Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
The importance of rigor and engagement on student achievement and mastery: an evaluation study
(USC Thesis Other)
The importance of rigor and engagement on student achievement and mastery: an evaluation study
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
THE IMPORTANCE OF RIGOR AND ENGAGEMENT ON STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT
AND MASTERY: AN EVALUATION STUDY
by
Stephenie Wright
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2021
Copyright 2021 Stephenie Wright
ii
Table of Contents
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................... v
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. vi
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... vii
Chapter One: Introduction of the Problem of Practice .................................................................... 1
Organizational Context and Mission ................................................................................... 1
Organizational Goal ............................................................................................................. 2
Related Literature ................................................................................................................ 4
Importance of the Evaluation .............................................................................................. 7
Description of Stakeholder Groups ..................................................................................... 7
Stakeholder Group for the Study ......................................................................................... 9
Purpose of the Project and Questions ................................................................................ 11
Methodological Approach ................................................................................................. 11
Definitions ......................................................................................................................... 12
Organization of the Project ................................................................................................ 13
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ......................................................................................... 14
Passive Learning and its Negative Effect on Engagement and Rigor ............................... 14
History and Evolution of Education Theory ............................................................... 14
Passive Learning .......................................................................................................... 15
Engagement and Active Learning ............................................................................... 16
History of Assessment in Secondary Education ................................................................ 17
Impact of Student Engagement and Rigor ................................................................... 18
Role of Student Engagement in Secondary Education ................................................ 19
Role of Lesson Rigor in Secondary Education ............................................................ 21
Impact of Combined Student Engagement and Rigor ................................................. 22
Clark and Estes’s Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences Framework ... 23
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences ................................ 23
Knowledge and Skills .................................................................................................. 24
Motivation ................................................................................................................... 29
Organization ................................................................................................................ 33
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and Motivation and
the Organizational Context ................................................................................................ 38
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 42
Chapter Three: Methods ................................................................................................................ 43
Participating Stakeholders ................................................................................................. 43
Survey Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale ............................................. 44
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale ................................................................. 44
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale ......................................... 44
Data Collection and Instrumentation ................................................................................. 44
iii
Surveys ........................................................................................................................ 45
Interviews .................................................................................................................... 45
Data Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 46
Credibility and Trustworthiness ........................................................................................ 47
Validity and Reliability ..................................................................................................... 47
Ethics ................................................................................................................................. 48
Chapter Four: Results and Findings .............................................................................................. 49
Participating Stakeholders ................................................................................................. 50
Determination of Assets and Needs .................................................................................. 51
Results and Findings for Knowledge Causes .................................................................... 52
Teachers Have Conceptual Knowledge of the Importance of Rigor ........................... 53
Teacher Require Greater Procedural Knowledge of Incorporating Engagement ........ 58
Results and Findings for Motivation Causes ..................................................................... 62
Teachers Possess Utility Value in Incorporating Rigor and Engagement ................... 62
Teachers Lack Self-Efficacy in Effectively Designing Engaging and Rigorous
Lessons ........................................................................................................................ 64
Results and Findings for Organization Causes .................................................................. 69
NHS Needs to Improve Upon its Emerging Culture of Innovation ............................ 69
NHS Does Not Provide Training on Ways to Implement Engaging and Rigorous
Lessons ........................................................................................................................ 72
NHS Teachers Need More Support to Visit Classrooms to See Their Peers in Action
..................................................................................................................................... 75
Summary of Validated Influences ..................................................................................... 76
Chapter Five: Recommendations .................................................................................................. 80
Knowledge Recommendation ........................................................................................... 80
Motivation Recommendation ............................................................................................ 82
Organization Recommendations ....................................................................................... 83
Cultivate a Culture of Innovation Through Encouraging Experimentation in Lesson
Design .......................................................................................................................... 84
Provide Professional Development to Incorporate Rigor and Engagement ................ 85
Encourage and Facilitate Peer Visits ........................................................................... 86
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan ............................................................... 87
Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations ........................................................ 87
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators ..................................................................... 88
Level 3: Behavior ........................................................................................................ 88
Level 2: Learning ........................................................................................................ 91
Evaluation of the Components of Learning ................................................................. 93
Level 1: Reaction ......................................................................................................... 94
Evaluation Tools ................................................................................................................ 95
Immediately Following the Program Implementation ................................................ 95
Delayed for a Period After the Program Implementation ............................................ 96
Data Analysis and Reporting ............................................................................................. 97
Summary ............................................................................................................................ 97
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach ...................................................................... 98
iv
Limitations and Delimitations ........................................................................................... 98
Future Research ................................................................................................................. 99
Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 100
References ................................................................................................................................... 102
Appendix A Informed Consent ................................................................................................... 113
Appendix B Survey Items ........................................................................................................... 114
Appendix C Interview Protocol ................................................................................................... 118
Appendix D Professional Development Session Evaluation ....................................................... 120
Appendix E Professional Development Session Evaluation ....................................................... 122
v
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Organizational Mission, Global Goal, and Stakeholder Performance Goals ................... 10
Table 2 Knowledge Influences and Knowledge Types to Achieve Stakeholder and
Organizational Goals ..................................................................................................................... 29
Table 3 Motivation Influences to Achieve Stakeholder and Organizational Goals ...................... 33
Table 4 Organizational Influences on Stakeholder Goal ............................................................... 37
Table 5 Teacher Thoughts on Engagement ................................................................................... 61
Table 6 Teacher Self-Efficacy Related to Incorporating Rigor and Engagement ......................... 68
Table 7 Teachers Participating in Peer Teacher Classroom Visits ................................................ 75
Table 8 Knowledge Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data ................................................. 77
Table 9 Motivation Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data .................................................. 77
Table 10 Organization Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data ............................................. 77
Table 11 Summary of Knowledge Influence and Recommendations ........................................... 81
Table 12 Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations .......................................... 82
Table 13 Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations ....................................... 84
Table 14 Outcomes, Metrics and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes .......................... 88
Table 15 Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods and Timing for Evaluation ................................. 89
Table 16 Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors ............................................................ 90
Table 17 Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program ......................................... 94
Table 18 Components to Measure Reactions to the Program ....................................................... 95
Table 19 Sample Dashboard .......................................................................................................... 97
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Conceptual Framework for the Study Integrating Knowledge, Motivation and
Organizational Influences .............................................................................................................. 39
Figure 2 Nadua High School’s Masters Grade Level Performance Compared to the
Organizational Goal and State Average ........................................................................................ 53
Figure 3 Teachers Disagree that Classroom Instruction Should be Built Around Simple Problems
....................................................................................................................................................... 54
Figure 4 Results of Asking Teachers if Teaching Facts is Necessary ........................................... 55
Figure 5 Results of Asking the Importance of Teaching Critical Thinking Skills ........................ 56
Figure 6 Results of Teaching Critical Thinking Skills is More Important than Specific Content 56
Figure 7 Teacher View of Their Role in Facilitating Inquiry ........................................................ 57
Figure 8 Results When Asking Teachers if Students Should Answer Independently Versus if
Teachers Should Demonstrate How to Solve a Problem Correctly .............................................. 59
Figure 9 Breakdown of Responses for the Importance of Rigor and Engagement Simultaneously
....................................................................................................................................................... 63
Figure 10 Overwhelming Positive Belief NHS Teachers Can Help Students Believe They Can
Do Well in Class and Keep Students on Task When Working on Rigorous Assignments ........... 66
Figure 11 Mixed Results of Helping the Most Difficult Students and Ability to Motivate Students
with Low Intrinsic Motivation ....................................................................................................... 66
Figure 12 Classification of Responses for Teachers Using Lecture in Their Classroom .............. 70
Figure 13 Professional Learning Community Influence on Instruction ........................................ 73
vii
ABSTRACT
Active learning is critical to the development of lifelong learners. This study employed a mixed-
methods approach to determine the extent to which teachers incorporate rigor and engagement in
their classrooms. Both of these elements are required to create active learning environments for
students. This evaluation study investigated the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences that affect teachers successfully incorporating rigor and engagement in their
classrooms. Gaps were discovered among the proposed knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences that are barriers to the successful implementation of rigor and
engagement. Survey responses and interview findings conveyed that teachers understand the
importance of rigor and engagement. However, they are not adept at incorporating the practices,
nor do they have the organizational support needed for successful implementation. The findings
of this study were that there is a remaining need for targeted training and opportunities to work
together to see rigor and engagement in practice.
1
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION OF THE PROBLEM OF PRACTICE
Students who are passive learners do not develop the skills needed to become lifelong
learners (Haidet et al., 2004). Passive learners sit and are highly dependent on the instructor to
impart the next piece of information to write down (Petress, 2008). The passive learner is
expected only to comply with instructions and not actively engage with the knowledge presented
(Petress, 2008). Haidet et al. (2004) reported learners exposed to passive learning techniques
through lecture had an achievement rate lower than those who participated in active learning.
This problem of passive learning in secondary schools is important to address since passive
learning results in students who are not motivated to learn, are disinterested in the curriculum,
and are, therefore, unsuccessful in their learning activities (Edwards, 2015; Petress, 2008). When
teachers do not incorporate active learning techniques, they do not maximize a student’s capacity
to learn. This study examined teacher knowledge, teacher motivation, and organizational
influences needed to increase engagement and rigor in the classroom.
Organizational Context and Mission
Nadua High School (NHS; a pseudonym used to protect the organization’s identity) is a
rural secondary school in a small Texas town. NHS’s paraphrased vision is to be exemplary in all
endeavors with engaged students and teachers. NHS strives to be a school with effective
instruction and assessment that efficiently uses time and resources. NHS has five core values: the
student is the center of everything they do; the school community leverages individual strengths
to meet complex and challenging goals; the district fosters a collaborative spirit because they
believe they are better when they are together; the school community will help everyone to never
stop learning in unbounded curiosity; the district is guided by a strong moral compass comprised
of upstanding character, ethics, and integrity. The desire of NHS is for all individuals involved
2
with the school to be challenged to rise to the core values regardless of their position in the
school. The core values and vision complement each other in joint efforts to bring about
excellence. NHS’s mission complements this vision: turning passive learners into active and
engaged learners to optimize the knowledge and skills necessary to be successful in life after
completing their formal education.
NHS is led by the superintendent and assistant superintendent of the school district as
well as by the school’s principal and assistant principal. The school is governed by the local
school board, comprised of seven community members. NHS has 27 teachers who serve 268
students.
The problem of practice of passive learners directly impacts NHS, its students, and its
vision and mission. NHS can achieve the mission of turning passive learners into active and
engaged learners by encouraging the implementation of active learning techniques in the
classroom to optimize the knowledge and skills necessary to be successful in life after high
school.
Organizational Goal
One of NHS’s academic goals is that, by May 2022, 30% of its students will score at the
Masters Grade Level standard, which is the highest standard measured on the State of Texas
Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR). Students who achieve at the Masters Grade Level
as set forth by the Texas Education Agency have demonstrated they can think critically and can
apply the knowledge assessed in a myriad of ways (McCeig, 2019). The Campus Improvement
Team, comprised of teachers, parents, and community members, is charged with creating goals
for every school year. At the beginning of each school year, this committee reconvenes to
reevaluate and adjust the goals and reflect on progress from the previous year. After the Campus
3
Improvement Team comes to a consensus, the goals are presented to the District Improvement
Team and later to the local school board for approval. Throughout each school year, the
committee meets to discuss progress toward the goals and make adjustments and changes to
reach the goals.
The achievement of this goal will be measured by the students’ achieving at the highest
level of the STAAR after completing English I, English II, Algebra I, Biology, and U.S. History
courses. The STAAR has three performance labels of achievement measured each year. The
lowest level is the Approaches Grade Level, which is the standard students must meet to pass the
assessment. The Texas Education Agency deems students who meet this performance label to be
likely to succeed in the next course with some degree of targeted academic intervention. The
second performance label is Meets Grade Level. Students who meet this performance level will
likely be successful in the subsequent course and have demonstrated they can think critically in
familiar contexts. The final and most difficult level to achieve is Masters Grade Level. The
students who achieve at this level have demonstrated they can think critically and successfully
apply knowledge assessed in various unfamiliar contexts.
It is important to evaluate the school’s performance in relation to the performance goal to
ensure the school’s graduates are prepared for the rigors of the world outside of high school.
Evaluating the organization’s performance enables the organization to study the depth of rigor
attained through engaging lessons designed with academic achievement in mind.
By turning passive learners into active learners and incorporating higher levels of rigor
and greater engagement in lessons, students show greater mastery of a subject (Edwards, 2015;
Hess et al., 2009). When teachers implement active learning techniques, students can answer
more rigorous questions more accurately (Fata-Hartley, 2011). For NHS to accomplish the goal
4
of 30% of students achieving at the Masters Grade Level on the STAAR, teachers must design
lessons that incorporate higher levels of rigor and include more engaging activities.
Related Literature
This section provides a brief overview of existing literature that supports passive learning
as an ineffective modality of teaching. First, it will examine learning theory and its impact on
teaching (Fine, 2014; Powell & Kalina, 2009). Next, the study will move to the impact of lesson
design (Blakely, 2015; Haidet et al., 2004; Marks, 2000). Then, it will focus on understanding
the impact of testing in today’s classrooms (Fata-Hartley, 2011; Haidet et al., 2004; Powell &
Kalina, 2009). Finally, the study will examine the impact on achievement with regard to passive
teaching (Fata-Hartley, 2011; Hsu, 2008; Petress, 2008; Powell & Kalina, 2009).
Classroom arrangement reveals aspects of a teacher’s educational philosophy. Teachers
who acknowledge a pedagogical change from knowledge delivery to learning facilitation shift
their classrooms from rows of desks with students working independently to flexible groupings
of students working collaboratively, which illustrates the transformation of current learning
theory from behaviorism to cognitivism to constructivism (Yilmaz, 2011). The rich affiliation
and creativity fostered in these learning environments are a stark contrast to the traditional
settings arranged for student compliance and passivity; here, teachers instruct explicitly, and
assignments are on a surface level (Fine, 2014).
Vygotsky (as cited in Powell & Kalina, 2009) believed that learning occurs most
effectively when teachers are facilitators, not lecturers imparting new information to captive
audiences. Vygotsky’s social constructivism view reasons that interactions between students and
teachers in a classroom create an effective learning environment (Powell & Kalina, 2009). Most
5
teachers work to plan lessons without understanding how to design engaging learning
experiences for their students from the constructivist view.
Passive learning occurs when the instructor simply transmits to the learner the knowledge
required by the curriculum (Marks, 2000). Within this paradigm, teachers are keepers of
knowledge, and they see the student’s role simply as receivers of the knowledge (Blakely, 2015).
In passive learning models, particularly lectures, students feel as if they need an expert to present
the material. The students believe they cannot understand the difficult material without a
seasoned guide to help them uncover and explore it (Haidet et al., 2004). When preparing a
lecture, teachers do not look at where students are in their learning, and they lecture on the topic
they deem valuable and relevant to the student (Blakely, 2015). Because of the significant weight
given to standardized testing, teachers feel the need to transmit the curriculum to the students in
the easiest and timeliest manner, without regard for appropriate techniques for deep and
engaging learning (Haidet et al., 2004; Marks, 2000).
Teachers feel the burden of transmitting the full curricula of information needed to fulfill
mandatory standardized testing requirements. Passive learning through lectures is an efficient
way to transmit the subject matter from the teacher to the student (Haidet et al., 2004). However,
this approach does not allow for reaching the needed depth of knowledge (Fata-Hartley, 2011).
Students taught through passive methods perform lower than students taught through active and
engaging methods (Fata-Hartley, 2011). For the curriculum to be taught at the appropriate level
and subsequently retained, the student must internalize the material: “A lecture does not allow
for thinking; it is passive” (Hightower, 2014, p. 18). Vygotsky believed this internalization of
knowledge occurs when there is social interaction among students or between the student and
6
teacher (Powell & Kalina, 2009). Students who are not permitted to interact with the curriculum
and others will not have a deep understanding of the curriculum.
Passive learning does not require any activity from the learner, and the learner does not
have any investment or involvement in the work; therefore, the learning is not reinforced or
embedded in their everyday life (Petress, 2008). When students do not interact with the new
knowledge, it is not assimilated into their knowledge set. They must also have time to build on
their knowledge base and incorporate new learning into their prior knowledge (Powell & Kalina,
2009).
Hsu (2008) studied students in two groups: teacher-led and student-led. Each group took
a pre-test to determine their previous knowledge. On this test, the two groups of students scored
similarly. The teacher-led group scored 28.25% (2.26 out of 8), while the student-led group
scored 35.5% (2.84 out of 8) for a difference of 7.25%. Teachers taught students in the teacher-
led group using passive learning techniques (primarily lecture) and taught the student-led group
through active learning techniques like exploration and cooperative learning. The post-test
results showed the teacher-led group neither gained nor retained as much knowledge during the
activities as the student-led group. The teacher-led group earned an average post-test score of
51.375% (4.11 out of 8), while the student-led group earned an average score of 80.875% (6.47
out of 8). The teacher-led group made a gain of 23.125, while the student-led group made a gain
of 45.375, almost doubling the teacher-led group’s gain (Hsu, 2008). The results of Hsu’s (2008)
study show the importance of active learning. Passive learning is not effective for student
learning. This study builds on this concept. Students have higher achievement scores when
learning through active strategies, and students taught through active strategies can correctly
answer questions of higher rigor and apply their new knowledge more accurately.
7
Importance of the Evaluation
It is important to evaluate the organization’s performance in relation to the goal of 30%
of students performing at the Masters Grade Level standard, the highest level measured on the
STAAR. Active learning raises engagement to a level where students do not feel they are
working to learn but simply fulfilling their innate need for mastery (Petress, 2008). While
passive learning leads students to be uninvolved in their learning process, it also leads to a lack
of motivation (Petress, 2008). Active learning increases the student’s interest in learning
(Rotgans & Schmidt, 2011). If passive learning is not addressed, students will not reach their full
academic potential (Fata-Hartley, 2011; Hsu, 2008). When exposed to active learning, students
reported less time spent studying as well as a 15% to 20% increase in their associated grades
(Anjur, 2011). In addition, students active learning methods lead to students becoming lifelong
learners (Haidet et al., 2004). Active learning requires a mind shift from the traditional, teacher-
led classroom. Rotgans and Schmidt (2011) characterized the “active learning classroom by
authentic learning tasks, collaborative learning, limited direct instruction from teachers, and self-
initiated individual learning activities” (p. 64). If the classroom can be transformed into an active
learning classroom, students will perform at higher rates and will have the tools to become
lifelong learners. By the end of their high school careers, students will know how to successfully
communicate ideas and solve complex problems (Fine, 2014).
Description of Stakeholder Groups
There are three stakeholder groups at NHS: students, teachers, and administrators. Each
stakeholder group has an impact on the organizational goal. Each stakeholder group is important
for achieving the organizational goal of 30% of students reaching the Master’s Grade Level on
the STAAR. Students are the subject of each classroom and the individuals who are ultimately
8
responsible for achieving the organizational goal, as it is their performance that is directly
measured. However, teachers are the most influential party in a classroom regarding the
instruction delivered. If the teacher is motivated and has the appropriate knowledge to teach a
student through active learning techniques, they have the greatest impact on a student.
Administrators must provide opportunities for teachers to grow in their knowledge and hone
their craft, which, in turn, impacts students and their subsequent success.
The NHS teachers are critical to the success of the organizational goal; they are on the
front lines working toward accomplishing the goal each day in their classrooms. The school
employs 27 teachers. The teachers are members of two ethnic groups: 1.6% are two or more
races, and the remaining 98.4% are White. Their range of experience in education is such that
9.9% are beginning teachers, 14.9% have between 1 and 5 years’ experience, 14.5% have been
teaching for 6 to 10 years, 42.3 have been teaching for 11 to 20 years, and 18.4% have over 20
years’ experience. Sixteen percent of NHS teachers have a master’s degree, with the remaining
84% possessing a bachelor’s degree (Texas Education Agency, 2018).
Nadua High School serves 268 students (Texas Education Agency, 2018). The student
body is 0.4% African American, 11.2% Hispanic, 83.6% White, 1.5% American Indian, and
3.4% two or more races. Twenty-nine percent of NHS’s students are economically
disadvantaged, and 42.5% are characterized as at-risk of not graduating due to meeting one or
more of 13 at-risk indicators set forth by the state of Texas (Texas Education Agency, 2018).
These at-risk indicators include being retained one or more years, previously not meeting the
passing standard on the STAAR, being classified as homeless, being a teen parent, being placed
in a disciplinary alternative education setting, and being expelled. The high percentage of
9
economically disadvantaged students, coupled with the high percentage of students meeting at
least one of the at-risk indicators, provides a challenge to NHS teachers.
The administrators at NHS, in conjunction with the superintendent and assistant
superintendent, are the final group of stakeholders. The superintendent and assistant
superintendent both have over 25 years’ experience in education. The principal holds a master’s
degree in education and has over 20 years’ experience. The assistant principal also holds a
master’s degree and has nine years’ experience in education. The campus and district
administrators, along with the Campus Improvement Team and District Improvement Team,
worked to create the organizational goal, vision, and mission for the high school. These three
items create urgency and set the trajectory for NHS.
Stakeholder Group for the Study
Each group of stakeholders is required to achieve the organizational goal of raising the
Masters Grade Level achievement rate to 30%. Administrators will provide support and feedback
to the teachers in their quest to achieve their stakeholder goal of 100% of teachers providing
engaging and rigorous lessons daily. Students will be expected to engage authentically in these
rigorous lessons every school day. For the purpose of this evaluation, teachers were the focus of
this study. Teachers have the greatest direct impact on student engagement through the lessons
they design and the greatest direct impact on student achievement through their engaging
lessons’ level of rigor. The teacher stakeholder group’s goal is for 100% of them to provide
students with engaging and rigorous lessons each day.
Rigor can be misinterpreted easily (Francis, 2018). Often, rigor is seen as additional
course requirements. However, rigor is not about the amount of course work; it is about the type
of coursework. Rigor is the process of guiding the students to develop the capacity to understand
10
difficult and ambiguous content (Droms, 2013). Rigorous coursework should affect students by
driving them to higher academic accomplishment through critical inquiry (Francis, 2018).
Lessons deemed rigorous do not provide additional assignments; they are lessons that require
deep thought that can transform students’ thinking.
Engagement is often seen as student involvement in the course material. However, for
involvement to become engagement, the student has to be more than involved in the curriculum.
True engagement occurs when students are psychologically invested and willing to devote time
to their educational endeavors (York et al., 2015). One way to increase student engagement is to
provide lessons embedded with design qualities like engaging activities. Schlechty (2003) found
10 design qualities useful when designing lessons. These design qualities will be explored further
in the next chapter.
Table 1 details the organizational mission, organizational performance goal, and the
stakeholders responsible for accomplishing the organizational performance goal at NHS.
Table 1
Organizational Mission, Global Goal, and Stakeholder Performance Goals
Organizational Mission
The mission of Nadua ISD is to turn passive learners into active and engaged leaners to optimize the
knowledge and skills necessary to be successful in life after completing their formal education (NHS,
2016).
Organizational Performance Goal
By May 2022, 30% of Nadua High School students will score at the Masters Grade Level standard,
which is the highest level of the State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness or STAAR.
Administrators
By May 2021, 100% of campus
administrators will conduct daily
walkthroughs to evaluate the level of
rigor and engagement observed in the
classroom.
Teachers
By May 2021, 100% of
teachers at Nadua High
School will provide students
with engaging and rigorous
lessons daily.
Students
By May 2021, 100% of
students at Nadua High
School will authentically
engage in rigorous lessons
daily.
11
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project was to evaluate the degree to which teachers at NHS provide
engaging and rigorous lessons every school day. By incorporating rigor and engagement each
day, NHS expects the percentage of students achieving at the highest level to increase to the
stakeholder goal of 30% as measured by the STAAR. While a complete performance evaluation
would focus on all stakeholders, for practical purposes, the stakeholders of focus in this analysis
were NHS’s teachers.
The guiding questions for this study were the following:
1. What are the stakeholder knowledge and motivation related to achieving the
stakeholder goal of incorporating rigorous and engaging activities in the classroom on
a daily basis?
2. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and stakeholder
knowledge and motivation?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?
Methodological Approach
Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis framework was used to evaluate NHS’s
instructional practices regarding rigor and engagement. The gap analysis allowed for the
exploration of the underlying knowledge, motivation, and organizational gaps that contribute to
the achievement of the stakeholder goal of 100% of NHS’s teachers providing students with
engaging and rigorous lessons every school day. By determining the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational gaps and simultaneously working to bridge these, the organization can work to
achieve the organizational goal.
12
The methodological framework for the study was a sequential mixed-methods case study.
Surveys were administered first, followed by interviews. This process allows the researcher to
further explain the quantitative data through the qualitative data (Creswell, 2014). The
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences were assessed through surveys and
interviews. The surveys were distributed using Qualtrics in the fall of 2019. Interviews were
conducted in person during the teacher’s conference period in the spring of 2020.
Definitions
Approaches Grade Level Performance Label: The first and lowest performance label of
the STAAR. This is the level at which, when met, students are deemed to have passed the
assessment by the Texas Education Agency. Students who meet this label are likely to succeed in
the next course with some degree of targeted academic instruction. The average score to meet the
Approaches Grade Level Performance Label is 47.4% (Texas Education Agency, n.d.).
Masters Grade Level Performance Label: The most rigorous performance label of the
STAAR. Students who achieve at this performance label have demonstrated they can think
critically and can successfully apply the knowledge assessed in a variety of unfamiliar contexts.
The average score to earn the Masters Grade Level Performance Label is 82.6% (Texas
Education Agency, n.d.).
Meets Grade Level Performance Label: The middle level of performance labels of the
STAAR. When students achieve this standard, they are regarded as likely to succeed in the
subsequent course, are deemed to be college and career ready as well as able to think critically in
familiar contexts. The average score to attain the Meets Grade Level Performance Label is
63.8% (Texas Education Agency, n.d.).
13
Passive Learning: Characterized as occurring when the instructor simply transmits the
knowledge required by the curriculum to the learner, traditionally in the form of a lecture
(Blakely, 2015; Marks, 2000).
STAAR: State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness. STAAR is the state
assessment students take after completing the English I, English II, Algebra I, Biology, and U.S.
History courses.
Organization of the Project
This study is organized into five chapters. Chapter One provided the reader with an
overview of the key concepts and terminology commonly found in a discussion about passive
learning in a secondary school. Chapter One also introduced NHS’s mission, goals, and
stakeholders as well as a review of the evaluation framework. Chapter Two provides a review of
current literature surrounding passive learning and its implications for students. Chapter Two
also explores the literature surrounding the knowledge, motivation, and organizational gaps
required to achieve the stakeholder goal. Chapter Three examines the methodology as it pertains
to the choice of participant, data collection, and analysis of data. In Chapter Four, the data and
results of the study are described and analyzed. Chapter Five provides recommendations for
practice, based on data and literature, as well as recommendations for an implementation and
evaluation plan.
14
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
This literature review will examine the underlying causes of the low percentage of
students achieving at the Master’s Grade Level performance label. Master’s Grade Level is the
highest and most rigorous level that can be achieved on the STAAR. This literature review
begins with general research on the negative impact of passive learning, followed by the positive
impact of a rigorous curriculum and the characteristics of engaging high school classrooms. In
addition to the general research literature, the review of literature will use Clark and Estes’s
(2008) gap analysis conceptual framework to discuss key influences, specifically knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences on the teachers’ ability to implement rigorous and
engaging lessons and their subsequent impact on student achievement. This chapter will
conclude with the conceptual framework for the study.
Passive Learning and its Negative Effect on Engagement and Rigor
Despite the advancement of learning theory, there are disparities among the instruction
teachers provide students. These disparities stem from the lack of knowledge of learning theories
and their possible applications with regard to passive and active learning in the classroom (Fine,
2014). This section will include a review of the evolution of education theory and how education
theory impacts the modern classroom, a description of passive learning, and an explanation of
engagement and active learning.
History and Evolution of Education Theory
Learning theory has evolved as researchers have agreed, disagreed, and taken on a new
view of the most current learning theory. This transformation began in 1938 with behaviorism
set forth by B. F. Skinner (as cited in Tuckman, 2006). Since 1938, learning theory has evolved
with Bandura and social cognitive theory (Denler et al., 2006), information processing theory
15
(Schraw & McCrudden, 2006), cognitive load theory (Kirschner et al., 2006), and Vygotsky with
sociocultural learning theory (Gredler, 2009).
The practice of teaching has not always evolved to keep pace with the changes in
learning theory. Current classrooms are often designed for teachers to lecture and students to sit
passively and absorb the information (Fine, 2014). Many assignments are designed in the same
vein and require students to recall information to which they were exposed (Fine, 2014). This
passive activity mindset does not correspond with the constructivist mindset. Vygotsky advanced
learning theory and believed learners must be active participants in their education to advance
their learning (Gredler, 2009). Vygotsky summed up this learning theory with the following:
A concept is more than the sum of certain associative bonds formed by memory, more
than a mere mental habit; it is a complex and genuine act of thought that cannot be taught
by drilling but can be accomplished only when the child’s mental development itself has
reached the requisite level (as cited in Zender, 1973, p. 9).
It is important for teachers to be aware of how education and learning theory evolved and the
impact that it has on their classrooms. That evolution shapes teachers’ mindsets and should
impact their practice. Instead, teachers are teaching in a method grounded in behaviorism to
control students’ behavior without guiding the students to deeper learning using sociocultural
learning theory (Fine, 2014; Gredler, 2009).
Passive Learning
Passive learning is characterized by students who are not actively engaged in the learning
taking place in their school classrooms. Teachers lecture to students to transmit their own ideas
in a well-crafted message (Blakely, 2015). Lecture is one of the least taxing forms of instruction
to plan and one of the most efficient ways to transmit the subject matter from the teacher to the
16
learner (Haidet et al., 2004; Marks, 2000). However, by transmitting knowledge through lecture
and other passive learning techniques, students do not interact with the knowledge; they are
simply exposed to the material (Fata-Hartley, 2011). By being exposed to new knowledge only
through passive learning techniques, students cannot internalize the information and add the new
knowledge to their existing knowledge for later use.
Passive teaching is a pervasive model in secondary schools throughout the United States.
This teaching model is characterized by lecture and the transmission of knowledge from teacher
to student. The teachers and students alike are disengaged in the teaching and learning process
and are simply marking the days until the end of the school year (Marks, 2000). The withdrawal
from the learning process corresponds to 40% to 60% of students reporting chronic
disengagement, which is characterized by chronic absenteeism that eventually results in their
dropping out of high school (Marks, 2000).
Engagement and Active Learning
Active learning or engagement is characterized by self-regulated learning. Engagement is
shown when students are full and active participants in purposeful learning activities (Miller &
Dumford, 2018). Engagement is demonstrated when a student is working intently to deeply
understand the subject matter presented (Rotgans & Schmidt, 2017). Engagement is critical for
students to feel they are not working to learn but are simply fulfilling their innate need for
learning and mastery (Fata-Hartley, 2011). Students must interact with the new material, relate it
to past experiences, and apply it to their daily lives for it to become part of their permanent
knowledge set (Fata-Hartley, 2011). When students are allowed to fully interact with the
knowledge, the course failure rate drops from 15.6% to 10.9% (Freeman et al., 2007).
17
Related to a lower failure rate, Yenen and Dursun (2019) found that students learning
through active learning methods had higher test scores compared to those who were not exposed
to active learning. The average test score for students learning through active learning was 85.21
compared to 74.81 for those without active learning activities (Yenen & Dursun, 2019). These
students also retained information at a higher rate than those who did not have the opportunity to
learn through active learning techniques. Anjur (2011) also found that, when students
participated in active learning rather than passive learning, their time spent studying decreased
while their grades increased by 15% to 20% over their peers who were taught utilizing passive
learning techniques.
When active learning is utilized, failure rates decrease, and corresponding mastery rates
increase (Freeman et al., 2007). With increasing course completion rates, the number of students
graduating increases. The most impactful course of action to increase student graduation rates is
to increase active learning through student engagement (Kortering & Christenson, 2009). While
dropping out of school is generally only a problem that culminates in high schools, the signs
pointing to a risk of dropping out of high school can be traced to the first grade. Students must be
active and engaged in their learning to have an attachment to school and continue their education
through high school completion (Kortering & Christenson, 2009; Wang & Fredricks, 2014). If
the classroom can be transformed into an active learning classroom, students will perform at
higher rates and will have the tools to become lifelong learners.
History of Assessment in Secondary Education
Assessment in public education is not a new phenomenon. High stakes for students and
teachers emerged in the 21st century. However, standardized testing began as early as 2200 B.C.
with the Chinese civil service (Huddleston & Rockwell, 2015). In the United States, secondary
18
schools began administering entrance exams in the 1820s (Garrison, 2009). Early on, the exams
were individualized verbal recitations of material learned throughout the year. Horace Mann’s
greatest contribution was his belief that children “should be provided with a free, nonselective,
academically challenging, fair and morally just system of schooling” (as cited in Baines, 2006, p.
269). He went on to change the format of exams in 1845 (Huddleston & Rockwell, 2015). The
exams were initially given in front of the student’s peers to provide competition among students
and increase each student’s individual intrinsic motivation. However, Mann did not believe this
practice of public oral exams was effective; he believed the practice impeded overall student
morale (as cited in Garrison, 2009).
There has been a dramatic increase in the number of standardized tests given to students
that began in the 1960s due to a growing concern over declining SAT scores and continued with
the A Nation at Risk report in 1983 (Huddleston & Rockwell, 2015; Smith, 2014). Since the
implementation of the No Child Left Behind legislation in 2002, the rate of standardized testing
for each school that participates in more than two tests per year has increased from 13.7% to
29.9% (Smith, 2014). While standardized testing is common in the United States, it is also
common in the vast majority of industrialized countries (Smith, 2014). Standardized testing has
become a measuring stick for schools’ success in the United States and around the world.
Impact of Student Engagement and Rigor
Rigor and engagement are most powerful and effective when combined in the secondary
classroom (Fine, 2014). Although each is strong on their own, they are omnipotent when
combined. Student engagement is a primary factor in increasing school completion rates
(Kortering & Christenson, 2009). Academic rigor implores students to actively participate in the
19
class, hence intrinsically motivating them and spurring them on to greater engagement
(Matsumura et al., 2008).
Role of Student Engagement in Secondary Education
Engagement is a critical component of successful and productive learning. Teachers who
elicit high levels of engagement in their lessons stimulate students’ intrinsic motivation. When
students are intrinsically motivated, they are engaged in deeper and more conceptual learning
than those who are motivated by external forces (Early et al., 2014; Wang et al., 2014).
Engagement in high schools is particularly important, as a student’s engagement at this level is
foundational to subsequent academic habits and further educational achievement in
postsecondary programs (Cooper, 2014). Further, when students are engaged in the teacher’s
lesson, they feel as if the learning is useful and interesting. Because of their interest in the lesson,
students will be persistent in completing the lesson and exert the maximum effort needed to
succeed in the learning activity (Bircan & Sungur, 2016). Rotgans and Schmidt (2017) studied
medical students and found that students who were highly engaged in the curriculum scored
higher on an assessment of learning than students with lower engagement.
Early et al. (2014) found that “engagement is a prerequisite for school success” (p. 3).
Engagement in learning increases students’ confidence in their academic ability, which, in turn,
kindles a fire for further learning (Petress, 2008). Students believe that active learning is more
interesting and engaging when it includes real-world applications. School must be more than the
collecting of facts and skills that only lays the foundation for the interesting work found in the
workforce (Fine, 2014). When students encounter engaging work in high school, they perform
better on standardized tests, have higher attendance rates, are significantly less likely to drop out
20
of school, and develop into better citizens (Kortering & Christenson, 2009; Marks, 2000; Petress,
2008).
Schlechty (2003) found 10 design qualities that promote student engagement: content and
substance, product focus, organization of knowledge, clear and compelling product standards,
protection from adverse consequences for initial failure, affiliation, affirmation, choice, novelty
and variety, and authenticity. When these qualities are added to a lesson, they can transform
students into truly engaged learners who will persist even when facing difficulties (Saeed &
Zyngier, 2012). Content and substance regard incorporating rich knowledge that is relevant to
the student. By incorporating lessons with a product focus that has a clear connection between
what the students perceive to be important and the product they are assigned to create, students
are more likely to engage in the task to its fullest and to task completion (Schlechty, 2003). The
content must be organized in a way that makes sense to students. The curriculum can be
disjointed when presented, but, for maximum engagement, it must be unified and easy to follow.
All work should have clear and compelling product standards. Students are much more willing to
persist in a task to completion when the standards are clearly delineated and relevant to them
(Schlechty, 2003).
High school can be a trying time for students. Students, especially those who struggle,
must receive the opportunity to work without the fear of embarrassment when trying a task for
the first time. Protection from adverse consequences for initial failure is critical to students’
engagement in schoolwork (Schlechty, 2003). Affiliation is also important for increased
engagement. Students are more likely to engage in work that allows for their affiliation with
other students. Additionally, students who work with others achieve at higher rates (Makola,
2017). Affirmation of a product is critical to student success. Students should know that the work
21
being done matters and is important; the importance of the work should be affirmed. A critical
component of engaging students in classroom work is choice. Providing students with choice in
their work reduces apathy and empowers them to take an active role in their learning (Carrabba
& Farmer, 2018; Schlechty, 2003). Incorporating novelty and variety into a classroom is
essential in maintaining engagement. However, novelty can quickly wear off and become
mundane; this is where variety becomes important. New and innovative work is engaging to
students because they have never encountered the activity before. The final design quality to
increase engagement is authenticity. If lessons create meaningless and inconsequential work,
students will not be engaged in lessons or learning. Each of these design qualities can positively
impact engagement, and their impact is multiplied when more than one is added to a lesson
(Schlechty, 2003).
Role of Lesson Rigor in Secondary Education
Rigor is a necessary component of a lesson; it allows students the opportunity and
challenge necessary for growth in their learning. Rigor can be implemented in a myriad of ways.
First and foremost, critical thinking must be included to raise a lesson's rigor (McCollister &
Sayler, 2010). Students must think through material meticulously. Rigor cannot be achieved with
the simple learning of facts; rigor is only achieved with critical thinking and questioning of the
material presented (Gordon & Palmon, 2010). In addition, conceptual transformation and the
transfer of learning must occur for the learning to be deemed rigorous (Draeger et al., 2013).
Academic rigor provides tasks for students that command high levels of reasoning and
great focus (Cooper, 2014). Rigorous lessons and activities urge students to take ownership of
their learning and develop a greater capacity for lifelong learning (Draeger et al., 2013). This
academic rigor is exhibited through teachers providing interesting and meaningful work,
22
supporting students to meet high expectations, and expressing passion for the content (Cooper,
2014). By holding students to high standards and transmitting rigorous instruction, both students
and teachers build and extend the contributions during discussions regarding challenging topics
(Matsumura et al., 2008). Rigor is more than difficult assignments. Rigor demands a student’s
focus and high levels of cognition to achieve the teacher’s expectations.
Impact of Combined Student Engagement and Rigor
For the highest levels of achievement, engagement and rigor must be addressed
simultaneously. Achieving academic rigor requires active and engaged learning in the classroom,
meaningful and relevant curriculum, cultivated higher-order thinking, and appropriately high
expectations (Draeger et al., 2013). When rigorous learning is absent, student engagement is
negligible (Washor & Mojkowski, 2007). Conversely, truly rigorous learning involves a deep
engagement in the curriculum with teachers providing realistic and relevant texts, tools, and
language encompassed in an authentic real-world setting (Washor & Mojkowski, 2007). When a
rigorous curriculum is coupled with engaging activities, students achieve at higher levels and
drop out of school at lower rates (Early et al., 2014).
Rigor and engagement are more powerful when included together; they drive each other.
Fata-Hartley (2011) found that students who are taught using passive learning techniques could
answer 60.2% of basic-level, low-rigor questions correctly. However, when students were taught
the same material using active learning techniques, they answered 80.3% of high-level, high
rigor questions correctly (Fata-Hartley, 2011). She concluded that even the lowest-level students
who were taught using active learning strategies scored substantially higher on questions that
required them to think at a deeper level (Fata-Hartley, 2011). James (2016) worked with fourth
graders in Washington to determine if they would achieve at the highest levels measured on
23
standardized testing when they were exposed to deeper levels of rigor while using real-world
engaging situations. Across the state of Washington, 31% of the students met this high standard.
However, 71% of the students exposed to increased rigor and engagement achieved at the
highest level (James, 2016). Students need to be actively engaged in meaningful and rigorous
learning tasks to incorporate the new knowledge presented into their existing knowledge set.
Clark and Estes’s Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences Framework
Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis provides a framework to identify performance gaps
and their underlying causes that impede the attainment of organizational and related stakeholder
goals. This framework examines three critical areas: stakeholder knowledge and skills,
stakeholder motivation influences, and organizational barriers. The knowledge and skills
component in this study evaluated teachers’ knowledge and skills to attain the organizational
goal of 30% of NHS’s students achieving at the Masters Grade Level performance on the
STAAR. Motivation consists of the teachers’ active choice in participating in achieving the goal,
persistence in that work, and the appropriate level of mental effort exerted to attain the
organizational goal. The organizational barrier component of the framework involves policies
and procedures that are misaligned with the organizational goal as well as the inappropriate
allocation of resources and inadequate facilities. These barriers can plague organizations’
achievement of their goals. The organizational goal of 30% of NHS’s students achieving at the
Masters Grade Level of the STAAR was assessed with the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational (KMO) gap analysis as presented by Clark and Estes (2008).
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences
This section discusses the influences that impact the achievement of the stakeholder goal
of 100% of teachers at NHS providing students with engaging and rigorous lessons every school
24
day. The first part of this section is the knowledge and skills required to accomplish the goal.
The section will look at the conceptual knowledge regarding the importance of rigor and the
procedural knowledge necessary to incorporate engaging activities in the classroom. Next will be
a look at the motivation influences. The motivation components identified are the utility value of
designing engaging and rigorous lessons to be implemented daily and the self-efficacy teachers
require to implement those lessons. The final portion is the look at the cultural model and
cultural setting of NHS and how this impacts the implementation of rigorous and engaging
lessons in each classroom.
Knowledge and Skills
To ensure lessons are designed and implemented to a high level of rigor, teachers must
understand rigor and its importance in instructional design. Teachers must also understand the
importance of engagement and subsequently implement engaging activities in their classrooms
each day.
Teachers and their ability to design appropriate lessons are crucial to students’ ultimate
success (Washor & Mojkowski, 2007). Teachers must possess the knowledge and skills required
to prepare students (Clark & Estes, 2008). Student learning cannot be impacted to the extent
needed without first determining if teachers possess the knowledge and skills necessary to
instruct students to the required depth of rigor while utilizing appropriate and effective engaging
practices (Clark & Estes, 2008). Teachers need to obtain these knowledge and skills, and they
must be able to implement the skills in their classrooms (Mayer, 2011). The literature reviewed
investigated a few of the knowledge and skills required of NHS teachers to meet the achievement
goal for their students.
25
For the teacher stakeholder group to accomplish the goal of 100% of them providing
students with engaging and rigorous lessons every school day, they must first possess the
required knowledge and skills to implement these lessons and assignments. Knowledge can be
categorized into four dimensions: factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive (Krathwohl,
2002). Factual knowledge is the basic knowledge that the target must possess. In this case, the
factual knowledge is for each teacher to define rigor and engagement correctly. Conceptual
knowledge is a step above factual knowledge; it is knowing the relationships and
interrelationships between multiple pieces of factual knowledge. This type of knowledge
classifies information into categories. The activity of classification requires factual knowledge of
each of the pieces of information. Procedural knowledge is knowing how to complete a process,
such as how to implement engaging activities in a classroom lesson. The final type of knowledge
is metacognitive. Metacognitive knowledge is awareness of one’s own thinking (Krathwohl,
2002). An example is a teacher reflecting on his or her strengths and weaknesses in the
classroom. Metacognition is a powerful knowledge type. Metacognition guides the learner
through their cognition and allows them to self-regulate their learning (Mayer, 2011). While all
four types of knowledge are critical to the success of NHS and the accomplishment of the
stakeholder goal, only conceptual and procedural knowledge types were addressed in this study.
Teacher Knowledge of the Importance of Rigor
It is imperative for teachers to possess the conceptual knowledge of rigor and its
importance for a school to be successful. Simply asking students to remember facts and answer
questions correctly on a paper and pencil standardized test does not deem them ready for college
or careers (Conley, 2011). Schools that require more rigor in the classroom have students that
26
learn more of the curriculum and have less of an achievement gap between student groups (Lee
& Ready, 2009).
Teachers need to incorporate higher levels of rigor in their classrooms. Rigor is often
thought of as additional or extremely challenging work; however, this is not the case (Early et
al., 2014). Rigor is characterized by challenging and thought-provoking work, urging students to
accomplish more than they previously could with appropriate support and scaffolding while
creating a passion for the content (Cooper, 2014; Early et al., 2014). Rigor in a lesson creates a
learning environment designed to elicit higher cognition levels (Cooper, 2014). The cognition
levels are placed in a hierarchy from less rigorous to most rigorous: remember, understand,
apply, analyze, evaluate, and create (Krathwohl, 2002). A rigorous curriculum is characterized
by requiring analytical skills and requiring students to provide evidence for their assertions
during open-ended discussions (Matsumura et al., 2008). These activities are accomplished
through the analyze, evaluate, and create levels of the hierarchy above (Krathwohl, 2002;
Matsumura et al., 2008). Through higher levels of rigor, students are exposed to complex
problems that require them to explain their cognition in a myriad of ways (Matsumura et al.,
2008).
When teachers do not require students to achieve at high levels of rigor, they allow them
to meet subpar expectations. Students will not voluntarily go beyond expectations; therefore, it is
essential that high expectations be established for rigor to be implemented successfully and
consistently (Early et al., 2014; Matsumura et al., 2008). The high levels of rigor will only be
achieved when the teacher accepts nothing less (Early et al., 2014). Teachers must challenge
students to fully invest themselves in the curriculum to reach the necessary levels of rigor
(Cooper, 2014).
27
Teacher Knowledge of How to Incorporate Engaging Practices
The lack of procedural knowledge in incorporating engaging practices in lesson design
can be life-altering for students. Cooper (2014) surveyed more than 275,000 high school students
and found that 65% were bored in at least one class at school each day, and 16% said they were
bored in each class throughout the day. Students’ academic habits are formed in high school; this
greatly impacts their attitude toward education throughout their entire life (Cooper, 2014). If
students are disengaged in their classes, they are more likely to have lower standardized test
scores and attendance rates (Early et al., 2014). They also drop out of school at higher rates
(Early et al., 2014). It is critical to implement engaging practices in high schools to combat
disengagement in the classroom and its negative consequences (Cooper, 2014).
Engagement is critical for student success (Early et al., 2014). Students must be actively
involved in the experiences designed for learning. Being actively involved requires the students’
attention, their interest in the subject, their investment of the time required to complete the task,
and their full effort (Wang et al., 2014). When attention, interest, investment, and effort are at
their maximum, students are engaged in the curriculum, their achievement rates rise, and they
enroll in more rigorous and challenging courses while their dropout rates become almost
nonexistent (Wang et al., 2014).
There are three types of engagement: affective, behavioral, and cognitive (Early et al.,
2014; Wang et al., 2014). Affective engagement is characterized by students’ emotions regarding
the class; this can include students’ feelings toward the teacher, their interest in the curriculum,
and the enjoyment they receive from the curriculum (Cooper, 2014; Wang et al., 2014).
Behavioral engagement is the easiest type of engagement to manipulate. Behavioral engagement
is comprised of participation in the designed activities, time spent on these activities, and
28
effectively following instructions (Cooper, 2014; Early et al., 2014; Wang et al., 2014).
Cognitive engagement is the most difficult to influence; it is the concentration exerted and
mental effort expended on the activities (Cooper, 2014; Early et al., 2014; Wang et al., 2014).
While these three types of engagement are distinctly different, they are highly connected, and
classroom engagement requires all three (Cooper, 2014).
It is critical that teachers support students and their learning to influence students’
engagement levels; teachers must also be masters of the curriculum and passionate about the
topic (Early et al., 2014). Schlechty (2001) found 10 design qualities for teachers to embed in the
assignments they design that impact engagement: product focus, clear and compelling product
standards, protection from adverse consequences, affirmation of performances, affiliation,
novelty and variety, choice, authenticity, organization of knowledge and content and substance.
While all of these qualities have an impact on engagement when used singularly, that impact is
compounded when they are used together (Schlechty, 2001). These design qualities give teachers
building blocks to add engagement to their classrooms as they see fit when designing lessons.
Learning experiences focused on a product rather than a worksheet and allowing teachers and
students to experiment in their learning without the risk of failure engages students in the
learning process (Schlechty, 2001). Increasing engagement is critical to each student’s success;
teachers can no longer rely on their personal teaching styles to ensure success (Cooper, 2014).
By incorporating these design qualities, each teacher, independent of their personality, can
implement engaging experiences in their classroom rather than experiences that are simply
entertaining (Schlechty, 2001).
Table 2 shows the knowledge influences and knowledge types required to achieve NHS’s
stakeholder and organizational goals.
29
Table 2
Knowledge Influences and Knowledge Types to Achieve Stakeholder and Organizational
Goals
Organizational Mission
The mission of Nadua ISD is to turn passive learners into active and engaged leaners to
optimize the knowledge and skills necessary to be successful in life after completing their
formal education (NHS, 2016).
Organizational Performance Goal
By May 2022, 30% of Nadua High School students will score at the Masters Grade Level
standard, which is the highest level of the State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness
or STAAR.
Stakeholder Goal
By May 2021, 100% of teachers at Nadua High School will provide students with engaging
and rigorous lessons on a daily basis.
Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type Knowledge Influence
Assessment
Teachers need to understand
the importance for high levels
of rigor to be included in their
lessons.
Declarative (Conceptual) Teacher Surveys and
Interviews
Teachers need to know how
to incorporate engaging
practices in their classrooms.
Procedural Teacher Surveys and
Interviews
Motivation
Addressing teacher motivation is critically important to accomplish the stakeholder goal
of all teachers incorporating rigorous and engaging lessons daily. There is more to meeting the
goal than having the correct knowledge base; to be successful, there must also be adequate
motivation (Rueda, 2011). Motivation is the knowledge to complete the task as well as the
willingness or want to complete the task (Rueda, 2011). The components of teacher motivation
are active choice, persistence, and effort; these elements drive student achievement and
30
effectiveness (Han & Yin, 2016; Rueda, 2011). It is crucial for classroom teachers to actively
pursue increasing their motivation for teaching, as they suffer from high levels of stress
compared with other professions, which, in turn, decreases their motivation (Han & Yin, 2016).
This section will focus on teacher motivation with regard to the importance and implementation
of rigor and engagement in their classrooms. When teacher motivation is increased, the
classroom is more effective (Han & Yin, 2016). Two theories will be addressed: self-efficacy
theory and expectancy value theory, including the utility value of incorporating rigorous and
engaging activities in the curriculum.
Teacher Self-efficacy
Self-efficacy is a building block of motivation (Pajares, 2006). Self-efficacy is the belief
that a person can complete a complex task (Holzberger et al., 2013). When teachers have higher
self-efficacy, they believe they are capable of completing tasks and are, therefore, more
motivated to begin the task, persist within the task, and expend the mental effort needed to see
the task to completion (Rueda, 2011). There are four influences to self-efficacy: mastery
experience, vicarious experience, social persuasions, and physiological reactions (Pajares, 2006).
The most influential of these is the mastery experience (Pajares, 2006). When a task is
completed, self-efficacy is raised, and when the task is not completed, self-efficacy falls (Pajares,
2006).
Teachers’ self-efficacy greatly impacts their effectiveness and, consequently, student
achievement (Sehgal et al., 2017). Teachers with high self-efficacy beliefs also achieve higher
instructional quality than teachers with lower self-efficacy beliefs (Holzberger et al., 2013).
These self-efficacious teachers hold the belief that they are capable of designing complex and
intricate lessons. When teachers are more self-efficacious, they are willing to learn new
31
strategies to implement engagement and rigor in their lesson design and further raise their self-
efficacy to, in turn, attempt even more new and innovative strategies (Holzberger et al., 2013;
Sehgal et al., 2017).
Teacher self-efficacy and effectiveness are positively correlated (Han & Yin, 2016;
Sehgal et al., 2017). When teachers possess higher self-efficacy levels, they work more
diligently, are more invested in their individual learning, are more persistent, and are less
stressed than their less efficacious counterparts (Holzberger et al., 2013). Similarly, teachers who
work with others and receive positive feedback increase their self-efficacy when compared to
those who work alone and do not receive regular feedback regarding their teaching (Sehgal et al.,
2017). Collaboration can be utilized as an important tool to raise a teacher’s self-efficacy (Sehgal
et al., 2017). When teachers observe peers and use that experience to reflect and ultimately
improve their craft, they become more self-efficacious. In addition, their students will increase
their learning, and there will also be an increase in test scores (Han & Yin, 2016; Sehgal et al.,
2017). As teachers recognize their ability to provide greater instructional quality, their self-
efficacy increases, which, in turn, allows them to try to reach new heights of instructional quality
(Holzberger et al., 2013). This becomes a never-ending cycle of improvement (Holzberger et al.,
2013).
Teacher Utility Value (Expectancy Value Theory)
Teachers must believe there is value in implementing engaging practices and rigorous
curriculum in the classroom to meet achievement measures. Expectancy value theory places
value on the task at hand. There is value to be gained when the task is accomplished, and it is
greater than the cost of completing the task (Eccles, 2006). There are four interrelated
components of expectancy value theory: intrinsic interest, attainment value, utility value, and
32
cost (Eccles, 2006). Intrinsic value is the extent to which one is interested in the activity and will
receive joy from simply completing the task (Eccles, 2006). Attainment value is higher if the
task fits within one’s image of themselves (Eccles, 2006). Utility value is determined by the
extent to which the task will help in the achievement of one’s long-term goals (Eccles, 2006).
Cost is the perceived expense of undertaking the activity (Eccles, 2006). The attainment value
and utility value must outweigh the perceived cost for the activity to be worth undertaking. The
more the individual values the goal, the greater the likelihood of choosing the activity deemed
important to achieve the goal, persisting in it, and providing the necessary mental effort to
complete it, which ultimately leads to accomplishing the goal (Rueda, 2011). While all
components of expectancy value theory are important for the attainment of NHS’s stakeholder
goal, only utility value will be discussed.
Teachers must realize the role of student engagement and, conversely, the role
disengagement plays in school. When students are not presented with relevant and engaging
work, they are not engaged in the classroom (Schlechty, 2001). More than 175,000 of 275,000
students surveyed reported they were not engaged in at least one class throughout the day, with
16% of all participating students reporting they were not engaged the entire day (Cooper, 2014).
A major factor in students’ deciding to drop out of school is disengagement in the classroom
(Cooper, 2014). Teachers must realize the value of incorporating engaging activities and the
long-term effects the lack of engagement holds for their students (Cooper, 2014). Bircan and
Sungur (2016) found that cognitive engagement is essential for students’ achievement. For
students to reach their full potential, teachers need to see the value in engaging lessons and
rigorous curriculum. Rigorous lessons are intrinsically motivating for students, which allows
teachers to reach their goals of higher student achievement (Early et al., 2014). Rigor and the
33
students’ participation in that rigorous activity fulfills the teacher’s utility value (Cooper, 2014).
The teacher can see value through the students’ hard work; if the students are working diligently,
then the teacher perceives that the curriculum is important and the lesson design is effective for
student achievement (Cooper, 2014).
Table 3 shows the motivation needed to achieve NHS’s stakeholder and organizational
goals.
Table 3
Motivation Influences to Achieve Stakeholder and Organizational Goals
Organizational Mission
The mission of Nadua ISD is to turn passive learners into active and engaged leaners to
optimize the knowledge and skills necessary to be successful in life after completing their
formal education (NHS, 2016).
Organizational Performance Goal
By May 2022, 30% of Nadua High School students will score at the Masters Grade Level
standard, which is the highest level of the State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness
or STAAR.
Stakeholder Goal
By May 2021, 100% of teachers at Nadua High School will provide students with engaging
and rigorous lessons daily.
Assumed Motivation Influences Motivational Influence Assessment
Utility Value – Teachers need to see the value
in designing engaging and rigorous lessons
Teacher Survey and Interviews
Self-Efficacy – Teachers need to believe they
are capable of effectively designing lessons
that are engaging and rigorous
Teacher Survey and Interviews
Organization
There is more needed for an organization to be successful than bridging the stakeholder’s
knowledge and motivation gaps (Clark & Estes, 2008). Organizational influences must also be
addressed simultaneously for NHS to achieve the stakeholder goal. The stakeholders can possess
the required knowledge and be sufficiently motivated and still not be successful in attaining their
goal. Organizational barriers are often created by inefficient processes or a lack of resources
34
(Clark & Estes, 2008). Culture and climate influence these barriers; when the culture and climate
evolve, the barriers can also react to the change in climate and culture. Culture and climate are
assessed through cultural models and settings. Cultural models are the shared understanding of
how the world works and what is valued in the environment (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001).
The cultural setting is the tangible piece of culture. It is the employees, the resources, and the
tasks as well as how and why the resources are used as they are (Gallimore & Goldenberg,
2001).
Teachers drive a school’s culture (Lee & Li, 2015). Students often see teachers as having
all the answers. Teachers are expected to be experts in their content area as well as in
instructional design. Because of these expectations, teachers’ willingness to experiment and
innovate with instructional strategies is often lost. Teachers hold on to the time-tested strategy of
lecture to impart the information that is required to be transmitted (Lee & Li, 2015). There is
little deviation from traditional lecture-driven classrooms at NHS. While this is a reliable avenue
to convey information, another more effective method must be explored for the transmission and
subsequent internalization of knowledge.
Culture of Willingness to Incorporate Innovative Strategies
Creating a culture of innovation is crucial to an organization’s success (Stempfle, 2011).
Effective teaching is a continuous iteration of experimentation and growth gleaned from
innovation (Lee & Li, 2015). However, innovation also brings about anxiety and pressure (Chen
& Wang, 2015). Therefore, NHS’s culture needs to be adapted to create a safe space for teachers
to feel comfortable to innovate and attempt to incorporate new instructional strategies. When
teachers are not innovative and do not implement engaging strategies, the results elicited from
students are limited to lower-level knowledge (Lee & Li, 2015). To reach higher levels of
35
understanding and deeper levels of rigor, teachers must vary their strategies to incorporate
engaging instruction. One of Schlechty’s (2003) design qualities is protection from adverse
consequences, which is essential for students to take chances in their learning without failure
becoming final. This is also crucial for teachers to feel free to take chances when incorporating
new strategies. To reach deeper levels of rigor, teachers must be willing to take chances and not
simply strive to achieve the easily attainable goals (Stempfle, 2011), such as settling for students’
reaching only the Approaches Grade Level performance label of the STAAR. In many instances,
this requires answering only 37% of the questions correctly. Teachers should push students to
strive to achieve at the Meets and Masters Grade Level performance labels.
Valuing professional development is essential to teachers’ growth (Hilton et al., 2015)
and must be regarded as an important aspect of the culture at NHS. Professional development is
necessary to properly train teachers to implement engaging practices and incorporate rigorous
lessons. Because professional development is costly and requires the scarce resource of time, it
must be supported and encouraged by administrators. Professional development provides the
resources teachers need to complete their jobs, which, in turn, creates productive and successful
students and schools (Buckingham & Coffman, 1999). When teachers receive professional
development, they continue to evolve and develop, which creates school change and improves
student learning (Chen & Wang, 2015).
Teacher Training to Provide Engaging and Rigorous Lessons
Teachers are often reluctant to change their instructional strategies to incorporate new
instructional strategies (Hilton et al., 2015). Teachers need professional development to feel
comfortable and supported when incorporating engaging and rigorous lessons and activities in
their classrooms. School culture must provide access to professional development that promotes
36
true professional learning and encourages experimentation when incorporating that learning and
putting it into practice in the classroom (Hilton et al., 2015). When an organization’s culture is
ignored, professional development will fail to create a positive learning environment for teachers
(Rauf et al., 2014). A campus administrative team must provide professional development
opportunities as well as lead by example to foster a culture that values professional development
(Lee & Li, 2015). A teacher’s attitude toward professional development is modeled after the
administrators’ attitude toward professional development, both of which impact and drive the
overall school culture regarding professional development (Rauf et al., 2014). Without a culture
that values professional development, teachers will not be receptive to acquiring new knowledge
regarding engaging practices and rigorous lessons.
Time is often overlooked as a resource, but how time is prioritized communicates an
organization’s priorities (Schein, 2004). Teachers are often left in isolation to complete their
work without the advantages of meeting with their peers and the thought that meeting with peers
is not a useful and productive use of time. However, when teachers have the time to collaborate,
there is significant school improvement as well as significant professional empowerment (Chen
& Wang, 2015).
Teacher Availability to Visit Peer Classrooms
Teachers who teach in standardized tested subject areas are more prone to working in
isolation than teachers outside of these subjects (Chen & Wang, 2015). However, teachers can
only reach their highest potential when they have the time to interact with others and not isolate
themselves from others around them (Lee & Li, 2015). Improvement occurs when there is a
continuous flow of external information that creates a conflict of previously held ideas
(Stempfle, 2011). When teachers visit other classrooms and collaborate with others about what
37
makes good teaching and learning, they can also determine what could be integrated into their
classrooms for use with their students to increase the number of engaging and rigorous lessons
(Schmoker, 2010).
Table 4 shows the organizational influences required to achieve the stakeholder and
organizational goals of NHS.
Table 4
Organizational Influences on Stakeholder Goal
Organizational Mission
The mission of Nadua ISD is to turn passive learners into active and engaged leaners to
optimize the knowledge and skills necessary to be successful in life after completing their
formal education (NHS, 2016).
Organizational Performance Goal
By May 2022, 30% of Nadua High School students will score at the Masters Grade Level
standard, which is the highest level of the State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness
or STAAR.
Stakeholder Goal
By May 2021, 100% of teachers at Nadua High School will provide students with engaging
and rigorous lessons daily.
Assumed Organizational Influences
Organization Influence
Assessment
NHS needs a culture of willingness to try new strategies to
incorporate into lesson design.
Teacher Surveys and
Interviews
Assumed Organizational Influences
Organization Influence
Assessment
NHS needs to provide training on ways to implement engaging
and rigorous activities in the classroom.
Teacher Surveys and
Interviews
NHS teachers need the ability to visit teacher’s classrooms to see
their peers in action.
Teacher Surveys and
Interviews
38
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and Motivation and
the Organizational Context
A conceptual framework is the communication and connection between the primary
concepts represented in a study (Maxwell, 2013). It is used as the structure of the study (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). The purpose of the conceptual framework is to represent the connections
through a graphical and narrative representation of the concepts and interrelationships among
them (Maxwell, 2013). While the literature on the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences at NHS are presented individually, the conceptual framework illustrates the
connection and relationships among them and the impact they have on the stakeholder goal of
teachers providing students with rigorous and engaging activities daily.
39
Figure 1
Conceptual Framework for the Study Integrating Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational
Influences
40
Figure 1 represents the conceptual framework integrating knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences at NHS with the ultimate end of reaching the stakeholder goal of
teachers providing students with engaging and rigorous activities daily. The large maroon circle
represents the organization of NHS. Detailed within this circle are the overarching cultural
models and cultural settings. The cultural model influence to be explored is the culture of
innovation in teaching strategies (Chen & Wang, 2015; Lee & Li, 2015; McCharen et al., 2011;
Stempfle, 2011). The cultural setting influences are the opportunity to provide training for
teachers to assist in their consistent incorporation of engaging and rigorous activities (Hilton et
al., 2015; Lee & Li, 2015; Rauf et al., 2014; Taylor, 2010; Tichnor-Wagner et al., 2016) and
providing opportunities for teachers to visit their peer’s classroom (Balker, 2015; Chen & Wang,
2015; Lee & Li, 2015; McCharen et al., 2011). These influences on the cultural model and
setting mold the teacher stakeholder group and impact the entirety of NHS.
The blue circle represents the stakeholder group of teachers within the NHS organization.
Within this circle are the stakeholder knowledge and motivation influences that simultaneously
affect the attainment of the stakeholder goal. The knowledge influences identified as crucial to
the stakeholder and organizational goal are the teachers’ conceptual knowledge of the
importance of including high levels of rigor in each of their lessons (Cooper, 2014; Early et al.,
2014; Matsumura et al., 2008) and their procedural knowledge of incorporating engaging
practices in their classrooms (Cooper, 2014; Early et al., 2014; Wang et al., 2014). The
motivation influences identified are the teachers’ utility value in designing engaging and rigorous
lessons (Han & Yin, 2016; Holzberger et al., 2013; Sehgal et al., 2017) and their self-efficacy to
believe they are capable of effectively designing engaging and rigorous lessons (Cooper, 2014;
Early et al., 2014). The knowledge and motivation influences are equally important to the
41
stakeholders in the attainment of the stakeholder goal. The bidirectional arrow represents the
connection and equality between the knowledge and skills influences and the motivation
influences.
The knowledge and skills influences are essential to the attainment of the stakeholder
goal. Without the conceptual knowledge of the importance of high levels of rigor, teachers do
not realize the need to design lessons with high levels of rigor. Additionally, without the
procedural knowledge of providing engaging practices, teachers cannot design lessons that
provide high engagement levels. However, knowledge of the importance of rigor and ability to
incorporate engaging practices in lesson design are not enough to address the stakeholder goal.
Motivation must be addressed concurrently, as they are mutually influencing. Teachers must see
the value in designing engaging and rigorous lessons as well as believe they can design lessons
with adequate rigor and engagement. The motivation is not enough, nor is the knowledge and
skills enough to attain the stakeholder goal. Singularly, knowledge, and motivation hold no
power, so they must be nurtured collectively. Only by simultaneously addressing these gaps in
knowledge and motivation while cultivating a culture of innovation can teachers create lessons
that are rigorous and engaging to students.
The stakeholder goal is contained in a blue rectangle to correspond to the blue circle
containing the stakeholder group. The arrow points from the organizational circle, which
encompasses the stakeholder group of teachers and the knowledge influences and motivation
influences. This arrow indicates the stakeholder knowledge influences coupled with the
motivation influences and the organizational influences converge to inform the stakeholders and,
therefore, impact the stakeholder goal. The stakeholder goal, in turn, impacts the organizational
goal, which is depicted in the maroon rectangle that corresponds to the maroon organization
42
circle. Progress toward attainment of the organizational goal subsequently influences the
organization, as shown by the green arrow pointing from the organizational goal to the
organization circle.
Conclusion
The stakeholder goal evaluated in this study was that, by May 2021, 100% of teachers at
NHS will provide students with engaging and rigorous lessons each day. Chapter Two presented
literature on education theory and its evolution over time, a look at passive learning and active
learning and their impact on student achievement, and the impact of combined student
engagement and rigor. The literature presented supports the need for rigor and engagement to be
present in the classroom daily. The Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis model was utilized to
analyze teachers’ knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences and their ability to
design lessons that embed adequate engagement and rigor. Chapter Three will begin with an
explanation of the methodological approach taken to evaluate the stakeholder goal.
43
CHAPTER THREE: METHODS
This study examined the teacher knowledge, teacher motivation, and organizational
influences needed to reach the stakeholder goal of 100% of teachers at NHS providing engaging
and rigorous lessons daily. This chapter describes the methodology for the study, including the
data collection and analysis procedures. The guiding questions for this study were the following:
1. What is the stakeholder knowledge and motivation related to achieving the
stakeholder goal of incorporating rigorous and engaging activities in the classroom
daily?
2. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and stakeholder
knowledge and motivation?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?
This chapter briefly reviews the stakeholders participating in the study. The chapter then
moves to the sampling criteria and recruitment strategies for the survey and interviews. The
sampling criteria and recruitment strategies are followed by the rationale for using surveys and
interviews to gather data. Study credibility, trustworthiness, validity, and reliability are discussed
next. The chapter concludes with ethical considerations.
Participating Stakeholders
The stakeholder groups of students and teachers are both uniquely positioned to
contribute to the implementation of increased rigor and engagement in the classroom. However,
teachers can impact multitudes of students, whereas students have the largest impact on
themselves. All full-time teachers at NHS were included in an initial census survey. The goal of
the study was to interview 10 teachers.
44
Survey Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
The survey goal was to have the entire full-time teaching staff of 27 teachers participate
in the anonymous survey. The researcher presented the purpose of the study. The survey was
then electronically distributed through email to full-time, certified teachers. Reminders were sent
through Qualtrics to the faculty members who did not initially respond to the survey.
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Criterion 1
The teacher must have participated in the survey and volunteered to participate in the
subsequent interview. The teachers must have participated in the survey for the interview to be
an additional source of information from the same pool of people.
Criterion 2
The teacher must have more than one year of teaching experience, but the experience
does not have to be specifically at NHS. First-year teachers would not have the experience
necessary to answer the study’s questions.
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
There were few responses to the request to participate in an interview among the
teachers. Because there was a low turnout, all who volunteered were interviewed. Six teachers
volunteered. Three of them were core teachers (English, history, and science), and the other three
taught elective courses.
Data Collection and Instrumentation
This study employed a survey and interviews to collect data on teachers’ perception of
the importance of rigor and engagement in the classroom. Each method addressed the research
questions. The researcher confirmed findings and boosted the internal validity of the study by
45
gathering data through multiple methods, known as triangulating the data (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). Each of the methods, their rationale for inclusion, and their instrumentation are detailed in
the next section.
Surveys
Surveys were administered online using Qualtrics. The researcher sent a link to the
teaching faculty. The purpose of the study and survey was introduced via email. Also, included
in the introduction to the survey was the informed consent (Appendix A) to remind participants
that they could cease participation in the survey and study at any time. The survey consisted of
25 multiple-choice items relating to the knowledge and motivation influences regarding
incorporating rigor and engagement in the classroom as well as organizational influences at
NHS. Nine of the 25 questions related to the knowledge influences, 10 represented the
motivation influences, and the remaining six characterized the organizational influences (See
Appendix B for the survey instrument).
Interviews
This study also used a semi-structured approach to interviewing. The semi-structured
approach allows for consistency between interviews and the flexibility for probing questions
when the opportunity arises during the interview (Patton, 2002). The semi-structured approach
assisted the interviewer in remaining consistent in the order and phrasing of questions, which
increases the comparability of responses (Patton, 2002). Interviews allow researchers to enter a
world to which they normally do not have access and learn from those in the world (Weiss,
1994). While conducting interviews, it was imperative to use a variety of question types to gain
the best picture of what teachers do to incorporate rigor and engagement in their classrooms.
46
Interview Protocol
Six types of open-ended questions (experience, opinion, feeling, knowledge, sensory, and
background), as presented by Patton (2002), were developed by the researcher and made up the
interview protocol. The most prevalent type of question was the experience and behavior
question type. This type of question permitted the researcher to see through the respondent’s
eyes how they brought rigor and engagement to the classroom. The conceptual framework that
guided this study integrated the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences at NHS.
The questions inquired about the respondents’ experiences in their classrooms, their knowledge
of the process of incorporating rigor and engagement, their motivation in incorporating rigor and
engagement, and their perception of the organizational climate and culture in relation to
supporting their ability to incorporate rigor and engagement in their lessons.
Interview Procedures
For this study, the researcher interviewed six teachers using the interview protocol (see
Appendix C). The participants were assured the interviews would remain confidential before the
interview began. The teacher interviews were conducted face-to-face during the teachers’
conference period at NHS. All interviews were recorded by the interviewer with an external
audio recorder after the participants gave permission for these to be recorded. Recording
preserves the integrity of the interview and allows for transcription of the interview in its
entirety.
Data Analysis
Descriptive statistical analysis was conducted once all survey results were submitted. The
survey was completed online utilizing Qualtrics. The data was then exported to Excel to
complete the analysis. Frequencies were calculated for all Likert-scale questions in the survey.
47
The percentage of stakeholders who strongly agreed or agreed were compared in relation to those
who strongly disagreed or disagreed. The mean, median, and mode were calculated to describe
the responses.
After the interviews were conducted, the recordings were immediately uploaded to
Rev.com by the interviewer and transcribed by the program. After receiving the transcriptions,
analysis began with a three-phase coding process (Harding, 2013). The first phase consisted of
open coding, which included identifying empirical codes tied to the conceptual framework. The
second phase of coding included aggregating identified empirical codes into analytical/axial
codes. The final phase was used to identify patterns and themes related to the conceptual
framework and study questions (Harding, 2013).
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Credibility and trustworthiness are essential components of a study. The researcher used
the strategies of rich data and triangulation for ensuring credibility and trustworthiness. The first
strategy of utilizing rich data is essential to eliminate researcher bias from the study. Researcher
bias is mitigated through rich data, such as the verbatim interview transcripts (Maxwell, 2013).
The transcripts record each verbal detail of the interview, not simply the details the researcher
felt were important (Maxwell, 2013). The final strategy used to increase credibility and
trustworthiness was triangulation. Using additional sources of data increases the reliability of the
data, and the study is more credible (Maxwell, 2013).
Validity and Reliability
Validity and reliability are critical to the value of a quantitative study (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). A study is valid when the results can be generalized to a larger population
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Reliability is achieved when the study can be replicated with the
48
same results and is driven by the study’s instrumentation. To increase validity and combat
sampling bias, all teachers were invited to participate in the survey. Ensuring a high response
rate is critical to a small sample. Because of the small size of NHS with only 27 teachers, a
census was needed to adequately represent the teacher stakeholder group with confidence. The
anonymous survey removes any threat associated with participation. Because of the nature of
Qualtrics, reminder emails were sent without the researcher having knowledge of who had or had
not responded to the survey.
Ethics
Human subjects require protection during the research. The researcher’s responsibility is
to show respect, honor promises, avoid coercion, and do no harm when researching (Rubin &
Rubin, 2012). The IRB process assisted in ensuring the teachers’ protection when participating in
this study. All participants were informed of the intent of the study, that their participation was
voluntary, and that they could revoke their consent at any time during the process (Glesne,
2011). The qualitative interviews were audio-recorded after the participants had granted
permission for them to be. The interviews were coded, and all identifiable information was
removed for confidentiality (Rubin & Rubin, 2012). The original interview audio files were kept
by the researcher on her laptop, not in the cloud. The transcripts with all identifiable information
removed were kept in a locked file cabinet in the home office of the researcher until the
completion of the study.
Biases cannot be completely eradicated, but, if the researcher is cognizant of the bias, it
can be minimized. Because of the small number of teachers on staff, a census was used to
conduct the survey, therefore eliminating selection bias. A scripted interview approach was used
to maintain consistency throughout interviews as well as to help mitigate bias.
49
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
This chapter analyzes the qualitative and quantitative data gathered during the study and
presents the results within the framework of the study’s purpose and research questions. The
purpose of this study was to evaluate the knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational
influences related to teachers’ providing students with engaging and rigorous lessons daily.
These influences are imperative to the teachers’ contributions towards achieving NHS’s goal of
30% of the students reaching the Masters Grade Level standard on the STAAR. This study
sought to answer three research questions:
1. What is the stakeholder knowledge and motivation related to achieving the
stakeholder goal of incorporating rigorous and engaging activities in the classroom
daily?
2. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and stakeholder
knowledge and motivation?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?
This study collected quantitative data through surveys and qualitative data through
interviews during the spring of 2019. The chapter begins with a look at the organizational goal
and presents the most current data related to the students achieving at the Masters Grade Level
standard. Next, each KMO influence is analyzed, and the survey results and interview findings
are presented according to Clark and Estes’s (2008) framework developed in Chapter Two. Each
influence is first examined through surveys and then through teacher interviews. The answers to
Research Questions One and Two were found in the analysis of these KMO influences. The third
50
research question is addressed in Chapter Five with the recommendations for organizational
practices to close the gaps in the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences.
Participating Stakeholders
The primary stakeholder group for this study was the teachers at NHS. A census was
conducted of the professional staff, but only 20 of the 27 teachers responded to the survey. The
participants range in teaching experience from a first-year teacher to a 27-year veteran teacher.
Eight of the survey respondents were male, and 12 were female. Information on the respondents’
racial makeup was not collected, as there is not much diversity among the teaching staff at NHS.
Collecting and disaggregating information on race would have made the survey and interview
respondents easily identifiable.
Interview participants were teachers who volunteered to be interviewed at the conclusion
of the survey. Of the 20 teachers who responded to the survey, six volunteered to be interviewed.
All six interviews were conducted in person on a mutually agreed upon day during the teacher’s
conference period. The length of the interviews varied from 16 to 38 minutes. Below is a
summary of the interview participants.
Janet Fleming. Ms. Fleming is a business and technology teacher with 8 years of
experience. She began in education as a para-professional and then earned an alternative
certification to become a teacher. She first taught at the elementary school and moved to high
school three years prior to this study. Ms. Fleming teaches three different courses at NHS.
Brooke Stewart. Ms. Stewart began teaching over 30 years prior to this study. She left
teaching three times in the course of her career to pursue other endeavors. She currently teaches
three different science courses. Ms. Stewart has experience in the traditional high school as well
as in an alternative high school. This is Ms. Stewart’s first year at NHS.
51
Sam Brown. Mr. Brown has 23 years of experience in education. He is a teacher and a
coach. His current teaching assignment is three courses, including U.S. History. His U.S. History
class does not include higher-achieving students, as they are enrolled in a U.S. History class at
the local community college. This is Mr. Brown’s third year at NHS.
Doug Peake. Mr. Peake is at the end of his first year of teaching. He teaches four
agricultural classes at NHS.
Megan Stevens. Ms. Stevens has 18 years of experience in education. She teaches two
journalism courses at the high school and is the PALs sponsor for the district. This is Ms.
Stevens’s twelfth year at NHS.
Julie Jennings. Ms. Jennings has 15 years of teaching experience. She teaches English II
and teaches a remedial class for students who have not been successful on the end-of-course
exam. This is Ms. Jennings’s fourth year at NHS.
Determination of Assets and Needs
When determining if each influence is an asset or a need, a simple majority (50%) could
have been used as the delineation between an asset and a need. However, survey data evaluation
revealed that a simple majority of responses would not adequately expose students to the
classroom rigor and engagement needed, as suggested by Paige et al. (2013), for their success.
Students deserve to have more than 50% of their teachers understand rigor and engagement and
subsequently know how to incorporate them in the classroom. The researcher determined that
75% of the survey respondents must respond appropriately for the influence to be regarded as an
asset; anything less is a need to be targeted. Evaluation of the interview data was similar.
A simple majority is a step in the right direction, but it was determined that 67% of the
interview participants must be in agreement for an influence to be considered an asset. There
52
were six interviews conducted, so 67% translates to four of the six participants answering
positively for the influence to be considered an asset. Agreement among less than 75% of the
survey respondents or 67% of the interview participants is deemed an area of need and will be
targeted for improvement.
Results and Findings for Knowledge Causes
All public schools in Texas administered five subject area tests in April and May of 2019.
Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, tests were not given in the 2019–2020 school year. Across
the state, there were 2,099,102 tests administered in 2019, with 531,109 of test-takers scoring at
Masters Grade Level standard for an overall state percentage of 25.3%. At NHS, there were 411
tests taken, with 84 of test-takers scoring at the Masters Grade Level standard. The percentage of
NHS’s students who met the Masters Grade Level is 20.4%, which remains well below the
organizational goal of 30% and the state average. This study examined conceptual knowledge of
the importance of rigor and procedural knowledge of incorporating engagement into classroom
lessons.
53
Figure 2
Nadua High School’s Masters Grade Level Performance Compared to the Organizational Goal
and State Average
Teachers Have Conceptual Knowledge of the Importance of Rigor
For NHS’s teachers to identify and apply evidence-based practices for including rigor in
their classrooms, they first need to understand the importance of including rigor in the lessons
they present to their students. This study found that NHS teachers have a clear understanding of
the need to incorporate rigor in their classrooms. This was shown by the survey responses as well
as the findings from interviews. The responses and findings are discussed in detail below.
Survey Results
Figure 3 shows that 19% of the survey respondents believed that instruction should be
centered around problems with clear answers that most students can easily grasp, while 81%
30%
25%
20%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Goal State NHS
Nadua High School Masters Grade Level Percentage Compared to
Organizational Goal and State Average
54
disagreed or strongly disagreed with statements. Most teachers surveyed believed that instruction
should not be centered around problems with clear answers.
Figure 3
Teachers Disagree that Classroom Instruction Should be Built Around Simple Problems
Respondents were much more divided on the importance of teaching facts explicitly.
Forty-four percent of the teachers surveyed agreed that how much a student learns depends
primarily on how much background knowledge the student has in the topic. Not one teacher
strongly agreed with the statement. An additional 44% disagreed with the statement. However,
the final 13% strongly disagreed with the statement. Figure 4 shows the percentage of responses.
The teachers were divided on the importance of background knowledge and fact transmission.
Aggregating the responses shows that 44% agree while 56% disagree or strongly disagree.
0%
19%
75%
6%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
Instruction should be built around problems with clear
answers and around ideas that most students can grasp
quickly.
55
Figure 4
Results of Asking Teachers if Teaching Facts is Necessary
Conversely, all teachers agreed or strongly agreed that students must interact with the
knowledge being taught in order for the learning to be retained. Eighty-one percent of teachers
surveyed agreed that teaching critical thinking skills is necessary for student learning. Nineteen
percent strongly agreed that interacting with the knowledge heavily impacts student learning.
Figure 5 shows that all teachers know the importance of interacting with the knowledge being
presented in the lesson, but some believe in critical thinking skills more strongly than others. As
shown in Figure 6, all teachers agreed, and 31% of them strongly agreed, that teaching critical
thinking skills and reasoning skills is more important than the specific curriculum content taught.
0%
44% 44%
13%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
How much a student learns depends primarily on how
much background knowledge they have in the topic being
taught; that is why teaching facts is so necessary.
56
Figure 5
Results of Asking the Importance of Teaching Critical Thinking Skills
Figure 6
Results of Teaching Critical Thinking Skills Is More Important than Specific Content
19%
81%
0% 0%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
How much a student learns depends predominantly on
how they interact with the knowledge being taught; that is
why teaching critical thinking skills is so necessary.
31%
69%
0% 0%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
Teaching students to think critically and use reasoning
skills are more important than specific curriculum content.
57
Of the teachers surveyed, most believed that their role is to facilitate student inquiry.
Seventy-five percent agreed that their main role in teaching students is to facilitate their learning.
An additional 13% strongly agreed while the remaining 13% disagreed that their role is to
facilitate their students’ own inquiry.
Figure 7
Teacher View of Their Role in Facilitating Inquiry
Interview Findings
Four of six teachers had an understanding of rigor and its importance in lesson design.
Mr. Brown stated, “I don’t know if I have a question I’ve given this year that’s a factual
question.” He goes on to expound on the idea that he is not interested in a student simply
completing the work. He is interested in the student’s presenting quality work. Compliance is not
the goal; learning to the depth of the rigor required is his goal. Ms. Jennings further developed
the construct: “If the kids are being challenged, it is rigorous.” Ms. Stevens stated in her
interview that rigor “means a higher standard, more critical thinking skills, pushing students to
go past just the average.” The other two teachers could not verbalize the importance of rigor.
13%
75%
13%
0%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
My role as a teacher is to facilitate my students' own
inquiry.
58
Their responses were centered around the more difficult courses they teach. Their experience
with rigor was shaped by the inherent difficulty of the curriculum they are tasked with teaching,
in their specific cases, chemistry and accounting.
Summary
The survey results and interview findings correspond with one another. Four of the six
teachers interviewed had an understanding of the importance of rigor, and the majority of
teachers surveyed see the importance of rigor in the lessons they design. Ideally, everyone
surveyed and interviewed would share the same ideals regarding the importance of rigor.
However, there is enough consensus for the assumed knowledge influence to be deemed an asset.
Teacher Require Greater Procedural Knowledge of Incorporating Engagement
Students need lessons to be engaging in order for the lessons to be impactful on learning.
Teachers need to possess the procedural knowledge of how to incorporate engaging practices in
their classrooms. Through surveys and interviews, most NHS teachers demonstrated they possess
the procedural knowledge of incorporating engaging lessons, but a simple majority has not been
determined to be enough for an influence to be deemed an asset.
Survey Results
Respondents were asked four questions regarding what engaging practices look like in a
classroom and their perceived procedural knowledge of incorporating engaging practices. Sixty-
nine percent of teachers responded negatively to the statement, “a quiet classroom is needed for
effective learning.” Most teachers agreed that active and effective learning is not generally a
quiet process. A lecture-style presentation is the passive transfer of knowledge from teacher to
student (Roberts, 2019). Contradicting the belief that a quiet classroom is not an effective
59
learning environment, 81% of respondents identified that they present new topics through lecture
at least once a week.
The respondents answered with conflicting information regarding two additional
questions. Seventy-five percent of the teachers agreed or strongly agreed that effective teachers
demonstrate the correct way to solve a problem. Conversely, 88% of the teachers agreed or
strongly agreed with the statement that students should be allowed to think of solutions to
practical problems themselves before the teacher shows them how they are solved. Upon first
look, the two questions appear to validate each other. However, the phrasing of the questions was
purposefully contradictory; for the influence to be validated, the answers to the two questions
should have had divergent responses. While the responses to the other survey questions showed
validation of the influence, the conflicting answers to the final two questions did not. The
answers to the survey questions were not consistent and show a need in this area. Figure 8 shows
that both questions were answered very similarly.
Figure 8
Results When Asking Teachers if Students Should Answer Independently Versus if Teachers
Should Demonstrate How to Solve a Problem Correctly
13%
75%
6% 6% 6%
69%
25%
0%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
Answering independently vs. Teacher demonstrating the
correct solutions
Students should think of solutions independently.
Teachers should demonstrate the correct way to solve a problem.
60
Interview Findings
Five of the teachers interviewed shared a common belief that student ownership is
imperative for engagement to be incorporated in the classroom. The five teachers in agreement
also spoke of students working through complex problems that do not have singular correct
answers. The teachers identified that, when work is only for a grade, students are not as engaged,
and the work is generally not rigorous.
Ms. Fleming recounted that students are more engaged in her classroom when she allows
them to have ownership over their learning. When she allows students to work through problems
without precise answers, the students utilize critical thinking skills. She believes these complex
problems encourage engagement. Mr. Peake has found this in his agriculture class. He spoke of a
project in his class in which the students were building a trailer. He organized the class so that
there were managers in charge of different aspects. This allowed ownership and peer leaders to
interact with before asking the teacher for additional help to address the obstacle they
encountered. Mr. Peake found that students worked much harder and more diligently when other
students were allowed to be the leaders.
Of the five teachers who self-reported they incorporated engagement in their classroom,
two spoke of the difficulty in giving up control to engage students. They viewed the increase in
engagement to be positively correlated with an increase in student autonomy and control. The
transition of control from teacher to student was uncomfortable for two of the teachers. Ms.
Stevens has found that “giving up a little bit of control and giving them the ownership has made
them more engaged, and they hold something accountable.” The one outlier was, again, Ms.
Stewart. When asked what she had done to get and keep students engaged, her response was, “I
guess not much at this point in time.” Table 5 shows the name of each teacher, whether the
61
teacher believes they incorporate engagement successfully in their classroom, and a quote
demonstrating their incorporation of engagement.
Table 5
Teacher Thoughts on Engagement
Teacher Name Demonstrates Procedural
Knowledge
Quote
Mr. Brown Y “So I do some of those unorthodox things every
once in a while because I want them to try to feel
what is different thought process because
everything that we are is from our perspective.”
Ms. Fleming Y “I think, when you get them to have some
ownership in something, then they are more
engaged.”
Ms. Jennings Y “If I can attempt to appeal to their sense of
humor, a lot of times they’ll at least perk up to try
to be engaged.”
Mr. Peake Y “You learn a lot more hands-on with this stuff.”
Ms. Stevens Y “Giving up a little bit of control and giving them
ownership has made them more engaged.”
Ms. Stewart N “I guess not much at this point in time. I don’t
know.”
Summary
The survey results and interview findings are similar in relation to teachers’ possessing
the procedural knowledge of how to incorporate engagement. Most teachers know what is
needed to integrate engagement into their lessons and classrooms. For some teachers, this is
difficult, as evidenced by the conflicting survey questions and stated apprehension regarding
relinquishing control of students’ learning to the students themselves. For this influence to be
determined to be an asset, 75% of the teachers needed to agree on the surveys and 67% in the
62
interviews. The survey results fell short of that threshold; however, the interview findings
surpassed it. Through surveys, a simple majority of the teachers demonstrated they have the
procedural knowledge of incorporating engaging practices into their classrooms. However, this
simple majority needs to be translated into a larger majority for this to be seen as an asset. At the
time of the study, teachers’ procedural knowledge of incorporating engagement is considered a
need to be addressed at NHS.
Results and Findings for Motivation Causes
There were two influences evaluated in this study related to motivation among teachers.
The first the utility value of designing engagement and rigorous lessons. The second motivation
influence was the teachers’ self-efficacy in terms of believing they are capable of designing
engaging and rigorous lessons. Both of these influences were evaluated through surveys and
interviews. The results are discussed below.
Teachers Possess Utility Value in Incorporating Rigor and Engagement
For teachers to provide engaging and rigorous lessons each day, they must value the
practices and believe these to be effective. This study found that participants see the value in
designing engaging and rigorous lessons.
Survey Results
Three survey questions pertained to the utility value of designing engaging and rigorous
lessons. Teachers overwhelmingly agreed that students must be challenged by the lessons the
teachers design. Ninety-four percent of teachers agreed or strongly agreed that students should be
challenged in every unit they study. All teachers surveyed agreed that students learn the most
when they are engaged in the lesson. Teachers agreed that rigor and engagement separately are
crucial to student learning and success, and 94% of the teachers also agreed that pairing rigor and
63
engagement in the same lesson would allow students to gain an even deeper understanding of the
topic presented. Figure 9 shows the breakdown of responses to incorporating rigor and
engagement in the same lesson.
Figure 9
Breakdown of Responses for the Importance of Rigor and Engagement Simultaneously
Interview Findings
Each of the teachers interviewed verbalized that they valued the utilization of rigor and
engagement in the classroom. One teacher said he does “some of those unorthodox things every
once in a while because I want them to try to feel what is different in their thought process
because everything that we are is from our perspective.” Mr. Brown detailed some very rigorous
and engaging activities he has designed for his U.S. History class. He spoke about the most
engaging and rigorous practices in his classroom, but he still doubted that he was incorporating
the practices to the extent his students needed to be successful. He said, “I found one of my flaws
is I don’t step out of the box sometimes. I tend to go back to what works, and that’s one thing I
31%
63%
6%
0%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
I believe incorporating rigor and engagement in the same
lesson will allow my students to gain a higher
understanding of the topic.
64
have to work on.” While he is very engagement-centered, he wonders if he could do more to
engage his students.
All six teachers interviewed believed there is value in the incorporation of rigor and
engagement. Mr. Brown was the only one who spoke of the temptation to return to the more
traditional and more comfortable. He says he “tends to go back to what works, and that’s one
thing I have to work on.” The one teacher who has answered that rigor cannot be achieved in all
courses spoke of “some new things I’m considering and looking into trying to implement over
the course of the next semester, and seeing if I don’t get better results.” Even Ms. Stewart was
considering trying new and innovative instructional practices in her classroom, which
demonstrates that she values the practice even if lacking in experience and knowledge.
Summary
The teachers who were surveyed and interviewed understand that rigor and engagement
bring value to the classroom. With higher rigor and engagement, instruction is more effective,
and achievement can be higher. While the participants recognize the value, not all were
incorporating rigor and engagement in each lesson to the extent discussed in the procedural
knowledge section. However, there is enough consensus for this influence related to value to be
categorized as an asset.
Teachers Lack Self-Efficacy in Effectively Designing Engaging and Rigorous Lessons
Teachers have to believe that rigor and engagement impact student learning and success,
and they need to believe they are capable of incorporating rigor and engagement into their
lessons. Through surveys and interviews, NHS teachers demonstrated they lack self-efficacy in
terms of effectively designing engaging and rigorous lessons.
65
Survey Results
NHS teachers were asked seven questions related to their self-efficacy regarding their
implementation of rigor and engagement in their lesson design. The study found that all teachers
answered positively to designing rigorous lessons at least once a week as well as to designing
engaging lessons once a week. All teachers believe they are accomplishing the integration of
rigor and engagement separately.
Most respondents agreed they were able to help students believe they can do well in their
class and to keep students on task when working on rigorous assignments (94% in each
instance). Conversely, only 56% of them agreed they are able to motivate students who do not
show interest in their content. Seventy-five percent of NHS teachers believe they are able to get
through to the most difficult students. That means 25% do not have the self-efficacy to believe
they can reach those students. Teachers have the self-efficacy to design rigorous and engaging
lessons and recover after a lesson does not go as planned, but they do not have the self-efficacy
to help students who are not intrinsically motivated to do well. While 56% of the teachers
believe they can motivate students who are not motivated, 44% of them do not believe they can
adequately motivate students. Figures 10 and 11 show the juxtaposition of responses.
66
Figure 10
Overwhelming Positive Belief NHS Teachers Can Help Students Believe They Can Do Well in
Class and Keep Students on Task When Working on Rigorous Assignments
Figure 11
Mixed Results of Helping the Most Difficult Students and Ability to Motivate Students with Low
Intrinsic Motivation
6%
88%
6%
0%
6%
88%
0%
6%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
Teacher Self-Efficacy in Helping Students
I keep students on task when they are working on rigorous assignments.
I help students believe they can do well with their work in my class.
6%
69%
25%
0%
6%
50%
44%
0%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
Teacher Self-Efficacy in Reaching Unmotivated and
Challenging Students
I am often able to get through to the most difficult students.
I am able to motivate students who show low interest in my subject and content.
67
Interview Findings
The NHS teachers who were interviewed were divided in their self-efficacy regarding
incorporating rigor and engagement into their lessons. Three of the teachers had high self-
efficacy, and three had low self-efficacy. A discussion of their interview responses follows.
Two teachers were forthcoming in their lack of confidence in developing engaging and
rigorous lessons. Mr. Peake was honest in his answer: “I failed a lot in Vet Med. I take a step
back and redo it and teach myself better, so I can teach them better.” While his self-efficacy is
low, his answer demonstrates persistence. Ms. Fleming had a similar response when asked if she
was comfortable integrating rigor and engagement: “I am not confident in that yet.” Both
teachers are new to the NHS and have less than five years of cumulative experience in a high
school setting.
The three most experienced teachers are the most self-efficacious. Mr. Brown is so
confident in his ability that he said, “I feel like I’m at the point now that I really think my rigor is
pretty high.” Interestingly, he was also the most unsure of whether he was doing enough to
engage his students, all the while detailing extremely engaging examples of what he does in his
classroom. He believes he can always do more to help his students be successful. When the
researcher asked Ms. Jennings what she needed to incorporate more rigor in her classroom, she
was confident in her ability to incorporate more rigor. All she felt she needed was “time. It’s
always time.” She also felt that would help to incorporate more engagement in her classroom.
Table 6 includes a quote from each teacher interviewed and determines if each demonstrates self-
efficacy in regards to incorporating rigor and engagement in their classroom.
68
Table 6
Teacher Self-Efficacy Related to Incorporating Rigor and Engagement
Teacher Name Demonstrates Teacher
Self-Efficacy
Quote
Mr. Brown Y We did trench warfare for World War I and we
came in and we had 150 wads of paper on each
side. Made the trenches, divided teams, had a
commander. I turned the lights off, put war
sounds with pictures of trench actual black and
white pictures on. Cranked it up loud and I had a
ceasefire period and I said you can go. Open fire.
And there’s a war. If you got hit, you had to lay
where you are. Then I had little short clips of
letters, actual letters that were written from
soldiers from the trenches home. Someone had to
stand up and read what the conditions of the
trenches were and talk about that. I gave them a
debriefing sheet that they had to go through and
talk about what they felt. What would be the
worst aspect? Different things like that to try to
get the feel of what the war was like.
Ms. Fleming N I’m not confident yet, but I feel like in the next
few years, I can start taking pieces that I like from
others and make my own.
Ms. Jennings Y I try to link their individual interests as much as
possible.
Mr. Peake N I failed a lot in Vet Med. Take a step back and
redo it and teach myself better about something.
Ms. Stevens Y Giving up a little bit of control and giving them
the ownership has made them more engaged.
Ms. Stewart N There are some things I’m considering doing and
looking into trying to implement over the course
of the next semester, and seeing if I don’t get
better results.
69
Summary
The survey results and interview findings are very similar regarding teacher self-efficacy.
Most teachers felt they are self-efficacious in incorporating rigor and engagement in their
lessons. Although it is a majority, the percentage is barely a majority. Exactly 50% of the
teachers interviewed have self-efficacy, and 56% of the teachers surveyed believe they can
motivate students who show low interest. Because this area is a simple majority, self-efficacy
should be an area of focus and intervention to transform this need into an asset.
Results and Findings for Organization Causes
The final area of results and findings are organizational causes in relation to
incorporating rigor and engagement in the classroom. Organizational barriers can unwittingly
prohibit the attainment of organizational goals. Inefficient processes or a lack of resources often
create these organizational barriers (Clark & Estes, 2008). The results and findings regarding
culture and climate are discussed below.
NHS Needs to Improve Upon its Emerging Culture of Innovation
Nadua High School teachers must feel administrators support their desire to implement
rigorous and engaging activities and lessons. The school culture must support this endeavor.
Teachers must not feel as if failure is final, and they must be willing to incorporate novel and
authentic activities in their classrooms (Schlechty, 2003). Teachers must feel supported in their
innovative instructional decisions. Administrators must support and cultivate experimentation
and innovation for NHS to excel (Stempfle, 2011). Three survey questions and two interview
questions explored this cultural model of innovation. Teachers are willing to innovate; however,
they do not utilize innovative strategies more than passive lecturing. It is not clear whether they
70
do not feel administrators support their efforts to adjust their instructional practices or if they
hesitate because of an issue not uncovered in this study.
Survey Results
Each of the NHS teachers surveyed reported designing engaging lessons at least once a
week. However, 81% also communicated using lectures at least once a week. Teachers report
using engaging practices often, but they also rely on the passive lecture style at least weekly to
teach students regarding new topics.
All teachers surveyed responded they can adapt quickly when trying when they find a
new and out-of-the-box lesson does not have a positive effect on their students. Teachers feeling
as if they bounce back after failure shows a culture of willingness to innovate. However, the
results are mixed in how much they actually innovate, as the teachers are still employing passive
transfer of knowledge through lecture at least once a week. Figure 12 shows how often teachers
use lecture as a mode of instruction.
Figure 12
Classification of Responses for Teachers Using Lecture in Their Classroom
19%
69%
13%
0%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Less than once a
week
1-2 times a week 3-4 times a week 4+ times a week
Number of times a week NHS teachers use lecture to
present new topics.
71
Interview Findings
As discussed above, all of the teachers surveyed responded that they bounce back when
using innovative strategies in the classroom. Teachers also answered they were using lecture as
well as engaging practices at least once a week. Like the survey results, the interview findings
were mixed. Only four of the six teachers interviewed could detail a time they tried something
new and innovative. In the course of the interviews, Mr. Brown and Ms. Jennings could detail
the myriad of innovative ways they were incorporating rigor and engagement in their lessons.
These two teachers embody the culture of innovation to try new strategies. Mr. Peake and Ms.
Stevens also spoke about different times they tried something other than traditional instructional
practices. Ms. Stevens spoke of transitioning her classes to a flipped model where instruction is
done at home by video or web link rather than in person. She said, “I’m a very traditional lecture,
take notes, go around, but this just met our needs better. Everyone was active at all times.” Ms.
Stevens continued, “I think it’s pushed me as a teacher. It’s expanded my creativity and my
desire to learn, so I think it reflects in my planning, in the organization, and so that will affect the
students.”
The final two teachers could not think of times when they had tried new and
unconventional strategies. Both made a point to say they were allowed to but did not feel
comfortable incorporating new rigorous and engaging activities at this point in their careers. Ms.
Fleming spoke of an activity in which she created a scavenger hunt, but she was afraid to
incorporate other areas of the school in the scavenger hunt and confined it to her classroom. She
spoke about not being brave enough to send them out of her classroom to complete the activity.
72
Summary
The survey results and interview findings were varied. Teachers surveyed felt capable of
trying new and innovative strategies and were supported if those endeavors were not successful
in their first attempt. However, they relied on lecture at least once a week. The interview findings
were also not definitive: 67% of the teachers felt they did try new activities in their classrooms.
The other 33% of the interviewees had previously answered in their survey responses that they
incorporated authentic and novel strategies. When interviewed, they could not expound on those
experiences or give examples of when they occurred. It appears those teachers felt they could
take those chances but were not willing to do so. The mixed results determine that this is an area
of need for NHS.
NHS Does Not Provide Training on Ways to Implement Engaging and Rigorous Lessons
Teacher training and continued professional development are critical to consistent
implementation of engaging and rigorous lessons. All teachers require professional development
to learn new strategies and develop skills to incorporate new strategies to best help their students
succeed. There is a multitude of ways to participate in professional development. Some ways
explored below are through a professional learning community, mentoring relationship,
instructional coaching, visiting peer classrooms, and the traditional professional development
setting. Teachers at NHS are well versed in traditional professional development, but the
professional development sessions are not geared toward engaging and rigorous lesson design
and implementation.
Survey Results
All respondents participated in some form of professional development training; most
were in the form of conferences at the regional service center. Because all teachers participate in
73
professional development, this format could be capitalized on to increase rigor and engagement
in the classroom. In addition to these traditional professional development training sessions, 75%
of the teachers also participated in a professional learning community (PLC). Of the participating
teachers, 83% reported that the PLC has some or a great deal of influence on their instructional
practices. From the experience of NHS teachers, PLCs are the most used and the most valuable
professional development tool that impacts instruction. Figure 13 shows the influence a PLC has
on instruction. PLCs are not always geared toward increasing rigor and engagement in lesson
design but are valued by the teacher in impacting instruction.
Figure 13
Professional Learning Community Influence on Instruction
Other professional development strategies are utilized at NHS in smaller and more
sporadic settings. Five of the teachers surveyed reported participating in a mentoring relationship
with another teacher, and three teachers surveyed participate in instructional coaching. The
teachers participating in these settings all reported that the activity influences their instructional
practices. However, with so few participants in these professional development activities, a
25%
58%
17%
0%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Great deal Some Little None
Professional Learning Community Influence
74
strong conclusion cannot be made on the professional development’s impact on instruction and
implementing engaging and rigorous activities.
Interview Findings
The teachers interviewed were not very talkative about the professional development
activities in which they participated. No teacher reported that the professional development
training was directly related to increasing rigor and engagement in the classroom. Also, none of
the teachers interviewed could expand on how the professional development impacted
instruction after. Ms. Stevens spoke of a national conference she attended; however, she could
not articulate how it impacted her classroom instruction. She said that she felt renewed when she
returned, and it brought back her excitement for teaching, but she did not express that the
conference informed her instructional practices or impacted her incorporation of rigorous or
engaging practices.
Ms. Stewart was more critical of the professional development opportunities at NHS. Ms.
Stewart has taught in several districts across the state and has a broad expanse of experience
from those opportunities. She pointed out that “there’s not a science teacher PLC at all that I’ve
seen in this district or that I’ve been involved with, which I am used to something like that.” She
also asked if “sitting at home with my laptop on my lap looking over what idea that somebody
has done” counted as professional development, as that is the mode of professional development
that she believes is the most beneficial.
Summary
While all teachers have been compliant in attending professional development, they do
not appear to have gained useful information to guide their instructional practices. Specifically,
75
they have not gained new knowledge on how to incorporate rigor and engagement in their
classrooms through daily lessons. This influence is a validated need.
NHS Teachers Need More Support to Visit Classrooms to See Their Peers in Action
To learn new strategies and how to incorporate them, teachers must not work in isolation.
Learning new strategies and talking to other teachers about how to incorporate those strategies is
valued, but seeing those strategies implemented is crucial to implementing the strategies
observed (Schmoker, 2010). While NHS provides the opportunity to visit classrooms, many
teachers do not conduct peer visits.
Survey Results
While previous research has shown that collaboration is key in school improvement
(Chen & Wang, 2015), it has not been a priority at NHS. Only 13% of the respondents have
observed peers’ classrooms within the district. All respondents agreed that the observations
influenced their own instructional practices. Table 7 shows the number of teachers participating
in peer observations and the impact the visits have had on their classrooms.
Table 7
Teachers Participating in Peer Teacher Classroom Visits
Teachers Participating Some Influence on Classroom
Instruction
Great Deal of Influence on
Classroom Instruction
2 1 1
Interview Findings
Only three of the six teachers interviewed shared insight into their experience visiting
peers’ classrooms. Of those three teachers, one physically visited another classroom, but it was
not at NHS. Ms. Fleming connected with a fellow teacher at a school approximately three hours
76
away from NHS. Ms. Fleming observed the classroom and the way the other teacher presented
material and guided students through the lesson:
I went and observed her classroom and, at that point, she didn’t stand up and give a
lesson. Her kids were on their computers. They were working on a project. They were
completing one project, and then started another. It was good to see how that was
working.
She said the experience informed her way of guiding students through the curriculum. While Ms.
Jennings did not have experience visiting other classrooms at NHS, she added, “If I had wanted
to go in and watch the other classes, it wouldn’t be an issue whatsoever.” She spoke of
organically working collaboratively with other teachers. The English teachers problem-solve
together to work out the best solution for their students, but they have not visited one another’s
classrooms.
Summary
The survey results and interview findings are similar. Both show a lack of opportunity to
visit peers’ classrooms. The teachers believe they would be allowed to visit, but there is not a
system to encourage this practice. This influence is determined to be a need.
Summary of Validated Influences
Tables 8, 9, and 10 show the KMO influences for this study and their determination as
assets or needs.
77
Table 8
Knowledge Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data
Assumed Knowledge Influence Asset or Need
Teachers need to understand the importance for high
levels of rigor to be included in their lessons.
Asset
Teachers need to know how to incorporate engaging
practices in their classrooms.
Need
Table 9
Motivation Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data
Assumed Motivation Influence Asset or Need
Utility Value – Teachers need to see the value in
designing engaging and rigorous lessons
Asset
Self-Efficacy – Teachers need to believe they are
capable of effectively designing lessons that are
engaging and rigorous
Need
Table 10
Organization Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data
Assumed Organization Influence Asset or Need
NHS needs a culture of innovation to try new
strategies to incorporate into lesson design.
Need
NHS needs to provide training on ways to implement
engaging and rigorous activities in the classroom.
Need
NHS teachers need the ability to visit teacher’s
classrooms to see their peers in action.
Need
78
Nadua High School teachers know the importance of implementing high levels of rigor in
their lessons and see the value in incorporating rigor and engagement. Teachers need to bolster
their procedural knowledge in incorporating engagement in the classroom as well as increasing
their self-efficacy in designing engaging and rigorous lessons. These two influences can be
addressed through professional development, as will discussed in the next chapter. All three
organizational influences need to be addressed to close the gap.
Interview data suggests that NHS’s culture is in need of targeted improvement as it
pertains to professional development. Teachers would not speak openly about professional
development opportunities. Teachers were asked about their involvement in professional
learning communities, mentoring relationships, instructional coaching, traditional professional
development sessions, and observing peer teacher’s classrooms. The researcher got the
impression that there were not many opportunities for professional development that the teachers
valued. By working on the perception of professional development, teachers might be more
willing to actively participate instead of simply complying with the requirements to attend
professional development.
Professional development at NHS is viewed as the traditional professional development
sessions where teachers receive tools in a lecture format with little interaction between the
presenter and attending teachers. By broadening their perception of professional development to
include other avenues for learning where teachers are able to collaborate and reflect on their
practice teachers may see professional development as a way to grow in their profession instead
of a requirement to maintain their certification.
79
Chapter five will present recommendations for the influences that need support. Five
influences were revealed to be areas of need requiring improvement. The next chapter will
provide recommendations to close the KMO needs that have been found.
80
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS
Chapter Four discussed the determination of the assumed influences as needs or assets.
These influences were validated through survey and interview findings, which were organized
into KMO influences. This chapter will discuss recommendations for each KMO influence need
determined in Chapter Four and will be organized according to the KMO influences. The
recommendations are specific to NHS and are grounded in research. Following the
recommendations, the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) will be
discussed. This model is the basis for implementation and evaluation when incorporating the
recommendations and changes at NHS based on this study's results and findings. The use of the
New World Kirkpatrick Model allows administrators to determine if the recommendations are
being implemented and provide the change desired in incorporating increased rigor and
engagement in each teacher’s classroom.
Knowledge Recommendation
The revised Bloom’s taxonomy (Krathwohl, 2002) framed the assumed knowledge
influences for this study. Krathwohl (2002) restructured Bloom’s taxonomy into a pyramid of
knowledge types organized into three knowledge types: declarative knowledge, including factual
and conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge and metacognitive knowledge. This study
explored gaps in declarative knowledge and procedural knowledge.
Results did not reveal a need to increase teachers’ declarative knowledge of the
importance of high levels of rigor. However, there was a need to increase teachers’ procedural
knowledge regarding incorporating engaging practices. Table 11 presents the assigned
knowledge influences and the validation of each influence through surveys and interviews. One
81
assumed knowledge influence was validated, and recommendations were developed to address
the knowledge influence.
Table 11
Summary of Knowledge Influence and Recommendations
Knowledge Influence Principle and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Teachers do not know how
to incorporate engaging
practices in their
classrooms. (Procedural)
To develop mastery, individuals
must acquire component skills,
practice integrating them, and
know when to apply what they
have learned (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Provide training to clarify
Schlechty Design Qualities
that will be used to enhance
the implementation of
engaging practices in
classrooms.
The data showed that participants do not know how to incorporate successful engaging
practices in their classrooms. For teachers to gain this needed procedural knowledge, they must
acquire individual skills, integrate them, and determine how and when to apply them (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006). When incorporated, the 10 design qualities discussed in Chapter Two could
increase students’ engagement (Schlechty, 2003). These design qualities are content and
substance, product focus, organization of knowledge, clear and compelling product standards,
protection from adverse consequences for initial failure, affiliation, affirmation, choice, novelty
and variety, and authenticity. The recommendation is for NHS to provide training to clarify how
to consistently integrate these design qualities.
The lack of procedural knowledge of incorporating engaging practices in lesson design
can be life-altering for students. Cooper (2014) surveyed more than 275,000 high school students
and found that 65% were bored in at least one class at school each day while 16% said they were
bored in every class. Students form academic habits in high school; this greatly impacts their
attitude toward education throughout their lives (Cooper, 2014). If students are disengaged in
their classes, they are more likely to have lower standardized test scores and attendance rates as
82
well as higher dropout rates (Early et al., 2014). It is critical to implement engaging practices in
high schools to combat the negative consequences of classroom disengagement (Cooper, 2014).
Motivation Recommendation
Rueda (2011) stated that, to be motivated, one must actively choose the activity, persist in
the activity, and provide the appropriate amount of effort to complete the activity. Self-efficacy
was studied and subsequently validated as a construct to be prioritized and targeted for
organizational improvement. Utility value was not validated as a need among teachers in this
study. Participants do not believe they are capable of effectively designing engaging and rigorous
lessons. Table 12 suggests recommendations for addressing the motivational influence of self-
efficacy.
Table 12
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Motivation
Influence
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific Recommendation
Self-Efficacy:
Teachers do not believe they
are capable of effectively
designing lessons that are
engaging and rigorous
Learning and
motivation
are enhanced
when
learners have
positive
expectancies
for success
(Pajares,
2006).
Provide professional development with input,
practice, and targeted feedback that guides
teachers toward the successful design of
engaging and rigorous lessons.
When teachers believe themselves capable of completing a task, they are self-efficacious
(Holzberger et al., 2013). This self-efficacy is a building block of motivation (Pajares, 2006).
The data showed participants do not believe themselves capable of effectively designing
engaging and rigorous daily lessons. This is imperative for success in the classroom; learners’
83
positive expectations enhance learning and motivation (Pajares, 2006). The recommendation to
combat this lack of self-efficacy is to provide teachers at NHS professional development with
input, practice, and targeted feedback on designing engaging and rigorous lessons.
Teacher self-efficacy greatly impacts teacher effectiveness and, therefore, student
achievement (Sehgal et al., 2017). Teachers with high self-efficacy beliefs also have higher
levels of instructional quality than teachers with lower self-efficacy beliefs (Holzberger et al.,
2013). These self-efficacious teachers believe they are capable of designing more complex and
intricate lessons. When teachers are more self-efficacious, they are willing to learn new
strategies to design lessons for increased engagement and rigor and further raise their self-
efficacy to, in turn, attempt even more new and innovative strategies (Holzberger et al., 2013;
Sehgal et al., 2017).
Organization Recommendations
An organization’s cultural models and settings must align with each other and with the
organization’s mission and goals. The cultural model influence examined in this study was a
culture of innovation to try new strategies. Two cultural settings were also analyzed: professional
development opportunities and ability to observe peer teachers in their classrooms. All three
organizational influences were validated as needs. Table 13 shows the assumed organizational
influences that were validated and given priority. Each cultural model and setting yielded a
recommendation to support it and alleviate the disconnect between practice and the needed
change.
84
Table 13
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed
Organization
Influence
Principle and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
NHS needs a
culture of
innovation to try
new strategies to
incorporate into
lesson design.
Leaders can create an effective
accountability system when they
engage in the challenging but
necessary process of analyzing the
complex social and political
elements within an organization.
School leadership is an important
factor in building capacity and
student achievement (Waters et al.,
2003).
NHS administrators need to
allow flexibility in the daily
requirements for a teacher.
Encourage experimentation and
innovation in the classroom.
NHS needs to
provide training on
ways to implement
engaging and
rigorous activities
in the classroom.
Effective leaders provide ongoing
professional development to
facilitate teachers acquiring new
knowledge (Melesse & Gulie,
2019)
Provide professional
development that specifically
focuses on rigorous and engaging
instructional strategies.
NHS’s teachers
need the ability to
see their peers in
action.
Effective leaders share power
appropriately. They consider equity
in the process of allocating
resources (Johnson, 2006).
Establish a collaborative work
environment by providing time
for teachers to visit classrooms
and learn from each other
through professional learning
communities as well as visiting
classrooms in an Instructional
Round setting.
Cultivate a Culture of Innovation Through Encouraging Experimentation in Lesson Design
NHS needs a culture of innovation to be willing to try new strategies for lesson design.
Leaders can create an effective accountability system when they engage in the challenging but
necessary process of analyzing an organization’s complex social and political elements. School
leadership is an important factor in building capacity and student achievement (Waters et al.,
2003). The recommendation is for administrators at NHS to allow flexibility in teachers’ daily
85
requirements. Additionally, NHS needs to encourage teacher experimentation and innovation in
the classroom.
Creating a culture of innovation is crucial to an organization’s success (Stempfle, 2011).
Effective teaching is a continuous iteration of experimentation and growth gleaned from
innovation (Lee & Li, 2015). However, innovation brings about anxiety and pressure (Chen &
Wang, 2015); therefore, the culture at NHS needs to be adapted to create a safe space for
teachers to feel comfortable to innovate and attempt to incorporate new instructional strategies.
When teachers are not innovative or able to implement engaging strategies, students’ results are
limited to the lower levels on Bloom’s Taxonomy (Lee & Li, 2015). To reach the higher levels
of rigor at the create, evaluate, and analyze levels, teachers must vary the strategies to
incorporate engaging instruction.
Provide Professional Development to Incorporate Rigor and Engagement
NHS needs to provide resources for specific training on implementing engaging and
rigorous lessons. Teachers' quality is the highest determining factor of student success; therefore,
teachers must continually acquire new knowledge (Melesse & Gulie, 2019). The
recommendation is for NHS administrators to provide professional development on
incorporating rigorous and engaging instructional strategies.
Valuing professional development is essential to teachers’ growth (Hilton et al., 2015)
and must be regarded as an important aspect of the culture at NHS. Professional development is
necessary to properly train teachers in implementing engaging practices and incorporating
rigorous lessons. Professional development provides the resources teachers need to complete
their jobs, which, in turn, creates productive and successful students and schools (Buckingham &
Coffman, 1999). There are many avenues by which to participate in professional development.
86
Any activity that affects teacher knowledge and instructional as well as student learning
outcomes are subsequently improved is professional development (Darling-Hammond et al.,
2009). Professional development includes the traditional one-day workshop format as well
ongoing professional learning communities. Professional development is most effective when it
is collaborative, collegial, and ongoing (Darling-Hammond et al., 2009). When teachers receive
effective professional development, they continue to evolve and develop, which creates school
change and improves student learning (Chen & Wang, 2015). Because professional development
is costly and requires the scarce resource of time, it must be supported and encouraged by
administrators (Buckingham & Coffman, 1999).
The academic calendar at NHS has staff development days distributed throughout the
year; therefore, adequate time is allocated to implement the needed professional development
recommended without adding additional time to the teachers’ day. The professional development
sessions can be varied in their format and facilitator but all must have a goal of teacher growth
and increased experimentation in the classroom (Hilton et al., 2015). Nadua High School
teachers are accustomed to spending time each summer attending professional development
sessions, but these sessions need to be geared toward incorporating increased rigor and
engagement in their lessons. These sessions also need to be scattered throughout the school year
when the strategies learned can be implemented and change enacted during the school year
(Hilton et al., 2015).
Encourage and Facilitate Peer Visits
NHS teachers need to see their peers in action. Effective leaders consider equity in the
process of allocating resources (Johnson, 2006). The recommendation is to establish a
collaborative work environment by providing time for teachers to visit other classrooms and
87
learn from each other by collaborating through professional learning communities as well as
visiting classrooms in an instructional round setting.
Teachers of standardized tested subjects are more prone to working in isolation than
teachers outside of standardized tested subjects (Chen & Wang, 2015). However, teachers can
only reach their highest potential when they have time to interact with others and not isolate
themselves (Lee & Li, 2015). Improvement occurs when there is a continuous flow of external
information that creates a conflict regarding previously held ideas (Stempfle, 2011). In their
peers’ classrooms, teachers can observe engaging practices and rigorous lessons.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
The implementation and evaluation plan used to incorporate this study's suggestions is
the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The original Kirkpatrick
model defines four levels of evaluating training programs. These levels are reaction, learning,
transfer, and results, in that order. The updated model reverses the order to begin with the results
of the training in mind, which are termed Level 4. These results must include leading indicators
that measure the progression of the training results. Level 3 focuses on the participant’s
application of the behavior learned in training. Level 2 measures the increase in the participant’s
knowledge, skill, and motivation resulting from the training. Level 1 is the simplest; it measures
the participant’s satisfaction with the training (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). By using the
New World Kirkpatrick Model, the training is designed with the results in mind and tied to a
change in performance and results.
Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations
Nadua High School’s mission is to turn passive learners into active and engaged learners
to optimize their knowledge and skills to be successful after completing their formal education.
88
Teachers at NHS are tasked with providing students engaging and rigorous lessons daily. This
stakeholder goal is critical for students learning at their highest level and subsequently reaching
their highest potential after high school. The proposed solution of a comprehensive teacher
training program, increased teacher collaboration through professional learning communities,
and peer classroom visits should increase rigor and engagement in the classroom. This increase
is critical in turning passive learners into active and engaged learners.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Table 14 outlines the Level 4 outcomes, metrics, and methods for external and internal
outcomes to be implemented after this study. If the internal outcomes are achieved, the external
outcomes will subsequently be met.
Table 14
Outcomes, Metrics and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
Increased college
readiness rates.
The percentage of students
successfully completing
their freshman year of
college.
Survey former students after their
freshman year of college.
Improved community
perception of
effectiveness of NHS.
Increased enrollment.
Comparison of enrollment numbers
from year to year, including transfer
students retained and lost.
Internal Outcomes
Increased engaging
activities designed for
student participation.
Number of lessons created
by teachers with increased
engagement.
Classroom observations and grade
book audits showing less book work
and higher number of projects.
Increased focus on
incorporating rigorous
activities to promote
student learning.
Number of teachers
incorporating high levels
of rigor in their classroom
daily.
Administrators review lesson plans
to assess the level which teachers
are incorporating high levels of
rigor in the classroom.
Level 3: Behavior
Critical Behaviors
89
The stakeholders of focus are the teachers at NHS. The first critical behavior is that they
will understand the impact that rigor and engagement in the classroom have on student success.
The second critical behavior is that they will incorporate a variety of engaging activities in the
classroom. The third critical behavior is that they will evaluate their ability to incorporate rigor
and engagement in the classroom. While the stakeholders of focus are the teachers, the
administrative team must work alongside the teachers to encourage implementation of rigor and
engagement in the classroom. The administrative team of the principal and assistant principal is
tasked with monitoring lesson plans to ensure they contain the elements of rigor and
engagement. Table 15 lists the specific metrics, methods, and timing for each of these outcome
behaviors.
Table 15
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
1. Teachers
demonstrate an
understanding of the
impact rigor and
engagement in the
classroom has on
student success.
Number of teachers
who successfully
complete professional
development session
on the impact of rigor
and engagement in
the classroom.
Track the number of
teachers attending a
professional
development session
concerning the
impact of rigor and
engagement in the
classroom.
Complete the
professional
development session
as a part of new
teacher orientation at
NHS with updated
training during each
school year.
2. Teachers
incorporate a variety
of engaging activities
in the classroom.
Number of teachers
who achieve targeted
number of different
engaging activities in
the classroom.
Track the number of
engaging activities
utilized by teachers in
the classroom
through lesson plans.
Admin to review
lesson plans monthly.
3. Teachers evaluate
their ability to
incorporate rigor and
engagement in the
classroom.
Number of teachers
who participate in
self-assessment
instrument to assess
their ability to
incorporate rigor and
engagement in the
classroom.
Track the number of
teachers participating
in annual professional
development that
includes a self-
assessment
component for
teachers.
Annually during the
professional
development week
prior to the beginning
of the school year.
90
Required Drivers
Teachers require the support of the administrators at NHS to successfully apply new
information and implement strategies learned in professional development to support and sustain
critical behaviors over time. These critical behaviors will require a combination of organizational
drivers to reinforce, encourage, and reward as well as an accountability system to monitor and
ensure new behaviors are applied and maintained. Table 16 shows the recommended drivers to
support the teachers’ critical behaviors for incorporating higher levels of rigor and engagement.
Table 16
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical
Behaviors
Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Reinforcing
Provide information in the form of pamphlets
educating teachers of the impact of
implementing high levels of rigor in the
classroom.
Beginning of each six
weeks grading period
1
Provide training to clarify Schlechty Design
Qualities that will be used to enhance the
implementation of engaging practices in
classrooms.
Each semester 1, 2, 3
Encouraging
Provide professional development addressing
the importance and impact that designing
engaging and rigorous lessons can have on
students’ learning.
Throughout the school year
during planned
professional development
days.
1, 2, 3
Encourage experimentation and innovation in
the classroom.
Ongoing 2
Rewarding
Increase recognition of those teachers that are
influential in the process.
Ongoing 3
Monitoring
NHS administrators need to allow flexibility in
the daily requirements for a teacher.
Ongoing 2
91
Method(s) Timing
Critical
Behaviors
Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Monitoring
Provide opportunities through Campus Improvement Teams and
District Improvement Teams for teachers to be influential in
creating and adapting the organizational goals and mission.
Quarterly 1, 2, 3
Establish a collaborative work environment by providing time for
teachers to visit classrooms and learn from each other by
collaborating through professional learning communities as well
as visiting classrooms in an instructional round setting.
Ongoing 2
Organizational Support
To support the implementation of teachers’ critical behaviors, NHS will prioritize
ongoing professional development activities that emphasize the importance of rigorous and
engaging activities. NHS will also incorporate professional learning communities and
Instructional Rounds to gain experience implementing rigorous and engaging activities.
Additionally, teachers will be provided more opportunities for input in the change process by
being more active participants in the Campus Improvement Teams and District Improvement
Teams. The support of NHS administrators is crucial for real change to be realized when
increasing levels of rigor and engagement in the classroom. For the administrators to actively
support the teachers in increasing rigor and engagement, they must also be well versed in rigor
and engaging instructional practices. Administrators must attend professional development
sessions geared toward rigor and engagement before they can support and guide teachers in their
implementation of increased rigor and engagement.
Level 2: Learning
Learning Goals
Following the completion of the recommended solutions, teachers will be able to do the
following:
92
1. Understand the importance of high levels of rigor to be included in their lessons, (D)
2. Incorporate engaging practices in their classrooms, (P)
3. See the value in designing engaging lessons, (Value)
4. See the value in designing rigorous lessons, (Value)
5. Indicate confidence in effectively designing engaging and rigorous lessons,
(Confidence)
6. Integrate new and innovative strategies in the classroom, (P)
7. Implement standards of high expectations for lesson design, (M)
8. Implement engaging and rigorous activities in the classroom, (P)
9. Teacher’s classroom to see rigorous and engaging practices implemented in a
classroom setting. (M)
Program
The learning goals will be achieved with a comprehensive training program targeting the
implementation of various instructional practices that positively impact rigor and engagement in
the classroom. The training program will include pamphlets, professional development sessions
throughout the year, a program to encourage experimentation in the classroom, a program to
provide recognition, and opportunities to participate in campus improvement teams and observe
other teachers while teaching.
During the in-service week prior to the beginning of school, teachers will be provided
with pamphlets educating them on the impact of implementing high levels of rigor in the
classroom. The week of in-service also allows for training regarding the Schlechty Design
Qualities. This training presents insights into the importance of engaging practices as well as
provides tools for the successful implementation of engaging practices. Subsequently, a portion
93
of the information provided in the pamphlets and training will be emphasized during each of the
professional development days during the school year. This emphasis allows for the information
to be reviewed in smaller increments throughout the year and remain at the forefront of the
teacher’s minds when designing lessons.
Throughout the year, teachers will be encouraged to experiment and innovate in their
classrooms. Teachers will be encouraged to share their experiments and innovations at monthly
faculty meetings. Teachers will also be recognized for being influential in the experimentation
and innovation of their classrooms. For these professional development activities to be
successful, administrators must support the activities by providing flexibility in the teachers’
schedules. Administrators need to encourage and support a collaborative work environment by
providing time for teachers to visit their peers’ classrooms, so they can learn from each other and
their practices.
Evaluation of the Components of Learning
The teachers participating in the professional development plan must acquire the
necessary declarative knowledge before it can be applied to solve a problem. During the
professional development activities, it is crucial to include declarative and procedural
knowledge. The teachers also need to value the training as important to the work they do in their
classrooms. This professional development is critical to build their confidence in applying the
knowledge and skills to be successful in implementing rigor and engagement in the classroom.
Table 17 shows the methods and activities used to evaluate the components of learning.
94
Table 17
Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program
Methods or Activities Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”
Knowledge checks using brief quizzes. After the introduction of the pamphlets as well
as at the end of each professional development
day throughout the school year.
Knowledge checks through pair and small
group discussion.
Periodically during the initial in-service week
before the beginning of school as well as during
each professional development day throughout
the school year.
Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”
Pre-assessment and post-assessment to
measure increased competence.
First day of in-service and at the end of the in-
service week.
Model the skills learned. During in-service week.
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Pre-assessment and post-assessment to
measure task value.
First day of in-service and at the end of the in-
service week.
Track participation of peer classroom
observations.
Ongoing.
Observation of teachers’ statements and
actions demonstrating whether they see the
benefit of what they are being asked to do
on the job.
During the beginning of school professional
development week.
Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”
Survey using scaled items regarding
confidence in applying new skill on the job.
At the end of the in-service week.
Discussion with teachers. Ongoing.
Pre-assessment and post-assessment to
measure confidence.
First day of in-service and at the end of the in-
service week.
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”
Pre-assessment and post-assessment to
measure commitment.
First day of in-service and at the end of the in-
service week.
Create an individual action plan as well as
goals for the faculty as a whole.
During in-service and monitor throughout the
professional development days throughout the
school year.
Level 1: Reaction
Immediately after professional development takes place, it is necessary to determine if
the learners deem the program’s quality worthwhile by receiving feedback. The evaluation of the
professional development program aims to measure the session’s engagement and relevance as
95
well as the participants’ customer satisfaction (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). These
evaluation methods can be performed in a formative fashion to inform instruction or in a
summative fashion to evaluate the professional development session at the completion of the
session and subsequently inform changes. Table 18 shows the method reactions will be measured
and the time of those measurements.
Table 18
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Methods or Tools Timing
Engagement
Percentage of teachers who complete all professional
development activities
Post-program
Observation by instructor During each professional
development session
Attendance During each professional
development session
Professional development evaluation At the end of each professional
development session
Relevance
Brief pulse-check with participants During each professional
development session
Discussion with participants During each professional
development session
Methods or Tools Timing
Relevance
Course evaluation At the end of each professional development session
Customer Satisfaction
Discussion with participants At the end of each professional development session
Course evaluation At the end of each professional development session
Evaluation Tools
Immediately Following the Program Implementation
Teachers will be asked for their input regarding the training after each session throughout
the school year. Electronic surveys will be distributed through email after each session. These
surveys will measure the Level 1 interest in the content, relevance to their assignment, and
96
satisfaction regarding the training. The surveys will also measure Level 2 learning with questions
regarding the declarative and procedural knowledge gained from the training. Also included in
the Level 2 evaluation are the teacher participant’s attitude, confidence, and commitment. The
survey that will be distributed to the participants can be found in Appendix D.
Attendance will be tracked during the live professional development sessions, and
teachers will be observed by the instructor to determine their Level 1 engagement. Teachers will
also participate in pulse-checks and be led in discussions to measure the Level 1 relevance of the
session to their current assignment. Level 2 knowledge will be measured by discussions and
activities in which teachers participate during the professional development sessions. Teachers’
attitudes, confidence, and commitment will be monitored by instructor observation of teacher
participants.
Delayed for a Period After the Program Implementation
The administrators at NHS will send a survey of Likert-style questions as well as open-
ended questions to all teacher participants at the end of the school year, which corresponds to the
end of the training cycle. The goal of this survey is to examine all four evaluation levels
presented by Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016). Teacher participants will be asked if the
training was relevant to their assignment (Level 1). Level 2 will be addressed by questions
regarding whether the training increased their declarative and procedural knowledge and
enhanced their attitude, confidence, and commitment to providing increased rigor and
engagement in the classroom. Questions will be asked regarding the training’s application to
their classroom practices to gauge the impact of Level 3 critical behaviors. Level 4 will be
evaluated with questions aimed at determining the extent to which increased rigor and
engagement increase student success. The survey instrument is found in Appendix E.
97
Data Analysis and Reporting
The goal of Level 4 is for teachers to increase rigorous and engaging activities in the
classroom. The findings of the evaluations will be reviewed after each professional development
session. Table 19 provides a sample of a dashboard that will be used to track progress toward the
Level 4 goals.
Table 19
Sample Dashboard
Metric Target Actual
Rigorous lessons are presented to students each day. 100% 100%
Engaging activities are available to students each day. 100% 100%
Students are achieving at the Masters Grade Level of the STAAR test. 30% 28%
Summary
The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) was used to
develop this study’s recommended solutions for NHS to achieve its goal of providing rigorous
and engaging activities each day in each classroom. This framework is effective when evaluating
the professional development activities because it focuses on four levels of evaluation. The New
World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) begins its evaluation by determining
the results required for improvement and moves to what behaviors are needed to accomplish the
results. The behavior is followed by what learning is required to change the behavior. The last
level is how the professional development participants react to the professional development
activities. All four of these levels can be assessed during the professional development program.
By continually assessing using all four levels, the professional development program can be
adapted to ensure its success.
98
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach
Any methodological approach chosen brings strengths and weaknesses with it. Clark and
Estes’s (2008) gap analysis framework was used as the framework for this study. This allowed a
multifaceted look at all areas of NHS. Gaps in KMO influences were assessed and evaluated.
The identification of gaps was subsequently followed by identifying research-based solutions to
fill those gaps to incorporate rigor and engagement in the classroom.
A weakness of the study is that NHS is a small, rural school; the school's unique makeup
does not fit most school settings. Because of this, the results are not easily transferable to
additional schools and contexts. Because of the fast-paced and ever-changing landscape of
education, it is unknown if the entire suite of recommendations will be implemented or if they
will be implemented with fidelity. An additional weakness of this study was the questions asked
associated with the organizational gaps. Reworking the survey and interview questions to include
additional items relating to professional development geared specifically toward rigor and
engagement would allow for a more robust discussion and potentially additional
recommendations.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations are elements of the study that are not within the control of the researcher,
while the delimitations are the restraints of the study that the researcher has chosen (Simon,
2011). This study design produced some limitations to the data. First and foremost is the sample
size. The sample was small because of the size of the school. There are 27 teachers at NHS, and
a mere 20 responded to the survey. This gives a response rate of 74%. Of the 27 teachers, six
were interviewed to provide greater insights; however, this gives way to another limitation of the
study.
99
Honesty is crucial in surveys and interviews. Before beginning the survey and the
interview, the respondents were assured the survey and interview would remain anonymous and
that there would be no threat of reprisal for answers from the survey or interview. Respondents’
answers could have been simply what they believed the researcher was looking for rather than
their honest answers. Because of the specificity of the site, the results are not generalizable to
other high schools. The study was generated specifically for the accomplishment of the specific
mission and goals of NHS and is not generalizable to the greater high school setting.
The principal delimitation impacting this study was the available sample due to the study
site selected. When deciding on a topic and place to research, it was decided to research at a
school that was similar in size and demographics to the school in which the researcher works.
This delimitation allowed the researcher to translate the findings and, therefore, the
recommendations to her school. The demographics of the chosen school are another delimitation,
as a small, rural school is not as prevalent in number as a larger, more urban school. Therefore,
the findings are not easily translatable to a larger setting with more diverse demographics. Each
school setting provides different resources, and recommendations cannot be translated
effectively from the rural setting to an urban setting or vice versa without sweeping changes in
implementation.
Future Research
Recommendations for future research are based on the limitations and delimitations of
this study. The first recommendation is to extend this study to area schools similar to NHS.
Multiple area schools are similar in size and demographics to NHS. Extending the study to these
schools would allow a larger sample and provide additional perspectives on rigor and
engagement.
100
It would be valuable to continue the research at NHS after the suggested
recommendations are implemented. This additional research would determine if there was
increased rigor and engagement in lesson design. The nature of a school invites turnover in the
faculty. Extending the research to show any differences in new faculty versus tenured faculty
could illustrate interesting distinctions. Having a prolonged study could highlight cultural models
and settings that have become engrained in the fabric of NHS by passing down the importance of
rigor and engagement to new hires.
Conclusion
Nadua High School sets out each day to engage students and teachers in the learning
process. Students who are not engaged in the learning process and are not challenged at a high
level of rigor do not develop the skills needed to become lifelong learners. This study sought to
determine the knowledge, motivation, and organization gaps in incorporating rigor and
engagement in lesson design as well as provide recommendations to needs identified through the
course of this study. Gaps were found in teachers’ procedural knowledge of incorporating
engaging practices, believing they are self-efficacious in effectively designing engaging and
rigorous lessons. Gaps were also found in a lack of a culture of innovation, professional
development offerings, and opportunities to learn from peer classroom visits.
Recommendations were presented to close the gaps found. Rigor and engagement are
important to prepare students for the world after high school. Filling these gaps is critical to the
success of students at NHS and elsewhere. To bridge the five gaps, the recommendation is to
provide professional development that can bolster procedural knowledge, increase self-efficacy,
and demonstrate how to incorporate rigor and engagement. In addition to professional
development, a culture of innovation needs to be cultivated, and administrators must encourage
101
and facilitate peer classroom visits. Each of these recommendations was found to increase rigor
and engagement in the classroom through research.
The areas of need above must be addressed and corresponding gaps filled to reach the
stakeholder goal of teachers providing rigorous and engaging lessons daily, the organizational
goal of achieving mastery on a test, and the overarching goal of educators that is instilling in
their students the passion and drive needed for them to become lifelong learners. If we allow
students to be challenged to their maximum potential and fulfill their innate need for mastery, we
fulfill our purpose as educators.
102
REFERENCES
Anjur, S. S. (2011). Student-centered physiology in high schools. Advances in Physiology
Education, 35(2), 161–167. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00076.2010
Baines, L. (2006). Does Horace Mann still matter? Educational Horizons, 84(4), 268–275.
Balker, B. (2015). Defining an empowering school culture (ESC): Teacher perceptions. Issues in
Educational Research, 25(3), 205–225.
Bircan, H., & Sungur, S. (2016). The role of motivation and cognitive engagement in science
achievement. Science Education International, 27(4), 509–529.
Blakely, B. J. (2015). Pedagogical technology experiences of successful late-career faculty.
College Teaching, 63(4), 146–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2015.1049243
Buckingham, M., & Coffman, C. (1999). First break all the rules. Simon and Schuster.
Carrabba, C., & Farmer, A. (2018). The impact of project-based learning and direct instruction
on the motivation and engagement of middle school students. Language Teaching and
Educational Research, 1(2), 163–174.
Chen, P., & Wang, T. (2015). Exploring the evolution of a teacher professional learning
community: A longitudinal case study at a Taiwanese high school. Teacher Development,
19(4), 427–444. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2015.1050527
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Information Age.
Conley, D. T. (2011). Building on the common core. Educational Leadership, 68(6), 16–20.
Cooper, K. S. (2014). Eliciting engagement in the high school classroom: A mixed-methods
examination of teaching practices. American Educational Research Journal, 51(2), 363–
402. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831213507973
103
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. SAGE.
Darling-Hammond, L., Wei, R.C., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009).
Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development
in the United States and abroad. National Staff Development Council.
Denler, H., Wolters, C., & Benzon, M. (2006). Social cognitive theory.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/social-cognitive-theory/
Draeger, J., del Prado Hill, P., Hunter, L. R., & Mahler, R. (2013). The anatomy of academic
rigor: The story of one institutional journey. Innovative Higher Education, 38(4), 267–
279. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-012-9246-8
Droms, L. (2013). The effects of interactive note-taking on increasing rigor and student
achievement for high-school foreign language. In P. B. Swanson & K. Hoyt (Eds.),
Dimension 2013 (pp. 59–73). Southern Conference on Language Teaching.
Early, D. M., Rogge, R. D., & Deci, E. L. (2014). Engagement, alignment, and rigor as vital
signs of high-quality instruction: A classroom visit protocol for instructional
improvement and research. High School Journal, 97(4), 219–239.
https://doi.org/10.1353/hsj.2014.0008
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/
Edwards, S. (2015). Active learning in the middle grades classroom: Overcoming the Barriers to
Implementation. Middle Grades Research Journal, 10(1), 65–81.
Fata-Hartley, C. (2011). Resisting rote: The importance of active learning for all course learning
objectives. Journal of College Science Teaching, 40(3), 36–39.
104
Fine, S. M. (2014). “A slow revolution”: Toward a theory of intellectual playfulness in high
school classrooms. Harvard Educational Review, 84(1), 1–23.
https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.84.1.qtr193464843n334
Francis, C. (2018). Academic Rigor in the College Classroom: Two Federal Commissions Strive
to Define Rigor in the Past 70 Years. New Directions for Higher Education, 2018(181),
25–34.
Freeman, S., O’Connor, E., Parks, J. W., Cunningham, M., Hurley, D., Haak, D., Dirks, C., &
Wenderoth, M. P. (2007). Prescribed active learning increases performance in
introductory biology. CBE Life Sciences Education, 6(2), 132–139.
https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.06-09-0194
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3601_5
Garrison, M. J. (2009). A measure of failure: The political origins of standardized testing. SUNY
Press.
Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.). Pearson.
Gordon, M. E., & Palmon, O. (2010). Spare the rigor, spoil the learning. Academe, 96(4), 25–27.
Gredler, M. E. (2009). Hiding in plain sight: The stages of mastery/self-regulation in Vygotsky’s
cultural-historical theory. Educational Psychologist, 44(1), 1–19.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520802616259
Haidet, P., Morgan, R. O., O’Malley, K., Moran, B. J., & Richards, B. F. (2004). A controlled
trial of active versus passive learning strategies in a large group setting. Advances in
105
Health Sciences Education : Theory and Practice, 9(1), 15–27.
https://doi.org/10.1023/B:AHSE.0000012213.62043.45
Han, J., & Yin, H. (2016). Teacher motivation: Definition, research development and
implications for teachers. Cogent Education, 3(1).
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186x.2016.1217819
Harding, J. (2013). Qualitative data analysis from start to finish. SAGE.
Hess, K. K., Jones, B. S., Carlock, D., & Walkup, J. R. (2009). Cognitive rigor: Blending the
strengths of Bloom’s taxonomy and Webb’s depth of knowledge to enhance classroom-
level processes. (ED517804). ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED517804.pdf
Hightower, S. (2014). Effect of Active learning on students' academic success in the medical
classroom (Publication No. 3613711) [Doctoral dissertation, Walden University].
ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
Hilton, A., Hilton, G., Dole, S., & Goos, M. (2015). School leaders as participants in teachers’
professional development: The impact on teachers’ and school leaders’ professional
growth. The Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(12).
https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2015v40n12.8
Holzberger, D., Philipp, A., & Kunter, M. (2013). How teachers’ self-efficacy is related to
instructional quality: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3),
774–786. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032198
Hsu, Y. (2008). Learning about seasons in a technologically enhanced environment: The impact
of teacher-guided and student-centered instructional approaches on the process of
students’ conceptual change. Science Education, 92(2), 320–344.
https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20242
106
Huddleston, A. P., & Rockwell, E. C. (2015). Assessment for the masses: A historical critique of
high-stakes testing in reading. Texas Journal of Literacy Education, 3(1), 38–49.
James, L. (2016). Mathematics awareness through technology, teamwork, engagement, and
rigor. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching, 5(2), 55–62.
https://doi.org/10.5430/jct.v5n2p55
Johnson, A. (2006). Privilege, power, and difference. McGraw Hill.
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation.
ATD Press.
Kirschner, P., Kirschner, F., & Paas, F. (2006). Cognitive load theory.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/cognitive-load-theory/
Kortering, L. J., & Christenson, S. (2009). Engaging students in school and learning: The real
deal for school completion. Exceptionality, 17(1), 5–15.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09362830802590102
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice,
41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Lee, H., & Li, M. F. (2015). Principal leadership and its link to the development of a school’s
teacher culture and teaching effectiveness: A case study of an award-winning teaching
team at an elementary school. International Journal of Education Policy and Leadership,
10(4). https://doi.org/10.22230/ijepl.2015v10n4a555
Lee, V. E., & Ready, D. D. (2009). U.S. high school curriculum: Three phases of contemporary
research and reform. The Future of Children, 19 (1), 135–156.
https://doi.org/10.1353/foc.0.0028
107
MacNeil, A. J., Prater, D. L., & Busch, S. (2009). The effects of school culture and climate on
student achievement. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 12(1), 73–84.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13603120701576241
Makola, Q. (2017). Peer-Assisted Learning Programme: Supporting students in high-risk
subjects at the mechanical engineering department at Walter Sisulu University. Journal of
Student Affairs in Africa, 5(2), 17–31.
Marks, H. M. (2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in the elementary,
middle, and high school years. American Educational Research Journal, 37(1), 153–184.
https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312037001153
Matsumura, L. C., Slater, S. C., & Crosson, A. (2008). Classroom climate, rigorous instruction
and curriculum, and students’ interactions in urban middle schools. The Elementary
School Journal, 108(4), 293–312. https://doi.org/10.1086/528973
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Pearson Education.
McCeig, K. (2019, April 15). STAAR Performance Standards.
https://tea.texas.gov/student.assessment/staar/performance-standards/
McCharen, B., Song, J., & Martens, J. (2011). School innovation: The mutual impacts of
organizational learning and creativity. Educational Management Administration &
Leadership, 39(6), 676–694. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143211416387
McCollister, K., & Sayler, M. F. (2010). Lift the ceiling: Increase rigor with critical thinking
skills. Gifted Child Today, 33(1), 41–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/107621751003300110
Melesse, S., & Gulie, K. (2019). The implementation of teachers’ continuous professional
development and its impact on educational quality: Primary schools in Fagita Lekoma
108
Woreda, Awi Zone, Amhara Region, Ethiopia in Focus. Research in Pedagogy, 9(1), 81–
94. https://doi.org/10.17810/2015.93
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Miller, A. L., & Dumford, A. D. (2018). Do high-achieving students benefit from honors college
participation? A look at student engagement for first-year students and seniors. Journal
for the Education of the Gifted, 41(3), 217–241.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353218781753
Paige, D. D., Sizemore, J. M., & Neace, W. P. (2013). Working inside the box: Exploring the
relationship between student engagement and cognitive rigor. NASSP Bulletin, 97(2),
105–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192636512473505
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. http://www.education.com/reference/article/self-efficacy-
theory/
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Petress, K. (2008). What is meant by “active learning?” Education, 128(4), 566–569.
Powell, K. C., & Kalina, C. J. (2009). Cognitive and social constructivism: Developing tools for
an effective classroom. Education, 130(2), 241–250.
Rauf, P. A., Ali, S. K. S., Aluwi, A., & Noor, N. A. M. (2014). The effect of school culture on
the management of professional development in secondary schools in Malaysia.
Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 2(3), 41–52.
Roberts, D. (2019). Higher education lectures: From passive to active learning via imagery?
Active Learning in Higher Education, 20(1), 63–77.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787417731198
109
Rotgans, J. I., & Schmidt, H. G. (2011). Situational interest and academic achievement in the
active-learning classroom. Learning and Instruction, 21(1), 58–67.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.11.001
Rotgans, J. I., & Schmidt, H. G. (2017). The relation between individual interest and knowledge
acquisition. British Educational Research Journal, 43(2), 350–371.
https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3268
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.).
SAGE.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. Teachers College Press.
Saeed, S., & Zyngier, D. (2012). How motivation influences student engagement: A qualitative
case study. Journal of Education and Learning, 1(2), 252–267.
https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v1n2p252
Schein, E. H. (2004). The concept of organizational culture: Why bother? In E. H. Schein (Ed.),
Organizational culture and leadership (3rd ed., pp. 3–24). Jossey Bass.
Schlechty, P. C. (2001). Inventing better schools an action plan for educational reform. Jossey-
Bass.
Schlechty, P. C. (2003). Inventing better schools: An action plan for educational reform. Wiley.
Schmoker, M. (2010). Tipping point: From feckless reform to substantive instructional
improvement. Phi Delta Kappan, 85(6), 424–432.
https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170408500605
Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory/
110
Sehgal, P., Nambudiri, R., & Mishra, S. K. (2017). Teacher effectiveness through self-efficacy,
collaboration and principal leadership. International Journal of Educational
Management, 31(4), 505–517. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-05-2016-0090
Simon, M. K. (2011). Dissertation and scholarly research: Recipes for success (2011 Ed.).
Dissertation Success, LLC.
Smith, W. C. (2014). The global transformation toward testing for accountability. Education
Policy Analysis Archives, 22(116). https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v22.1571
Stempfle, J. (2011). Overcoming organizational fixation: Creating and sustaining an innovation
culture. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 45(2), 116–129.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2011.tb01091.x
Taylor, R. T. (2010). Leadership to improve student achievement: Focus the culture on learning.
AASA Journal of Scholarship & Practice, 7(1), 10–23.
Texas Education Agency. (n.d.). STAAR performance labels and policy definitions.
https://tea.texas.gov/student.assessment/staar/performance-standards/
Texas Education Agency. (2018). 2017-2018 Texas academic performance reports.
https://rptsvr1.tea.texas.gov/perfreport/tapr/2018/index.html
Tichnor-Wagner, A., Harrison, C., & Cohen-Vogel, L. (2016). Cultures of learning in effective
high schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(4), 602–642.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X16644957
Tuckman, B. (2006). Operant conditioning. http://www.education.com/reference/article/operant-
conditioning/
111
Wang, M., & Fredricks, J. A. (2014). The reciprocal links between school engagement, Youth
problem behaviors, and school dropout during adolescence. Child Development, 85(2),
722–737.
Wang, Z., Bergin, C., & Bergin, D. A. (2014). Measuring engagement in fourth to twelfth grade
classrooms: The classroom engagement inventory. School Psychology Quarterly, 29(4),
517–535.
Washor, E., & Mojkowski, C. (2007). What do you mean by rigor? Educational Leadership,
64(4), 84–87.
Waters, T., Marzano, R. J., & McNulty, B. (2003). Balanced leadership: What 30 years of
research tells us about the effect of leadership on student achievement. Mid-Continent
Research for Education and Learning.
Weiss, R. S. (1994). Learning from strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview
studies. The Free Press.
Yenen, E. T., & Dursun, F. (2019). The effect of active learning approach on student
achievement in secondary school 5th grade English course. Novitas-ROYAL, 13(2), 175–
186.
Yilmaz, K. (2011). The cognitive perspective on learning: Its theoretical underpinnings and
implications for classroom practices. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational
Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 84(5), 204–212.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2011.568989
York, T. T., Gibson, C., & Rankin, S. (2015). Defining and measuring academic success.
Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 20(5), 1–21.
112
Zender, B. F., Jr. (1973, February 16). A commentary on an unusual dialogue between Jean
Piaget and Lev S. Vygotsky [Paper presentation]. Third annual UAP Conference on Piaget
and the Helping Professions, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
113
APPENDIX A
INFORMED CONSENT
Welcome to the research study! We are interested in understanding the importance of
rigor and engagement in the high school classroom. You will be presented with information
relevant to your experience incorporating rigor and engagement practices in your classroom and
asked to answer some questions about it. Please be assured that your responses will be kept
completely confidential.
The study should take you approximately 10 minutes to complete. Your participation in
this research is voluntary. You have the right to withdraw at any point during the study, for any
reason, and without any prejudice. If you would like to contact the Principal Investigator in the
study to discuss this research, please e-mail Stephenie Wright at stephedw@usc.edu.
By clicking the button below, you acknowledge that your participation in the study is
voluntary, you are at least 18 years of age, and that you are aware that you may choose to
terminate your participation in the study at any time and for any reason.
Please note that this survey will be best displayed on a laptop or desktop
computer. Some features may be less compatible for use on a mobile device.
114
APPENDIX B
SURVEY ITEMS
1. How much a student learns depends primarily on how much background knowledge they
have in the topic being taught; that is why teaching facts is so necessary. (K-C)
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
2. How much a student learns depends predominantly on how they interact with the
knowledge being taught, that is why teaching critical thinking skills is so necessary.
(K-C)
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
3. Instruction should be built around problems with clear answers and around ideas that
most students can grasp quickly. (K-C)
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
4. Teaching students to think critically and use reasoning skills are more important than
specific curriculum content. (K-C)
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
5. A quiet classroom is usually needed for effective learning. (K-P)
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
6. My role as a teacher is to facilitate my students’ own inquiry. (K-C)
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
7. Effective/good teachers demonstrate the correct way to solve a problem. (K-P)
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
115
8. Students should be allowed to think of solutions to practical problems themselves before
the teacher shows them how they are solved. (K-P)
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
9. I believe students need to be challenged in every unit of study. (M-U)
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
10. I believe students learn the most when they can be engaged in the lesson. (M-U)
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
11. I believe incorporating rigor and engagement in the same lesson will allow my students to
gain a higher understanding of the topic. (M-U)
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
12. I am often able to get through to the most difficult students. (M-S)
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
13. I keep students on task when they are working on rigorous assignments. (M-S)
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
14. I am able to motivate students who show low interest in my subject and content. (M-S)
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
15. I help students to believe they can do well with their work in my class. (M-S)
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
16. I design rigorous lessons at least once a week. (M-S)
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
17. I design engaging lessons at least once a week. (M-S)
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
116
18. I bounce back after trying a new out of the box lesson that does not have a positive effect
on my students. (M-S)
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
19. When I present new topics to my class, I use a lecture style presentation. (K-P)
< 1 a week 1-2 week 3-4 week Every day
20. I participate in a professional learning community. (O) Yes No
a. If Yes: How much influence would you say the PLC had on your instructional
practice?
A great deal of influence Some influence A little influence No influence
21. Do you participate in a mentoring relationship with another teacher? (O) Yes No
a. If Yes: How much influence would you say the mentoring relationship had on
your instructional practice?
A great deal of influence Some influence A little influence No influence
22. Do you participate in instructional coaching (O) Yes No
a. If Yes: How much influence would you say the instructional coaching had on
your instructional practice?
A great deal of influence Some influence A little influence No influence
23. How many days of professional development did you attend in the summer of 2018? (O)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10+
24. Have you taken advantage of professional development outside of Region 9? (O)
Yes No
a. If Yes: How much influence would you say the outside professional development
had on your instructional practice?
117
A great deal of influence Some influence A little influence No influence
25. I participated in observation visits to other teachers in my school district. (O)
Yes No
a. If Yes: How much influence would you say the observation visits had on your
instructional practice?
A great deal of influence Some influence A little influence No influence
26. Are you willing to participate in a follow-up interview?
Yes No
a. If Yes: Please enter your email address so that I may contact you to set up a
time and date for an interview.
(K-C=Knowledge-Conceptual, K-P=Knowledge-Procedural, M-S=Motivation-Self-Efficacy, M-
U=Motivation-Utility Value, O=Organizational)
118
APPENDIX C
INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
Introduction
Welcome, your insights in this interview are to help determine a teacher’s impact on rigor
and engagement in the classroom. I have already gone over the consent document with you. Just
as a reminder, you are welcome to stop the interview at any time. Is it okay if I record this
interview? By recording I will be able to obtain a truer picture of your experience.
Interview Questions
1. What subject do you teach?
2. How long have you been in education?
3. What does a typical day in your classroom look like? (K)
4. Tell me about a time you have tried something out of the box in your classroom? (O)
a. When was it?
b. What about it made it a success?
c. What about it made it a failure?
5. What value does designing an out of the box lesson have for your classroom? (K)
6. How do you go about designing lessons for your classes? (K)
7. What have you done to get students interested in what they are learning in your
classroom? (M)
8. Who generally has a more active role in your classroom, you as the teacher, or the
students? (K)
9. Rigor is a word that has been tossed around in education recently, what does rigor mean
to you? (K)
119
10. How, if at all, do you incorporate rigor in your classroom? (K)
a. When was it?
b. What about it made it a success?
c. What about it made it a failure?
11. Do you think it is important to push students to higher levels of rigor? (M)
a. Why or why not?
b. What are the benefits?
c. Do you feel you are currently able to push students to higher levels of rigor?
d. What would help you to reach that?
12. Tell me about the best teacher or lesson you have seen or been told about that has
students highly engaged? (M)
a. What makes his/her classroom outstanding?
b. What does he/she do differently?
13. Tell me about any professional development that you have had that helps to add rigor into
your classroom? (O)
14. Tell me about any professional development you have attended that gave you tools to
increase student engagement? (O)
15. What do you feel you need to be able to incorporate more rigor in your classroom? (O)
16. What do you feel you need to be able to increase student engagement in your classroom?
(O)
120
APPENDIX D
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT SESSION EVALUATION
Please complete the following evaluation regarding rigor and engagement in the
classroom. Your input is valuable to assess the quality of the professional development. Future
professional development sessions will be developed after the consideration of your responses.
Level 1 - Interest in Content
1. This professional development session
held my interest.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
2. The instructor encouraged my
participation.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
Level 1 - Relevance
3. What I learned today will help me
increase the rigor in my classroom.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
4. What I learned today will help me
increase engagement in my classroom.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
5. What I learned today is relevant to
what I do in the classroom.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
Level 1 - Teacher Satisfaction with Training
6. I would recommend this professional
development session to others.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
Level 2 - Knowledge
7. I understand the importance of
incorporating rigor in the classroom.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
8. I understand the importance of
increasing engagement in the
classroom.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
9. I understand how to increase rigor in
my classroom.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
121
10. I understand how to increase student
engagement in my classroom.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
Level 2 - Attitude
11. I believe that increasing rigor in my
classroom will positively impact
student success.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
12. I believe that increasing student
engagement in my classroom will
positively impact student success.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
13. I believe that increasing rigor and
student engagement in my classroom
will positively impact student success.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
Level 2 - Confidence
14. I believe that I am capable of
increasing rigor in my classroom.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
15. I believe that I am capable of
increasing student engagement in my
classroom.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
Level 2 - Commitment
16. I will increase the rigor in my
classroom.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
17. I will increase engaging activities in
my classroom.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
122
APPENDIX E
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT SESSION EVALUATION
Please complete the following evaluation regarding rigor and engagement in the
classroom. Your input is valuable to assess the quality of the professional development program
developed for this school year. Future professional development programs will be developed
after the consideration of your responses. Your responses will help us in understanding your
satisfaction, learning, implementation of increasing rigor and engagement in the classroom.
Level 1 - Reaction
1. What I learned in the professional
development program has been useful
in implementing rigor in my
classroom.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
2. What I learned in the professional
development program has been useful
in incorporating increased engagement
in my classroom.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
Level 2 - Learning
3. I find that the strategies presented in
the professional development program
helped me implement additional
engaging activities in my classroom.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
4. I find that the strategies presented in
the professional development program
helped me incorporate higher levels of
rigor in my classroom.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
Level 3 - Behavior
5. I have successfully applied what I
learned in training to my work.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
6. I feel encouraged to apply what I
learned by my principal.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
7. I have time with my peer teachers to Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree
123
share what is successful in my
classroom and share struggles related
to what I have learned.
Disagree Agree
8. I have time with my principal to share
what is successful in my classroom
and share struggles related to what I
have learned.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
Level 4 - Results
9. My focus on increased rigor is helping
my students be successful.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
10. My focus on increased engagement is
helping my students be successful.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
11. I am seeing positive results from
applying what I have learned.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
12. I am providing my students engaging
lessons daily.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
13. I am providing my students rigorous
lessons daily.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Agree
12. What early signs of success have you seen from your implementation of increased rigor
and engagement in the classroom?
13. How could this professional development program be improved?
14. What has helped you implement what you have learned?
Abstract (if available)
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Increasing family engagement at Lily Elementary School: An evaluation model
PDF
The knowledge, motivation, and organization influences affecting the frequency of empathetic teaching practice used in the classroom: an evaluation study
PDF
Quality literacy instruction in juvenile court schools: an evaluation study
PDF
One to one tablet integration in the mathematics classroom: an evaluation study of an international school in China
PDF
Civic learning program policy compliance by a state department of higher education: an evaluation study
PDF
Online graduate-level student learning and engagement: developing critical competencies for future leadership roles: an evaluation study
PDF
Cultural proficiency to provide equity for African American and other students of color: an evaluation study
PDF
Leveraging social-emotional learning to improve school climate, mental health, and student achievement in K-12 student populations
PDF
Characteristics that create a quality early learning center: An evaluation study
PDF
Exploring mindfulness with employee engagement: an innovation study
PDF
Instructional differentiation and accommodations to support student achievement in SLD and ADHD secondary school populations: an evaluation study
PDF
STEM teacher education: An evaluation study
PDF
An evaluation study of... What do teachers know about gifted students?
PDF
The importance of technological training among public school teachers integrating one-to-one computing: an evaluation study
PDF
Adaptability characteristics: an evaluation study of a regional mortgage lender
PDF
Big-four consulting firm female senior manager engagement, retention and productivity in pursuit of the partner level
PDF
Access to standards-based curriculum for students with severe and multiple disabilities: an evaluation study
PDF
Managers’ learning transfer from the leadership challenge training to work setting: an evaluation study
PDF
A gap analysis of the community school: an evaluation of the implementation of self-directed learning
PDF
The successful implementation of diversity and inclusion efforts: a study of promising practice
Asset Metadata
Creator
Wright, Stephenie
(author)
Core Title
The importance of rigor and engagement on student achievement and mastery: an evaluation study
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)
Publication Date
02/22/2021
Defense Date
01/11/2021
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
active learning,engagement,OAI-PMH Harvest,rigor,Secondary School
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Phillips, Jennifer (
committee chair
), Castruita, Rudy (
committee member
), Ferrario, Kim (
committee member
)
Creator Email
sdgwright@gmail.com,stephedw@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-420497
Unique identifier
UC11668576
Identifier
etd-WrightStep-9281.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-420497 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-WrightStep-9281.pdf
Dmrecord
420497
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Wright, Stephenie
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
Tags
active learning
rigor