Table 33, continued
Proposed
Solution(s)
Action Steps Building Capacity
& Resource
Requirements
Timeline Indicators, Measures &
Constraints
3. Implement
phases of
implementation
of the OCDE
Project GLAD®
model into the
professional
learning cycle
The instructional
leader would be
responsible for
incorporating the
phases into the
professional
learning series.
Each phase would
take approximately
one year to
implement, in
which instructional
leaders would need
the support of the
District to build
depth of
understanding of
each phase.
3 years KPI: Teachers could
articulate why they
were using the
strategies in meeting
the needs of emergent
bilingual students.
KPI: Teachers would
gain confidence in best
instructions for
emergent bilingual
students.
KPI: Instructional
leaders would know
what to look for and
how to better provide
feedback to teachers.
Strategy 3: EL
typology needs
and OCDE Project
GLAD®
alignment
1. Develops and
utilizes a cross-
walk between EL
typologies and
the OCDE
Project GLAD®
strategies
District trainers
would oversee the
cross-walk
development,
whereas mentors
would engage in
critical reflection,
and instructional
leaders use
intentionally for
instruction.
1 year to
develop.
Year 2
implemen
t.
KPI: Instructional
leaders would better
know how to support
the various typologies
of ELs
KPI: Teachers would
more intentionally
utilize strategies in
bests meeting the
various typologies

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 200
Table 33, continued
Proposed
Solution(s)
Action Steps Building Capacity
& Resource
Requirements
Timeline Indicators, Measures
& Constraints
2. Develops and
utilizes a cross-
walk between the
ELD standards
and the OCDE
Project GLAD®
strategies
District trainers
would oversee the
cross-walk
development,
whereas mentors
would engage in
critical reflection,
and instructional
leaders use
intentionally for
instruction.
1 year to
develop.
Same year
to
implement.
KPI: Instructional
leaders would better
provide feedback on
integrated and
designated ELD
instruction
KPI: Teachers would
intentionally deliver
integrated and
designated ELD
instruction
KPI: Students would
achieve higher scores
on SBAC and
ELPAC
3. Develop and
utilizes a cross-
walk between the
ELPAC
performance
tasks and OCDE
Project GLAD®
strategies
District trainers
would oversee the
cross-walk
development,
whereas mentors
would engage in
critical reflection,
and instructional
leaders use
intentionally for
instruction.
1 year to
develop.
Same year
to
implement.
KPI: Students would
be better prepared to
take the ELPAC
KPI: Students would
obtain greater
proficiency in
listening, speaking,
reading & writing
KPI: More students
would be ready to
reclassify

Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Utilizing the above strategy solutions, this section will examine these strategies as
components of an integrated implementation and evaluation plan.
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
The model that informed this implementation and evaluation plan is Kirkpatrick and
Kirkpatrick’s (2006) Four Level Model of Evaluation. The model suggests that evaluation plans
start with identifying the organizational goal. The four levels represent a sequence in evaluating
programs and professional learning. “Each level is important and has an impact on the next
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 201
level” (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2006, p.21). As one moves from one level of evaluation to
the next, the process becomes more difficult and time-consuming, with no levels being bypassed.
The four levels are:
Level 1- Reaction
Level 2- Learning
Level 3- Behavior
Level 4- Results
In evaluating these four levels, one considers the degree to which the desired results or
organizational goal is attained. In backwards planning, organizational leaders can analyze the
findings, establish recommendations, and bridge the recommended solutions with the
organizational goals. Using the four levels powers connections between the immediate solutions
and the more macro goals (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2006) of closing the achievement gap for
EB students.
To begin, the organizational goal is examined in relation to the KMO influences analyzed
through the research study.
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations
The mission of CSESD is to ignite every child’s imagination and passion (CVESD,
2017). To sustain their vision that, “every child is an individual of great worth,” they are
committed to providing each student with the learning environment and supports they need to be
successful (CVESD, 2017, p. 27). Both location (close to the Mexico border) and the diverse
student population that reside within this San Diego District requires special attention on the
emergent bilingual (EB) population, classified English Learners constituting 35% of their student
population. The organizational goals outlined in their LCAP in support of their EB population
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 202
shared: (a) students will engage in relevant learning experiences in ELD that integrate critical
thinking skills, collaboration and creativity and (b) students will increase (language) proficiency
as measured by ELPAC and SBAC (CSESD, 2017). Furthermore, principals and teachers will
provide the needed supports to increase EB students’ English proficiency, as measured on the
ELPAC, from 67% to 70%, growing by 5% annually through 2020. Reclassification rates of EB
students will increase from 21% to 23%, growing by 10% annually through 2020. These
organizational goals will be accomplished through the following identified actions: Training
resource teachers, administrators and instructional leadership teams in the ELA/ELD
Framework, ELD Standards and ELPAC, including best practices in curriculum and instruction.
The use of the OCDE Project GLAD® model has been identified as one professional learning
structure in meeting the high impact strategies to support language development needs.
Table 34 articulates the organizational goals and the stakeholder goals that will seek to
attain the overarching organizational goal defined. Based on the findings of this study,
instructional leaders have the capacity to fulfill their stakeholder goal and support in realizing the
organizational goal. The recommendations provided provides a plan for other organizations and
instructional leaders to consider in fulfilling similar organizational performance goals. CSESD’s
organizational goals, aligns with the greater problem of practice of closing the achievement and
opportunity gaps for EB students by ensuring high quality culturally and linguistically sustaining
teaching and learning.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 203
Table 34
Organizational Mission, Goal and Stakeholder Performance Goals (revisited)
Organizational Mission
Costa Sur Elementary School District’s mission is to nurture every child’s imagination, intellect, and
sense of inquiry.
Organizational Performance Goal
By June 2018, CSESD, Administrators and Teachers will provide the needed supports to increase
emergent bilingual students’ English proficiency, as measured on the ELPAC, from 67% to 70%, growing
by 5% annually through 2020. Reclassification rates of emergent bilingual students will increase from
21% to 23%, growing by 10% annually through 2020.
CSESD’s Goal Administrator’s Goal Teacher’s Goal
Sustain a vision and mission
that embraces diversity and
creates pathways for districts
to increase opportunities for
emergent bilinguals.
Administrators will increase best
practices related to andragogy,
supporting teacher implementation
of the OCDE Project GLAD®
model for emergent bilingual
students by 5% growth of
implementation annually.
[Insert 55% of teachers at the 20 identified
schools will implement research-
based instructional practices,
OCDE Project GLAD®, across all
content areas by 2018.

Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Table 35 shows the proposed Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators in the form of
outcomes, metrics and methods for both external and internal outcomes for instructional leaders
in CSESD. If the internal outcomes are met as expected as a result of training and organizational
support for instructional leaders’ performance in applying tenants of andragogy, professional
learning communities, professional learning cycles (modeling, practice, coaching, mentoring,
reflecting, planning and assessing), then the external and internal outcomes should also be
realized.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 204
Table 35
External Outcomes, Metrics and Indicators
External Outcomes
Proposed
Solution(s)
Action Steps Building Capacity
& Resource
Requirements
Timeline Indicators, Measures
& Constraints
Strategy 1:
District
Develops an
Infrastructure
of Support
1. Investigate one’s
values and biases
concerning emergent
bilingual students.
Hiring an outside
provider may be
necessary.
Engaging in
professional
learning through
cultural
proficiency or
critical race
theory.
The cost of an
outside consultant
may be a resource
requirement.
On-going KPI: District
personnel know
where they are in
their continuum of
building their cultural
proficiencies and
their biases.
KPI: District
personnel have
critical reflective
practices to support
them in continued
growth.
KPI: District
personnel can lead
others in critically
reflective practices.
Constraint:
Engaging in these
practices requires
vulnerability and
time. The provider
would need to be
highly skilled in
working through
these processes. The
District would need
the patience and
funds to invest in this
over time.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 205
Table 35, continued
External Outcomes
Proposed
Solution(s)
Action Steps Building Capacity
& Resource
Requirements
Timeline Indicators,
Measures &
Constraints
2. Develop shared
responsibility,
reflected in District
publications of
LCAP, Vision,
Mission and Values
Superintendent
would take the
lead on this
initiative and
assign a staff
member to support
in publication
alignment.
Time to build
meaning of what is
stated as a District
and community
would be
necessary.
Immediate KPI: Messaging on
District publications
shows depth of
commitment to
emergent bilingual
students and
continued efforts
being engaged in
3. Develop hiring
practices in which
high quality
Principals and
Teachers
knowledgeable of
meeting the needs of
emergent bilingual
students are hired
Cabinet, and the
Superintendent,
would continue to
lead this effort.
This protocol is
already in motion;
no additional time
should be needed.
Creating a
common vision of
what is expected
of applicants.
In progress KPI: Highly
qualified
Instructional leaders
and classroom
practioners that
understand how to
meet the needs of
emergent bilingual
students would be
hired
Constraint: Board
alignment with
hiring practices.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 206
Table 35, continued
External Outcomes
Proposed
Solution(s)
Action Steps Building Capacity
& Resource
Requirements
Timeline Indicators,
Measures &
Constraints
4. Create a
Mentorship Network
between the District
and Site Instructional
Leaders
The
Superintendent
would lead this
effort, executed by
Executive
Directors. This
structure is already
in place and
should require
minimal resources
to maintain.
Yet, refined work
on ensuring that
all Executive
Directors have an
expert knowledge
base of emergent
bilingual students
may need to occur.
In progress KPI: Emergent
bilingual students
are on every
Network agenda
KPI: Mentors and
instructional leaders
have instructional
conversations about
how various EL
Typologies’ need
are being met
Strategy 3: EL
typology needs
and OCDE Project
GLAD®
alignment
1. Develops and
utilizes a cross-walk
between EL
typologies and the
OCDE Project
GLAD® strategies
District trainers would
oversee the cross-walk
development, whereas
mentors would engage
in critical reflection.
1 year to
develop.
Year 2
implement.
KPI: Instructional
leaders would
better know how to
support the various
typologies of ELs
KPI: Teachers
would more
intentionally utilize
strategies in bests
meeting the various
typologies

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 207
Table 35, continued
External Outcomes
Proposed
Solution(s)
Action Steps Building Capacity
& Resource
Requirements
Timeline Indicators, Measures
& Constraints
2. Develops and
utilizes a cross-
walk between the
ELD standards and
the OCDE Project
GLAD® strategies
District trainers
would oversee the
cross-walk
development,
whereas mentors
would engage in
critical reflection.
1 year to
develop.
Same year to
implement.
KPI: Instructional
leaders would better
provide feedback on
integrated and
designated ELD
instruction
KPI: Teachers would
intentionally deliver
integrated and
designated ELD
instruction
KPI: Students would
achieve higher scores
on SBAC and ELPAC
3. Develop and
utilizes a cross-
walk between the
ELPAC
performance tasks
and OCDE Project
GLAD® strategies
District trainers
would oversee the
cross-walk
development,
whereas mentors
would engage in
critical reflection,
and instructional
leaders use
intentionally for
instruction.
1 year to
develop.
Same year to
implement.
KPI: Students would
be better prepared to
take the ELPAC
KPI: Students would
obtain greater
proficiency in
listening, speaking,
reading & writing
KPI: More students
would be ready to
reclassify

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 208
Table 36
Internal Outcomes, Metrics and Indicators
Internal Outcomes
Proposed
Solution(s)
Action Steps Building
Capacity &
Resource
Requirements
Timeline Indicators, Measures &
Constraints
Strategy 2:
Instructional
Leaders
Develop an
Infrastructure
of Support
1. Redefine
and develop
professional
learning
communities
Instructional
leaders lead this
effort.
Given the
concept of PLC’s
are in place, little
time should be
needed in
refining the lens.
No expected
funds should be
needed.
1 year KPI: Teachers should be
talking more intentionally on
student learning of emergent
bilingual students
KPI: Refined classroom
practices reflecting the needs
of emergent bilingual students
2. Refine
professional
learning cycles
to more
specifically
align to tenants
of andragogy
Instructional
leaders lead this
effort at the site
level.
Given the
concept of PLC’s
are in place,
incorporating
practice
experience,
learning from
action, and
learning
mediated through
context should
take little time to
implement.
No expected
funds should be
needed.
1 year KPI: Teachers should feel
more confident in executing
OCDE Project GLAD®
strategies
KPI: Teachers should be able
to more deliberately employ
OCDE Project GLAD®
strategies
Constraint: Given many
instructional leaders are not
aware of the tenants of
andragogy, time may take
longer than expected to bridge
additional learning.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 209
Table 36, continued
Internal Outcomes
Proposed
Solution(s)
Action Steps Building
Capacity &
Resource
Requirements
Timeline Indicators, Measures &
Constraints
3. Implement
phases of
implementation
of the OCDE
Project
GLAD®
model into the
professional
learning cycle
The instructional
leader would be
responsible for
incorporating the
phases into the
professional
learning series.
Each phase
would take
approximately
one year to
implement, in
which
instructional
leaders would
need the support
of the District to
build depth of
understanding of
each phase.
3 years KPI: Teachers could articulate
why they were using the
strategies in meeting the needs
of emergent bilingual students.
KPI: Teachers would gain
confidence in best instructions
for emergent bilingual
students.
KPI: Instructional leaders
would know what to look for
and how to better provide
feedback to teachers.
Strategy 3:
EL typology
needs and
OCDE
Project
GLAD®
alignment
1. Develops
and utilizes a
cross-walk
between EL
typologies and
the OCDE
Project
GLAD®
strategies
Instructional
leaders use
intentionally for
instruction.
1 year to
develop.
Year 2
implement.
KPI: Instructional leaders
would better know how to
support the various typologies
of ELs
KPI: Teachers would more
intentionally utilize strategies
in bests meeting the various
typologies
2. Develops
and utilizes a
cross-walk
between the
ELD standards
and the OCDE
Project
GLAD®
strategies
Instructional
leaders use
intentionally for
instruction.
1 year to
develop.
Same year
to
implement.
KPI: Instructional leaders
would better provide feedback
on integrated and designated
ELD instruction
KPI: Teachers would
intentionally deliver integrated
and designated ELD
instruction
KPI: Students would achieve
higher scores on SBAC and
ELPAC

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 210
Table 36, continued
Internal Outcomes
Proposed
Solution(s)
Action Steps Building
Capacity &
Resource
Requirements
Timeline Indicators, Measures &
Constraints
3. Develop and
utilizes a cross-
walk between
the ELPAC
performance
tasks and
OCDE Project
GLAD®
strategies
Instructional
leaders use
intentionally for
instruction.
1 year to
develop.
Same year
to
implement.
KPI: Students would be better
prepared to take the ELPAC
KPI: Students would obtain
greater proficiency in listening,
speaking, reading & writing
KPI: More students would be
ready to reclassify

Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. Using the tenants of andragogy to enhance best practices for EB
students, instructional leaders refine their current practices of professional learning communities
and professional learning cycles to increase implementation OCDE Project GLAD®. The
overarching critical behavior is that site level instructional leaders develop an infrastructure of
support using the tenants of andragogy to enhance best practices for EB students. The first
critical behavior is that instructional leaders will develop professional learning communities
focused on student learning, specifically emphasizing EB student growth. Aligning DuFour’s
three big ideas of professional learning communities to meeting the needs of EB students will
support in progress towards the organizational goal. See Appendix E for professional learning
communities aligned to emergent bilingual students’ needs. The second critical behavior is that
site level instructional leaders develop professional learning cycles that utilize OCDE Project
GLAD® strategies, incorporating in the following procedures: Learning from Experience,
Learning from Reflective Action, and Learning Mediated Through Context. Instructional leaders
would need to understand how adults learn, so that implementation practices during professional
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 211
learning cycles could be enhanced. The incorporations of these practices deepen the
intentionality, uproots belief systems of oneself and student learning and develops common
understandings within a community. These shifts, though apparently subtle, may require
extensive time to engage in deep practice. Appendix F, How Adults Learn, outlines the various
shifts and behaviors that could enhance the process articulated between training, “safe practice,”
“opening for peer observations and practice,” and “Monitor. Measure. Modify,” as stated by
interviewees of their current professional learning cycle. The third critical behavior is site
instructional leaders making each phase of the cycle explicit of how to implement the OCDE
Project GLAD® over time. See Appendix G, OCDE Project GLAD® One Year
Implementation, for details. The specific metrics, methods, and timing for each of these outcome
behaviors appears in Table 37.
Table 37
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing
Critical Behaviors Metrics
Methods
Timing
1. Instructional leaders
develop professional
learning communities
(PLC) focused on
student learning,
specifically
emphasizing emergent
bilingual student
growth.
1a. The frequency of
teachers talking more
intentionally about
student learning of
emergent bilingual
students

1a. The instructional
leadership team (ILT)
member will enforce the
pre-determined agenda
that has the revolving
topic of ELs.

1a. Will be
implemented upon
the beginning of the
new school year.

Thereafter – monthly,
at PLC or
“collaboration” time.
1b. The number of
OCDE Project
GLADR® strategies
used at an “advanced”
level increases.

1b. ILT will schedule
“safe practice” and
“observation” of the
implementation of the
model. Using scheduled
walkthroughs, growth of
strategies will be
monitored, following
the implementation
plan.

1b. ILT report to
Instructional Leader -
monthly.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 212
Table 37, continued
Critical Behaviors Metrics
Methods
Timing
2. Instructional leaders
develop professional
learning cycles that
utilize OCDE Project
GLAD® strategies,
incorporating in the
following procedures:
Learning from
Experience; Learning
from Action; and
Learning Mediated
through Context.
2a. Teachers confidence
in executing OCDE
Project GLAD®
strategies increases.
2a. Instructional leaders
engage in reflective
conversations
throughout “safe
practice” and “peer
observations” on
learnings from
implementation.

2a. Professional
learning cycles begin
within the first month
of school starting and
last 6-8 weeks in
duration.
2b. Teachers lesson
plans show deliberate
use of OCDE Project
GLAD® strategies to
meet content and
language objectives.
2b. Collective teacher
efficacy would be
evident during
“collaboration”
time/PLC in which
teachers’ are designing
lesson plans.
2b. ILT report to
Instructional Leader -
monthly.

1 year for lessons to
be designed with
greater intentionality.

3. Instructional leaders
make each phase of the
cycle explicit of how to
implement the OCDE
Project GLAD® model
over time.
3a. Teachers could
articulate why they were
using the strategies in
meeting the needs of
emergent bilingual
students.

3a. Instructional leaders
would monitor the
implementation of
OCDE Project GLAD®
strategies using a
refined professional
learning cycle with
phases of OCDE Project
GLAD®
Implementation.

3a. Professional
learning cycles begin
within the first month
of school starting and
last 6-8 weeks in
duration.

Would take up to 3
years for proficient
and high
implementation to
occur.

3b. Observational
protocols- Instructional
leaders would know
what to look for and
how to better provide
feedback to teachers.
3b. Instructional leaders
would use a rubric to
see progress from
novice implementation
(or emergent) to mastery
(or advance) of OCDE
Project GLAD®.

3b. Rubrics used in
conjunction with
professional learning
cycles. Beginning
use within the first
month of school
starting.

Would take up to 3
years for proficient
and high
implementation to
occur.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 213
Required drivers. Instructional leaders would require the support of district personnel

to reinforce what they learn in training and encourage them to apply what they have learned to
engaging in professional learning communities, professional learning cycles, coaching,
mentoring, reflection, planning and monitoring. District personnel would need to support in
deepening understanding of the tenants of andragogy and narrowing elements of the professional
learning cycle to incorporate phases of OCDE Project GLAD® implementation. Table 38 shows
the recommended drivers to support critical behaviors of instructional leaders.
Table 38
Required Drivers to Support Instructional Leaders’ Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical Behaviors Supported
1, 2, 3
Reinforcing
Job Aid with a cross-walk on the various EL
typologies and how the OCDE Project GLAD® model
can support each typology, specifically which
strategies and for what purpose.

Ongoing 1
Job Aid with a cross-walk on the alignment of the
ELD standards and how the OCDE Project GLAD®
strategies support with both integrated and designated
ELD.

Ongoing 1
Job Aid that includes a clearly structured chart of the
different Component Areas of the OCDE Project
GLAD® model and the various strategies, the
research base and purpose of the strategy.

Ongoing 2, 3
Job Aid that details the tenants of andragogy and
explains how adult learners learn best.

Ongoing 2
Job Aid that details professional learning communities
(PLC) and how to align PLC’s to meeting the needs of
emergent bilingual students.

Ongoing 1
Job Aid that visually represents the cycles of
improvement and implementation.

Ongoing 2, 3
Job Aid that includes steps to implementation with
time frames of expected practice.

6-8 weeks of
implementation
3
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 214
Table 38, continued
Method(s) Timing
Critical Behaviors Supported
1, 2, 3
Reinforcing
Provide an organizational model of how to replicate
professional learning communities from the District
level, mimicked at the site level. Provide professional
learning on PLCs.

Beginning of
year
1
Provide professional learning on continuous
improvement. Develop a learning cycle based on
student data. Provide a job aid that includes the steps
to implement with time frames of expected practice.

Quarterly 1, 2
Professional learning provided, in which an instructor
models how to observe a teacher implementing OCDE
Project GLAD®, then provides feedback, and then
measures progress; increasing implementation.

Quarterly 2
Job Aid that outlines different methods of increasing
teacher implementation and practice over time and
minimizes extraneous role responsibilities.

Ongoing 1, 2, 3
Develop an infrastructure of support that prioritizes
emergent bilingual students via organizational
meetings.

Monthly 1, 2, 3
Encouraging
Provide professional learning in which partners
practice engaging in reflective practices though
coaching techniques.

Monthly 1, 2, 3
Provide opportunities for instructional leaders and the
District mentor to assess current school capacity and
brainstorm additional expertise.

Monthly 1, 2, 3
Cultivate a culture of participation with all
stakeholders in achieving organization goals by
encouraging feedback and communication by all
stakeholders.

Ongoing 1, 2, 3
Executive Directors provide professional learning on
emergent bilinguals, infrastructures to enhance
instructional practices, on-site mentorship and
accountability with site instructional leaders.

Monthly 1, 2, 3

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 215
Table 38, continued
Method(s) Timing
Critical Behaviors Supported
1, 2, 3
Rewarding
Provide widely recognized and respected peer models
during professional learning to demonstrate the
positive public impact resulting from careful planning
and monitoring; and within the established
timeframes.

Monthly 1, 2, 3

Monitoring. Three strategies could be used to ensure that the required drivers occur: (a)
the district can use Principal’s Instructional Leadership Team monthly meetings to share success
stories; (b) two months after training, the district can ask instructional leaders to self-report their
confidence and self-efficacy in job-related tasks; and (c) district mentors can assess the
performance of instructional leaders through the monthly mentorship meetings at school sites.
Frequent checks can help the organization monitor progress and make adjustments if results do
not align with expected roll-out times.
Level 2: Learning
Learning goals. Following the completion of the recommended solutions, instructional
leaders will be able to:
1. Understand EL typologies and what types of services and strategies best meet their
needs, (C)
2. Recognize the details of the OCDE Project GLAD® model’s strategies and how they
apply to emergent bilingual student populations, (C)
3. Understand, apply and monitor OCDE Project GLAD® within integrated and designated
ELD settings, (P)
4. Apply the tenants of andragogy and strengthen professional learning communities and
professional learning cycles, (P)
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 216
5. Refine professional learning communities to focus on instruction and learning that best
meets the needs of emergent bilingual students, (P)
6. Refine professional learning cycles to incorporate tenants of andragogy and increase
teacher efficacy in meeting the needs of emergent bilingual students, (P)
7. Incorporate phases of OCDE Project GLAD® into professional learning cycles to
increase best practices for emergent bilingual students, (P)
8. Value the intentional use of the OCDE Project GLAD® model as an avenue to close the
opportunity and achievement gap for emergent bilingual students (V).
Program. The learning goals listed in the previous section will be achieved with a
training program that explores in-depth the legal, moral and ethical imperatives in meeting the
needs of EB students. The learners, instructional leaders, will study a broad range of topics
pertaining to second language acquisition, EL typologies, andragogy, professional learning
communities, continuous improvement, professional learning cycles, measuring impact and the
OCDE Project GLAD® model’s role in closing the opportunity and achievement gap for EB
students. The program is blended, consisting of three online asynchronous modules of 120
minutes (2 hours) each and one face-to-face leadership ensemble workshop that is 420 minutes,
or two face-face leadership ensemble workshops that run 210 minutes each (7 hours). The total
time for completion is 540 minutes (9 hours).
During the asynchronous online modules, learners will be provided job aids with key
terms and references regarding EL typologies, policies and regulations, tenants of andragogy,
Component Areas of OCDE Project GLAD®, as well as flow charts representing professional
learning cycles and phases of implementation. The job aids will be demonstrated on video using
authentic applications and relevant scenarios, key terms will be defined and examples and non-
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 217
examples of effective practices for EB students will be shared. Videos will be paused and
prompts or reflections will surface, for learners to think critically of their understanding.
Additionally, learners will be expected to accumulate evidence of practice using the various job
aids and submit deliverables, in which feedback will be provided through the online platform.
During the synchronous in person session(s), the focus will be on applying what
instructional leaders have learned through the asynchronous online courses, analyzing their
educational institutes data, creating an implementation plan using professional learning
communities and continuous improvement cycles. Developing metrics of impacts on how they
will assess higher implementation of teachers’ use of the OCDE Project GLAD® strategies in
bridging the identified gaps of data for their EB students, to then report back to the instructors at
the National Training Center.
Components of learning. Demonstrating conceptual knowledge is often necessary as a
precursor to applying the knowledge to solve problems. It is important to evaluate learning for
both conceptual and procedural knowledge being taught. It is also important that learners,
instructional leaders, see the value in engaging in the training as a prerequisite to using their
newly learned knowledge and skills in their work capacities. It is also important that learners see
the value in completing the entirety of the training. Additionally, learners (instructional leaders)
also must be efficacious that they can succeed in applying their developed knowledge and skills
from the training and are committed to using the learning in their work to improve the
instructional quality for all students, but vital for emergent bilingual students. Table 39 lists the
evaluation methods and timings for these components of learning.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 218
Table 39
Components of Learning for the Program
Methods or Activities Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”
Knowledge checks on how adults need to be
involved in the planning and evaluation of their
instruction using case studies.

In the asynchronous portions of the course after
case studies are read.
Knowledge checks through discussions, “pair,
think, share” and other individual/group activities
on the value of using adult experiences for the basis
of learning.

Periodically during the asynchronous portions
of the course in person workshop and
documented via observation notes.

Knowledge checks via short answer prompts via
chat feature on how adults are most interested in
learning subjects that have immediate relevance
and impact to their job or personal life.

Periodically during asynchronous portions of
the course.
Knowledge checks by having learners teach their
classmates about how adult learning is problem-
centered rather than content-oriented.

After each course is complete.
Knowledge checks through learners explaining
their thinking behind the deliverables that they
bring back from one course to the next.

After each course is complete.

Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”
During the asynchronous portions of the course
using scenarios, instructional leaders will provide
examples of agendas where increased planning
time was provided for teachers and how to optimize
meetings days for planning.
In the asynchronous portions of the course at
the end of each module/lesson/unit

Demonstration in groups and individually of using
the job aids to successfully perform the skills of
incorporating the tenants of andragogy.

Periodically during asynchronous portions of
the course; but after the first course.
Quality of the feedback from peers during group
sharing regarding professional learning cycles
created and structures for professional learning
communities.
During the leadership ensemble.

Retrospective pre- and post-test assessment survey
asking participants about their level of proficiency
before and after the training in using
implementation plans.

During the leadership ensemble.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 219
Table 39, continued
Methods or Activities Timing
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Instructor’s observation of participants’ statements
and actions demonstrating that they see the benefit
of meeting the needs of emergent bilingual
students.

During the leadership ensemble.
Discussions of the value of what they are being
asked to do regarding developing implementation
plans.

During the leadership ensemble.
Instructor’s observations of participant’s quality of
deliverables or completion rate of assignments.

Throughout the online courses and leadership
ensemble.
Retrospective pre- and post-test assessment item.

After the course.
Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”
Survey items using scaled items Following each module/lesson/unit in the
asynchronous portions of the course.

Discussions following practice and feedback.

During the workshop.
Retrospective pre- and post-test assessment item. After the course.

Commitment “I will do it on the job.”
Discussions following practice and feedback.

During the workshop.
Create an individual action plan.

During the workshop.
Retrospective pre- and post-test assessment item. After the course.

Level 1: Reaction
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2006), shares that evaluating a participant’s reaction
measures the degree of customer satisfaction. Though this may be the most surface level of
evaluations, it is often vital for the continuation of the program success. It is important to get a
positive reaction and in addition, that participants react favorably. When participants are happy
and enthusiastic, the motivation to learn is peaked. “Positive reaction may not ensure learning,
but negative reaction almost certainly reduces the possibility of learning occurring” (Kirkpatrick
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 220
& Kirkpatrick, 2006, p. 22). Table 40 articulates the components to measure reactions to the
program stated above.
Table 40
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Methods or Tools Timing
Engagement
Data analytics in the learning management
system.

Ongoing during asynchronous portion of the
course.
Completion of online modules/lessons/units. Ongoing during asynchronous portion of the
course.

Observation by instructor/facilitator. During the leadership ensemble.

Attendance.

During the leadership ensemble.
Course evaluation. Two weeks after the course.
Relevance
Brief pulse-check with participants via survey
(online) and discussion (ongoing).
After every module/lesson/unit and the
workshop.

Course evaluation.

Two weeks after the course.
Customer Satisfaction
Brief pulse-check with participants via survey
(online) and discussion (ongoing).
After every module/lesson/unit and the
leadership ensemble.

Course evaluation. Two weeks after the course.

Immediately following the program implementation. During the asynchronous
portion of the course, the online module platform will collect data on who participates, when
they started, for what duration of time, if assignments were completed and the completion of the
modules by the participants. These data points will be used as engagement indicators of the
instructional leaders. Their overall satisfaction with the content and delivery of the online course
will also be evaluated. Throughout the course, knowledge checks will be activated as well,
either through multiple choice questions, short answers, or survey. Additionally, through the
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 221
online platform, surveys after each module will be administered and collected, assessing the
relevance of the material and application to their job performance in meeting the needs of
emergent bilingual students. Their overall satisfaction with the content and delivery of the online
course will also be evaluated. Throughout the course, knowledge checks will be activated as
well, either through multiple choice questions, short answers, or survey.
For Level 1 evaluation, during the in-person Leadership Ensemble (training), the
instructor will conduct periodic brief check ins by asking the participants how they feel about the
content on a scale of 1-4, or the relevance they are seeing to their work. Additionally,
participants “Exit Slip” for the day would be to provide a “Got” and “Want”- something they
“got” from the day, and something they still “want” for on-going support. Level 2 evaluation
during the Leadership Ensemble will include checks for understanding of the content via partner
and group sharing, and other learning partnership configurations where participants are asked to
make meaning of text, or artifact and negotiate for meaning within their small group.
Additionally, instructional leaders will be asked to finalize their implementation plans based on
the data they had been analyzing and the learning that was gleaned from the asynchronous
sessions. Level 3 evaluation will occur within this context by having the participants engage in
actually practicing the knowledge and skills they learned about in previous learning settings.
Working with a small group of peers, instructional leaders will practice the content, skills, and
behaviors associated to the learnings. In turn, each peer group member, will also be providing
feedback, exhibiting Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3 forms of evaluation.
Exhibit E displays a table in which to assess how professional learning communities can
be aligned to meeting the needs of EB students, determining what learning is necessary for
instructional leaders to employ. Exhibit F represents a matrix that delineates how adults learn,
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 222
operating as a reflective tool to determine what behaviors are needed in engaging in the tenants
of andragogy to support adult learners in making instructional shifts. Exhibit H provides a
reaction evaluation to the online program provided, while Exhibit I is a reaction evaluation for
the Leadership Ensemble Training. These resources will support in continuous improvement and
in best meeting the needs of EB students.
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. Approximately four weeks
after the training, 12 weeks and then 24 weeks after training, instructors will administer surveys
containing open and scaled items using the Qualtrics platform. Measured will be participant’s
perspective, satisfaction and relevance of the training (Level 1), confidence and value of
applying their training (Level 2), application of the training and extent of how implementation
plans (including tenants of andragogy, professional learning communities and continuous
improvement cycles) have progressed (Level 3), and to what degree have emergent bilingual
students increased in language proficiency, content understanding and experienced the closing of
the achievement gap (Level 4). Requesting examples or evidence from the participants and how
they measured this progress.
Data Analysis and Reporting
The Level 4 Goal of “results” in closing the opportunity and achievement gaps may be
measured through using the following metrics. Instructional leaders, having determined a
school-wide or grade-level wide goal of what aspect of emergent bilingual student growth would
be measured, would have developed a professional learning cycle to reflect the need. Thereafter,
teachers would conduct a pre and post assessment of emergent bilingual students of progress
over time. Using a Dashboard, data could be represented by growth of the area identified.
Attributing the intentional use of the identified OCDE Project GLAD® strategies of having been
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 223
employed to support the particular goal. Instructional leaders may choose specific language
domains (listening, speaking, reading or writing) to integrate OCDE Project GLAD® strategies
to support, then utilizing a state-wide standardized language assessment (i.e. CA ELPAC) as the
method of reporting results. Similarly, having identified areas of skill development, writing,
reading, or oral language production, the continuous improvement cycle would incorporate
strategies specific to meeting that goal, and then might use local or state-wide assessment to
report.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations included in this study are the nature of self-reporting and time constraints.
Given that individuals will be self-reporting on their own knowledge and skills, motivational and
organizational influences within the interviews holds limitations in responses, as they may not be
accounting for their own biases and could either inflate or devalue their experiences.
Furthermore, the time limitations in collecting and analyzing data (three months) constrained
options in designing the study utilizing additional stakeholder groups such as District leaders and
teachers or engaging in other data collection methods that would require more time to both
schedule and execute, such as observations.
Delimitations are the choices, boundaries and parameters that I have set for this study,
including the data collection methods, the chosen stakeholder group to analyze, and the sampling
criteria. One delimitation that proved quite problematic was the stakeholder criteria of having
three years or more experience as an administrator/instructional leader. Given this particular
District recently had a retirement initiative ensure, many veteran administrators left the District
months prior to the study. Locating instructional leaders that were identified as the group to be
implementing the OCDE Project GLAD® model with this criterion was not feasible, nor was it
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 224
to also locate an instructional leader that had three or more years implementing the OCDE
Project GLAD® model. Furthermore, the contexts in which these incorporated solutions transfer
to other educational agencies could vary because of the infrastructures of those institutions.
Future Research
Engaging in this study reveals the complexity of (a) the role of an instructional leader in
navigating leadership and the demands of overseeing a school, focused on instructional
leadership, and (b) the on-going efforts in ensuring that the nation’s largest growing nation is
prepared to support the on-going changing needs of EB students. This study but began to
explore the ways in which we can better support EB students. Future research could investigate
the relationships parents in building a child’s academic and linguistic repertoire. With newer
policy centered on parent engagement, the role of the parent in today’s education system needs
further analysis in building systems of support. Yet, as these various factors align, the
organization, educational system and the role of continuous improvement in our schools in
language development has largely gone unattended. In understanding the deep rooted
marginalized practices of the system, one might be able to unravel the web and continue bridging
the divide between the have and have nots.
Based on the findings, future research on administrative preparation programs and the
methods of preparing leaders for the complexity of growing diverse classrooms is an area of
further analysis. Investigating how the concepts and applications of andragogy are interwoven
into the curriculum, and how then principals become instructional leaders that advocate and build
systems for the marginalized. Additionally, how night this work then transfer into better teacher
pre-service preparation programs.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 225
In better understanding the impact of the OCDE Project GLAD® model on EB students,
a comparative analysis between non-implementers and implementers could be conducted, using
implementation practices gleaned from this study. In considering the growing population of EB
students within the nation, the possibilities for future research are endless.
Furthermore, based on the findings, additional analysis in different types of programs,
such as Dual Immersion and the instructional leader’s, would also respond to the wonderings of
EL typologies and the promotion of biliteracy. An analysis on how the global context attends to
their multiliterate society’s to better understand options for the U.S. efforts in embracing
multiliteracy would need to be explored. Considerable potential in analyzing how global
educational agencies attends to multiliteracy, language policy, standards development,
curriculum, program development, implementation practices and organizational infrastructures to
support implementation would contribute highly to obtain a more comprehensive lens as to how
language supports are being attended to globally. In understanding the global context, we can
better understand how best to prepare instructional leaders, teachers and students for an ever
changing learning environment and economy.
Conclusion
This evaluation study aimed to understand the principal’s roles in leading instructional
shifts for emergent bilingual education. What surfaced in this study, was the urgency and the
intention that we as a society must broach this topic. With such growing classified and non-
classified populations of emergent bilingual students, our society and economy is ill-prepared for
our youth to not have the linguistic, cultural perspectives and empathy for other cultures and
experiences that it will need. In the growth of globalization and technological disruptions, the
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 226
need for humanity and understanding is ever-present, language is a bridge to understanding of
oneself and others.
The role of the principal to lead and guide their adult and youth learners cannot be
understated. In better understanding the knowledge and skills, motivations, and organizational
influences that are required to lead will support in creating foundational considerations when
best meeting the needs of diverse learners. This work is valuable across the nation and would
argue internationally.
As this work continues to evolve, and more is understood regarding language acquisition,
second language acquisition, cognition, and learning, the work too will need to evolve.
Understanding one another is at heart of all this work, whether it’s linguistic assets, typologies,
or andragogy, these concepts requires the people to bridge existing gaps. Our humanity is the
disruption that is needed to resolve the inequities we see within our educational systems, making
the learning process reflective of all students’ needs, and vital for emergent bilingual students.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 227
REFERENCES
Aguirre, F., Bowman, K. L., Mendez, G., Mendez, S., Robbie, S. & Strum, P. Mendez v.
Westminster: A Living History. (Pursuing the Dreams of Brown and the Civil Rights Act:
A Living History of the Fight for Educational Equality) (Discussion). (2014) Michigan
State Law Review, No. 3, 2014. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=26291466
Alexander, D. H. (1999). Status of education reform in public elementary and secondary
schools: Teacher's perspectives. Washington D.C.: National Center for Education
Statistics.
Ambrose, S. A. (2010). How learning works: 7 research-based principles for smart teaching.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Arshavskiy, M. (2013). Instructional design for elearning: Essential guide to creating successful
elearning courses. www.yourelearningworld.com
August, D. & Hakuta, K. (1997). Improving schooling for language minority children: A
research agenda. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
Bailey, A. L. (2011). Do current English language develop standards/proficiency standards
reflect the English needed for success in school? Language Testing, 28(3), 343-365.
Bandura, A. (1977). Analysis of self-efficacy theory of behavioral change. Cognitive Theory and
Research. 1(4), 287-310.
Batalova, J. F. (2007). Measures of change: The demography and literacy of adolescent English
Learners. Washington DC: Migration Policy Institute.
Beck, I. (2002). The role of decoding in learning to read. Scholastic Red, -12.
Bensimon, E. (2005). Closing the achievement gap in higher education: An organizational
learning perspective. New Directions for Higher Education, 131, 99-111.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 228
Bhowmik, M. B. (2013). Role of pedagogy in effective teaching. Basic Research Journal of
Education Research and Review. 2(1), 1-5.
Blasé, J. & Blasé (1999). Principals' instructional leadership and teacher development: Teacher's
perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly. 35(3), 349-378.
Bogdan, R. & Biklen. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and
methods (5th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.
California Department of Education. (1981). Schooling and language minority students: A
theoretical framework. Los Angeles, CA: California State University, Los Angeles-
Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment Center.
California Department of Education. (2014). California English language development
standards: Kindergarten through grade 12. Sacramento, CA: Author.
Costa Sur Elementary School District. (2017). Bogdan, R. & Biklen. Local control
accountability plan (LCAP) and annual update template. Chula Vista, CA: Author.
Costa Sur Elementary School District. (2018). District. Retrieved http://www.cvesd.org/district
Clark, R. & Estes (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, N.C.: Information Age.
Clift, R. T. (1990). Encouraging reflective practice in education: An analysis of issues and
programs. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Cochran-Smith, D. (2003). Multicultural teacher education: Research, practice, and policy. In J.
& Banks, Handbook of Research on Multicultural Education (2nd ed., pp. 931-975). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Collier, V. & Thomas (1999). Making U.S. schools effective for English language learners, Part
1. TESOL Matters, 9(4), 1-6.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 229
Colon-Muniz, A., & Lavadenz, M. (2016). Latino civil rights in education: La luche sigue. New
York, NY: Routledge.
Constantino, P. M. (2001). Developing a professional teaching portfolio: A guide for success.
Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Corbin, J. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing
grounded theory (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Crain, R. L. (1985). School desegregation and Black occupational attainment: Results from a
long-term experiment. Baltimore, MD: Center for Social Organization of Schools Report,
Johns Hopkins University.
Crawford, J. (2004). Educating Costa Sur Elementary School District. English learners (5 ed.).
Los Angeles, CA: Bilingual Educational Services.
Creswell, J. (2014). Research design: Qulitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Cummins, J. (1999). BICS and CALP: Claifying the distinction. Bloomington, IN: ERIC.
Danielson, C. (2000). Teacher evaluation to enhance professional practice. Alexandria, VA:
ACSD.
Danielson, L. (2009). Fostering reflection. Educational Leadership- How Teachers Learn. 66(5).
Darling-Hammond, L. (2002). Research and rhetoric on teacher certification: Teacher
certification reconsidered. Educaiton Policy Analysis Archives, 10(36), 1-55.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2015). The flat world and education: How america's committment to
equity will determine our future. New York, NY: Teacher's College Press.
Darling-Hammond, L. H. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Palo Alto, CA:
Learning Policy Institute.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 230
Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2013). Critical race theory: the cutting edge. (3 ed.) Philadelphia,
PA: Temple University Press.
Dembo, M. & Seli, H. (2016). Motivation and learning strategies for college success: A focus on
self-regulated leraning (5th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Drago-Severson, E. (2007). Helping teachers learn: Principals as professional development
leaders. Teachers College Record, 109(1), 70-125.
Dufour, R. (1998). Professional learning communities at work: Best practices for enhancing
student achievement. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
Eccles, J. (2007). Motivational perspective on school achievement: Taking responsibility for
learning and teaching. In R. In Sternberg (Ed.), Optimizing student success in schools
with the new three r's (pp. 199-202). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Elfers, A. S. (2014). How school and district leaders support classroom teachers' work with
English language learners. Educational Administration Quarterly, 50(2), 305-344.
Entz, S. (2007). Why pedagogy matters: The importance of teaching in a standards-based
environment. Forum on Public Policy: A Journal of the Oxford Round Table.
Fenner, D. (2014). Advocating for English learners: A guide for educators. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin.
Fillmore, L. & Snow. (2000a). Loss of family languages: Should educators be concerned?

Theory into Practice, 39(4).

Fillmore, L. & Snow. (2000b). What teachers need to know about language. Washington DC:
ERIC Clearinghouse on Language and Linguistics.
Fleischman & Hopstock. (1993). Descriptive study of services to limited English Proficient
Students. 1(45). Arlington, VA: Development Associates.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 231
Freeman, F. M. (2002). Closing the achievement gap: How to reach limited-formal-schooling
and long-term English learners. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 46(2),p. 191.
Gándara, Rumberger, Maxwell-Jolly, & Callahan (2003). English learners in California schools:
Unequal resources, unequal outcomes. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(3).
Garcia, O. K. (2008). From English language learners to emergent bilinguals. New York, NY:
Teachers College.
Gay (2000).

Genesee, F. L. L. (2006). Educating English language learners: A synthesis of research
evidence. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Glickman, C. (1995). Supervision of instruction: A developmental approach (3rd ed.). Boston,
MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Glickman, C. D. (2002). Leadership for learning: How to help teachers succeed. Alexandria,
VA: ACSD.
Griner, A. & Stewart. (2012). Addressing the achievement gap and disproportionality through
the use of culturally responsive teaching practices. Urban Education, 48(4), 585-621.
Hall, G. (2011). Implementing change: Patterns, principles and potholes. Boston, MA: Allyn &
Bacon.
Hopstock, P. (2003). Descriptive study of services to LEP students and LEP students wtih
disabilities (Special topic report #2: Analysis of Office of Civil Rights Data related to
LEP students). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Istance, D. C. (2006). Demand-sensitive schooling? Evidence and issues (Schooling for
tomorrow). Paris, France: OECD.
Jenkins, B. (2009). What it takes to be an instructional leader. Principal, 1-34.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 232
Joyce & Showers (2003). Student achievement through staff development. Nottingham: National
College for School Leadership.
Kagan, S. (1989). The structural approach to cooperative learning. Educational Leadership.
47(4), 12-15.
Kennedy, M. (2016). How does professional development improve teaching? Review of
Educational Research, 86(4), 945-980.
Knowles, M. (1984). Andragogy in action: Applying modern principles of adult learning. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Krathwohl, D. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice.
41(4), 212-218.
Lambert, L. (2003). Leadership capacity for lasting school improvement. Alexandria, VA:
ACSD.
Larrivee, B. (2000). Transforming teaching practice: Becoming the critically reflective teacher.
Reflective Practice. 1(3), 293-307.
Leithwood, K. (1994). Leadership for school restructuring. Educational Administration
Quarterly. 30(4), 498-518.
Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago
Press.
Lucas, T. (2011). Teacher preparation for linguistically diverse classrooms: A resource for
teacher educators. New York, NY: Routelage.
Lunenburg, F. (2010). The principal as instructional leader. National Forum of Educational and
Supervision Journal, 27(4).
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 233
Marks, H. (2003). Principal leadership and school performance: An integration of
transformational and instructional leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly.
39(3), 370-397.
Maxwell. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE.
McIntyre, E. H. (2011). Reading instruction for diverse classrooms: Research-based, culturally
responsive practice. New York, NY: The Gilded Press.
Merriam, S. & Tisdell. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Meyer, J. S. (1994). Centralization, fragmentation, and school district complexity. Stanford, CA:
Stanford Education Policy Institute, School of Education, Stanford University.
National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2017). The condition of education. Washington
DC: U.S. Department of Education.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2009). The condition of education. Washington DC:
U.S. Department of Education.
National Education Association. (2001). Professional development for general education
teachers of English language learners. Washington DC: NEA Quality School Programs
& Resources Department.
National Education Association. (2015). Understanding the gaps: Who are we leaving behind-
and how far? Washington DC: Author.
Northwest Center for Public Health Practice. (2012). Effective adult learning: A toolkit for
teaching adults. Seattle, WA: Author.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 234
Olsen, L. (1998). Made in America: Immigrant students in our public schools. New York, NY:
New York Press.
Olsen, L. (2006). Ensuring academic success for English learners. UC Linguistic Minority
Research Institute, 15(4).
Olsen, L. (2010). Reparable harm: Fulfilling the unkept promise of educational opportunity for
California's long term English learners. Long Beach, CA: Californians Together.
Olsen, L. (2014). Meeting the unique needs of long-term English learners. Long Beach, CA:
National Education Association.
Orange County Department of Education. (2015). OCDE Project GLAD(R) National Training
Center learning guide (2nd ed.). Costa Mesa, CA: Author.
Paine, S. M. (2009). Engaging stakeholders: Including parents and the community to sustain
improved reading outcomes. Washington DC: Sustaining Reading First.
Paris, D. (2017). Culturally sustaining pedagogies: Teaching and learning for justice in a
changing world. The Journal of Teaching and Learning, 11(1), 35-37.
Paris, D. (2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, and
practice. Educational Researcher, 41(3), 93-97.
Parrish, T. M. (2006). Effects of the implementation of Proposition 227 on the education of
English learners, K-12: Findings from a 5-year evaluation. American Institutes for
Research and WestEd.
Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE.
Pew Research Center. (2008). The role of schools in the English Language Learner Achievement
Gap. Washington DC: Author.
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 235
Pintrich, P. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
teaching and learning contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667-686.
Research Center. (1979). The Belmont report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the
protection of human subjects of research. Kansis City, KS: The Commission.
Rubin, H. & Rubin. (2012). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.). Los
Angeles, CA: SAGE.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. New York, NY:
Teachers College Press.
Rumberger, R. (2000). The schooling of English learners. In E. H. Burr (Ed.), Crucial issues in
California education (pp. 23-44). Berkley, CA: Policy Analysis for CA Education.
Sadiku, L. M. (2015). The importance of four skills of reading, speaking, writing and listening in
a lesson hour. European Journal of Language and Literature Studies. 1(1), 23-31.
Saldana, L. (2014). The stages of implementation completion for evidence-based practice:
protocol for a mixed methods study. Implementation Science. 9(43), 3-11.
Sanders, W. (1995). Educational assessment reassessed: The usefulness of standardized and
alternative measures of student achievement as indicators for the assessment of
educational outcomes. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 1-15.
Sanders, W. & Rivers. (1996). Cumulative and residual effects of teachers on future student
academic achievement. Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee Value-Added Research
and Assessment Center.
Santa Ana, O. (2004). Chronology of events, court decisions, and legislation affecting language
minority children in American public education. In O. Santa Ana (Ed.), Tongue tied: The
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 236
lives of multilingual children in public education (pp. 87-105). Lanham, MD: Rowman &
Littlefield.
Santos, M. D.-H. (2012). Teacher development to support English language learners in the
context of Common Core State Standards. Understanding Language.
Stanton-Salazar, R. (2011). A social capital framework for the study of institutional agents and
their role in the empowerment of low-status students and youth. Youth and Society,
43(30), 166-179.
States, E. C. (2013). English langauge learner: A growing, yet underserved population. The
Progress of Education Reform, 14(6), 1-7.
U.S. Department of Education. (2014). The purpose of English language proficiency standards,
assessment, and instruction in an age of new standards: Policy Statement from the
Understanding Language Initiative. Washington DC: Author.
Vygotsky (1978)
Walqui, A. (2012). Instruction for diverse groups of English language learners. Stanford, CA:
Stanford University.
Wells, A. & Winter. (1994). Perpetuation theory and the long-term effects of school segregation.
Review of Educational Research, 64(4), 531-555.
Wolfe, P. (2001). Brain matters: Translating research into classroom practice. (2
nd
ed.)

Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 237
APPENDIX A
Interview and Document Analysis

Assumed
Knowledge
Influence
Knowledge
Type
Knowledge Influence Assessment Learning
Solution Principle
Proposed
Solution
Instructional leaders
know the different
typologies of
emergent bilingual
students.

Instructional leaders
understand the
OCDE Project
GLAD® model and
strategies for
meeting the needs of
emergent bilingual
students.

Instructional leaders
have an
Declarative
Knowledge
(Conceptual)

Declarative
Knowledge
(Conceptual)

Declarative
Knowledge
Interview 1: How would you describe
your English Learner population?

Interview 1: What types of English
Learners do you have within Costa
Sur?

Artifact: Review District 2017-2020
LCAP for English Learner Data.

Artifact: Review Costa Sur
Elementary School District’s
(CSESD) English Language
Proficiency Assessment for California
(ELPAC) scores for emergent
bilingual students’ proficiency levels.

Interview 2: How has your English
Learner population changed over time
in Chula Vista?

Interview 2: Explain how the LCAP
and has supported your understanding
of your emergent English Learner’s
demographics and needs.

Interview 2: Explain how the ELPAC
and has supported your understanding
of your English Learner student’s
demographics and needs.

Interview 1: How would you describe
the connection between the OCDE
Project GLAD® model and English
Learners?

Interview 1: What do you know of the
components of the OCDE Project
GLAD® model and how it engages in
culturally responsive teaching and
learning, if at all?

Artifact: Review handouts or
PowerPoints used in training.

Interview 2: Share how these materials
were used within your training?

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 238
Administrative
Credential and know
how to engage in
andragogy through
professional
learning, coaching,
planning and
evaluation of
teachers.

Instructional leaders
know how to support
teachers in enacting
best practices (like
the OCDE Project
GLAD® model) and
reflecting on when to
use what strategies
and for what
purposes, adjusting
for language
scaffolding.
(Conceptual)

Procedural
Knowledge

Interview 1: How has the learning
connected to your Administrative
Credential supported you in best
meeting the needs of your teacher’s
instructional practices, if at all?

Interview 1: How might your
Administrative Credential have
supported you in developing the skills
to evaluate instructional programs and
teacher’s practices in meeting the
needs of English Learners?

Interview 1: How do you provide
professional learning opportunities?
Draw upon a recent experience if
applicable.

Interview 1: What are the elements of
effective coaching?

Artifact: Analyze a pre-assessment
provided to teachers regarding OCDE
Project GLAD®.

Interview 2: How did you conduct a
pre-assessment, if at all?

Interview 2: How do you intend to use
this data?

Interview 1: What steps have you
taken in the implementation of the
OCDE Project GLAD® strategies, if
any?

Interview 1: What coaching protocols
do you utilize in implementation
processes?

Artifact: Identify frequency in training
calendars for OCDE Project GLAD®
training and coaching.

Artifact: Review an observational
protocol used during instructional
rounds.

Artifact: Review PowerPoints and
handouts from professional learning
cycle or coaching.

Interview 2: How do you go about
scheduling trainings?
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 239

Interview 2: How do you share data
from observational protocols.

Interview 2: Tell me about how these
PowerPoints were created?

Instructional leaders
know how to reflect
on the effectiveness
of OCDE Project
GLAD®
implementation and
are able to adjust
their implementation
strategies as
necessary.
Metacognitive
Knowledge
Interview 1: What processes do you
engage in to support your own
reflection, if any?

Interview 1: What steps do you take in
reflecting about coaching?

Interview 1: What have been strengths
of the implementation process?

Interview 1: What have been
weaknesses of the implementation
process?

Artifact: Identify patterns found within
Reflection form/guide.

Interview 2: Explain x more from your
reflection.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 240
Motivation
Construct
Assumed Motivation
Influence
Motivation Influence
Assessment
Motivational
Solution
Principle*
Proposed
Solution*
Utility
Value
Instructional leaders see
the value of teachers
implementing best
practices in student’s
language development.
Interview 1: What are
your thoughts about
integrated ELD?

Interview 1: In what ways
do you validate the use of
OCDE Project GLAD®
strategies, if at all?

Artifact: Review
incentive processes.

Interview 2: How did you
encourage this process, if
at all?

Interview 2: Which of
these incentives did you
find most well received?

Self-
Efficacy
Instructional leaders
believe they are capable of
effectively training and
coaching teachers to
implement the OCDE
Project GLAD® model,
which are best
instructional practices for
emergent bilingual
students.
Interview 1: How do you
build teachers’
confidence to implement
the OCDE Project
GLAD® model?

Interview 1: In what
ways has your confidence
changed from when you
first began supporting
teachers in implementing
the OCDE Project
GLAD® model?

Interview 1: What would
you recommend to other
instructional leaders in
best steps to supporting
implementation?

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 241

Organizational
Influence
Category
Assumed
Organizational
Influences

Organizational
Influence Assessment
Research-Based
Recommendation
or Solution
Principle
Proposed
Solution
Cultural Model
Influence 1
The District needs to
cultivate a culture of
asset-based mindsets
regarding Emergent
Bilinguals so that
instructional leaders
can better support
teachers in meeting
the complex needs of
emergent bilingual
students.

Interview 1: What
suggestions might you
provide in creating a
climate where English
Learner students are
accepted?

Cultural Model
Influence 2
The District needs to
have a culture of
collective
responsibility in
attending to the needs
of emergent bilingual
students.
Interview 1: How are
English Learner
students considered in
the designing of
classroom instruction,
if at all?

Cultural Setting
Influence 1
The District needs to
develop a plan for
instructional
leadership training on
presenting, coaching
and ongoing
professional learning
structures.
Interview 1: What type
of ways are
Instructional Leaders
supported by the
District in building
coaching skills?

Interview 1: How are
Instructional Leaders
assessed in their
development of
training?

Interview 1: How are
Instructional Leaders
assessed in their
development of
coaching?

Artifact: Review
strategic plan for
administrative
development.

Artifact: Review
training schedules

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 242

Interview 2: What type
of feedback are
instructional leaders
provided with
regarding their
professional learning, if
any?
Cultural Setting
Influence 2
The District needs to
develop a
systematized plan for
professional learning
implementation
regarding emergent
bilingual students.

Interview 1: How has
the District developed a
training plan for
instructional leaders to
support English
Learner students, if at
all?

Interview 2: What
impact has
instructional leaders
had on instructional
practices in the
classroom, if at all?
Specific to emergent
bilingual students.

Cultural Setting
Influence 3
The District needs to
set an explicit priority
of utilizing OCDE
Project GLAD®
strategies.

Interview 1: Tell me
about the District’s
support or lack thereof
of OCDE Project
GLAD®
implementation?

Interview 1: How has
professional learning
and coaching using the
OCDE Project
GLAD® model had an
impact on student
achievement for
English Learner
students, if at all?

Artifact: Review LCAP

Artifact: Review Goals

Interview 2: What
additional steps do you
see are still needed in
supporting the needs of
English Learner
students?

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 243
APPENDIX B
INTERVIEW PROTOCOL- INTERVIEW #1
Thank you for taking time out of your busy schedule to interview with me. I am the researcher
and will be conducting all of the interviews to ensure your confidentiality. Your answers to the
questions will be kept confidential and I will assign a pseudonym to the interview to keep your
identity confidential.

Today I have a series of questions that may take 1-1 ½ hours to complete. The aim of these
questions are to evaluate the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that may
impact your ability to coach and provide professional development opportunities to teachers as
they work with English Learners. We will look closely at how OCDE Project GLAD® may be
involved in these processes. The data will be used to help us develop strategies to support you
and teachers as they work with English Learners.

In the informed consent you agreed to audio recording, please keep in mind that the digital
recording will be transcribed by a third part and destroyed to keep your identity confidential. Are
you still o.k. with being recorded today?

I will start out with questions about knowledge influences.

(Knowledge Influence Questions)

1. How would you describe your English Learner population?
2. What types of English Learner students do you have in Costa Sur Elementary?
3. How would you describe the connection between the OCDE Project GLAD® model and
English Learners?
4. What do you know of the components of the OCDE Project GLAD® model and how it
engages in culturally responsive teaching and learning, if at all?
5. What steps have you taken in the implementation of the OCDE Project GLAD®
strategies, if any?
6. How has the learning connected to your Administrative Credential supported you in best
meeting the needs of your teachers’ instructional practices, if at all?
7. How might your Administrative Credential have supported you in developing the skills to
evaluate instructional programs and teacher practices in meeting the needs of English
Learners?
8. Describe your knowledge of andragogy.
a. What are important tenants of andragogy?
b. Explain how your Administrative Credentialing program integrated knowledge
and skills of andragogy into the program, if any?
c. In what ways have you used andragogy in your position as an instructional leader,
if at all?
d. How has knowledge and skills of andragogy supported you in your role as
instructional leader if this school?
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 244
9. Describe what professional learning opportunities you personally provide? Draw upon a
recent experience if applicable.
10. What are the elements of effective coaching?
11. What coaching protocols do you utilize?
12. What processes do you engage in to support your own reflection, if any?
13. What steps do you take in reflecting about coaching?
14. What have been strengths in your implementation of coaching practices?
15. What have been weaknesses in your implementation of coaching practices?

I would like to now transition into questions related to motivational influences.

(Motivational Influence Questions)
1. What are your thoughts about integrated ELD?
2. In what ways do you validate the use of OCDE Project GLAD® strategies, if at all?
3. How do you build teachers’ confidence to implement the OCDE Project GLAD® model?
4. In what ways has your confidence changed from when you first began supporting
teachers in implementing the OCDE Project GLAD® model?
5. What would you recommend to other instructional leaders in best steps to supporting
implementation?

Now we are going to discuss the organizational influences

(Organizational Influence Questions)
1. What suggestions might you provide in creating a climate where English Learners are
accepted?
2. How are English Learners considered in the designing of classroom instruction, if at all?
3. What type of ways are instructional leaders supported by the District in building coaching
skills?
4. How are instructional leaders assessed in their development of training?
5. How are instructional leaders assessed in their development of coaching?

Thank you for time. If you have any questions or think of anything you would like to add please
feel free to contact me directly. Once the audio recording is transcribed, may I contact you with
any follow-up questions?

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 245
APPENDIX C
Interview Protocol- Interview #2

Thank you for taking time to meet with me again! I am the researcher and will be continuing to
conduct all interviews to ensure your confidentiality. Your responses to these questions will be
kept confidential and I will assign a pseudonym to the interview to keep your identity
confidential.

Today I have a series of questions that may take 1 ½ -2 hours to complete. The aim of these
questions are to expand upon previous questions asked in interview #1 and clarify questions now
surfaced from review, observation or analysis of the documents and artifacts that were provided.
These questions will also be framed as knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that
may impact your coaching and professional learning opportunities provided to teachers as they
work with English Learners. The data will be used to help us develop strategies to support you
and teachers as they work with English Learners.

In the informed consent you agreed to audio recording, please keep in mind that the digital
recording will be transcribed by a third part and destroyed to keep your identity confidential. Are
you still o.k. with being recorded today?

I will start out with questions about knowledge influences.

(Knowledge Influence Questions)
1. How has your English learner population changes over time?
2. Explain how the LCAP has supported your understanding of English Learner students’
needs.
3. Please share how these PowerPoints and Agendas are used in training.
4. How did you conduct a pre-assessment of teacher knowledge of the OCDE Project
GLAD® NTC model, if at all?
5. How do you go about scheduling trainings specifically intended to support English
Learners in your school?
6. How do you share data from observational protocols?
7. Tell me about how you chose what content to integrate in the PowerPoints and handouts
you created for professional learning (or coaching).
8. Share with me your ideas on these patterns found within the reflection forms.

I would like to now transition into questions related to motivational influences.

(Motivational Influence Questions)
1. When reviewing incentives processes at your school for implementing OCDE Project
GLAD®, how did you encourage this process on its inception, if at all?
2. Which of these incentives did you find more well received by teachers?

Now we are going to discuss the organizational influences
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 246

(Organizational Influence Questions)
1. In reviewing your District’s strategic plan, share with me from your perspective, what
types of feedback are instructional leaders provided with regarding their professional
learning, if at all?
2. What impact has instructional leaders had on instructional practices in the classroom for
English Learners, if at all?
3. I’ve had the opportunity to review both LCAP and District Goals, what additional steps
do you see are still needed in supporting the needs of English Learners?

Thank you for time. This concludes my data collection processes. If you have any questions or
think of anything you would like to add please feel free to contact me directly. Once the audio
recording is transcribed, may I contact you with any follow-up questions?

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 247
APPENDIX D
Information Sheet
University of Southern California
Information Sheet for Research

EXAMINING INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERS’ IMPLEMENTATION OF THE OCDE
PROJECT GLAD® NATIONAL TRAINING CENTER MODEL:
AN EVALUATION STUDY

You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Nicole Chávez at the University of Southern
California (USC). Please read through this form and ask any questions you might have before deciding
whether or not you want to participate.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
This research study aims to understand how instructional leaders train and support teachers in the
implementation of the OCDE Project GLAD® model’s strategies through professional learning and
coaching. In better understanding instructional leaders, I seek to address the opportunity gaps of Emergent
Bilinguals/English Learners in obtaining culturally and linguistically responsive teaching and learning
through highly qualified certified teachers.

PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
Participation in this study is voluntary and you may stop at any time without penalty. If there is any aspect
of the study that may affect your well-being, you may stop the process. Your well-being is of the highest
value as is your time and expertise.

If you agree to take part in this study, you will be asked to engage in two rounds of interviews and provide
documents or artifacts for review. The initial interview will take approximately 60-90 minutes in which you
will be asked about your role as an instructional leader and how you engage classroom teachers in
professional learning and coaching, specific to the OCDE Project GLAD® model. Following this initial
interview, a document/artifact review of training and coaching materials will commence. Items reviewed
include, but are not limited to: handbooks and PowerPoints supporting OCDE Project GLAD® NTC
implementation, training calendars observational protocols, coaching tools, reflection forms or guides,
strategic plans referencing professional learning supports for administrators, and emails reflective of
coaching supports. Both English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (ELPAC) and the
District’s Local Control Accountability Plans (LCAP) will be reviewed in advance. I will independently
conduct this review process after the initial interview. Professional learning and coaching materials will be
kindly requested to be provided by each volunteer in the study. Upon completion of the document/artifact
review, participants will be asked to engage in a second interview to clarify and illuminate understandings
of the documents/artifacts reviewed, approximately taking 90-120 minutes. Participants will be audio
recorded during both interviews to best capture individual sentiments for data collection and analysis.
Participants will have an opportunity to obtain transcriptions of your audio recordings to ensure one’s voice
was appropriately captured. If you do not want to be audio recorded, you should not participate in this
study. Additionally, you do not have to answer any questions you do not want to during either interview,
or provide documents/artifacts you do not want to provide.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 248
PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
You will not receive any payment/compensation for participation in this study.

CONFIDENTIALITY
Any identifiable information obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential and be kept in
a secured, locked location. At the completion of the study, direct identifiers will be destroyed and the de-
identified data may be used for future research studies. If you do not want your data used in future studies,
you should not participate.

The members of the research team and the University of Southern California’s Human Subjects Protection
Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors research studies to protect the rights
and welfare of research participants.

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact Nicole Chávez at
ndchavez@usc.edu and/or (949) 506-8120 or Dr. Jenifer Crawford at jenifercrawford@gmail.com.

IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have questions, concerns, or complaints about your rights as a research participant or the research in
general and are unable to contact the research team, or if you want to talk to someone independent of the
research team, please contact the University Park Institutional Review Board (UPIRB), 3720 South Flower
Street #301, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu.

Thank you for your consideration!

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 249
APPENDIX E
Professional Learning Communities: Aligning to Emergent Bilingual Students’ Needs
Big Idea Description Aligning to Emergent
Bilingual Needs
Ensuring That Students Learn A shift from teaching to
learning
What do we want our
emergent bilingual students to
learn?

How will we know each
emergent bilingual student
has learned it?

How will we respond when
an emergent bilingual student
experiences difficulty in
learning?

A Culture of Collaboration “The powerful collaboration
that characterizes
professional learning
communities is a systematic
process in which teachers
work together to analyze and
improve their classroom
practice” (DuFour, 1998, p.
6)

How might continuous school
improvement for emergent
bilingual learners be
achieved?

What barriers need to be
removed for success to occur
for emergent bilingual
students?
A Focus On Results Engaging in data dialogue
that shifts instructional
practice.
What quality indicators
inform me of instructional
progress as a teacher? Of
student learning?

What is the data saying about
our emergent bilingual
students?

What might be the root cause
of this?

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 250
Appendix F
How Adults Learn
Shift One:
Learning Through Experience

Shift Two:
Learning from Reflective
Action
Shift Three:
Learning Mediated Through
Context
Demonstration/Modeling
(Joyce & Showers, 1980)

This practice has practioners
observe a demonstration, or
someone else model the expected
practices. This may be most similar
to the “training” or “input”
referenced in the current
professional learning cycle.
Coaching
(Hampton, Rhodes & Stokes,
2004)

The focus of coaching is usually
task and performance: The role of a
coach is to give feedback on the
skills or performance observed.
The coach set the goals.
Contextualization
(Cordova & Lepper, 1996)

Presenting learning activities for
teachers, even those involving
abstract instructional operations, in
meaningful contexts of some
inherent appeal to the learn should
have significant effects on the
motivation to implement. For
adults, learning must take place in
relevant settings or situations.

Approximation of Practice
Through a Simulated Setting
(Grossman, Hammerness &
McDonald, 2009)

This practice has practioners try-on
a new practice in a setting that is
similar to their own setting, using
similar resources and expectations,
but not their setting. For example,
practicing with adults acting as
students, without students.

Mentoring
(Hampton, Rhodes & Stokes,
2004)

Mentoring involves primarily
listening with empathy, sharing
experience (usually mutually),
professional friendship, developing
insight through reflection, being a
sounding board, and encouraging.
In mentoring, the learner sets the
goals.
Socialization
(Gee, 1990)

We understand each other because
we share conventions about how to
use and interpret language. The
process of socialization, developing
shared jargon, behavior, practices
and expectations connects us with
our community and deepens our
practices. Within the
implementation of OCDE Project
GLAD®, everyone knowing the
terms of the strategies and methods
to deliver builds camaraderie.

Rehearsal Practice
(Ball & Forzani, 2009)

This practice has practioners trying-
on the new practice in their own
setting with no expectations beyond
self-monitoring. This is most
similar to “safe practice” currently
articulated in professional learning
cycles.

Microteaching
(Hattie, 2015)

Hattie describes micro-teaching as
a practice that typically involves
teachers conducting mini lessons to
a small group of students, and then
engaging in a post-discussion about
the lessons. Microteaching can also
be conducted via videoing oneself
and reflecting later. The goal of
microteaching is to give you the
confidence, support and feedback
so you can improve your teaching
methods.
Social Constructivism
(Piaget, 1936)

Within social constructivism,
learning is mediated by an
individual’s social and cultural
contexts, “truth” is relative and
based on an individual’s context,
individuals develop the capacity to
adapt to constantly changing
environments, learners develop
knowledge and understanding as
they engage in and interact with
their social and cultural contexts.
Within the professional learning
cycle, learning through doing is
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 251

critical, yet the process must be
non-evaluative for growth of
implementation to occur.

“Communities of Practice”
(DuFour, 2007, 2014)
(Hattie, 2012)

This practice reflects building
collective teacher efficacy, where
teachers learn together how to best
engage in and deliver the practice.
This may be reflected in peer
observations and feedback.
Critical Reflection
(Gay & Kirkland, 2003)

Critical reflection requires
analytical introspection, continuous
reconstruction of knowledge, and
the recurring transformation of
beliefs and skills that are essential
elements of self-reflection. Critical
reflection delves into issues of race,
ethnic diversity, and social justice
in classroom practices.
Feedback
(Hattie, 2017)

Feedback is information that you
give to your learners that helps
them close the gap between where
they are now with their work, and
where they could be. The goal of
feedback is to provide the learner
with insight that helps them
improve their performance.

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 252
APPENDIX G
OCDE Project GLAD® Implementation

Year One

Year One, Phase One: Establishing the Foundation for Learning

Phase One:
Strategy
Set A
Phase One:
Strategy
Set B
Phase
Two:
Strategy
Set C
Phase
Two:
Strategy
Set D
Phase
Two:
Strategy
Set E
Srategy Set B:
Cooperative
Learning
Strategy Set
A: Positive
Environment
• T-Graph for Social
Skills
• Team Points
• Numbered Spoons
• 3 Personal
Standards
• Signal Word
• Zero Noise Signal
• 10/2 Partner Share
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 253
Year One, Phase Two: Using OCDE Project GLAD® Within a Series of Connected Lessons

Strategy Set E:
Cross-Curricular
Integration
Strategy Set D:
Cross-Curricular
Integratrion
Strategy Set C:
Cross-Curricular
Integration
• Poems and Chants
• Sentence Patterning
Chart
• Pictorial Input Chart
• Learning Log
• ELD Review
• Literacy Awards
• Observation Charts
• Inquiry Charts
PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 254
APPENDIX H
Reaction Sheet for Online Program
Please complete this form to let us know your reaction to the online program. Your input will
help us to evaluate our efforts, and your comments and suggestions will help us to plan for future
programs that meet your needs and interests.

Instructions: Please circle the appropriate number of each statement and then add your
comments.

High Low
1. How do you rate the subject content? 4 3 2 1
(interesting, helpful, etc.)
Comments:

2. How do you rate the activities and facilitation? 4 3 2 1
(intentional, engaging, etc.)
Comments:

3. How do you rate the instructor? 4 3 2 1
(preparation, communications, etc.)
Comments:

4. How do you rate the assignments? 4 3 2 1
(meaningful, relevant, etc.)
Comments:

5. How do you rate the course schedule? 4 3 2 1
(time, length, etc.)
Comments:

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 255

6. How do you rate the ability to navigate the platform? 4 3 2 1
(ease of use, etc.)
Comments:

7. How well did the content meet the outcomes of the course? 4 3 2 1
Comments:

8. How would you rate the program as an educational 4 3 2 1
experience to help you in implementing best practices
for emergent bilingual students?

9. What topics were most beneficial?

10. What would have improved the online course?

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 256
APPENDIX I
Reaction Sheet for Leadership Ensemble
In order to determine the effectiveness of the program in meeting your needs and interests, we
need your input. Please give us your reactions, and make any comments or suggestions that will
help us to serve you.

Instructions: Please circle the appropriate number of each statement and then add your
comments.

High Low
1. The material covered in the program was relevant. 4 3 2 1
Comments:

2. The material was presented in an interesting way. 4 3 2 1
Comments:

3. The instructor was an effective communicator. 4 3 2 1
Comments:

4. The instructor was well prepared. 4 3 2 1
Comments:

5. The audiovisual aids were effective. 4 3 2 1
Comments:

6. The handouts will be of help to me. 4 3 2 1
Comments:

PRINCIPAL’S ROLE 257

7. I will be able to apply the learning to supporting 4 3 2 1
my teachers.
Comments:

8. The agenda supported meeting the outcomes of the 4 3 2 1
training.
Comments:

9. There was a good balance between presentation and 4 3 2 1
group involvement.
Comments:

10. I feel that the training will help me do my job better. 4 3 2 1
Comments:

11. What would help make the training better?

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Explicit instruction’s impact on the student achievement gap in K-12 English language learners

PDF

A community cultural capital approach: bilingual teachers' perceptions and impact in their dual language immersion classroom

PDF

Supporting emergent bilinguals: implementation of SIOP and professional development practices

PDF

Effective course design for improving student learning: a case study in application

PDF

Teach them to read: implementing high leverage pedagogical practices to increase English language learner academic achievement

PDF

One to one tablet integration in the mathematics classroom: an evaluation study of an international school in China

PDF

Collaborative instructional practice for student achievement: an evaluation study

PDF

The intersection of race and language in special education: a study of the referral process of emergent bilingual students to the special education program

PDF

Teacher role in reducing the achievement gap: an evaluation study

PDF

Girls in STEM: the underrepresented trajectory in Tennessee: an innovation study

PDF

Closing the achievement gap for students with disabilities: a focus on instructional differentiation - an evaluation study

PDF

Examining the relationship between knowledge, perception and principal leadership for standard English learners (SELs): a case study

PDF

An evaluation study of effectiveness of continuous professional development in Ethiopia

PDF

A case study on influences of mainstream teachers' instructional decisions and perceptions of English learners in Hawai'i public secondary education

PDF

Implementation of the International Baccalaureate Middle Years Program in an urban secondary school: an improvement practice to address closing the achievement gap

PDF

A community cultural capital approach: bilingual teachers’ perceptions and impact in their dual immersion classrooms

PDF

Principals’ impact on the effective enactment of instructional coaching that promotes equity: an evaluation study

PDF

Using technology to drive high academic achievement

PDF

Evaluation of New Teacher Induction (NTI) mentor practice for developing NTI teachers capable of differentiating instruction to address cultural diversity, equity, and learner variability

PDF

Teaching quality in Zhejiang University of Technology

Asset Metadata

Creator Chávez, Nicole Deanna (author)

Core Title Leading instructional shifts in emergent bilingual education: a principal's role

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Global Executive

Publication Date 08/12/2019

Defense Date 05/02/2019

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

Tag achievement gap,bilingual education,Coaching,EL,emergent bilingual students,emergent bilinguals,English learner,instruction,instructional leader,mentorship,OAI-PMH Harvest,opportunity gap,principals

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Crawford, Jenifer (committee chair)

Creator Email ndchavez@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-210079

Unique identifier UC11662670

Identifier etd-ChavezNico-7763.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-210079 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-ChavezNico-7763.pdf

Dmrecord 210079

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Chávez, Nicole Deanna

Type texts

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

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA