University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Quality literacy instruction in juvenile court schools: an evaluation study

(USC Thesis Other)

Quality literacy instruction in juvenile court schools: an evaluation study

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 1

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JUVENILE COURT SCHOOLS: AN
EVALUATION STUDY

by

E. Scott Pierce

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 2019

Copyright 2019 E. Scott Pierce
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I cannot express enough gratitude to my advisor, Dr. Monique Datta for your ongoing
support, guidance and good humor throughout this process. Thank you for being my dissertation
Kahuna that guided my journey. Your Mana and Aloha spirit provided words of wisdom and
guidance that I am eternally grateful for. Mahalo! Dr. Darline Robles, your passion and words of
wisdom affirmed the beautiful burden I carry to empower those that our society deems unworthy.
I am grateful for all the times you challenged me to examine my own biases and preconceived
ideas of how I view others. Dr. Lawrence Picus, your intellect and wit are inspirational. I am
indebted to your guidance and willingness to share your insights and knowledge that helped
shape my Doctoral journey. I could not have asked for a better dissertation committee.
This journey would not have been possible without the sacrifices my dad, Ed Pierce,
made throughout his life in order to provide a better path in life for my siblings, mom and
myself. This dissertation would never have come to fruition if not for the man I call my “hero”.
Dad, words can never express the gratitude and love I have for you. Thank you for always
challenging me to be the best I can be and showing me that the greatest accomplishment in life,
is to love and sacrifice for the ones you love. Mom, you left this earth two weeks before I
received my letter of acceptance, but I know that you have been watching over me all this time.
I finally did it…and I know you know.
Cohort 6! You were such an inspiration and joy to share this journey with. I am so
excited to see what the future holds for each and every one of us. I truly feel blessed to call all of
you colleagues and friends.
Last but not least, thank you to my wife and children. Allie, your support and love over
the past three years has been amazing. You are and will always be the love of my life. The long
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 3

nights and weekends now belong to you! Thank you for allowing me to walk down this path and
fulfill a lifelong dream. Now it is time to travel and explore the world! Colette, Colton and
Claire, you have inspired me to live a life of integrity, dedicated to making this world a better
place than when I first arrived. My hope and prayer is that I have been a good role model and
example what is possible if you sacrifice, believe in yourself and never give up. Thank you for
inspiring me every day to reach for the stars.

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 4

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements 2

List of Tables 6
List of Figures 7
Abstract 8
Chapter One: Introduction 9
Introduction of the Problem of Practice 9
Organizational Context and Mission 10
Organizational Goal 11
Related Literature 12
Importance of the Evaluation 12
Description of Stakeholder Groups 13
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals 16
Stakeholder Group for the Study 17
Purpose of the Project and Questions 17
Methodological Framework 18
Definitions 19
Organization of the Project 19

Chapter Two: Review of Literature 21
Quality Literacy Instruction 21
Juvenile Court Schools 26
Literacy Instruction in Juvenile Court Schools 29
Clark and Estes’ (2008) Gap Analysis Theoretical Framework 34
Stakeholder Knowledge Influences 35
Stakeholder Motivation Influences 41
Organization Influences 47
Conceptual Framework 52
Conclusion 59

Chapter Three: Methodology 60
Participating Stakeholders 61
Data Collection and Instrumentation 65
Data Analysis 69
Credibility and Trustworthiness 71
Ethics 72
Limitations and Delimitations 73

Chapter Four: Results and Findings 75
Purpose of the Project and Questions 75
Participating Stakeholders 76
Results and Findings 80
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 5

Research Question One 81
Research Question Two 86
Research Question Three 106
Synthesis 112

Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations 114
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences 114
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan 127
Summary 146
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach 147
Limitations and Delimitations 148
Future Research 150
Conclusion 151

References 153

Appendices 165
Appendix A: Interview Protocol 165
Appendix B: Observation Protocol 168
Appendix C: Initial Training Workshop Evaluation. 170
Appendix D: Program Evaluation 173
Appendix E: Accountability Report Card 175

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 6

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Organizational Mission, Global Goal and Stakeholder Performance Goals 16
Table 2. Knowledge Influences on Stakeholder Goal 40
Table 3. Motivational Influences on Stakeholder Goal 46
Table 4. Organizational Influences on Stakeholder Goal 51
Table 5. Participant Information 77
Table 6. Knowledge Influence Results 89
Table 7. Motivation Influence Results. 104
Table 8. Organizational Influence Results 111
Table 9. Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations 115
Table 10. Summary of Motivational Influences and Recommendations 120
Table 11. Summary of Organizational Influences and Recommendations 123
Table 12. Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes 129
Table 13. Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation 131
Table 14. Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors 133
Table 15. Evaluation of the Components of Learning 139
Table 16. Components to Measure Reactions to the Program 142
Table 17. Accountability Report Card 145

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 7

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Conceptual framework 55
Figure 2. Appropriate Literacy Skills for Secondary Students 95
Figure 3. Development of Appropriate Literacy Instruction 99

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 8

ABSTRACT
This study employed a qualitative approach to evaluate quality literacy instruction in a juvenile
court school. Teachers’ ability to develop and implement six literacy-based units of study were
examined. Teachers from a juvenile court school in central California participated in interviews
and an observation of their classroom regarding their literacy instructional practices. Interview
responses, observation fieldnotes and literature were analyzed to triangulate teacher practices and
perspectives regarding the development and implementation of literacy-based units of study. A
modified Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analysis Framework was utilized to assess knowledge,
motivational, and organizational influences on teachers’ ability to develop and implement six
literacy-based units of study. The findings of this inquiry revealed that teachers possessed the
motivation to develop six literacy-based units of study but faced knowledge and organizational
barriers hindering attainment of their stakeholder goal. Responses indicated that teachers possess
self-efficacy and attributed the success or failure to develop and implement literacy-based units
of study to their own efforts. Partially validated and validated gaps in teacher knowledge and
organizational influences hindered teachers from developing and implementing literacy-based
units of study. The findings of this study emphasized the need for professional learning
opportunities to meet the need of juvenile court school students, clear communication of the
organizational goals and vision, and effective feedback on instructional practices. The
development and implementation of an effective plan to address these knowledge and
organizational issues could assist juvenile court schools in improving literacy instruction for
incarcerated students.

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 9

Chapter One: Introduction
Introduction of the Problem of Practice
Low literacy skills amongst juveniles is a significant indicator for determining high risk
for juvenile incarceration and recidivism. Researchers examining the characteristics of
incarcerated juvenile students indicate low literacy skills as a major risk factor that leads to
disengagement from the classroom, which induces behaviors that result in suspensions,
expulsion, and incarceration (Christie & Yell, 2008; Pyle, Flower, Fall & Williams, 2016; Snow
& Woodward, 2017). Moreover, in 2015, the United States Department of Justice reported that
48,043 juvenile students in the United States had been incarcerated, of which approximately 55%
to 61% of those incarcerated juvenile students were identified as having a reading impairment,
including 33% of incarcerated students reading at a 4
th
grade level (Metsala, David & Brown,
2017; U.S. Department of Justice, 2015). Not only are chronic low literacy skills amongst
juvenile students a significant contributing factor in identifying a juvenile’s risk of arrest and
incarceration, but low literacy skills are also directly linked to recidivism, thus creating what the
literature refers to as the “school to prison pipeline” (Metsala et al., 2017; Nance, 2016; Pyle et
al., 2016; Snow & Woodward, 2017). However, a growing body of work is examining how
quality literacy instruction in juvenile court schools (JCS) can dismantle the “school to prison
pipeline” (Davey, 2017; Leone & Wruble, 2015; Snow & Woodward, 2017).
In a 2015 a report from the Council of State Governors (CSG) Justice Center, the CSG
recommended that JCS that serve incarcerated youth need to improve reading assessment scores
and provide the same rigorous curriculum and instruction as traditional public high schools, thus
providing literacy skills interventions. Recent research has identified academic interventions,
which includes quality literacy instruction during incarceration, play a significant role in
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 10

decreasing a juvenile defender’s odds of recidivism (Metsala et al., 2017; Thompson & Morris,
2016). This assertion by the CSG recognizes the importance of quality literacy instruction within
the JCS system and the role that literacy instruction plays in decreasing the odds of recidivism in
juvenile offenders.
Organizational Context and Mission
The Central Valley Juvenile Court (CVJCS) School (pseudonym) is a juvenile court
school (JCS) that serves high-risk seventh through twelfth grade students between the ages of 12
and 18 in four separate secondary (seventh through twelfth grades) county of education (COE)
community schools and two juvenile detention center schools; the Youth Facility Court School
and Juvenile Detention Facility Court School. Students who attend are under the protection or
authority of the juvenile court system and/or were incarcerated in the juvenile detention center.
Non-incarcerated CVJCS students are serving probation terms, therefore confined to attend one
of the four JCS CVJCS community school sites. On a daily basis, the CVJCS’s average
enrollment is 234 juveniles, whom are expelled, adjudicated or incarcerated.
The student population at the court and community schools is highly transient, as students
serve individual sentences and probation terms that vary from student to student depending on
the circumstances of their charges. Given the itinerant nature of the student enrollment and the
fact that most students are enrolled short-term, there are some recommended metrics that cannot
be addressed: English Learner Reclassification rates, Advanced Placement data, A-G course
completion rates, Career Technical Education Course completion rates, high school graduation
rate, high school dropout rate, middle school drop-out rate, and pupils who participate in the
Early Assessment Program (EAP). However, pupils are offered the EAP during the
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 11

administration of state testing. CVJCS does not expel students from their programs, thus
expulsion data does not apply.
The mission of CVJCS is to provide high-risk students an alternative educational setting
where they can develop the social, academic, and life skills to be transitioned successfully back
to their home schools or to complete the general equivalency diploma (GED)
requirements. Based on CVJCS’ mission statement and demographics, CVJCS role is significant
in the development of the literacy skills necessary to successfully return to a traditional high
school setting in order to reduce the likeliness of recidivism for their student population.
Organizational Goal
Central Valley Juvenile Court Schools’ (CVJCS) goal is that by May 2019, CVJCS will
increase from 5% to 9% of students meeting the state standards in English Language Arts (ELA)
on the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) annual assessment. The Executive
Director and Learning Director established this goal in May 2016 after reviewing data from the
SBAC assessment and the 2015/2016 Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) goals. In order
to fulfill the California State Priority for Pupil Outcomes, CVJCS set incremental growth for
each of the following years: a) in 2017, 7% of students meeting the state standards in ELA on the
SBAC assessment b) in 2018, 8% of students meeting the state standards in ELA on the SBAC
assessment, and c) in 2019, 9% of students meeting the state standards in ELA on the SBAC
assessment.
CVJCS’ goal of increasing student ELA scores aligns with their mission of providing an
alternative setting for expelled, adjudicated and/or incarcerated students to develop the necessary
literacy (academic) skills in order to successfully reenter a traditional high school or earn a GED.
Furthermore, this measurable and focused goal addresses a greater concern, as supported by
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 12

Metsala et al. (2017) and the CSG, which is the need to reduce recidivism in juvenile offenders
by equipping them with the literacy skills to be successful in school and beyond.
Related Literature
Numerous studies suggest that the “school-to-prison pipeline” is perpetuated by the low
literacy skills and low academic achievement of certain populations of students, who are also the
victims of unjust zero tolerance policies (Gregory, Skiba, & Noguera, 2010; Metsala et al., 2017;
Nance, 2016; Pyle et al., 2016; Snow & Woodward, 2017). Zero tolerance policies that extract
and exclude students from the learning environment are a significant contributing factor to the
widening achievement gap at the secondary educational level, producing long lasting effects that
set into motion a trajectory of poor academic performance, specifically low literacy performance
and increased risk of incarceration (Christie & Yell, 2008; Gregory et al., 2010; Morris & Perry
2016; Pyle et al., 2016; Snow & Woodward, 2017). A U.S. Department of Justice (2015) report
supports the research findings in reporting that over 55% of incarcerated students exhibit lower
literacy skills than their non-incarcerated peers. However, several multi-method studies propose
that school level interventions (including JCS), empirically-based literacy instruction, and a
strong connection to the school culture reduces the risk of recidivism (Kirkland, 2017; Snow &
Woodward, 2017; Thompson & Morris, 2016). The research cautions that failure on the schools
to provide adequate research-based literacy interventions has a dire effect on low achieving
students, therefore increasing their odds of recidivism and incarceration (Leone & Wruble, 2015;
Sealy-Ruiz, 2011; Snow & Woodward, 2017).
Importance of the Evaluation
It was important to evaluate CVJCS’s performance in relationship to the performance
goal, increasing student performance from 5% to 9% meeting state standards in ELA on the
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 13

SBAC assessment, for a variety of reasons. As of the 2018/2019 school year, the State of
California will include juvenile court schools in the newly established California Dashboard
accountability program to determine funding and if these schools will require technical
assistance in order to meet state educational priorities. California juvenile court schools are
required to complete an LCAP in order to receive base-line funding, which requires CVJCS to
set academic goals for their student population. The aforementioned populations continuously
record the lowest standardized reading scores, thus increasing the risk of low academic
performance due in part to low literacy skills leading to an increase in probability of recidivism
and incarceration. Evaluating the organization’s performance will enable stakeholders to gather
formative data that can be used to assess the organization’s programming decisions that
positively impact student progress.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
While the joint efforts of all stakeholders will contribute to the achievement of the overall
organizational goal to increase from 5% to 9% of students meeting the state standards in ELA on
the SBAC assessment, it is important to evaluate where the CVJCS teaching staff are currently
with regard to their performance goal. The stakeholder goal of developing and implementing six
literacy units of study is the main driver in order for CVJCS to meet their organizational goal.
Therefore, the stakeholders of focus for this study will be all CVJCS teaching staff. The
stakeholders’ goal, supported by the Executive Director, is that by January 2019 100% of CVJCS
teachers will develop and implement six literacy units that address the four focus areas of
literacy: reading, writing, speaking/listening and academic vocabulary. Literacy instructional
practices include activities such as close reading of both non-fiction and literary fiction, writing
across the curriculum, regular academic discourse, analysis of both print and media text, and a
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 14

focus on the use of academic language. Failure to accomplish this goal will lead to continued low
academic performance on the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium exam. Failure to
increase student scores will lead to CVJCS not meeting their stated LCAP goals, which
adversely impacts the organization’s ability to provide supports and interventions to its students,
as it could affect funding and support, and the organization’s overall goal to increase from 5% to
9% of students meeting the state standards in ELA on the SBAC assessment.
Teaching Staff
CVJCS currently employs 14 full time teachers. At each of the four JCS community
school sites, the site has a full time multi-subject teacher that teaches the four core subjects
(ELA, Math, Social Studies, and Science) from 8:00am to 2:20pm. One of the JCS community
school sites employs two teachers. Four of these teachers are fully credentialed and one teacher
is currently teaching on an intern credential. At the Youth Facility Court School and Juvenile
Detention Facility Court School, CVJCS currently is staffed with three English Language Arts
(ELA), three Math, two Science, and one Special Education teacher. Currently the Youth
Facility Court School and Juvenile Detention Facility Court School embed Social Studies into
their ELA instructional time. All nine of the teachers at the Juvenile Detention Facility Court
School and Youth Facility Court School are fully credential single subject teachers. Each of the
Juvenile Detention Facility Court School and Youth Facility Court School teachers teach three 1
½ hour block periods each day. When enrollment numbers increase, then their schedule
increases to four 1 ½ hour blocks. The current schedule is based on the low number of
incarcerated students at this time. CVJCS is currently expected to expand their teaching staff to
15 for the 2018/2019 school year.

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 15

Learning Director
CVJCS currently employs one full time Learning Director who oversees the development
of curriculum for all six CVJCS sites. She also serves as the acting principal at the Juvenile
Detention Facility Court School and Youth Facility Court School. The Learning Director is a
fully credentialed teacher and has obtained her preliminary administration credential. She holds
both a multi-subject and Special Education teaching credential. The Learning Director reviews
curriculum, unit design, and oversees the master teaching schedule, as well as work directly with
the Executive Director to create the Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) for CVJCS. The
Learning Director previously served as a classroom teacher at CVJCS and is currently serving in
her third year as the Learning Director.
Executive Director
CVJCS currently employs one full time Executive Director who oversees the overall
operation of all six CVJCS sites and serves as the acting principal at the four community school
sites. The Executive Director oversees the development and execution of the LCAP, operating
budget, vision and mission of CVJCS. The Executive Director oversees the evaluation of each
of the thirteen teachers and Learning Director. The Executive Director reports to the Deputy
Superintendent of Central Valley (CVCOE) County Office of Education (pseudonym) and the
Central Valley County Office of Education Board (pseudonym). The Executive Director is a
fully credentials multi-subject teacher and a fully credentialed administrator who had previously
served as a principal for three years at a K-8 school. She is currently serving her fourth year as
Executive Director of CVJCS.

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 16

Table 1 illustrates the organizational mission, organizational performance goal,
stakeholders’ performance goals
Table 1
Stakeholders Groups’ Performance Goals
Organizational Mission, Global Goal and Stakeholder Performance Goals
Organizational Mission
Central Valley Juvenile Court School is chartered to provide high-risk students an alternative
educational setting where they can develop the social, academic, and life skills to be transitioned
successfully back to their home schools or to complete the general equivalency diploma (GED).
Organizational Performance Goal
By May 2019, Central Valley Juvenile Court School’s student performance in ELA will increase
from 5% to 9% of students meeting the state standards on the SBAC assessment.

Stakeholder Goals
CVJCS Executive
Director
CVJCS Teachers CVJCS Learning
Director
CVJCS Students
By June 2018,
Central Valley’s
Court and
Community’s
Executive Director
will provide
resources, including
Professional
Development
opportunities, to
equip CVJCS
teachers to develop
six literacy units that
address the four focus
areas of literacy.

By January 2019
100% of Central
Valley’s Court and
Community Teachers
will develop and
implement six
literacy units that
address the four focus
areas of literacy:
reading, writing,
speaking/listening
and academic
vocabulary.
By April 2019
Central Valley’s
Court and
Community’s
Learning Director
will assist in the
development and
monitor the
implementation of the
six literacy units that
address the four focus
areas of literacy.

By May 2019, Central
Valley’s Court and
Community Schools’
student performance on
the SBAC annual
assessment will increase
from not meeting to
meeting the standards in
ELA.

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 17

Stakeholder Group for the Study
Although the joint efforts of all stakeholders will contribute to the achievement of the
overall organizational goal to increase student performance from 5% to 9% of students meeting
the state standards in ELA on the SBAC assessment for CVJCS, it was important to evaluate the
CVJCS teaching staff with regard to their performance goal. Therefore, the stakeholders of focus
for the study were all CVJCS teachers. The stakeholders’ goal, supported by the Executive
Director, is that 100% of CVJCS teaching staff would develop and implement six literacy units
that address the four areas of literacy: reading, writing, speaking/listening and academic
vocabulary. Literacy units include instructional practices such as close reading of both non-
fiction and literary fiction, writing across the curriculum, regular academic discourse, analysis of
both print and media text, and a focus on the use of academic language. Failure to increase
student scores will lead to CVJCS not meeting their stated LCAP goals, which adversely impacts
the organization’s ability to secure funding to provide supports and interventions to its students.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project was to evaluate the degree to which CVJCS is achieving its
stakeholder goal of 100% of CVJCS teachers developing and implementing six literacy units of
study that address the four focus areas literacy: reading, writing, speaking/listening and academic
vocabulary. The analysis focused on knowledge, motivation and organizational influences
related to achieving this stakeholder goal. While a complete evaluation project would focus on
all CVJCS stakeholders, for practical purposes, the stakeholders of focus of this analysis are the
CVJCS teachers.
As such, the questions that guided this study are the following:
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 18

1. To what extent are 100% of Central Valley Juvenile Court School teachers developing
and implementing six literacy units that address the four focus areas of literacy: reading,
writing, speaking/listening and academic vocabulary?
2. What are the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences related to achieving
the stakeholder goal?
3. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and stakeholder
knowledge and motivation?
4. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?
Methodological Framework
To close performance gaps and achieve organizational and stakeholder goals, it is
necessary to accurately identify causes of the gaps (Clark & Estes, 2008). The Clark and Estes’
(2008) gap analysis model is an analytical tool that can be utilized to identify root causes of
performance gaps within organizations. The framework includes an analysis of three essential
influences affecting the attainment of organizational goals: 1) knowledge, 2) motivation, and 3)
organizational culture (Clark & Estes, 2008). To reach targeted goals, all three of these
components must be present and aligned.
A modified version of the Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis model was used as the
framework for this study. Although the Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis model helps to
identify causes of performance gaps, for the purpose of this study a modified version of the
model was used to evaluate and identify the presence of gaps, versus the causes of gaps, in the
key areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences. The study employed a
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 19

qualitative method of data collection, which included interviews, observations, and collecting
artifacts.
Definitions
Juvenile: A young person, male or female, between the ages of 12 and 18 years old.
Juvenile Court Schools (JCS): Serves juvenile students under the protection or authority
of the juvenile court system and incarcerated in juvenile halls, homes, ranches, camps, day
centers, or regional youth facilities.
Literacy Instruction: Instruction that builds a student's reading comprehension, writing
skills, and overall skills in communication.
Recidivism: relapse into criminal behavior.
Literacy-based Units of Study: systems of literacy instruction, assessment, grading, and
academic reporting that are based on students demonstrating understanding or mastery of literacy
knowledge and literacy skills they are expected to learn as they progress through their education.
Organization of the Project
Five chapters are used to organize this study. This chapter provides the reader with the
key concepts and terminology commonly found in a discussion about literacy instruction for
incarcerated juvenile students in a JCS setting. The organization’s mission, goals, stakeholders
and the framework for the project are introduced. Chapter Two provides a review of current
literature surrounding the scope of the study. Topics of JCS, quality literacy instruction, literacy
and recidivism, and literacy instruction in JCS are addressed. Chapter Three details the
knowledge, motivation and organizational elements examined, as well as methodology used for
selection of participants, data collection and analysis. In Chapter Four, the data and results are
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 20

assessed and analyzed. Chapter Five provides solutions, based on data and literature, for closing
the perceived gaps, as well as recommendations for an implementation and evaluation plan for
the solutions.

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 21

Chapter Two: Review of Literature
This literature review examines the root causes of gaps in the development and
implementation of quality literacy instruction for incarcerated students at Central Valley Court
and Community Schools (CVJCS). The review begins with general research on quality literacy
instruction and how quality literacy instruction is the foundation for secondary academic success.
This section examines the key components of academic literacy instruction, effective literacy
instruction and interventions. The literature review shifts into exploring the research on juvenile
court schools (JCS) and the importance of quality literacy instruction for incarcerated students.
This is followed by an overview of literature on literacy instruction, professional development
for literacy teachers, and the challenges of implementing quality literacy instruction in JCS. This
section includes current research specific to JCS on teacher professional development practices
for alternative education and the implementation of quality literacy instruction. Following the
general research literature, the review turns to the Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analytic
Conceptual Framework and, specifically, knowledge, motivation and organizational influences
on teachers in a JCS setting to implement quality literacy instruction.
Quality Literacy Instruction
Quality literacy instruction is the foundation for secondary academic success (Swanson et
al., 2016). To create a foundation for academic success, researchers have identified key
components of academic literacy instruction (Graham et al., 2017; Shanahan, 2014; Vaughn et
al., 2013). Furthermore, key literacy instructional practices that are essential for juvenile readers
(Marchland-Martella, Martella, Modderman, Peterson & Pan, 2013) to acquire the literacy skills
needed for the 21
st
century (Leu, Kinzer, Coiro, Castek & Henry, 2017) have been identified and
should guide secondary instructional practices. However, struggling juvenile readers require
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 22

long term, targeted interventions that utilize key instructional practices to accelerate learning
(Allington & McGill-Franzen, 2014). In preparing juvenile students to be successful in both
academia and the workforce, quality literacy instruction across all disciplines is crucial.
Foundation for Secondary Academic Success
Academic literacy instruction across all content areas is the foundation for secondary
academic success, as students are required to read complex text across four or five different core
content disciplines each day (Swanson et al., 2016). In order to increase student academic
performance, explicit reading instruction needs to occur to address higher level reading skills
needed to engage in secondary content (Shanahan, 2014; Swanson et al., 2016). Vaughn et al.
(2013) indicate that knowledge acquisition (learning new knowledge) is directly correlated to
quality literacy instruction grounded in an overarching issue or question and appropriate text-
based instruction and reading. Thus, if a student is to be academically successful, then it requires
literacy instruction across the content disciplines (Shanahan, 2014).
Key Components of Academic Literacy Instruction
Student academic literacy development hinges on intentionally designed lessons that
incorporate key components of academic literacy instruction (Vaughn et al., 2013). In a meta-
analysis on the effectiveness of literacy programs that balance reading and writing instruction, it
was demonstrated that when literacy instruction is balanced with both the key components of
reading instruction and writing instruction, a student’s literacy performance in both reading and
writing improved (Graham et al., 2017). In Graham et al.’s (2017) meta-analysis, the studies that
measured growth in reading comprehension, decoding, vocabulary, fluency, writing quality,
writing mechanics, and writing output recorded positive gains in student performance. Similarly,
Shanahan (2014) marks that reading and writing across the secondary content areas increased
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 23

student knowledge, as well as improved literacy skills, especially comprehension. Although
academic literacy instruction grounded in direct instruction to develop student schema for
comprehension, vocabulary development, decoding and fluency are essential components for
developing basic literacy skills, juvenile readers require a new evolving approach to new
literacies and comprehension for a post-industrial world (Leu et al., 2017).
There are seven key instructional strategies that Marchland-Martella et al. (2013) identify
that effectively enhance explicit instruction for vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension: 1)
Activate Prior Knowledge; 2) Ask and Generate Questions; 3) Utilize Graphic Organizers; 4)
Mnemonic Strategies; 5) Text Structures; 6) Summarization; 7) Reciprocal Teaching.
Furthermore, Marchland-Martella et al. (2013) address motivation issues revolving literacy
instruction by declaring teachers provide content goals for reading, allowing and supporting
student autonomy, utilizing text interesting to students, and increasing collaborative learning
opportunities related to the text. These basic concepts lay the foundation for literacy instruction,
however, there is a new evolving shift to new literacies and the specific instruction needed to
acquire the emerging literacies (Leu et al., 2017).
Effective Academic Literacy Instruction for Juvenile Readers
Juvenile readers require academic literacy instruction that is focused on academic
vocabulary development and sophisticated reading comprehension (Conley, 2014; Leu et al.,
2017). A juvenile student’s level of reading comprehension is directly tied to a student’s
acquisition of academic vocabulary (Baumann, 2014). The shift in literacy instruction for
juvenile readers must focus on the interaction of the learner, text, contexts and culture (Conley,
2014). This instructional adjustment that Conley (2014) addresses is a move from learning
comprehension and vocabulary acquisition strategies to application of these skills in a variety of
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 24

academic contexts. However, academic vocabulary for juvenile readers has transitioned from an
etymological study to a deictic approach in which meaning is derived by context and purpose
(Leu et al., 2017; Shanahan, 2014). Not only do students need to develop the skills to derive
meaning from context (Baumann, 2014), but Leu et al. (2017) declares advanced reading
comprehension will require juvenile students to acquire these five new literacy skills: 1) Reading
to Identify Important Questions; 2) Reading to Locate Information; 3) Reading to Evaluate
Information Critically; 4) Reading to Synthesize Information; 5) Reading to Communicate.
Similar to Graham et al. (2017) and Shanahan’s (2014) findings that illustrated balanced reading
and writing instruction increased academic knowledge, Leu et al. (2017) indicates that targeted
new literacy instruction that is balanced with both reading and writing coupled with collaborative
efforts increased juvenile students meaning and knowledge construction skills. Given these shifts
in reading comprehension skills from basic understanding of the text to these five new literacies,
Fujimoto, Garcia, Medina, and Perez (2013) insist that educators shift their thinking and
understanding of the needs of their students in order to equip them with the necessary literacy
skills to succeed academically, especially when addressing the needs of struggling juvenile
readers.
Effective Literacy Intervention
Effective academic literacy interventions that target the acceleration of basic reading
comprehension are significant in improving juvenile literacy skills (Shanahan, 2014; Wanzek,
Swanson, Roberts, Vaughn & Kent, 2015). In an effort to bridge basic reading comprehension to
more complex comprehension of text, Wanzek et al. (2015) reinforces the assertion of Vaughn et
al. (2013) to use a balanced approach to instruction for both reading and writing utilizing
Marchland-Martella et al. (2013) seven instructional strategies, with an emphasis on non-fiction
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 25

social studies text. Wanzek et al. (2015) contend that a Team Based Learning (TBL) approach
accelerates comprehension as students work collaboratively with peers to construct meaning
from primary and secondary sources and apply their newly acquired knowledge to a current
socio-political context. Additionally, Joseph and Jolivette (2016) reveal that peer mediated
instruction that includes collaborative continuous and repeated reading, text dependent
discussions, and positive peer feedback improved basic comprehension of struggling readers.
Fragella-Luby, Ware and Capozzi (2009) support these assertions by outlining that teachers need
to continue reinforcing previous core literacy practices, teach content-based language and
literacy skills, and utilize small group/collaborative instruction. Emerging work related to new
literacies supports peer-to-peer collaborative efforts as a means to accelerate acquisition of
comprehension skills, as this type of effort requires critical thinking and text dependent
conversations to construct meaning from a variety of sources (Leu et al., 2017).
In a meta-analysis of research on struggling readers, Allington and McGill-Franzen
(2014) indicate that successful reading comprehension interventions require a long-term
approach with constant teacher led questioning. The researchers found that reading
comprehension improvements are possible, but the transference from teacher dependency to
autonomy takes an extended period of time, often years (Allington & McGill-Franzen, 2014). In
addition, Lai, McNaughton, Amituanai-Tola, Turner and Hsiao (2013) discovered that when
reading comprehension interventions are sustained over the course of three years or longer,
acceleration in student gains in comprehension occur. However, the researchers warn that these
gains are not linear, but occur in a staircase manner with may plateaus in the process (Lai et al.,
2013). With a long-term approach and a focus on acceleration of acquisition of comprehension
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 26

and academic vocabulary skills, struggling juvenile readers can acquire significant gains in
literacy performance.
Juvenile Court Schools
Juvenile court schools (JCS) face many unique challenges. Low academic achievement,
traumatized juveniles, a large Special Education population and the transient nature of JCS
students creates instructional and learning obstacles that many JCS teachers are not equipped to
address (Leone & Wruble, 2015; Mallet, 2016; Pyle et al., 2016; Thompson & Morris, 2016)..
These challenges include professional development and resources to address the needs of a
traumatized student population (Crosby, Day, Baroni & Somers, 2015; Gagnon, Houchins, &
Murray, 2012). To further exacerbate the challenges of teaching in a JCS, the resources,
technology and curriculum provided is often outdated or non-existent (Gagnon et al., 2012;
Wilkerson, Gagnon, Melekoglu & Cakiroglu, 2012).
Juvenile Court Schools’ Student Population
On any given day, there are approximately 48,000 incarcerated juveniles in the United
States sentenced to serve an average of 30 days in a court appointed detention facility. In 1973,
the first JCS were established in California by the California General Assembly to serve
expelled, adjudicated, paroled and incarcerated juvenile students (Wolford, 2000). In the state of
California, there are approximately 5000 incarcerated students per day and 26,000 juvenile
students per year who are served by the 74 juvenile courts schools (CDE, 2015-16). Over the
past 40 years of research on JCS student populations, several key characteristics have been
identified related to the students who are served by a JCS: a) approximately 45% of incarcerated
students having had or need special education services, b) approximately 30% of incarcerated
students are English Language Learners, and c) currently a large number of students are
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 27

identified as a vulnerable student population due to foster care, poverty, being a student of color,
juveniles having been traumatized or maltreated, and identifying as lesbian, gay, bisexual, and
transgender (LGBT) (Leone & Wruble, 2015; Mallet, 2016; Thompson & Morris, 2016). In a
2005 national survey of the 51 heads of state departments of juvenile or combined juvenile and
adult corrections, 47.7% of incarcerated juveniles were identified with an emotional disturbance
and 38.6% with a specific learning disability (Quinn, Rutherford, Leone, Osher & Poirier, 2005).
Furthermore, these aforementioned students often perform three to four grade levels below their
non-incarcerated peers (Leone & Wurble, 2015; Pyle et al., 2016).
Juvenile Court Schools’ Academic Performance
Incarcerated juvenile students exhibit poor academic performance that is measured below
their non-incarcerated peers (Green, Shippen & Flores, 2017). Assessment of literacy skills
amongst incarcerated juveniles reveals that 55%-61% of these students as having a reading
impairment, in which 33% of these students read at a 4
th
grade level and many reading
approximately 2-4 grade levels below their non-incarcerated peers (Metsala et al., 2017;
Thompson & Morris, 2016). Supporting data includes standardized state test scores that reveal
significantly lower scores for incarcerated juveniles and students who are served by JCS (Green
et al., 2017). Due to the transient nature of the student population, many students are often
missing test scores, therefore creating gaps in their academic cumulative files and records that
contain valuable information concerning their academic needs (Clark, Mathurs, Brook,
Cummings & Milligan, 2016). With a history of poor academic performance and low literacy
skills, incarcerated juveniles and students served by JCS are identified as a high risk to drop out
of school and considered a vulnerable student population (Gregory et al., 2010; Mallet, 2016).

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 28

Juvenile Court Schools’ Teaching Staff
Juvenile court school teachers work with a vulnerable and traumatized student population
(Mallet, 2016), however, a study on school staff perceptions of the challenges of working with
court involved students, noted that teachers felt ill-equipped to address the intellectual and
emotional needs of these traumatized students (Crosby et al., 2015). According to Shippen,
Houchins and Lockwood (2014), approximately 38% of incarcerated students have a disability
compared to 12% in a typical school, 45% deal with substance abuse issues, 65% have at least
one mental disorder, and 25% have been physically or sexually abused. Yet, the researchers
reveal that JCS teachers receive little to no pre-service preparation for teaching traumatized
students in a JCS context.
Teachers working in JCS are highly trained in the traditional educational settings, with
one study reporting 56.9% of JCS teachers holding a graduate degree beyond their credential
(Wilkerson et al., 2012). Although JCS teachers are highly trained in their content, they require
professional development and training that is focused on the unique needs of teaching in a
secured facility (Shippen et al., 2014). It is reported in one study that approximately 73% of JCS
teachers teach in self-contained classrooms, covering instruction for multiple content areas
(Wilkerson et al., 2012). In addition to teaching multiple subjects, Gagnon et al. (2012) maintain
that many teachers within the JCS system feel that their instructional materials, technology, and
curriculum are limited and/or out of date with current standards and practices to meet the various
demands of their student population. Moreover, when provided resources, JCS teachers need
guidance on how to adapt and contextualize these resources for the JCS and juvenile detention
center settings (Gagnon et al., 2012). Although there are challenges that JCS teachers face,
Leone, Krezmien, Mason and Meisel (2005) and Kirkland (2017) point to juvenile court teachers
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 29

as the key to reversing the school-to-prison pipeline. Kirkland emphasizes quality literacy
instruction as the key to create a new school-to-opportunity pipeline for the vulnerable student
population that JCS teachers serve.
Literacy Instruction in Juvenile Court Schools
Quality literacy instruction, established as the foundation for secondary academic success
(Swanson et al., 2016), is crucial for the academic success of JCS students (Lipsey, Howell,
Kelly, Chapaman & Carver, 2010). However, due to the unique challenges of serving detained
juveniles and organizational structure of JCS, barriers for quality literacy instruction within JCS
classrooms hinder quality literacy instruction.
Barriers for Quality Literacy Instruction
Quality academic literacy instruction and intervention requires a systematic approach that
allocates appropriate resources and enacts policies and procedures that focus on rehabilitation for
success rather than being punitive in nature (Kirkland, 2017; Nelson, Jolivette, Leone & Mathur,
2010). In order to create a systematic approach to ensure quality literacy instruction occurs,
juvenile court systems and juvenile detention centers need to have a greater understanding of the
role the JCS teachers play in the rehabilitation of their students (Kirkland, 2017; Leone &
Wruble, 2015; Metsala et al., 2017). JCS teachers often embrace effective literacy instruction,
but the punitive environment of juvenile detention centers, which house JCS, limits their ability
to effectively implement these instructional practices (Mallet, 2016; Wilkerson et al., 2012).
Many juvenile detention centers embrace the “punishment mentality” and overlook a large
population of juveniles that are incarcerated due to incorrigibility, truancy and to gain access to
mental health services (Nelson et al., 2010). Therefore, due to the “punishment mentality,
correctional officers focus on discipline through restrictions, which often limits JCS teachers
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 30

access to resources for students (Mallet, 2016). Gagnon et al. (2012) point out that often,
teachers and correctional officers are in direct conflict with one another in how to engage with
students served by JCS. Teacher and student safety is a key focus of correctional officers, not
best practices for instruction (Garcia, Catania & Nofziger, 2012). For example, collaborative
learning activities have shown to increase reading comprehension skills, especially when
bridging between basic comprehension to a more complex or sophisticated comprehension of a
text (Leu et al., 2017; Marchland-Martella et al., 2013). However, collaborative learning
opportunities are often limited or cannot be implemented in the JCS setting due to safety
concerns (Garcia et al., 2012; Wilkerson, Gagnon, Mason-Williams & Lane, 2012). The
researchers found that due to some students being required to be handcuffed, gang affiliation,
and other risk factors, students may not be allowed to work or talk with other students in the
classroom or have access to materials that could potentially be a weapon (Garcia et al., 2012;
Wilkerson et al., 2012). With a student population that is predominantly a high safety risk, JCS
teachers are required to make adjustments to instruction to meet the safety protocols put in place
by the juvenile detention center (Garcia et al., 2012; Gagnon et al., 2012).
The transient nature of the student population in JCS creates challenges in planning how
to provide appropriate student support and allocate instructional resources, as students move in
and out of juvenile detention centers (McDaniel, 2015). Additionally, a 2014 U.S. Department of
Education Report (Alexander & Lewis, 2014) proclaimed that many JCS face severe funding
restrictions that affect access to instructional technology, curriculum resources and student
support services, as dedicated funding is based on per pupil average daily attendance (ADA).
Furthermore, Leone and Wruble (2015) specify that JCS without dedicated budgets based on a
per pupil cost basis puts these schools at a disadvantage compared to traditional secondary
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 31

schools. Dedicated funding is a primary determinate for planning professional learning
opportunities, replacing and updating instructional materials, staffing needs, and acquiring
student support services (Houchins, Pucket-Patterson, Crosby, Shippen & Jolivette, 2009; Leone
& Wruble, 2015). A barrier often cited by JCS teachers to quality literacy instruction is the lack
of rigorous and up-to-date curriculum (Houchins et al., 2009).
The lack of resources and professional learning opportunities combined with restrictions
on how to interact with the student population creates barriers for teachers within the JCS to
develop and implement quality literacy instruction (Houchins et al., 2009). If JCS teachers are to
play a critical role in the academic success of juvenile offenders, this will require professional
learning opportunities and resources in order to provide quality literacy instruction and
interventions to meet the needs of their student population (Kirkland, 2016; Leone et al., 2010;
Leone & Wruble, 2015; Shippen et al., 2014).
Quality Literacy Instruction in Juvenile Court Schools
JCS that have embraced a culture of learning and implemented empirically based literacy
instruction have experienced positive growth in their students’ literacy skills (Bloomberg &
Pesta, 2017; McCray et al., 2018; Steele, Bozick & Davis, 2016; Wilkerson et al., 2012).
Researchers have discovered that both vocabulary development and reading fluency increases
significantly when literacy instruction utilized explicit strategies to analyze text for meaning and
were collaborative in nature. (Baumann, 2014; Conley, 2014; Metsala et al., 2017). In a recent
case study, incarcerated students participated in a peer mediated intervention, focused on basic
reading comprehension discussing the main ideas presented in non-fiction texts (Wexler, Reed,
Barton, Mitchell & Clancy, 2017). In the study of Wexler et al. (2017), students improved their
basic comprehension skills and began the transition from basic comprehension to the more
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 32

complex comprehension skills that Leu et al. (2017) outlined by reading to locate information,
synthesizing information and discussing main ideas and concepts. Likewise, Bloomberg and
Pesta’s (2017) study reveals that when JCS implement quality literacy instruction, students can
perform at the same grade level expectations of their non-incarcerated peers.
However, safety concerns can impose restrictions on empirically based literacy
instruction, especially collaborative instructional strategies and use of technology (Gagnon et al.,
2012). According to a study on instructional practices in juvenile courts schools, approximately
42% of JCS classrooms did not allow for students to utilize technology during instruction
(Wilkerson et al., 2012). Furthermore, due to zero to limited technology use in JCS classrooms,
57% of teachers were unable to utilize hypertext documents to provide individual instructional
support (Wilkerson et al., 2012). The need for teachers to modify and adjust instructional
strategies and allocation of resources to maintain safe conditions for both teacher and students
limits utilization of places limitations on key literacy instructional practices (Garcia et al., 2012).
In light of the documented need for teacher and student safety (Garcia et al., 2012), there
are limited professional development opportunities for JCS teachers on how to effectively adjust
empirically proven instructional practices to maintain a safe classroom environment within a
juvenile detention center (Gagnon et., 2012; Wilkerson et al., 2012). Shippen et al. (2014)
recommend that JCS teachers be provided more opportunities to collaborate and learn from one
another, citing that much of the educational professional development and curriculum specialists
lack understanding of the unique safety concerns of JCS. The aforementioned collaborative
professional development opportunities for JCS teachers should be active learning sessions in
which participants are engaged in interactive discussions, peer observations and feedback
sessions (Houchins, Shippen & Murphy, 2012). In order for JCS teachers to implement effective
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 33

changes with fidelity, Houchins et al. (2012) emphasize that learning from peers who are familiar
with the needs and challenges of the JCS context is crucial.
Although there is an apparent dearth of research on quality literacy instruction in JCS, the
results of those studies have shown positive results (Bloomberg & Pesta, 2017; McCray et al.,
2018; Steele et al., 2016; Wexler et al., 2017). If the goal of JCS is to rehabilitate and prepare
students to return to their traditional comprehensive middle or high school, then a shift from
punitive and reactive instructional program to an adoption of a proactive, preventative and
developmentally appropriate instructional framework needs to be implemented that embraces
effective literacy instructional practices (Jolivette, Scheuermann & Parks-Ennis, 2015).
Incarcerated juveniles who are served by JCS are among the least academically proficient
students (Alexander & Lewis, 2014), yet research supports that if students receive quality
literacy instruction, not only do students gain literacy skills to help them succeed academically, it
is a contributing factor in reducing recidivism in juvenile offenders (Leone & Wruble, 2015;
Metsala et al., 2017; Thompson & Morris, 2013).
Literacy and Risk for Recidivism
A key factor in identifying high risk for recidivism, becoming a repeat offender, among
incarcerated juveniles are low academic performance, more specifically low literacy skills
(Green et al., 2017; Thompson & Morris, 2016). When examining characteristics that repeat
offenders possess, Limited English Proficiency and low literacy skills are listed with trauma,
substance abuse, poverty, and being a student of color (Fujimoto et al., 2013; Kirkland, 2017;
Leone & Wruble, 2015; Thompson & Morris, 2016). Kirkland (2017) argues that disparities in
literacy education is a significant force that increases a young person’s likelihood of a life of
incarceration. In a study of the effects of education on recidivism, Hirsch, Dierkhising and Herz
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 34

(2018) note that targeted academic interventions, which includes literacy interventions, are
needed to reduce the risk of recidivism of juvenile offenders.
Impact of Literacy
Comprehensive academic literacy intervention that improves the reading and writing
skills of incarcerated juveniles are effective in combatting recidivism, which prepares students to
successfully return and complete traditional high school (Bloomberg & Pesta, 2017; Hirsch et al.,
2018; Svensson, Falth, Persson & Nilsson, 2017). Moreover, Steele et al. (2016) reveal that
when students’ literacy skills improve while incarcerated, these students increase their
probability of completing a diploma program or career certification program by 30%. Leu et al.
(2017) insists that students need to learn new literacies in order to be successful in the 21
st

century. In a framework of best practices for improving the effectiveness of juvenile justice
systems, skill building (which includes academics and literacy instruction) is listed with
counseling and multiple services as being highly effective in combatting recidivism (Lipsey et
al., 2010). In conjunction with the framework of Lipsey et al. (2010), Lipsey (2009) states that
effective skill building within the JCS setting is equally effective as outside preventative
measures in curbing recidivism. Therefore, JCS and detention centers that embrace a culture of
learning can equip incarcerated students with the necessary skills to succeed academically, return
to a traditional high school, and acquire the necessary literacy skills to be successful in the 21
st

Century (Bloomberg & Pesta, 2017; Svensson et al., 2017).
Clark and Estes’ (2008) Gap Analysis Theoretical Framework
Clark and Estes (2008) provide a systematic, analytic framework that clarifies
organizational and stakeholder performance goals and identifies the gap between the actual
stakeholder performance level and the stakeholder performance goal. Upon identifying the
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 35

stakeholder performance gap, Clark and Estes’ (2008) framework provides systematic processes
to examine the stakeholder knowledge, motivation and organizational influences that may impact
performance gaps. The four types of knowledge that could influence the stakeholder’s ability to
achieve the stakeholder goal are: (a) factual; (b) conceptual; (c) procedural; and (d)
metacognitive (Krathwohl, 2002). Motivation influences to be analyzed may include: (a) the
choice to consider goal achievement; (b) continuing to work towards the goal; and (c) the mental
effort to accomplish the goal (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). Motivational influences can
be examined through the motivational principles of self-efficacy, attributions, values and goals
(Rueda, 2011). Finally, organizational influences on stakeholder performance to consider may
include work processes, resources and workplace culture (Clark & Estes, 2008).
In this review, each of these elements of Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis will be
examined in terms of the teacher’s knowledge, motivation and organizational needs to meet the
performance goal of developing and implementing six literacy units of study by January 2019.
The first section will be a discussion of assumed influences on the stakeholder performance goal
in the context of knowledge and skills. Next, assumed influences on the attainment of the
stakeholder goal from the perspective of motivation will be considered. Finally, assumed
organizational influences on achievement of the stakeholder goal will be explored. Each of these
assumed stakeholder knowledge, motivation and organizational influences on performance will
then be examined through the methodology discussed in Chapter 3.
Stakeholder Knowledge Influences
Knowledge and Skills
Central Valley Juvenile Court Schools (CVJCS) provide an alternative educational
setting for students who are currently incarcerated or serving an expulsion from a comprehensive
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 36

high school. CVJCS must provide the same access to a quality education as comprehensive high
schools. To fulfill the California State Priority for Pupil Outcomes, CVJCS set an organizational
goal to increase from 5% to 9% of students meeting the state standards in ELA on the Smarter
Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) annual assessment. The stakeholders’ goal,
supported by the Executive Director, is that 100% of CVJCS teachers will develop and
implement six literacy units that address the four focus areas of literacy: reading, writing,
speaking/listening, and academic vocabulary. Literacy instructional practices include activities
such as close reading of both non-fiction and literary fiction, writing across the curriculum,
regular academic discourse, analysis of both print and media text, and a focus on the use of
academic language.
To assess the extent to which the CVJCS teaching staff possess the knowledge and skills
to develop and implement literacy instructional practices in their daily unit and lesson plans, it
was important to evaluate and determine if a gap in knowledge may have contributed to the
success, or lack thereof, of meeting CVJCS’s goal. Clark and Estes (2008) refer to this process as
a gap analysis, which was a critical first step in evaluating whether the CVJCS staff possessed
the knowledge of how to attain their goal(s). In this study, the gap analysis was used as a
framework to guide the subsequent research, as well as the literature review that follows in the
sections below.
The literature focuses on particular aspects of knowledge and skills that influence the
CVJCS teaching staff’s attainment of their goal of developing and implementing six literacy
units of study. Furthermore, the literature review includes a deeper analysis of the procedural
knowledge, the knowledge that Krathwohl (2002) defines as the knowledge of how specific
knowledge and skills can be used to accomplish a goal.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 37

Knowledge influences. A prerequisite for the CVJCS teaching staff to meet their
stakeholder goal of developing and implementing literacy-based units of study is the acquisition
of certain knowledge and skills of literacy units and instruction. Krathwohl (2002) identifies
four types of knowledge (factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive) that are essential to
the process of evaluating an organizational knowledge gap. To ensure the CVJCS’s teaching
staff can accomplish their stakeholder goal, an evaluation of their factual and procedural
knowledge provided important data in order to develop and provide the necessary professional
development and support. Due to the stakeholder goal being both the development and
implementation, the study required a deeper look beyond factual knowledge of literacy
terminology and the key elements and details of literacy instruction (Krathwohl, 2002). This
study focused on the evaluation of the CVJCS’ teaching staff’s procedural knowledge; the
understanding of how to do something (Krathwohl, 2002), of developing and implementing
literacy units. In order to effectively evaluate the CVJCS’s teaching staff’s procedural
knowledge, the study first examined the CVJCS’s teaching staff’s factual knowledge to establish
a foundation to explore their procedural knowledge.
Krathwohl (2002) categorizes procedural knowledge into three domains: 1) subject
specific skills; 2) subject specific techniques and methods; 3) subject specific criteria of when to
use appropriate procedures. To evaluate if the CVJCS teaching staff can obtain their stakeholder
goal of developing and implementing literacy-based units of study, a gap analysis focused on
two of the three domains; CVJCS’ teaching staff’s procedural knowledge of appropriate literacy
skills and appropriate literacy instructional methods (Clark & Estes, 2008; Krathwohl, 2002).
Assessing appropriate literacy skills. In order to meet the stakeholder goal of developing
and implementing six literacy units, CVJCS teachers must first understand the appropriate
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 38

literacy skills students need to possess to succeed academically. Shanahan and Shanahan (2008)
assert that although reading comprehension is the primary skill required to be successful at the
secondary level, these skills are exhibited in a variety of manner depending on the content
discipline. By engaging students in critical thinking exercises, academic discourse and writing in
response to the content, Shanahan and Shanahan (2008) reveal how teachers across all secondary
content areas can improve student reading comprehension. Additionally, Kamil et al. (2007)
identify three key literacy skills that juvenile readers need to possess to be proficient readers: 1)
schema to build vocabulary; 2) schema to apply the appropriate comprehension strategy; 3)
schema to engage in extended academic discourse of their readings. These three literacy skills or
schema, should be included in each literacy-based unit of study (Kamil et el., 2007; Shanahan &
Shanahan, 2008). Moreover, Leu et al. (2017) identify new key literacy comprehension skills
that are vital for academic and professional success in the 21
st
Century, which includes: 1)
Reading to Identify Important Questions; 2) Reading to Locate Information; 3) Reading to
Evaluate Information Critically; 4) Reading to Synthesize Information; 5) Reading to
Communicate.
Application of Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework included interviews with
the CVJCS teaching staff to evaluate their factual and procedural knowledge of how to build
schema in order to develop the new essential literacies outlined by that Leu et al. (2017). It was
important to evaluate their prior knowledge to determine how to create professional development
opportunities and support systems to help the CVJCS teaching staff acquire the literacy
component skills and the knowledge of how and when to apply those skills to their current
practice (Pintrich 2003; Shraw & McCrudden 2006).
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 39

Assessing appropriate instructional methods. After evaluating the CVJCS teaching
staff’s factual and procedural knowledge of how to build the appropriate literacy skills students
need to possess, it was important to assess and evaluate their procedural knowledge of
appropriate literacy based instructional methods (implementation of literacy units of study).
Krathwohl (2002) identifies subject specific techniques and methods as the second domain of
procedural knowledge. Therefore, it was necessary for the CVJCS’ teaching staff to be
evaluated not just on their development of literacy-based units of study, but also the
effectiveness of their delivery of the units of study. Heller and Greenleaf (2007) point to the
need for quality literacy-based instruction in all content areas at the secondary level and that
direct instruction on literacy skills is an essential component for students’ academic success.
Additionally, Jacobs (2008) emphasizes how secondary literacy-based instructional methods
differ from primary literacy-based instructional methods, yet many secondary teachers lack the
procedural knowledge to effectively deliver this instruction. Jacobs (2008) emphasizes that
secondary literacy instruction focus on meaning making and that secondary literacy instructional
methods need to consider race, ethnicity, language, socioeconomics, and gender when delivering
instruction. When considering Leu et al.’s (2017) new literacies, Jacobs (2008) assertions
provide key insight on how to a procedurally implement instruction to develop these new
literacies in a collaborative manner.
The gap analysis of the CVJCS teaching staff procedural knowledge of appropriate
literacy instructional delivery was significant in evaluating the stakeholder goal of developing
and implementing literacy-based units of study. For CVJCS, the implementation is crucial for
attaining the global goal of increasing from 5% to 9% of CVJCS students scoring at the
proficient level of the SBAC exam. Heller and Greenleaf (2007) state that students’ success
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 40

requires not just a well-developed unit, but, more importantly, the delivery and implementation
of the unit of study. In addition, Faggella-Luby et al. (2009) point to three areas of instructional
delivery (methods) that are crucial for juvenile literacy instruction: 1) direct instruction of
essential content and vocabulary; 2) cognitive skills: providing collaborative learning
opportunities as well as direct instruction and reciprocal teaching; 3) critical thinking skills:
providing opportunities for students to apply skills in a variety of scenarios, texts, and content.
The three key areas of literacy instruction that Faggella-Luby et al. (2009) directly correlates
with Kamil et al. (2007) three essential literacy skills, which all bridge into Leu et al.’s (2017)
new literacies that students need to be successful academically and professionally.
Table 2 illustrates the organizational mission, global goal, stakeholder goal, and four
knowledge influences identified in this literature review.
Table 2
Knowledge Influences on Stakeholder Goal
Organizational Mission
Central Valley Juvenile Court School is chartered to provide high-risk students an alternative
educational setting where they can develop the social, academic, and life skills to be transitioned
successfully back to their home schools or to complete the general equivalency diploma (GED).
Organizational Global Goal
By May 2019, Central Valley Juvenile Court School’s student performance in ELA will increase
from 5% to 9% of students meeting the state standards on the SBAC assessment.
Stakeholder Goal
By January 2019, 100% of Central Valley Juvenile Court School teachers will develop and
implement six literacy units that address the four focus areas of literacy: reading, writing,
speaking/listening and academic vocabulary.
Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type Knowledge Influence
Assessment
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 41

(i.e., declarative (factual or
conceptual), procedural, or
metacognitive)
Teachers need knowledge of
appropriate literacy skills
secondary students need.

Teachers need knowledge of
the appropriate literacy
instructional methods.

Teachers need knowledge of
how to develop appropriate
literacy instructional units.

Teachers need knowledge of
how to implement appropriate
secondary literacy units of
study.
Declarative

Declarative

Procedural

Procedural
Interview questions that
focused on teacher’s
knowledge of key literacy
skills that secondary students
need.

Interview questions that
focused on teacher’s
knowledge of literacy
instructional methods for
secondary teachers.

Interview questions that
focused on how to develop
literacy instructional units to
address the needs of secondary
students.

Interview questions that
focused on how to deliver
instruction of literacy units of
study to secondary students.

Stakeholder Motivation Influences
The success or failure of CVJCS to successfully reach their stakeholder goal depends
largely upon how motivated the CVJCS teaching staff are to develop and implement literacy
units of study. Rueda (2011) identifies motivation as a critical component of a stakeholder
starting, continuing, and completing the task, as it reveals how stakeholders perceive themselves
as learners and achievers. Thus, the teaching staff of CVJCS must be motivated to both develop
and implement literacy units of study to achieve their stakeholder goal.
Motivation is influenced by a variety of factors. Two specific factors are critical to the
success of the CVJCS teaching staff attaining their goal. First, the CVJCS teaching staff needs
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 42

to believe they are capable of effectively developing literacy units that address the four focus
areas of literacy. This belief in their ability is what Bandura (1991) identifies as self-efficacy in
his social cognitive theory. Bandura defines self-efficacy as individual’s belief that he/she can
complete the task at hand successfully. Second, the CVJCS teaching staff needs to attribute the
success or failure of developing and implementing literacy units of study to their own efforts.
Anderman and Anderman (2009) note that it is critical to attribute success or failure to effort
rather than ability. By evaluating the CVJCS teaching staff’s motivation through Anderman
and Anderman’s attribution theory, the researcher can examine how accurate feedback from
professional development and support structures for developing their procedural knowledge
also contributed to their motivation to accomplish their stakeholder goal.
Self-Efficacy Theory. Bandura’s (1991) social cognitive theory indicates that to
successfully attain a goal, one’s belief that they possess the abilities or can learn the necessary
abilities to accomplish the task are necessary for success. This belief in one’s self (self-efficacy)
is the key to starting, continuing and completing the task or goal (Bandura, 1991; Rueda 2011).
If an individual does not believe they possess the skills and ability to accomplish the goal or task,
then they have minimal motivation to start or even engage in the task or goal. Bandura argues
that self-efficacy is a key component of motivation for an individual to successfully accomplish a
goal or task.
To increase self-efficacy, Pajares (1996) declares it is critical to clearly communicate to
individuals that they can learn the necessary skills to develop the abilities to successfully
complete the task or goal. In order to successfully communicate and instruct individuals in
learning the necessary skills to accomplish an objective, it is important to set close, concrete and
challenging goals that allow and lead to success for the individual (Pajares, 1996). Stakeholder
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 43

success occurs by providing multiple opportunities for goal-directed practice utilizing a gradual
release model of scaffolding with constant immediate feedback on the progress of attaining the
targeted goal (Borgogni, Russo & Latham,, 2011; Pajares 1996). Pintrich (2003) even suggests
directly linking reward to the progress towards successful completion and learning. Bandura
(1991) indicates that individuals with low self-efficacy can be raised by positive experiences and
feedback, therefore, if an individual possess low self-efficacy it can be reversed by positive
experiences and feedback. Bandura (1991) identifies these two factors as mastery experience
and social persuasion.
CVJCS’s teaching staff’s self-efficacy. The CVJCS’s teaching staff needs to
understand how self-efficacy contributes to their development of literacy units. A study
conducted by Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2007) demonstrated the direct correlation between
teacher self-efficacy and its impact on student performance. In their research, Tschannen-Moran
and Hoy (2007) indicated that low teacher self-efficacy leads to low motivation, resulting in
teachers not creating the curriculum and instruction (units of study) that leads to student success.
Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2007) discovered that two key components of Bandura’s (1991)
four major influences on teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs (A. mastery experiences, B. verbal
persuasion, C. vicarious experiences, and D. physiological arousal), mastery experiences and
verbal persuasion had the biggest impact on improving teacher self-efficacy. Borgogni et al.
(2011), Pajares (1996) and Pintrich (2003) support Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2007) assertion
that teacher self-efficacy increases with mastery experiences of success and verbal persuasion
through effective immediate feedback.
When developing professional development opportunities for the CVJCS teaching staff,
the goals should include professional development opportunities that have close, concrete and
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 44

challenging task that allow and lead to success for the individual with gradual release of
scaffolds (Borgogni et al., 2011; Pajares, 1996) Likewise, support systems need to provide
immediate accurate targeted feedback on progress of learning and performance (Pajares, 1996).
By providing professional development and support systems that focus on mastery experiences
and verbal persuasion, CVJCS can reduce and alleviate factors that could be affecting the self-
efficacy of their teaching staff in regard to developing and implementing literacy units of study.
As indicated in Tschannen-Moran and Hoy’s (2007) study, increasing teacher self-
efficacy could be instrumental in CVJCS teacher motivation to develop and implement literacy
units of study. In addition, not only are teachers successful in accomplishing their goals and
tasks, student performance increases because of better curriculum and instruction (Tschannen-
Moran and Hoy, 2007).
Attribution Theory. Attribution theory is linked to self-efficacy theory in that both
contribute to the motivation of individuals to begin, persist and complete a goal, and both rely on
effective feedback for successful completion of the goal (Anderman & Anderman, 2006:
Pintrich, 2003). Attribution theory explains how individuals attribute success or failure to effort
rather than ability, therefore individuals need to understand that self-efficacy is driven by effort
and perception more than ability (Anderman & Anderman, 2009). Tschannen-Moran and Hoy’s
(2007) study indicate that Bandura’s (1991) mastery experiences and verbal persuasion
components are instrumental in developing strong teacher self-efficacy. In both mastery
experiences and verbal persuasion, accurate feedback that stresses the importance of effort and
self-control are critical elements that lead to success (Pintrich, 2003). The feedback attributes
the success on the effort, or the motivation of the individual to begin, persist and complete the
task.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 45

CVJCS attributes for success. The CVJCS teaching staff needs to attribute the success
or failure of developing and implementing literacy units of study to their own efforts. Brinson
and Steiner (2007) address the need for school leadership to provide accurate actionable
feedback to create a sense of ownership of the instruction and learning that occurs in their
classrooms. Furthermore, Elmore (2007) and Brinson and Steiner (2007) point to the need to
empower teachers, as empowered teachers understand that it is their effort and self-efficacy that
leads to improved student performance. When applying Anderman and Anderman’s (2009)
attribution theory to the context of CVJCS, it is significant to note that the goal is not to place
blame, but to empower teachers implement the literacy-based units of study to impact student
performance.
In creating professional development opportunities and support systems to empower the
CVJCS teaching staff, Pintrich (2003) stresses that accurate feedback with a focus on the
importance of effort and self-control are critical elements that lead to success. With a focus on
mastery experience and verbal persuasion, increased teacher self-efficacy will shift the
ownership of the success of the development and implementation of their literacy-based units of
study to the CVJCS teaching staff. This shift will lead to teachers attributing the success or
failure of the implementation on their own efforts.
Table 3 illustrates the organizational mission, global goal, stakeholder goal, and two
motivation influences identified in this literature review.

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 46

Table 3
Motivation Influences on Stakeholder Goal
Organizational Mission
Central Valley Juvenile Court School is chartered to provide high-risk students an alternative
educational setting where they can develop the social, academic, and life skills to be
transitioned successfully back to their home schools or to complete the general equivalency
diploma (GED).
Organizational Global Goal
By May 2019, Central Valley Juvenile Court School’s student performance in ELA will
increase from 5% to 9% of students meeting the state standards on the SBAC assessment.
Stakeholder Goal
By January 2019, 100% of Central Valley Juvenile Court School teachers will develop and
implement six literacy units that address the four focus areas of literacy: reading, writing,
speaking/listening and academic vocabulary.
Assumed Motivation Influences Motivation Influence Assessment
Instructors need to believe they are capable of
effectively developing units of study that
address the four focus areas of literacy.

CVJCS teaching staff needs to attribute the
success or failure of developing and
implementing literacy unit of study to their
own efforts
Interview item: “Please describe the process
of how you personally prepare to develop a
literacy-based unit of study?”

Interview item: “How well equipped do you
feel you are to develop literacy-based units of
study?”

Interview item: “When considering your
student population, what challenges do you
anticipate as teacher that you will need to
address in developing literacy-based units of
study?”

Interview item: “Think about a time when you
had to make an unexpected adjustment in
your delivery of a literacy-based lesson.
Walk me through what happened?”

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 47

Organization Influences
Clark and Estes (2008) indicate that even when stakeholders possess the necessary
knowledge and motivation to carry out their goal, inadequate processes or resources can create
barriers that hinder accomplishing the organizational goal. Furthermore, Schein (2004) states
that there should be a shared understanding of values, resources and systems of support that
equip the stakeholder to accomplish both the stakeholder and organizational goals. Clark and
Estes (2008) and Schein (2004) indicate that organizational culture impacts all efforts to improve
performance and if an organizational change is to be effective, leaders must consider all aspects
of an organization’s culture.
Several researchers indicate that organizational culture drives organizational
improvement efforts (Kezar, 2001; Langley et al., 2009; Moran & Brightman, 2009).
Organizational culture not only frames the how and what of improvement efforts, but more
importantly, the reason for the improvement effort (Kezar, 2001). Specifically, the researcher
explains that it is the intentionality of organizational leadership that guides the effort and
leadership must effectively communicate the scale and focus of the change effort to bring about
the desired results. In order to create critical mass for a change effort to take effect, Moran and
Brightman (2000) emphasis that there needs to be an alignment with both individual changes
(knowledge and motivation) and the organization change efforts. Furthermore, the researchers
state that change is both a top-down and bottom-up effort that requires effort and buy in from all
stakeholders involved in the change effort.
When implementing change efforts, Langley et al. (2009) emphasis that there are three
questions that drive that change effort: 1) What are we trying to accomplish? 2) How will we
know that a change is an improvement? 3) What changes can we make that will result in
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 48

improvement? For JCS, such as CVJCS, there are a variety of specific and unique challenges
that require teaching staff to be equipped to address in classrooms. Professional development,
clear instructional goals, and effective feedback are essential elements to ensure that the teaching
staff of CVJCS is equipped to address the instructional needs of their student population (Leone
& Wruble, 2015; Shippen et al., 2014). When organizational goals and policies conflict with
organizational culture, performance problems are likely to occur (Clark & Estes, 2008). To
avoid conflict between an organization and its stakeholders, leadership should take into
consideration the needs of the stakeholders and examine if the needs of the stakeholders align
with the organizational efforts (Clark & Estes, 2008; Moran & Brightman, 2009). CVJCS can
align their improvement efforts with the teaching staff by addressing the three questions outlined
by Langley et al. (2009): 1) Do the change efforts match with both the stakeholder and
organizational goals? 2) Are the efforts measurable? 3) Are the efforts effective in creating the
desired changes?
Professional Development. Professional development is necessary to prepare teachers
with the knowledge and skills necessary to the meet the unique instructional and learning needs
of the student population of juvenile court appointed schools (Shippen et al., 2014). Researchers
observe that juvenile court appointed schools face many unique challenges, including low
academic performance, high numbers of students with Special Education needs, traumatized
students and consist of a disproportionate number of students of color (Crosby et al., 2015;
Leone & Wruble, 2015; Mallet, 2016; Metsala et al., 2017). With a wide range of student needs
coupled with the trauma of incarceration, JCS teachers require professional development
opportunities to build their knowledge of literacy instructional practices (Kirkland, 2017; Leone
& Wruble, 2015; Swanson et al., 2016; Wanzek, 2015; Wilson, 2014). Kirkland (2017)
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 49

emphasizes that JCS teachers need to receive specific professional development that is focused
on meeting the academic needs of incarcerated students, as well as literacy instructional training.
Professional development opportunities have a significant impact on teacher knowledge
and motivation, therefore having significant impact on the implementation of quality literacy
instruction (Sailors, 2008; Wilson, 2014). When considering the amount of knowledge that JCS
teachers’ need to meet the literacy needs of incarcerated students, professional development is a
significant contributing factor to their success in impacting the academic performance of
incarcerated students (Sailors, 2008; Shippen et al., 2014; Wilson, 2014). In addition to literacy
instructional knowledge, JCS require teachers to have knowledge of how long-term trauma from
drugs, homelessness, abuse, neglect, racial injustice, and criminal lifestyles affect how students
learn and behave (Kirkland et al., 2017; Leone & Wruble, 2015; Shippen et al., 2014). One of
the essential components of change posed by Langley et al. (2009) is to know what changes that
will result in improvement. Professional development that focuses on equipping JCS teachers
with the necessary knowledge for the demands of teaching incarcerated juveniles would be an
effective change that leads to improvement.
Clear vision and directives for literacy instruction. Alignment between the CVJCS
teaching staff and CVJCS administration is crucial for the success of meeting the stakeholder and
organizational goal (Moran & Brightman, 2009). Clark and Estes (2008) argue that
organizational policies and culture should align, as policies often provide directives for
stakeholders as a point of reference on how to carry out the vision and goals of the organization.
Consequently, when Wilson (2014) points to the impact that literacy instruction has on
combatting recidivism, the CVJCS administration therefore needs to communicate a clear vision
and directives on how to carry out instructional interventions.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 50

Effective feedback on instructional practices. Kezar (2001) contends that organizational
leadership is responsible for communicating the scale and focus of change efforts. An essential
element of communicating the scale and focus of change efforts is providing effective feedback
during the implementation and ongoing progress of the change effort initiatives. Effective
feedback for teachers should focus on their instructional practices and how those instructional
practices are contributing to the success of not only the school, but also providing their students
with the tools and knowledge to reverse their current path along the “school-to-prison-pipeline”
(Metsala et al., 2017; Wilson, 2014). One of the key characteristics of incarcerated juveniles is
their low academic performance, typically two to four grade levels below their non-incarcerated
peers (Pyle et al., 2016). If the goal of JCS it to rehabilitate and return incarcerated students back
to a comprehensive high school, it is imperative that the teaching staff receives effective
feedback on their instructional practices, as the impact of quality literacy instruction is
significant in combating recidivism in juvenile offenders (Leone & Wruble, 2015; Metsala et al.,
2017).
Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2007) demonstrate that teacher self-efficacy increases with
effective immediate feedback on their instructional efforts. When considering that Clark and
Estes (2008) state that stakeholders need the resources and processes to carry out both the
stakeholder and organizational goals, effective feedback provides guidance and builds their
efficacy in order to successfully meet the goal. The CVJCS teachers play an integral role in
meeting the organizational goal of increasing student ELA performance, as they provide the
direct instruction to students. Teacher self-efficacy is essential, if CVJCS is to meet their goal
and change efforts are to be fully implemented. Clear, concise effective feedback will not only
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 51

build teacher self-efficacy, but also allow the teaching staff and CVJCS to measure if their
improvement efforts are successful.
Table 4 introduces the organizational influences on the stakeholders’ progress toward
achieving the organizational goal. Each of the influences has a unique impact on CVJCS’s
teaching staff to develop and implement quality literacy units of study.
Table 4
Organizational Influences on Stakeholder Goal
Organizational Mission
Central Valley Juvenile Court School is chartered to provide high-risk students an alternative
educational setting where they can develop the social, academic, and life skills to be transitioned
successfully back to their home schools or to complete the general equivalency diploma (GED).
Organizational Global Goal
By May 2019, Central Valley Juvenile Court School’s student performance in ELA will increase
from 5% to 9% of students meeting the state standards on the SBAC assessment.
Stakeholder Goal
By January 2019, 100% of Central Valley Juvenile Court School teachers will develop and
implement six literacy units that address the four focus areas of literacy: reading, writing,
speaking/listening and academic vocabulary.
Assumed Organizational Influences Organizational Influence Assessment
CVJCS teachers need to receive professional
development opportunities to gain literacy
instruction knowledge.

Interview Items: “What kinds of professional
development/learning opportunities have you
had to participate in on the topic of literacy?”

Interview item: “Please share in detail about a
recent professional development/learning
opportunity you participated in that informed
your understanding of quality literacy
instruction.”

Interview item: “Thinking of working in a
juvenile court school, what types of
professional development/learning have you
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 52

CVJCS teachers need to receive clear
directives of the vision and goals for literacy
instruction.

CVJCS teachers need to experience effective
feedback on their instructional practices.

had that had a focus on the needs of the student
population in a juvenile court school?”

Interview item: “Please share in detail about a
recent professional development/learning
opportunity you participated in that informed
your understanding of the needs of juvenile
court school students?”

Interview item: “In your own words, please
share your school’s student literacy learning
outcomes.”

Interview item: “When developing literacy-
based units of study, what resources do you
typically use?”

Interview item: “Please describe the support
systems in place to assist you in developing
literacy-based units of study?”

Interview item: “How are student learning and
literacy goals communicated to the teaching
staff?”

Interview item: “Can you share with me the
type of feedback you receive about your
instructional practices?”

Interview item: “Please describe the support
systems in place to assist you in developing
literacy-based units of study.”

Conceptual Framework
A conceptual framework helps to align perceptions of a problem of practice, theories,
prior research findings, and previous literature addressing the issue in order to drive the study
(Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Although each independent influence is presented
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 53

individually, it is important to note that they do not operate in isolation of one another. This
study utilized a modified version of the Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis model as the
conceptual framework to identify the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences of
CVJCS’ teaching staff’s ability to develop and implement literacy units to enhance the academic
literacy performance of their student population, which is composed of struggling incarcerated
and expelled students. The necessity of literacy units of study to close the achievement gap
between incarcerated/expelled juveniles and their non-incarcerated peers is significant not only
for closing the achievement gap, but also in reducing recidivism (Leu et al., 2017; Leone &
Wruble, 2015; Metsala et al., 2017). In order to close performance gaps, it is first necessary to
identify each of the knowledge, motivation and organization gaps that affect the stakeholders to
determine appropriate solutions (Clark & Estes, 2008). Although the Clark and Estes’ (2008)
gap analysis model helps to identify causes of performance gaps, for the purpose of this study, a
modified version of the model was used to evaluate and identify the presence of gaps, versus
causes of gaps, in the key areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational barriers.
Identifying gaps in knowledge entails analysis of the four primary knowledge types that
contribute to learning and performance gaps, which include factual, conceptual, procedural, and
metacognition (Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda, 2011). Gaps in motivation impact one’s ability to start
a task, continue to persist until the task is complete, and to dedicate the required mental effort to
be successful (Clark & Estes, 2008; Pintrich, 2003). The third factor affecting the achievement of
performance goals are organizational barriers, are present when organizational processes and
resources are either limited or ineffective (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences, contribute to the CVJCS’ teaching
staff’s ability to develop and implement literacy units of study in order to increase student
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 54

performance. In order for CVJCS’ teaching staff to develop and implement literacy units of
study, teachers need to have the knowledge of the appropriate secondary literacy skills and
knowledge of the appropriate literacy instructional methods (Leu et al., 2017; Metsala et al.,
2017; Vaughn et al., 2013). CVJCS teachers must also be motivated to see the value in
developing and implementing literacy units of study in order to increase student performance
(Wanzek et al., 2015). Furthermore, CVJCS teachers need to receive clearly defined instructional
goals and objectives, professional development opportunities, and effective feedback from
CVJCS’ leadership in order to develop and implement literacy units of study (Leone & Wruble,
2015; Shippen et al., 2014).
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 55

Figure 1 provides a visual representation of the framework used for this study. As shown
in the figure, knowledge, motivation, and organizational elements affect the achievement of
CVJCS teachers developing and implementing literacy units of study.

Figure 1. Study conceptual framework: Modified Clark and Estes gap analysis.
Self-Efficacy and
Attribution
Theory
Develop
Literacy Based
Units of Study
CVJSS
Professional Development
Instructional Goals
Effective Feedback
CVJCS Goal:
Increase ELA
Proficiency from 5%
to 9% on SBAC
Implement
Literacy Based
Units of Study
Declarative and
Procedural
Knowledge
CVJCS Teacher Goal
Develop and Implement Six
Literacy Based Units of Study
Declarative and
Procedural
Knowledge
Self-Efficacy and
Attribution
Theory
Organizational Influences
Stakeholder Knowledge and Motivational Influences
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 56

The conceptual framework illustrates how the relationship between the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influencers affect the CVJCS teaching staff in accomplishing
their stakeholder goal of developing and implementing literacy units of study in order to
accomplish the organizational goal of increasing student ELA performance on the SBAC yearly
assessment. The conceptual framework is driven by the organizational goal of increasing
student performance on the ELA segment of the SBAC assessment, from a proficiency rate of
5% to 9% by May 2019. The organizational goal is identified in the peach colored square at the
top right of the conceptual framework. An arrow pointing to the CVJCS organizational
influencers from the organizational goal leads the reader to examine the organizational cultural
influences on the stakeholder of the study. It is in this gray colored box that we first explore the
three organizational influences on the stakeholder: professional development opportunities,
instructional goals, and effective feedback. In his extensive work on organizational leadership
and change, Shein (2004) states that organizational culture is a pattern of shared basic
assumptions and beliefs that are both externally adapted by the organization and internally
integrated by the individual stakeholders within the organization. Therefore, the shared cultural
beliefs and assumptions have a significant impact on the stakeholder’s knowledge and
motivation influencers since organizational cultural norms drive an organization towards its
goals.
When examining these shared assumptions and beliefs, it is important to first understand
that without adequate resources, process systems, and value chains and streams, an
organization’s cultural structure can prevent the stakeholder group from achieving their goal
(Clark & Estes, 2008). Thus, the first segment of the modified Gap Analysis is to examine if
CVJCS is providing adequate professional development for their teachers, clear instructional
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 57

goals, and giving effective feedback to teachers on their development and implementation of the
literacy units of study. Each of these three components are essential to equip CVJCS teachers to
meet the demands of providing instruction for their specific student population (Leone &
Wruble, 2015; Shippen et al., 2014).
From the organizational cultural square, the next element of the conceptual framework is
the green square that states the stakeholder (CVJCS teachers) goal. The two-way arrow between
the organizational culture and the stakeholder goal represents the alignment that needs to occur
between the organization’s goal and culture with the stakeholder goal. In order for the
stakeholder goal to carry out its part in accomplishing the organizational goal, there must be a
shared understanding of values, resources and systems of support that equip the stakeholder to
accomplish the goal (Clark & Estes, 2008; Schein, 2004).
Once it is established that the stakeholder goal aligns with the cultural norms and goal of
the organization, the stakeholder’s knowledge and motivation influences need to be examined.
From the gray organizational square there are two downward arrows that lead the reader to the
two components of the stakeholder goal: the left blue square representing the development of
literacy units of study and the right blue square representing the implementation of the literacy
units of study. As already established, the organizational culture directly affects the
stakeholder’s knowledge and motivation influences, therefore it is important to examine how the
organizational cultural influences both components of the stakeholder goal (Clark & Estes, 2008;
Schein, 2004). However, the stakeholder’s knowledge and motivation influencers on both
components of the goal must also be examined.
From the green stakeholder goal square, there are two two-way arrows that connect the
two blue squares, one to the left representing the development of the literacy units of study and
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 58

the right blues square representing the implementation of the literacy units of study. It is
important to note that the stakeholder may possess the knowledge and motivation to accomplish
part of the goal. In order to make an accurate assessment of the gap in order to provide accurate
recommendations to address the gap, each component of the stakeholder goal needs to be
assessed with the Gap Analysis model (Clark & Estes, 2008). The upward arrows from the light
blue squares represent that knowledge and motivation influences for both components are
necessary in order to develop and implement the literacy units of study. The stakeholder must
possess declarative and procedural knowledge, be self-efficacious, and attribute the success or
failure to develop and implement literacy units of study to their own efforts (Bandura, 2005;
Krathwohl, 2002; Pintrich, 2003; Rueda, 2011). If there is a gap in one or more of these
influencers, then it can be assumed that the stakeholder lacks either the appropriate knowledge or
motivation to develop or implement the literacy units of study. It is important to note, that there
is an arrow that leads from the development of literacy units of study to the implementation of
the units of study. This arrow indicates that it is possible for stakeholder to possess the
knowledge and motivation to implement, but without the knowledge and motivation to develop
the units of study, the goal cannot be fully accomplished. Therefore, when analyzing the
knowledge and motivation of the CVJCS teachers, the first component examined is the
knowledge and motivation to develop literacy units of study before analyzing the knowledge and
motivation for implementation of the units of study.
A significant part of the conceptual framework is that it can be followed back up to
ensure that the stakeholder’s knowledge and motivation align with the stakeholder goal, the
cultural assumptions and beliefs and the organizational goal. This conceptual framework guides
the reader to understand the alignment of the perceptions of a problem of practice, theories, prior
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 59

research findings, and previous literature addressing the issue (Maxwell, 2013). Finally, this
modified version of the Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis model allows the researcher to
identify the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences of CVJCS’ teaching staff’s
ability to develop and implement literacy units of study to enhance the academic literacy
performance of their student population, struggling incarcerated and expelled students.
Conclusion
This literature review examined the root causes of gaps in the development and
implementation of quality literacy instruction for incarcerated students at CVJCS. The review
began with the general research on the importance of quality literacy instruction for incarcerated
students, followed by an overview of literature on literacy instruction, professional development
for JCS teachers, and the challenges of implementing quality literacy instruction in JCS. An in-
depth discussion on research literacy instructional practices and effective professional
development focused specifically on JCS’s teacher professional development practices for
implementation of quality literacy instruction. Following the general research literature, the
review focused on the Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analytic Conceptual Framework and,
specifically, knowledge, motivation and organizational influences on teachers in a court school
setting to implement quality literacy instruction in order to address how the assumed influences
affect the stakeholder and organizational goal. Chapter Three will outline the methodology of
the study.
.

Stakeholder
Knowledge (i.e.,
knowledge types),
Skills, Motivation
(i.e., self-efficacy,
value, etc.)

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 60

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
The purpose of this project was to evaluate the degree to which Central Valley Juvenile
Court School (CVJCS) is achieving its goal of increasing student ELA performance from 5%
met or exceed standards to 9% met or exceed state standards on the Smarter Balanced
Assessment Consortium (SBAC) assessment by May of 2019. The analysis focused on the
knowledge, motivation and organizational influences related to achieving this organizational
goal. While a complete evaluation project would focus on all CVJCS stakeholders, for practical
purposes, the stakeholders of focus in this analysis will be the CVJCS teachers. As such, the
questions that guided this study are the following:
1. To what extent is 100% of Central Valley Juvenile Court School teachers developing and
implementing six literacy units of study that address the four focus areas of literacy:
reading, writing, speaking/listening and academic vocabulary?
2. What are the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences related to achieving
this stakeholder goal?
3. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and stakeholder
knowledge and motivation?
4. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?
The chapter explains what methods were utilized to collect data and criterion of the
sample population for each of those research methods. Chapter Three also clarifies how the
instruments were administered and what incentives were provided to encourage participation in
the study. Information is included regarding efforts the researcher had taken to ensure the
reliability, credibility, and trustworthiness of the research. The chapter concludes with the
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 61

ethical considerations for the teachers who participated in the study, along with the limitations
and delimitations of the research.
Participating Stakeholders
The participating stakeholders for this study were the CVJCS teaching staff. CVJCS
currently employs 14 full time teachers. At three of the community schools, each site employs a
full time multi-subject teacher and at the fourth site, two full time multi-subject teachers provide
instruction. These teachers are responsible for teaching the four core subjects (English Language
Arts, Math, Social Studies, and Science) from 8:00am to 2:20pm. Two of these teachers possess
Clear California Multi-Subject Credentials, one teacher holds a preliminary California Multi-
Subject Credential and two of these teachers possess a Preliminary Intern Permit. At the
Juvenile Detention Facility Court School and Youth Facility Court School, these CVJCS sites are
currently staffed with four English Language Arts (ELA) teachers, three Math/Science teachers,
one Social Studies teacher and one Special Education teacher. Currently the Youth Facility,
Social Studies instruction is imbedded into the ELA instructional time, as the Social Studies
teacher is assigned to the Juvenile Detention Facility Court School. All nine of the teachers at
the Juvenile Detention Facility and Youth Facility possess Clear California Single Subject
Credentials for their content specific classes. Each of the Juvenile Detention Facility Court
School and Youth Facility Court School teachers provide instruction during three 1 ½ hour block
periods each day. When enrollment numbers increase, then their instructional schedule increases
to four 1 ½ hour block periods. The current schedule is based on the low number of incarcerated
students at this time assigned to these facilities. CVJCS is currently expected to expand their
teaching staff to fifteen for the 2018/2019 school year.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 62

Although the stakeholder goal is to increase the English Language Arts proficiency
scores on the annual SBAC exam, literacy instruction is expected in all core content areas,
therefore the five community schools’ teachers and the nine court school teachers were the
stakeholders considered for the sampling. Although the community schools’ teachers hold a
multiple-subject credential and may not possess the same literary content knowledge as the
single subject court school’s teachers, both sets of teachers should possess similar pedagogical
knowledge. Since the study evaluated the stakeholder’s knowledge, it is important to note that it
is pedagogical knowledge for literacy instruction rather than content knowledge that was
examined.
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Criterion 1. The first criterion for the sample was that participating CVJCS teachers
possess a valid multi-subject or single-subject California credential (preliminary, clear, intern,
preliminary intern permit, and temporary intern permit). CVJCS is currently under-staffed with
two classrooms at Juvenile Detention Facility School being taught by long-term substitute
teachers. Substitutes are not required to have the same training and expertise as credentialed
teachers.
Criterion 2. The second criterion was that the participating CVJCS teachers be the
teacher of record for any course/classroom that is responsible for teaching core content (English
Language Arts, Social Studies, Science and/or Science). It is the responsibility of each teacher
of record to develop and implement their literacy-based units of study for their own classrooms.
This allowed for richer analysis of the data as each teacher provided their own unique
perspective on the development and implementation of literacy-based units of study.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 63

Criterion 3. The third criterion was that the participating CVJCS teachers have had at
least two years of experience teaching in either a juvenile court school or alternative education
setting. Two teachers employed by CVJCS are first year intern teachers and it can be assumed
that these two teachers may not have had any courses yet on literacy instruction or literacy
instruction professional development.
Interview Sampling Strategy and Rationale
The interview component of the study was utilized to better understand the knowledge
and motivational influences that contribute to the CVJCS teaching staff’s development and
implementation of literacy-based units of study. The interviews focused on the meaning the
research participants made of the problem of practice, versus the researcher’s perspective or
findings from the literature (Creswell, 2014). After the initial purposive sampling recruitment of
12 CVJCS teachers, whom met all three criteria for participation in the sample size, the
researcher invited all 12 CVJCS teachers who could offer insight into addressing the knowledge,
motivation and organizational influences on the stakeholders accomplishing the stakeholder
goals. The invitation to all 12 CVJCS teachers to participate allowed for all qualified CVJCS
teacher to be involved in the study (Fink, 2013). The number selected represents a majority of
the CVJCS teaching staff that can provide information-rich data into the problem of practice
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The research questions are tied directly to the KMO analysis of the CVJCS’ teaching
staff’s stakeholder’s goal. Therefore, it was invaluable that the interviews focused on the
stakeholders who are carrying out the organizational goal. The stakeholder insight not only
provided data on their own knowledge and motivation, but what organizational influences they
attributed to their success, challenges, and failures (Clark & Estes, 2008). The conceptual
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 64

framework illustrates how the CVJCS teachers’ knowledge and motivation influences interact
with the organizational influences in their attempt to carry out both the stakeholder goal and how
it is directly tied to accomplishing the organizational goal. These stakeholder interviews
provided the initial data collected to evaluate the stakeholder’s knowledge and motivation
influences and organizational influences on the effectiveness of the CVJCS teachers developing
and implementing six literacy-based units of study.
Observation Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Criterion 1. The first criterion for the sample was that participating CVJCS teachers
possess a valid multi-subject or single-subject California credential (preliminary, clear, intern,
preliminary intern permit, and temporary intern permit). CVJCS is currently under-staffed with
two classrooms at Juvenile Detention Facility School being taught by long-term substitute
teachers. Substitutes are not required to have the same training and expertise as credentialed
teachers.
Criterion 2. The second criterion is that the participating CVJCS teachers be the teacher
of record for any course/classroom that is responsible for teaching core content (English
Language Arts, Social Studies, Science and/or Science). It is the responsibility of each teacher
of record to develop and implement their literacy-based units of study for their own classrooms.
This will allow for richer analysis of the data as each teacher will provide their own unique
perspectives on the development and implementation of literacy-based units of study.
Criterion 3. The third criterion was that the participating CVJCS teachers have had at
least two years of experience teaching in either a juvenile court school or alternative education
setting. Two teachers employed by CVJCS are first year intern teachers and it can be assumed
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 65

that these two teachers may not have had any courses yet on literacy instruction or literacy
instruction professional development.
Observation Sampling Strategy and Rationale
The second data collection method to be enacted were observations of the CVJCS
teachers who participated in the interviews. Johnson and Christensen (2015) indicate that
attitudes and behaviors are not always congruent and therefore, self-reporting data (interview
responses) should be verified. Each of the participants was observed providing instruction
during a 1 ½ hour block period of class time in the naturalistic setting of their own classroom.
The observations of the interviewees occurred in a naturalistic setting in order to verify or note
observable variances in behaviors from the interview data. The observations provided valuable
insight into both the motivation and organizational influences on the stakeholder (Clark & Estes,
2008; Johnson & Christensen, 2015). The naturalistic setting is significant, as the research
questions are based on the stakeholder’s goal and its impact on student performance. Therefore,
the naturalistic setting for the CVJCS teachers is their classroom. It is in the classroom that the
intersectionality of the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences are observable and
come into play. With the conceptual framework illustrating the intersectionality of the KMO
influences at the point of stakeholder goal in play, the classroom was the most logical location to
carry out the observations. When disclosing the purpose of the research and data collection
processes during the informed consent procedures, the researcher gained both permission for
participation in the interviews and observations.
Data Collection and Instrumentation
The proposed methodological framework by the researcher was a transformative
worldview study of the CVJCS teaching staff. The transformative worldview design is based on
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 66

Creswell’s (2014) explanation of the purpose of a transformative worldview to address issues of
social justice. Literacy instruction in juvenile court schools (JCS) is an issue of access and
equity, if the quality of curriculum and instruction is not the same as that of traditional schools.
Sub-par curriculum and instruction is a social justice issue that contributes to the “school-to-
prison-pipeline” (Kirkland, 2017; Wilson, 2014). Moreover, when evaluating the knowledge and
motivation influences on the CVJCS teachers’ development and implementation of literacy-
based units of study within the context of JCS, it is in essence an evaluation of access and equity.
Thereby evaluating the CVJCS KMO influencers is also addressing issues of equality that result
in an asymmetric power relationship (Creswell, 2014). The transformative worldview directed
how the researcher constructed interview questions, interpreted the data, and constructed
recommendations. The researcher chose to employ a modified ethnographic model based on
Creswell’s (2014) explanation of collecting data through interviews and observations within the
participants naturalistic setting in order to discover shared patterns of behavior, language, and
actions.
Assumed knowledge, motivation and organizational influences were evaluated utilizing a
modified GAP Analysis tool (Clark & Estes, 2008) after conducting interviews with nine of the
CVJCS’ teaching staff. Following the interviews, observations of the teachers who participated
in the interviews occurred in order to contrast participants behaviors with their self-reported
responses (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Documents and artifacts were collected
during observations in order to validate observation notes and assist in the analysis of the data
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The researcher attempted to answer the question of, “to what extent
is 100% of Central Valley’s Court and Community Teachers are developing and implementing
six literacy units of study that address the four focus areas of literacy: reading, writing,
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 67

speaking/listening and academic vocabulary?” By conducting interviews, observations, and
collecting artifacts and documents, the researcher provided a means of triangulation in order to
systematically address issues credibility and trustworthiness of the data collected in the study
(Maxwell, 2013).
Interviews
For the interviews, the researcher invited 12 of the 14 CVJCS teachers to provide insight
into evaluating the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences on the stakeholders
accomplishing the stakeholder and organizational goals. Ten participants accepted the invitation
to participate, but due to conflicting schedules, only nine of the ten participants that accepted the
invitation participated in the study. The questions of the interview focused on eliciting
participants’ knowledge, experiences, and values in relation to their stakeholder and
organizational goals (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The interviews employed 20 standardized open-
ended interview questions (Appendix A) in order to reduce the researcher’s bias in interpretation
of the data, yet at the same time, keeping a tight set of data for analysis (Johnson & Christensen,
2015). The open-ended questions allowed the participants to express their understanding of the
problem of practice and answer in their own words (Fink, 2013). Furthermore, Maxwell (2013)
indicates that interviewees have a difficult time connecting ideas abstractly, thus utilizing a
standardized interview protocol chronologically structured around specific events and actions
allowed the researcher to tap deep into the interviewee’s neurocognitive memory systems in
order to extract detailed data. Each participant interviewed one time, at the beginning of the data
collection process through a formal interview located at each of the participating CVJCS
teachers’ classrooms. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) emphasize the importance of the researcher to
develop a good rapport with the interviewees and create an environment that is comfortable and
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 68

friendly, therefore the researcher utilized the interviewees’ classrooms to conduct the formal
standardized interview to ease the interviewees’ concerns.
Observation
The researcher planned on observing participants of the study within 48 hours of the
interview. Of the nine participants, the researcher was able to observe six within 48 hours after
the interviews, but due to conflicting schedules, the remaining three participants were observed
within 72 hours of their interviews. The researcher observed as an observer as participant
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), as the researcher currently is known to the group, but is not a
member of the group. This role required the researcher to be conscientious of his biases and
emotional attachment to any previous work or encounters with the observed participants
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Rubin & Rubin, 2012). The conceptual framework and research
questions seek to analyze CVJCS’ teaching staff’s knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influencers on the development and implementation of literacy-based units of study for their
student population and what is the interaction between the organizational culture and the
stakeholder. Therefore, the observations transpired during the 1 ½ hour period classes in order to
record the implementation of the literacy-based units of study across the content areas at all
CVJCS school sites. The interviews, and artifacts/documents provided triangulation for the
development of literacy-based units of study and the observations will be utilized with the
interviews and artifacts/documents for triangulation of the implementation of the literacy-based
units of study. Field notes (Appendix B) were taken during observations, which included a
timestamp, environmental descriptors, non-inference field notes of activities, and reflection. The
reflection occurred immediately after the observation in order to record any emotional or
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 69

personal experiences during the observation that may have an impact on analysis of the data
(Maxwell, 2013).
Documents and Artifacts
The researcher planned to collect following documents and artifacts during the
observations: lesson plans, student handouts, and copies of student work. The lesson plans
operate as both personal documents and physical artifacts of the CVJCS’s teaching staff’s
development and implementation of literacy-based units of study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The lesson plans provided insight into understanding the responses to the interview questions
and revealed the CVJCS teachers’ knowledge of development and implementation of literacy-
based units of study. Student handouts and work provided additional artifacts into the CVJCS
teachers’ knowledge and organizational support materials.
Data Analysis
After the interviews and observations were concluded, the researcher employed the
following approaches in order to analyze the interview and observations: 1) Open Coding; 2)
Analytical Coding; 3) Identifying Patterns and Themes; 4) Findings and Assertions. The
researcher utilized the transcription service Rev.com to generate transcripts of the interview
responses and then checked for accuracy by comparing transcripts with recorded audio of the
interviews. During the accuracy checks, the researcher referenced analytical and reflection notes
for accurate responses. The researcher referred back to analytical notes and reflections when
reviewing observation field notes.
In the initial open coding of the interviews, the researcher utilized the conceptual
framework of the study to guide the development of a priori codes. Since the conceptual
framework is based on the Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analysis with a focus on knowledge,
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 70

motivation and organizational (KMO) influencers, the researcher developed a color-coded
system, assigning a color to identify each of the KMO influencers. However, since qualitative
research yields unknown emergent data, the researcher also included two other color codes; one
color for key terms/words and another color for complete phrases that emerged from the
analysis. The focus of the first round of coding was to discover what emerged in each individual
interview.
The second round involved the analytic coding process in which the researcher began
analyzing the data by typicality (grouping by traits). Although the researcher already established
a color code in his codebook and analysis, the researcher needed to dig deeper into the data. For
example, the conceptual framework examines the importance of teacher knowledge in
developing quality literacy units of study. Since the researcher identified data that reflects
knowledge influencers, the next step was to deconstruct the data on knowledge influences to the
four types of knowledge: declarative, procedural, conceptual and metacognition. This approach
allowed for an expansion of the code book in which to examine the types of knowledge data that
emerged and provide a numerical value to the data. By deconstructing the knowledge data, it
allowed for comparing the significance of one type of knowledge over another in the analysis of
this particular influencer. During the analytical coding, which included a record of both the
concepts and frequency of use throughout the transcript, the researcher employed a variety
analytical tools (Corbin & Strauss, 2008) in order to look at the data through a fresh perspective
in order to discover any new emerging details or insight into the data. The researcher utilized the
following Corbin and Strauss (2008) suggested tools for analyzing data: 1) use of questioning; 2)
making comparisons; 3) utilizing personal experiences; 4) examining language; 5) analyzing the
structure of responses.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 71

As the researcher engaged in the analytical coding, he utilized the jotting and analytical
memoing that Miles, Huberman and Saldana (2014) outlined in their work. The analytical
memoing allowed for the researcher examine the data from different perspectives and make
meaning from both the terms and the frequency of the data. Between jotting and analytical
memoing, guided by the conceptual framework and research questions, the researcher was able
to identify patterns and themes as they emerged from the analysis.
The third stage included examining the data and notes recorded in the codebook,
transcripts, the analytical memos, and jotting to extract the findings from the analysis. Although
the study is a qualitative study, the coding and typicality provided a quantitative element, in that
the researcher needed to examine the significance of the frequency of occurrences of key data
and how the percentages and raw number of occurrences contributes to the meaning making
process of that data. This approach provided a means in which to accurately identify patterns and
themes that emerged from the data analysis.
The fourth and final stage was the development of assertions based on the findings. In
developing assertions, the researcher referred back to the conceptual framework and research
questions in order that the assertions provide insights to the answers to the research questions.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
It was the responsibility of the researcher to produce data and the resulting findings that
are credible and trustworthy (Maxwell, 2013). Internal validity, or the accuracy of the study
findings to the external environment, is one way to measure the study’s credibility (Maxwell,
2013). The primary method the researcher utilized to improve credibility was the use of
triangulation, or multiple methods of data collection (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Triangulation allowed for validation of the findings across multiple methodologies, including the
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 72

use of interviews, multiple observations and the collection of artifacts/documents (Maxwell,
2013). A second strategy to increase credibility included respondent validation (Maxwell, 2013).
Data gathered from the interviews and observations was shared with participants in order to
reduce or eliminate any potential misinterpretation (Maxwell, 2013). By soliciting respondent
validation, the researcher limited the influence of his own personal biases. Finally, the
researcher sought out peer examination in order to address issues of reflexivity in his findings
from the data collection (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Ethics
Since the research involves human subjects, it was the researcher’s responsibility to
ensure ethical principles were upheld throughout the process of this study. The first step, the
study proposal was submitted to the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the University of
Southern California to ensure all ethical considerations in respect to human subjects were
addressed. In order to satisfy IRB requirements, informed consent was obtained from all
participants prior to the start of the study through signed consent forms. Research consent forms
included documentation that participation in the study is voluntary, reviewed any potential risks,
and acknowledged that participants may cease participation in the study at any time (Glesne,
2011; Rubin & Rubin, 2012).
The individual interviews for this study were audio recorded and a permission form was
obtained from participants, as well as a verbal consent prior to the interview, granting permission
to record. The confidentiality and privacy of the participants was crucial during the interviews
and observations. The researcher ensured that the information participants provided was held in
the highest level of confidentiality (Glesne, 2011). The data was presented with no unique
identifiers tied to the participants and each participant was assigned a pseudonym in order to
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 73

protect the confidentiality and privacy of the interviewees. When using pseudonyms, it was
important to ensure that the identity of the participants was not evident through the
organizational description and other information provided (Rubin & Rubin, 2012). A legend of
the participants was documented and stored. A separate legend of the participants was
maintained and held confidentially in a place separate from the interview notes, to allow the
researcher to identify a participant if needed (Maxwell, 2013).
It was also important that participation in the study cause no harm to the respondents,
which included not publishing information that could be detrimental to the respondents’
professional lives, including the loss of their jobs (Rubin & Rubin, 2012). To protect further the
privacy of the participants, the interview transcripts, observation collection tools, and
document/artifact data for this study were stored in a locked filing cabinet in a secure office. The
data was destroyed after the completion of the study. Only the researcher and professional
transcriber had access to the audio recordings, which were destroyed after transcription.
As an employee of the same authorizing organization, CVJCS is under the direction of
the local county office of education (COE), and the researcher serves as a curriculum specialist
in the Educational Resources Services (ERS) department of the COE and is known to the CVJCS
teaching and administration staff. The researcher recorded analytic notes and reflections after
and during the interviews and observations to be cognizant of his potential biases and beliefs
about JCS and CVJCS. As a former teacher in a traditional school setting, the researcher was
interested in the results and how to utilize this data to inform his own professional knowledge.
Limitations and Delimitations
Some of the possible limitations of the study include the power dynamic in the study and
how that might have impacted the honesty of respondents. The CVJCS teachers in the study are
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 74

all employed technically by the same COE as the researcher, and this might have contributed to
hesitation to being completely honest when answering interview questions. The information
form clearly indicates that the study is anonymous with no possibility of relation or reprisal,
however, this information may have not be perceived as truthful. There is also a possibility that
the follow up observations could have led to teachers trying to demonstrate what they think the
researcher wanted to observe, rather than natural routines, behaviors, and interaction with
students. Furthermore, since the study utilized a transformative model (Creswell, 2014), the
researcher needed to be aware of slipping into the role of researcher as an advocate for the
participants as he reviewed data, conducted analysis and reported findings. By relying on the
reported data, triangulation of the data, and peer review, the researcher was cognizant of his
biases (Creswell, 2014; Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 75

Chapter Four: Results and Findings

Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project was to evaluate the degree to which the CVJCS teachers were
able to successfully attain their stakeholder goal of developing and implementing six literacy-
based units of study. Although a complete evaluation project would focus on all CVJCS
stakeholders, for practical purposes, the stakeholders of focus for this study were the CVJCS’
teachers. The stakeholder goal of developing and implementing six literacy units that addressed
the four focus areas of literacy: reading, writing, speaking/listening and academic vocabulary,
was the primary driver for attaining the organizational goal. Therefore, a gap analysis of the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences of the CVJCS teachers was conducted to
evaluate how these influences would affect the stakeholders’ ability to attain the stakeholder
goal.
As such, the questions that guided this study were the following:
1. To what extent are 100% of Central Valley’s Juvenile Court School teachers developing
and implementing six literacy units that address the four focus areas of literacy: reading,
writing, speaking/listening and academic vocabulary?
2. What are the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences related to achieving
the stakeholder goal?
3. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and stakeholder
knowledge and motivation?
4. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 76

Data collection to answer these questions included interviews, observations, and literature
review. Research-based solutions are proposed and assessed in a comprehensive manner in
Chapter Five.
Participating Stakeholders
The stakeholders who participated in the study were full time ELA or general education
teachers with CVJCS. The teachers who participated in the interviews and observations met the
criterion outlined in Chapter Three of this study. The criterion was as follows: 1) possess a valid
multi-subject or single-subject California credential (preliminary, clear, intern, preliminary intern
permit, or temporary intern permit); 2) be the teacher of record for any course/classroom that is
responsible for teaching core content (English Language Arts, Social Studies, Science and/or
Science); 3) have had at least two years of experience teaching in either a juvenile court school
or alternative education setting. The criterion served to ensure that participants had adequate
experience teaching literacy in a juvenile court school or alternative school site environment in
order to provide credible responses to the interview questions and observations.
CVJCS employs 14 full time teachers who met the criterion and each of the 14 teachers
were invited by the researcher to participate in the study. Initially, 10 teachers volunteered to
participate in the study and four declined due to personal reasons. After the start of the study,
one teacher had to decline after volunteering to participate due to not being able to find a
mutually agreeable time for both the interviews and observations. Table 5 provides demographic
information of the nine interview respondents. To protect the confidentiality of the interview
respondents, pseudonyms have been used and specific identifying characteristics have been
omitted.

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 77

Table 5
Participant Information
Participants Gender Credential Teaching
Experience
JCS Experience
Mike M Multiple Subject 21 yrs 21 yrs
Kevin M Multiple Subject 11 yrs 10 yrs
Karen F Multiple Subject
Special Education

22 yrs 6 yrs
Sherry F Single Subject: ELA 16 yrs 16 yrs
Fred M Multiple Subject 22 yrs 16 yrs
Danny M Multiple Subject 3 yrs 8 yrs
Pete M Multiple Subject 2 yrs 4 yrs
Lana F Single Subject: ELA 18 yrs 4 yrs
Patty F Multiple Subject:
Special Education

18yrs 3 yrs

The following section will further discuss information about the nine CVJCS teachers
who participated in this qualitative study. The anonymity of each respondent is necessary, so the
researcher will continue to use pseudonyms and withhold any information that could
compromise their identity.
Mike is the longest tenured teacher at CVJCS. He began his teaching career at CVJCS
upon graduating college and earning his multiple subject teaching credential. Over the past 21
years, Mike has taught at three of the CVJCS sites and has been at his current site for 12 years.
The first CVJCS site that he served was a self-contained classroom, teaching all content areas for
grades 9-12 for two years. The second site was the juvenile detention center, where Mike taught
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 78

Social Studies for seven years. Mike’s current site CVJCS site utilizes two classrooms. Mike
currently is teaching Math and Science and another teacher provides ELA and Social Studies
instruction. Mike is involved in curriculum and instructional design for CVJCS.
Kevin has been a teacher with CVJCS for 10 years and has taught at two of the CVJCS
sites. He has been at his current site for eight years. Kevin’s first two years were at a different
CVJCS self-contained site, where he taught all grades 9-12 content areas. Kevin’s current site is
a self-contained, single teacher site in which he is responsible for teaching all grades 9-12
content subjects.
Karen is one of two teachers with 22 years of teaching experience. She has been teaching
with CVJCS for six years and is assigned to teach ELA at the CVJCS Juvenile Detention Facility
(JDF) for three periods and one period of pull out Special Education support. Karen possesses
both a multiple subject credential and a Special Education credential. Although she has only
taught in a JCS environment for six years, her previous 16 years of teaching were spent in rural,
low socio-economic, Title One schools in the Central Valley.
Sherry has been a teacher with CVJCS for 16 years. Upon earning her multiple subject
credential, Sherry was assigned to teacher ELA at the CVJCS JDF site and has taught ELA and
Social Science over the course of her tenure with CVJCS. Over the past eight years, she has
taught ELA exclusively for four periods each day. Sherry is involved with the ELA curriculum
and instructional design for CVJCS.
Fred is one of two teachers with 22 years of teaching experience and possesses a multi
subject credential. He has been a teacher with CVJCS for 16 years and has taught at four CVJCS
sites. The first three sites that Fred served were CVJCS self-contained, single teacher sites. He
was responsible for teaching all grade 9-12 content areas. Fred has been assigned to teach ELA
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 79

and Social Studies at CVJCS JDF for the past three years. Prior to joining the staff at CVJCS, he
taught in an elementary setting.
Danny has been a teacher with CVJCS for three years and possesses a multi-subject
intern credential. Danny has been with CVJCS for eight years and previously served as a
transition specialist. Danny’s site is a self-contained, single teacher site in which he is
responsible for teaching all 7-12 grades content curriculum.
Lana has been a teacher with CVJCS for one year and has been teaching for 18 years as a
high school English teacher. Lana has three additional years of JCS experience, as she
previously taught at a different JCS in California. Lana possesses a single-subject credential in
English and is one of two teachers assigned to her CVJCS site. She is currently teaching both
English and Social Studies (She is teaching Social Studies on special assignment for one
academic school year).
Pete has been a teacher with CVJCS for two years and possesses a multi-subject
credential. Pete has been with CVJCS for four years and previously served as a truancy
intervention officer. Pete’s site is a self-contained, single teacher site in which he is responsible
for teaching all 9-12 content curriculum.
Patty has been teaching with CVJCS for two years and is assigned to teach ELA at the
CVJCS JDF for two periods and one period of Social Studies. Patty possesses both a multiple
subject credential and a Special Education credential. Although she has only taught in a JCS
environment for two years, her previous six years of teaching were spent in rural, low socio-
economic, Title 1 schools as a Special Education teacher and her previous ten years as a
ELA/Social Studies teacher at a middle school in the Central Valley.

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 80

Results and Findings
The findings for this study are organized according to the research questions that guided
the data collection and analysis process. The researcher has organized this section by the
specific research questions that were posed with the themes that emerged related to each specific
research question during the data analysis. The researcher utilized the Clark and Estes (2008) gap
analysis model where the KMO influences were explored in relation to the stakeholder goal in
order to identify emergent themes from the data. The KMO influences are integrated into the
conceptual framework throughout the study and guided the researcher’s inquiry of evaluating the
CVJCS teachers’ ability to successfully attain their stakeholder goal of 100% of the CVJCS
teachers developing and implementing six literacy-based units of study. Utilizing qualitative
data analysis of the interview responses and observation fieldnotes, the researcher will connect
the findings to the research questions and conceptual framework that guided the inquiry. Clark
and Estes (2008) identify three causes of performance gaps: 1) stakeholder knowledge and skills;
2) motivation to achieve the goal; 3) organizational barriers. Therefore, the gap analysis of the
KMOs will indicate how the KMOs influence the CVJCS teachers’ ability to attain their
stakeholder goal of developing and implementing six literacy units of study.
Gaps in the KMO influencers were either validated, partially validated or not validated
based on the participant responses and observational fieldnotes. In order for an influencer to be
validated, 50% or more of the participant responses agreed that the influencer was necessary or
some type of agreement that a change or adjustment is necessary regarding the specific KMO
influencer. A partially validated KMO influencer occurred when a conflict between data sources
indicated 50% or more in agreement regarding the KMO influencer and less than 50% from the
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 81

other data source. When a KMO influencer was determined to not be validated, the participant
responses signify that a change is not necessary.
Finally, the researcher will synthesize the themes in connection with the conceptual
framework in order to make recommendations to address the gaps in the KMO influences.
Chapter Five of the study will address the fourth research question by providing
recommendations.
Research Question One
The first research question of the study asked to what extent are 100% of Central Valley
Juvenile Court School (CVJCS) teachers developing and implementing six literacy units that
address the four focus areas of literacy: reading, writing, speaking/listening and academic
vocabulary? The data collected from the interviews and observations revealed that a gap in
KMO influences resulted 100% of CVJCS teachers unable to successfully develop and
implement six literacy-based units of study. When asked how often you able to complete all the
steps to developing literacy-based units of study, 55% of CVJCS teachers responded with “50-
75% of the time”, 33% responded “occasionally”, and 11% responded “never”. Data analysis of
the self-reported responses of CVJCS teachers indicate that gaps in CVJCS teacher knowledge
and CVJCS organizational influencers hinder the development and implementation of literacy-
based units of study. The validated gaps in CVJCS teacher knowledge and CVJCS
organizational influencers are addressed in research questions two and three. Three subsequent
themes emerged from the data gathered during the interviews and observations:
• CVJCS teachers understand the need for a balanced approach to literacy
instruction.
• CVJCS teachers struggle with a long-term approach.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 82

• CVJCS teachers need clear directives on CVJCS literacy goals.
CVJCS teachers understand the need for a balanced approach to literacy
instruction. The development of quality literacy instruction requires teachers to develop units
that balance reading, writing and discourse (Graham et al., 2017; Shanahan, 2014; Vaughn et al.,
2013). Knowledge of a balanced approach allows teachers to design units that provide
instruction that builds student schema in vocabulary acquisition, how to apply reading
comprehension strategies, and to engage in extended discourse (Kamil et al., 2007). Throughout
the interview process, nine of the nine (100%) participants on 17 occasions declared the need for
literacy-based units of study to be balanced between reading, writing, and discourse. Lana
explained it as follows,
Look, it’s simple. We have to get the kids to read. Then read some more. Then get them
to talk. Maybe even debate. Write. Read some more. Talk some more. Read some
more. Mix up the reading, writing and speaking. But at the core of it, that is what we do.
We get them to read, write and talk about what we are reading and studying.
Sherry shared, “when I think of literacy, I think of reading, writing, and speaking. But, it also
needs to be reading about different things.” These two responses illustrate the CVJCS teachers’
knowledge of the importance of a balanced approach to developing and implementing literacy-
based units of study.
The researcher marked five of the nine (55%) participants engaged in a balanced
approach to instruction and student engagement during the observation period that included some
combination of reading, writing and speaking. In each of the observations of the five teacher’s
classrooms, students were engaged for a given period of time in reading and writing. In two of
the five classrooms utilizing a balanced approach, students participated in pair-share activities
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 83

based on their reading and writing. Pair-share is an instructional activity in which students’ share
their answer/thoughts with another student. In Sherry’s classroom, the researcher recorded
students reading an article, then writing their responses to the article to guide their classroom
discussion about the importance of the article. The researcher followed up with Sherry
afterwards asking, “I noticed you had students write out their initial thoughts about the article
before the classroom discussion, can you tell me why?” Sherry responded, “my kids need time
to think about what they read before talking about it. Giving them time to write their
responses… gives them time to think about it before talking about it.” The researcher followed
up with why is that important and the teacher stated,
If I went straight to discussing, I might have two or three kids ready to talk. If I give them
some time to think and write out their answers, then I can get more kids to talk in the
discussion. And, they have more to talk about.
Sherry’s response illustrates an understanding that in order to comprehend a text at a deeper
level, it requires a balanced approach that includes reading, writing and discourse. Furthermore,
Kevin emphasized that each day, “we read, write, and have some type of discussion.”
During the interviews and classroom observations, the CVJCS teachers demonstrated
knowledge of the need for a balanced approach to literacy instruction, as 100% (nine of nine) of
the participants indicated in their interview responses and 55% demonstrated during
observations, that a balanced approach to literacy instruction is important for student learning
and acquisition of literacy skills. A gap in knowledge of a balanced approach was not validated,
as participants’ responses signify no need for a change in CVJCS teacher knowledge regarding a
balanced approach to literacy instruction.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 84

CVJCS teachers struggle with a long-term approach. Allington and McGill-Franzen
(2014) argue that a long-term approach is necessary to meet the needs of struggling readers.
Given that the JCS population is often two to four grade levels below their non-incarcerated
peers (Metsala et al., 2017), a long-term approach is necessary in order to close the achievement
gap that exists between the CVJCS student population and their non-incarcerated peers. Data
analysis of participant responses resulted in 88% (eight of nine participants) of the CVJCS staff
having articulated a need for a long-term approach to developing and implementing literacy
instruction but lack the knowledge on how to develop a long-term approach to literacy
instruction. The recorded participant responses validated that a gap exists regarding teacher
knowledge of how to develop a long-term approach to literacy instruction, creating a barrier to
attainment of the stakeholder goal.
When asked about the challenges facing JCS teachers, eight of the nine participants
(88%) communicated “struggling readers/writers” and a need for a more “comprehensive, long-
term approach” to addressing student literacy-needs. Karen stated, “the majority, if not all of our
students are struggling readers. We really need to look at a long-term approach to helping
them.” Mike mentioned, “our students bounce between our facilities and are often with us two to
four years.” The researcher followed up with a clarifying question of what percentage of
students are with CVJCS for two or more years? Mike responded with, “I would say 90-95%.”
The researcher asked the question of “what percentage of the CVJCS students are with CVJCS
two or more years?” at the conclusion of classroom observations of the other eight participants,
resulting in a range of responses from 50% to 90% of CVJCS students enrolled two or more
years with CVJCS. The researcher inquired if there was a plan to address the long-term students’
literacy needs, in which eight of the nine (88%) participants were unable to answer. Mike, the
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 85

teacher who serves on the curriculum and instruction leadership team shared, “we are still
formulating a solid plan.” These responses reveal that the CVJCS teachers understand that
CVJCS needs to take a long-term approach to meeting the literacy needs of their students, but a
gap exists in their knowledge on how to develop and implement a long-term approach.
Clear directives of the vision and goals for literacy instruction. Alignment of vision
and literacy goals between the CVJCS teachers and CVJCS administration is critical for the
success of meeting the stakeholder and organizational goal (Moran & Brightman, 2000). Clark
and Estes (2008) argue that organizational policies and culture should align to provide clear
directives on how to carry out the vision and goals of the organization. The researcher collected
data from the CVJCS teachers on whether or not they received clear directives regarding the
vision of CVJCS and if they received clear directives on CVJCS literacy goals. The interviews
revealed that eight of the nine (88%) participating teachers had not received clear directives on
the vision of CVJCS and eight of the nine (88%) participating teachers had not received clear
directives on the CVJCS literacy goals. Mike, was the lone teacher who could articulate a
literacy goal, stating, “I know we are trying to improve student performance on the SBAC and
develop new reading and writing units.”
Fred, who claimed not receive clear directives said, “communication of goals is an issue.
I have no clue what is expected out of me, besides to teach. So, I just teach what I think is most
important.” Danny, a teacher with three years of teaching experience, responded with, “We have
goals?” In addition, four of the nine (44%) CVJCS teachers answered the questions regarding
goals and vision with “I don’t know”. These responses from 88% of the CVJCS teachers
validate a gap in communication between the CVJCS administration team and the CVJCS
teachers as to what are the common literacy goals and vision. Mike, the one teacher who
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 86

claimed to receive clear directives on the CVJCS vision and literacy goals, is the teacher who
serves on the leadership team and participates in the Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP)
development team, which includes formulating the vision and literacy goals.
Research question one summary. Analysis of the data collected from participant
interviews and observations revealed that 100% of the CVJCS teachers are unable to develop and
implement six literacy-based units of study units that address the four focus areas of literacy:
reading, writing, speaking/listening and academic vocabulary. The data analysis validated gaps
in teacher knowledge of how to develop a long-term approach to literacy instruction to meet the
needs of the JCS student population. A gap in the organizational influence of communicating
literacy goals and vision was validated by 88% of the CVJCS teachers not being able to
articulate CVJCS literacy goals and vision. However, a gap in teacher knowledge of a balanced
approach to literacy instruction was not validated, as the CVJCS teacher responses demonstrated
teacher knowledge of a balanced approach did not require any change.
Research Question Two
The second research question of the study asked, what are the knowledge, motivation and
organizational influences related to achieving the stakeholder goal? Analysis of the self-reported
interview responses and observation fieldnotes uncovered partially validated gaps in teacher
knowledge of appropriate literacy skills that students need and validated gaps in how to develop
interactive instruction and how to connect with student’s prior knowledge and personal
experiences. Data analysis of the motivation influences of self-efficacy and attribution of
success or failure showed that based on participant responses, self-efficacy and attribution theory
as motivation influences were not validated. Five subsequent themes emerged from the data
gathered during the interviews and observations:
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 87

• CVJCS teachers need to know appropriate literacy skills that secondary students
need.
• CVJCS teachers need knowledge of interactive instruction.
• CVJCS teachers need knowledge of how to connect to Prior Knowledge and
Student Experiences.
• CVJCS teachers demonstrate a strong belief in their abilities to develop and
implement Literacy-Based Units of Study.
• CVJCS teachers attribute the success and failure of developing and implementing
literacy-based units to their own efforts.
These themes are organized by knowledge influences and motivation influences.
Knowledge
The Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis model required the researcher to gather data in
order to evaluate if a gap exists in the stakeholders’ declarative and procedural knowledge of
how to accomplish the stakeholder goal. In order to accomplish the stakeholder goal, it is
important for the CVJCS teachers to understand what they need to know to accomplish the task
(Rueda, 2011). Therefore, the analysis of the knowledge influences focused on teacher
declarative and procedural knowledge of the development of literacy units and the
implementation of literacy units in order to validate, partially validate, or non-validate if a gap in
stakeholder knowledge existed. This analysis of the CVJCS teachers’ declarative and procedural
knowledge of developing and implementing literacy units aligns with the conceptual
framework’s outline of how the stakeholder’s goal is essential to meeting the overall
organizational goal of improving student performance on the SBAC assessment.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 88

The gap analysis of knowledge influences focused on four key areas of teacher
knowledge: 1) knowledge of appropriate literacy skills secondary students need; 2) knowledge of
appropriate literacy instructional methods; 3) knowledge of how to develop appropriate literacy
instruction; 4) knowledge of how to implement appropriate secondary literacy units of study.
During the course of the interviews and observations, the researcher gathered data from the
CVJCS teachers that focused on the aforementioned knowledge influences in order to validate or
invalidate if a gap existed in teacher knowledge of how to develop and implement literacy units
of study. This section will discuss the findings derived from the interviews and observations in
relation to CVJCS teacher knowledge of developing and implementing literacy units of study.
Table 6 illustrates the findings of knowledge influences indicating if the stakeholder
possesses the knowledge or if the stakeholder did not possess the knowledge, indicated by the
number of teachers who demonstrated knowledge or needing knowledge in their responses.

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 89

Table 6
Knowledge Influence Results
Knowledge Influence Interview and Observation Results

Knowledge Influence Interview:
Teachers
Possess
Knowledge

Interview:
Teachers
Do Not
Possess
Knowledge
Observation:
Teachers
Possess
Knowledge

Observation:
Teachers
Do Not
Possess
Knowledge
Knowledge of Appropriate Literacy
Skills for Students:

Schema Vocabulary 2 7 6 3
Schema Reading Comprehension 0 9 0 9
Schema Extended Discourse

9 0 5 4
Knowledge of Appropriate Literacy
Instruction:

Collaborative Learning 2 7 2 7
Academic Vocabulary Acquisition 8 1 6 3
Literacy Across Content

5 4 0 9
Balanced Approach 9 0 5 4
Interactive Instruction

3 6 2 7
Knowledge of Implementation of
Literacy Instruction:

Connect to Prior Knowledge
and Experience

4 5 NA NA
Long Term Approach 1 8 NA NA

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 90

Appropriate literacy skills secondary students need. Researchers Kamil et al. (2007)
have identified three key literacy skills that secondary students need to possess to be proficient
readers: 1) schema to build vocabulary; 2) schema to apply the appropriate comprehension
strategy; 3) schema to engage in extended academic discourse (speaking/listening and writing) of
their readings. Opportunities for students to develop these three literacy skills or schema, should
be included in each literacy-based unit of study (Kamil et al., 2007; Shanahan & Shanahan,
2008). Therefore, in order for teachers to develop and implement literacy-based units of study, it
is important to determine if the CVJCS teachers possess the declarative knowledge of the
appropriate literacy skills secondary students need to be proficient readers.
Schema to build vocabulary. Conley (2014) emphasizes that secondary students need to
be able to apply schema to build vocabulary in order to increase comprehension of a text. During
the interviews, participants were asked to identify key literacy skills that their students needed to
be proficient readers and academically successful. Responses from the interviews resulted in
seven of the nine (77%) participants unable to articulate or provide evidence that they possessed
declarative knowledge of schema for building vocabulary as an important skill for students to
possess.
Although two of the nine (22%) participants during the interviews exhibited knowledge
of the importance of schema to build vocabulary as an important skill for students to possess, the
observation data revealed six of nine (66%) teachers utilizing instructional practices that focused
on developing schema for academic vocabulary development with their students. The researcher
observed eight instances of direct instruction in six classroom observations (two classrooms
enacted two different instructional practices to build student schema to build academic
language). The instructional practices observed included: teaching of how to utilize contextual
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 91

clues to determine the meaning of unknown vocabulary, annotating text to generate questions
around unknown vocabulary, register play to associate with synonyms, and the utilization of a
vocabulary matrix.
The teachers that utilized two instructional practices during classroom observations were
asked by the researcher why the incorporation of two instructional practices to build student
schema to build academic vocabulary post-observation. Karen replied, “if I don’t hit the
vocabulary hard, they can’t get the content. They need to learn how to figure out words they
don’t understand.” In addition, the researcher recorded Patty explaining to students, “this is a
skill to help you figure out the meaning of words you don’t, so you can understand what you are
reading.” The researcher observed and noted three other teachers (Mike, Kevin, and Sherry)
making similar statements to their students during the vocabulary building activities.
While 77% of the CVJCS teaching staff could not articulate the importance of building
student schema to build academic vocabulary, the triangulation of the self-reported responses
with the observation fieldnotes indicated a deeper understanding of the importance of building
student schema to build academic vocabulary. Therefore, the combined data from interviews and
observations partially validate a gap in teacher knowledge of building student schema to build
academic vocabulary.
Schema to apply appropriate comprehension strategies. Each of the nine (100%)
participants in the study identified reading comprehension as an important element that students
must possess to be a proficient reader and to be successful academically. Sherry even declared,
“teaching English is all about helping kids comprehend what they are reading. It’s all about
reading comprehension.” The researcher responded with a clarifying question, asking for an
example of teaching students how to comprehend a text they are reading. Sherry listed,
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 92

“teaching students identify what the text says literally, what inferences can a reader make, and
connecting what is happening in the text to real world events.” Similarly, Kevin shared, “I have
them connect what they are reading to their head, what they know, their heart, what they feel and
the world.” Four of the teachers (Mike, Sherry, Lana and Danny) referred to a book study,
Disruptive Thinking, in which they learned the concept of book, head, heart (BHH). These
participant responses communicate that the CVJCS teachers possess knowledge of building
student schema to apply appropriate comprehension strategies.
The term “reading comprehension” was mentioned 52 times over the course of the nine
interviews and during classroom observations, the researcher recorded that in five of the nine
(55%) classes, students were asked to complete reading comprehension questions at the end of
reading the text. However, zero of the participants were noted providing instruction or referring
to a reading comprehension skill that students must possess or how students need to know how to
apply appropriate reading comprehension strategies to be a proficient reader. The self-reported
data from participants point to the CVJCS teachers recognizing the importance of students
possessing schema to apply appropriate comprehension strategies, however, the teaching of
building schema was not noted during the observations.
It is important to clarify that awareness of the importance of reading comprehension and
knowledge of building schema of appropriate comprehension strategies are two different
concepts. Building schema to apply appropriate reading comprehension strategies requires
teaching specific skills to be applied to different texts and contexts in order to comprehend the
text (Kamil et al., 2007; Shanahan & Shanahan, 2008). During the observations, the researcher
did not record direct instruction or references of reading comprehension strategies to build
student schema to apply appropriate comprehension strategies. Therefore, the data analysis of
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 93

the knowledge influence of building student schema to apply appropriate comprehension
strategies is partially validated.
Schema to engage in extended discourse. Possession of schema to engage in extended
discourse is essential for developing 21
st
Century literacy skills, acquire new knowledge, and
engage with sophisticated texts (Kamil et al., 2007; Leu et al., 2017). Extended discourse
includes analysis and evaluative writing, peer-to-peer academic conversations and debates that
require students to extend and build upon another student’s claim or counterclaim. Each of the
nine (100%) participants were able to identify writing as an essential element for literacy
instruction and seven of nine (77%) participants identified engaging in an oral academic
discussion as an important element for literacy instruction. In each case, the interviewees were
able to articulate the importance of students being engaged in extended writing and speaking to
gain greater comprehension of the text and topic. To emphasize the importance of writing (an
element of extended discourse), Lana stated,
We write, write, write. Everyday. Our routine is to start with a journal writing exercise
that is tied to the lesson or unit. Afterwards I have students’ pair-share their responses.
Then we take Cornel notes. And at the end of class, I try to have students give me a
quick paragraph, no more than 2-4 sentences, about what they learned in class. They are
always writing about what we are reading or learning about.
Lana’s response indicates a clear understanding of the importance of having all students engaged
in extended discourse with a text or topic, either by written, oral exchange or both. Patty
emphasized the point, “how else can we really know if a student understands a story if we don’t
have them write about?” The CVJCS teachers’ responses reflect an understanding that writing is
a skill that builds schema for extended discourse and comprehension of texts.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 94

During three of the observations (Karen, Fred, and Danny), students were engaged in an
extended writing piece in which the students applied their analysis of a text, thus engaging in
extended discourse of that text. Observations of two other classrooms (Mike and Kevin) resulted
in the researcher recording data on academic conversations in which students applied strategies
on how to state a claim, support claims with evidence and rebuttal on a controversial topic with
multiple perspectives. Students in Pete’s class was provided a handout of sentence starters that
focused on how to refer to textual evidence, build upon another’s claims and disagree with
another student’s position. Pete shared why he provided the sentence frames, “it is important to
teach students that if you make a claim, they need to know how to listen to the other side and
learn from another.” In addition, Kevin made the statement, “if we can’t get them to learn to
listen and then respond with evidence, then they will never learn to learn from others.” The
observations of students engaged in extended writing and academic conversations supported the
self-reported data from the interviews that the CVJCS teaching staff possess knowledge of the
importance of building student schema for extended discourse. The data analysis supports non-
validation of gap in CVJCS teachers’ knowledge of building student schema for extended
discourse.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 95

Figure 2. Appropriate Literacy Skills for Secondary Students.
Development of appropriate literacy instruction. Development of appropriate literacy
instruction requires a balanced approach to instruction that includes interactive instruction and
connecting content to student prior knowledge and personal experiences (Conley, 2014; Graham
et al., 2017; Marchland-Martella et al., 2013; Vaughn et al., 2013). The data collected by the
researcher measured the CVJCS teachers’ knowledge of the two aforementioned elements of
designing literacy units of study that are interactive in nature and that connect to students’ prior
knowledge and personal experiences. The need for a balanced approach was addressed in
research question one.
Interactive Instruction. A major shift in literacy instruction to develop proficient
secondary readers is the development of interactive instruction. Interactive instruction provides
interaction between the learner, other students, text, contexts and cultures (Conley, 2014).
Applying an interactive approach to instruction requires teachers to examine text sets, student
2
7
6
3
0
9
0
9 9
0
5
4
Interview: Possess
Knowledge
Interview: Do Not Possess
Knowledge
Observaton: Possess
Knowledge
Observation: Do Not
Possess Knowledge
Appropriate Literacy Skills for Secondary Students
Vocabulary Schema Comprehension Schema Discourse Schema
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 96

demographics, class setting, student socio-economics and the socio-political climate that students
experience on a daily basis (Conley, 2014; Leu et al., 2017). When asked about the biggest
challenge facing teachers in a JCS setting, Kevin stated, “with an ever-changing student
population, you just don’t know who you will have tomorrow, it is hard to figure out what stories
and activities to do.” Pete added, “these kids need to see themselves. Not their criminal, gang
selves, but Latino, Hmong selves in stories and curriculum. All they see, is white. The don’t see
themselves, their families and their people in what we are teaching.” These teacher statements
support Conley’s (2014) assertion that instruction should be an interaction between the learner,
other students, text, contexts and cultures. However, interview data revealed seven of the nine
(77%) teachers were not knowledgeable of the need to develop interactive instruction.
In seven of the nine (77%) of the classroom observations, students were engaged in
learning activities that did not require interaction with differing cultures, students, texts, or
content areas. The researcher recorded that the texts utilized in the classroom instruction of
seven of the nine (77%) of the classrooms were of a single perspective. In two of the nine
classes (Kevin and Pete), which were utilizing the same anchor text, The Things They Carried.
Both teachers incorporated additional texts from different cultural and perspectives to the topic.
In Kevin’s classroom, the teacher referred to both African-American and Vietnamese
perspectives to the text. When asked about this by the researcher after the observation, the
teacher responded, “the Vietnam War is such a complex issue. You cannot discuss O’Brien’s
perspective without discussing the others. Think about it.” Kevin’s response revealed an
understanding of the importance of incorporating instruction and curriculum that crosses context,
cultures and perspectives. However, with 77% of the CVJCS teachers not incorporating similar
instruction in their classrooms reveals a gap of knowledge of the need for interactive instruction
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 97

that provides interaction between the learner, other students, text, contexts and cultures (Conley,
2014).
The researcher asked each participant about their text, curriculum and instructional
choices for the lesson at the conclusion of each observation, resulting in five of the nine (55%) of
the participants stating it was “already planned” on the “curriculum map”. The researcher
followed up with a question about supplementing the planned curriculum with other texts and
resources, in which five of the nine teachers (55%) answered that they stick to the planned text,
curriculum and instructional strategies. Fred shared, “we have a planned unit and to keep
everyone on the same page, we stick to the plan.” Fred’s response highlights this validated gap
in knowledge of interactive instruction, as it illustrates a common approach and understanding of
instruction by the CVJCS teaching staff.
Connect to students’ prior knowledge and experience. Marchland-Martella et al. (2013)
argue that student autonomy and increased student motivation to learn occurs when students are
able to connect new learning to prior experiences and knowledge. Thus, the implementation of a
new unit or lesson should connect with students’ prior knowledge and/or their life experiences
(Marchland-Martella et al., 2013). The data collected reported four of the nine (44%)
participating teachers emphasizing the importance of connecting lessons and units to student
prior knowledge and experiences. Although the term “prior knowledge” was not used in the
interview responses, the phrase “what they know” (23 responses) and “their experiences” (16
responses) was recorded a combined 39 occurrences during the interview process. Kevin used
the term “what they know” 11 different times throughout the interview, including the statement,
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 98

These kids know more than we give them credit for. If you can just channel what they
know into what we are doing in class and connect what they know to what we are trying
to teach them, we can change what they know.
In addition, Pete lamented “so much of what we teach in our classes does not connect with our
students.” When asked as to how he addressed this issue, Pete responded, “I look for as much
(Latino) stories and Latino experts on a subject as I can find.” Kevin and Pete’s responses back
Marchland-Martella et al. (2013) argument that instruction should connect to student’s prior
knowledge and personal experiences.
Although a high frequency of the terms “what they know” and “their experiences” was
recorded, during the interviews, five of nine (55%) of teachers did not refer or allude to the
importance of connecting lessons student prior knowledge and experiences, thus validating a gap
in knowledge on how to connect to student’s prior knowledge and personal experiences.

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 99

Figure 3. Development of Appropriate Literacy Instruction.
Motivation
Clark and Estes (2008) declare that motivation is an essential element for choosing to
work towards a goal, persistence to finish the task, and determining how much mental effort an
individual exerts towards the effort to complete the task. Therefore, it is essential to examine the
motivation influences that affect a stakeholder’s ability to achieve their stakeholder’s goal within
an organization. In analyzing the motivational influences, the researcher focused on two key
components of motivation: self-efficacy and attribution of success or failure. Bandura (1991)
defines self-efficacy as one’s belief in one’s ability to accomplish a task or goal, therefore the
researcher focused on the CVJCS teachers’ beliefs in their ability (self-efficacy) to develop and
implement literacy units of study. Moreover, the researcher also analyzed how CVJCS teachers
attributed the success or failure of literacy units of study by applying Anderman and
Anderman’s (2009) assertion that success or failure is based on an individual’s effort not
2
7
2
7
4
5
2
7
Interview: Possess
Knowledge
Interview: Do Not Possess
Knowledge
Observation: Possess
Knowledge
Observation: Do Not
Possess Knowledge
Development of Appropriate Literacy Instruction
Interactive Instruction Connect to Prior Knowledge & Personal Experiences
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 100

ability. In addition, Rueda (2011) declares that attribution of success or failure reveals how
stakeholders perceive themselves as learners and achievers, informing the researcher’s self-
efficacy data analysis.
Teacher self-efficacy. This belief in one’s self (self-efficacy) is the key to starting,
continuing and completing the task or goal (Bandura, 1991; Rueda 2011). If the CVJCS teachers
do not believe they possess the skills and ability to develop and implement literacy-based units
of study, then they will have minimal motivation to start or even engage in the task. The
researcher gathered data during the interviews and observations that focused on the CVJCS
teachers’ self-perception of their ability to develop literacy-based units of study and their ability
to implement literacy units of study.
CVJCS teacher self-efficacy to develop literacy-based units of study. The CVJCS
teachers demonstrated a strong sense of self-efficacy to develop literacy-based units of study as
nine of nine (100%) participants self-reported that they possess the ability and tools to develop
literacy-based units of study. When asked how he felt about his ability to develop literacy-units
of study, Mike stated,
Better than ever, but I still feel like I have a lot to learn. But over the last three years with
the different strategies we have learned, it's a totally different game, and I have so many
new strategies and tools I can use in my lessons.
Another teacher, Sherry declared, “over the last couple of years we have really developed our
program and have a good idea on how to put together a quality program for our students.” The
responses of these two teachers illustrates the overall perspective of the CVJCS teachers’
perception of their ability to develop literacy unit of study without being over-efficacious, as the
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 101

Mike stated, “I still feel like I have a lot to learn.” Additionally, a long-term CVJCS veteran
teacher, Fred expressed,
I think I am much better equipped now. I’ve seen what works and doesn’t work, and how
to scaffold really well. And, how to include different elements in a way that kids can
respond. I think I’m pretty well equipped now.
The responses from this CVJCS teacher supports the finding that the CVJCS teachers possess a
strong sense of self-efficacy. Therefore, the motivation influencer of self-efficacy to develop
literacy-based units of study is not validated for this study.
CVJCS teacher self-efficacy to implement literacy-based units of study. In addition,
eight of the nine (88%) participants stated that they believed they possessed the ability to
implement the literacy-based units of study. The one teacher who did not believe that he
possessed the ability to implement, Pete, attributed it to his lack of experience as a teacher.
I am still figuring all of this out. I rely on the other teachers and the lessons they provide
me. I’m getting better, but I really couldn’t tell you if I really know how to write and
teach units or not.
In each interview, the participants expressed a belief in their abilities to develop and successfully
implement the units of study. When asked about implementing the units once they are
developed, Fred stated, “if you build it, you can teach it.” A follow up question from the
researcher to clarify the statement yielded, “When you are developing units or lessons, you have
to be confident that you can deliver the lesson. Otherwise, you really don’t believe in what you
are doing.” This response illustrates a strong sense of self-efficacy, as 88% of the CVJCS
teachers believe they possess the knowledge and skills to implement literacy-based units of
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 102

study. Therefore, the responses from the CVJCS teachers indicate that the motivation influencer
of self-efficacy to implement literacy-based units of study is not validated.
Teacher attribution of success or failure. Anderman and Anderman (2009) stress
that it is effort by the individual and whether or not the individual attributes success or failure
to their effort, and not on an external entity, as the determining factor of success or failure.
The researcher gathered data during the interviews and observations that focused on how
CVJCS teachers attributed the success or failure of the development of literacy-based units of
study and how they attributed the success or failure of the implementation of literacy-based units
of study.
CVJCS teacher attribution of success or failure of the development of literacy-based
units of study. The data collection resulted in six of the nine (66%) CVJCS teachers attributing
the success or failure of the development of literacy-based units on their own effort. These
teachers self-reported during the interviews that it was their effort and responsibility to possess
and gain the necessary knowledge and skills to successfully develop quality literacy-based units
of study.
Patty, a newer teacher with CVJCS declared, “with as much support as we get, there is no
excuse for not developing quality lessons.” When asked to clarify, she responded, “We are given
books, PD, time to plan. Yeah, our situation is tough, but to not have a well-planned lesson, it is
just unacceptable. If my lessons fail, that’s on me.” Another teacher, Karen responded, “it is our
responsibility to make sure we know how to put together our lessons and units.” In addition,
Mike, Kevin and Karen referred to success of development of literacy-based units of study as
“personal responsibility.” The responses support that these six participants attribute the success
or failure to develop literacy-based units to their own effort.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 103

Three of the teachers self-reported that the success or failure of the development of
literacy-based units of study was based on external forces. In each of the responses, the teachers
named the JCS setting and student population as being detrimental to being able to successfully
develop literacy-based unit of study. Fred stated, “There are too many obstacles to overcome in
JDF (Juvenile Detention Facility) and besides, our students are so low, we have to keep it
simple.” In addition, Patty said, “The type of student we have in the hall (JDF) doesn’t allow for
us create normal ELA lessons.” These viewpoints illustrate how three of nine (33%) of the
CVJCS teachers attribute the success or failure of the development of literacy-based units of
study on external forces. With 66% of the CVJCS teachers attributing the success or failure of
the development of literacy-based units on their own effort, these responses point to a non-
validation of attribution theory as an influencer for developing literacy-based units of study.
CVJCS teacher attribution of success or failure of the implementation of literacy-based
units of study. The data collection marked six of the nine (66%) CVJCS teachers attributing the
success or failure of the implementation of the literacy-based units on their own effort and three
of the nine (33%) CVJCS teachers attributing success or failure of implementation on the JCS
environment. The six CVJCS teachers that attributed the success or failure of implementation to
their own efforts were the same six teachers that attributed success or failure of the development
of literacy-based units of study to their own efforts. Kevin remarked, “if we want to be treated
like professionals, then we need to act like one and own what happens in our classrooms.” The
researcher followed up the comment with a clarifying question if he thinks there are obstacles
that keep him from implementing good instruction and he responded with, “our student
population and setting is a huge obstacle, but I’m here to work around, through and over those
obstacles.” Kevin’s response illustrates an understanding that success is based on continual
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 104

effort, regardless of what obstacles or challenges arise during the task. Additionally, Karen
shared, “in order to successfully teach our students, you have to take responsibility for your own
actions, beliefs, and willingness to try whatever it takes to help them succeed.” Furthermore,
these six CVJCS teachers connected “student academic success” to their own efforts to
successfully provide quality instruction. Mike declared, “my students are only able to learn
when I come fully prepared to bring my A game every day. That is my responsibility.” With
66% of the CVJCS teachers’ responses communicating an understanding that success or failure
of implementation of literacy-based units of study on their own efforts, attribution as a
motivation influencer for implementation of literacy-based units of study is not validated.
Table 7 illustrates the quantitative data derived from the interviews and observations by
the number of teachers that indicate the motivation influence results of self-efficacy and
attribution theory of the development and implementation of literacy-based units of study.
Table 7
Motivation Influence Results
Motivation Influence Interview and Observation Results

Development of Literacy
Units of Study
Implementation of Literacy
Units of Study

CVJCS Teacher
Self-Efficacy
Strong Self-
Efficacy

Low Self-
Efficacy
Strong Self-
Efficacy
Low Self-
Efficacy
9

0 8 1
CVJCS Teacher
Attribution
Self-Effort

External Entity Self-Effort External Entity
6 3 6 3

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 105

Research Question Two Summary
Analysis of the data collected from participant interviews and observations validated gaps
in teacher knowledge of interactive instruction and connecting instruction to students’ prior
knowledge and personal experiences. The gap in teacher knowledge in interactive instruction
was validated by 77% of the CVJCS teachers not being able to demonstrate knowledge of
interactive instruction in their self-reported responses and observation fieldnotes. Likewise, a
gap in teacher knowledge of how to connect to students’ prior knowledge and personal
experiences was validated with 55% of the CVJCS teachers not being able to demonstrate
appropriate knowledge. The data analysis partially validated gaps in teacher knowledge of
appropriate literacy skills that secondary students need. The analysis of CVJCS teachers’ self-
reported responses and observation fieldnotes revealed that CVJCS teachers’ knowledge in how
to build schema to build vocabulary and schema to apply appropriate comprehension strategies
was partially validated. However, the self-reported responses and observation fieldnotes, did
indicate that the CVJCS teachers do possess knowledge of how to build schema to engage in
extended discourse. The gap in the CVJCS teachers’ knowledge in appropriate literacy skills is
only partially validated, as their knowledge influence of how to build schema to extend discourse
is not validated and their knowledge of how to build schema to build vocabulary and apply
appropriate comprehension strategies is partially validated. However, a gap in teacher
motivation influences of self-efficacy to develop and implement literacy-based units of study and
their attribution of success or failure to develop and implement literacy-based units of study were
not validated. The CVJCS teacher responses demonstrated teacher motivation influences of self-
efficacy and attribution did not require any change.

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 106

Research Question Three
The third research question of the study asked, what is the interaction between
organizational culture and context and stakeholder knowledge and motivation? The data
collected by the researcher indicates that the interaction between the organizational culture and
the stakeholders has led to a breakdown in communication of the CVJCS vision, literacy goals
and effective feedback on instructional practices. Two subsequent themes emerged from the data
gathered during the interviews and observations:
• CVJCS teachers desire professional learning opportunities that address the needs
of serving students in a JCS setting.
• CVJCS teachers desire regular effective feedback on their instructional practices
and efforts in the classroom.
Organization
The third element that Clark and Estes (2008) identified as a cause for performance gaps
is organizational culture. Clark and Estes (2008) indicate that effective and efficient
organizational work processes and allocation of resources as vital components for stakeholders
within an organization to successfully accomplish their stakeholder goals. The researcher
focused data collection that addressed three areas of CVJCS organizational culture: 1)
professional development opportunities to gain literacy curriculum and instruction knowledge for
JCS students; 2) clear directives of the vision and goals for literacy instruction; 3) effective
feedback on their instructional practices. The CVJCS cultural influence of clear directives of the
vision and goals for literacy instruction was addressed in research question one. The following
data analysis and findings focused on professional development opportunities for CVJCS
teachers and effective feedback on their instructional practices.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 107

Professional development opportunities. Professional development opportunities are
critical in order for JCS teachers to meet the needs of their student population (Houchins et al.,
2009). Moreover, it is critical to understand, given the unique challenges of the JCS context, the
JCS setting requires professional learning opportunities and resources that meet the needs of the
JCS student population (Kirkland, 2017; Leone et al., 2005; Leone & Wruble, 2015; Shippen et
al., 2014). The data collection from the interviews and observations focused on three areas of
concern: 1) professional development opportunities for literacy instruction; 2) professional
development with a focus on the specific and unique needs of JCS student populations; 3)
adequate resources. The data collected indicates that the CVJCS teachers receive professional
development opportunities for literacy instruction, as nine out of nine (100%) participants stated
that they received professional development for literacy instruction. When discussing
professional development for the specific and unique needs of the JCS student population, three
of the nine (33%) participants agreed that they receive professional development opportunities
for the needs of JCS students. However, seven of the nine (77%) participating teachers stated
that they receive adequate resources to develop and implement literacy-based units of study.
Professional development opportunities for literacy instruction. As aforementioned,
100% of the CVJCS staff stated they receive professional development opportunities on how to
develop and implement literacy instruction. These professional learning opportunities include
staff development days, in which a literacy-specialists provides literacy focused learning
opportunities to the CVJCS teachers and self-selected opportunities to attend seminars,
conferences, and literacy focused workshops. The researcher inquired on the types of
professional learning opportunities the individual teachers have participated and two of the nine
(22%) of the participants attended a self-selected professional learning opportunity. Nine of the
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 108

nine (100%) participants stated that the CVJCS administration provides three to five staff
development days per year, in which a literacy specialist provides training for the CVJCS
teachers. Mike stated,
Over the past several years, we have received a lot of support. We have minimum release
days once a month and three to four days per year when we bring in an expert who will
train us on how to teach writing, ELD strategies, and how to just be better at teaching
English.
In addition, Patty commented on additional support from an ELA coach, “We have a coach who
visits our classrooms two to three times per month. He follows up with us on the training he
provides. I appreciate that he focuses on my specific needs.” The researcher followed up with
asking if the Patty thought this support enhanced the CVJCS teachers’ abilities to provide quality
literacy instruction? The teacher responded with, “of course it does. Many of us have been
teaching a long time, but we need someone with an outside point of view to help us teach better.”
Patty and Mike’s responses encapsulate the CVJCS teachers self-reported positions that they
receive adequate professional development for literacy-instruction. However, when asked about
professional development opportunities related to the specific needs of the JCS student
population, 66% of the CVJCS teachers declared they did not receive adequate professional
development in the area of the needs of the JCS student population.
Professional development on the needs of the JCS population. According to data
collected by the researcher, six of the nine (66%) participants stated they have not received
professional development on the needs of the JCS population. When the researcher probed for
clarification as to why, Lana speaking about those who lead professional development
opportunities,
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 109

Most of the people who come and present, have no clue as to what it is like in a court
school. When we ask questions, they cannot answer or provide examples of how what
they are presenting to us will work in a court school.
Fred echoed with a similar response, “we have these people come in to teach us strategies, but
when we ask them how do we make it work in JDF, they usually say the same thing. Just adjust
it.” These two responses from Lana and Fred illustrate the general perspective of the six teachers
who stated they did not receive professional development based on the needs of the JCS
population.
The researcher asked the three teachers who responded yes, they did receive professional
development on the needs of the JCS population, to clarify what types of professional
development opportunities they participated in? Each of the three respondents stated the
coaching from the County Office of Education (COE) provided one on one professional
development. Karen said,
We haven’t received any formal training or PD, but our ELA consultant (COE Coach)
tailors what he does to meet the needs of our students. So, if we are working on getting
our kids have deeper conversations about a story they have just read, he will make
adjustments in the strategies to meet the needs of our kiddos (students).
The other two respondents mentioned the COE Coach providing specific adjustments to meet the
needs of the JCS population and Kevin stated, “it is super beneficial to have someone who gets
our environment and makes it relevant to us.” Mike also responded with a statement that
mentioned “adjusting to our student population” when referring to the support provided by the
COE Coach. The responses from these three teachers indicate that they do believe that they
receive professional development that is focused on the specific needs of the JCS population.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 110

Effective feedback on their instructional practices. An essential element of
implementing a stakeholder goal is providing effective feedback during the implementation and
ongoing progress towards the completion of that goal (Kezar, 2001). Effective feedback for
teachers should focus on instructional practices and how instructional practices are contributing
to the success of equipping students with the tools and knowledge to succeed academically
(Metsala et al., 2017; Wilson, 2014). The researcher gathered data during the interviews and
observations that resulted in three of the nine (33%) participating teachers stating they received
effective feedback on instructional practices from administration. One teacher self-reported,
“our lead administrator always gives me feedback when she visits my classroom. And, she
always lets me know what I am doing well.” Another teacher stated, “when our admin or coach
visits, they always take time to meet with me and share what they observed and how I can
improve.” However, 66% of the CVJCS staff claim they do not receive effective feedback on
their instructional practices, except when it is a formal evaluation. All six of the nine teachers
who said that they do not receive effective feedback mentioned that the formal evaluation
process was the only time they received feedback. One teacher stated, “I would like to get more
feedback on what I am doing in the classroom, other than when I sit down to review my
evaluation.” This statement sums up the general response of the six participants who self-
reported that they did not receive effective feedback.
Table 8 illustrates the quantitative data derived from the interviews and observations that
indicate organizational influences that impact CVJCS teachers in the development and
implementation of literacy-based units of study. Analysis of the data indicate whether teachers
agree or disagree that CVJCS provides professional learning opportunities, clear directives and
clear feedback.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 111

Table 8
Organizational Influence Results
Organizational Influences Interview and Observation Results

Agree
CVJCS
Provides
Disagree
CVJCS
Provides

Professional Development Opportunities for Literacy Instruction

9 0
Professional Development with a Focus on JCS Student Needs

3 6
Clear Directives Aligned with Vision

1 8
Clear Directives on Literacy Goals

1 8
Effective Feedback on Instructional Practices

3 6

Research Question Three Summary
Analysis of the data collected from participant interviews and observations validated gaps
in organizational influences of providing professional development opportunities on the needs of
the JCS student population and providing effective feedback on instructional practices. The gap
in organizational influences of professional development opportunities on the needs of the JCS
student population and providing effective feedback on instructional practices was validated by
66% of the teacher responses signaling a gap. However, a gap in the organizational influence of
providing professional development opportunities for literacy instruction was not validated as
100% of the CVJCS teachers affirmed that CVJCS provides ample opportunities to participate in
literacy instruction focused professional development opportunities.

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 112

Synthesis
The findings derived from the data collected during the interviews and observations
demonstrated a variety of perspectives and understanding of the knowledge, motivation and
organizational influences that affect the stakeholders and their attempt to attain their stakeholder
goal of developing and implementing six literacy-based units of study. The study validated that
there are knowledge and organizational gaps that may contribute to the CVJCS teachers from
attaining their stakeholder goal. The analysis of the qualitative data revealed that CVJCS
teachers possessed knowledge of the need for a balanced approach to literacy instruction and the
need to build student schema for extended discourse, thus not validating these knowledge
influences. In addition, CVJCS Teachers demonstrate self-efficacy in their ability to develop and
implement literacy-based units of study and attribute the success or failure of developing and
implementing six literacy-based units of study to their own efforts. The data analysis of
participant responses related to self-efficacy and attribution did not validate these two
motivational influences. Furthermore, data analysis of the organizational influence of the
CVJCS teachers needing professional development opportunities on literacy instruction resulted
in this influence being not validated.
The analysis of the self-reported data validates gaps in stakeholder knowledge that is
essential to effectively develop quality literacy-based units of study. The validated gaps in
knowledge include how to develop a long-term approach for JCS population, interactive
instruction, and how to connect to student’s prior knowledge and personal experiences.
Furthermore, the data analysis partially validated gaps in CVJCS knowledge of the appropriate
literacy skills secondary students need, specifically regarding how to build student schema on
building vocabulary and applying appropriate comprehension strategies.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 113

In addition, data analysis validates gaps in organizational structures that are essential to
align the stakeholder’s efforts with that of the organization in order to meet the organizational
goal. The validated organizational influences included clear directives on CVJCS literacy goals
and vision, professional development on the needs of JCS student population, and effective
feedback on instructional practices. Therefore, it becomes the responsibility of the CVJCS
administration to provide professional development and channels of communication to address
the gaps that exist in the stakeholder knowledge. This approach, however, would require a large
scale organizational and cultural change over time. This challenge will be discussed in Chapter
Five with recommendations to address the obstacles to developing and implementing literacy-
based units of study that drive instruction and promote student learning.

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 114

CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
In the previous chapter, the assumed influences in the study were validated through
qualitative data analysis and organized into knowledge, motivation, and organizational
challenges in order to identify themes that emerged in relation to the research questions. Chapter
Five will discuss the significance of these findings with regard to theoretical principles and
provide recommendations to address areas in need of improvement. Like Chapter Four, the
recommendations are organized into categories of validated knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences. Recommendations are context-specific and research-based to increase
the likelihood of successful implementation. The remainder of the chapter describes how the
New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) will be used to implement the
recommendations and evaluate the impact. The model has four levels and will be utilized in
reverse order: results, behavior, learning, reaction. Effective use of the Kirkpatrick model will
provide important information about whether the recommendations are providing the desired
results in the CVJCS teachers’ attainment of their stakeholder goal of developing and
implementing six literacy-based units of study.
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
Knowledge Recommendations
Introduction. Table 9 represents the assumed knowledge influences and whether they
were validated through data gathered in interviews, observations and document analysis. The
first four influences listed in Table 9 were a priority for the study and are accompanied by
recommendations to address these knowledge influences. The last two influences were not
validated by data as CVJCS teachers displayed conceptual and metacognitive knowledge of
research-based practices for developing and implementing literacy-base units of study. As noted
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 115

by Clark (2008), the increase of declarative knowledge facilitates growth in procedural
knowledge and potentially acquiring skills for expertise. Therefore, the growth of the CVJCS
teachers’ declarative knowledge of appropriate secondary literacy skills and literacy instructional
practices could improve the CVJCS teachers’ procedural knowledge on how to effectively
develop and implement literacy-based units of study. The context-specific recommendation
explains how this declarative knowledge will be delivered to the CVJCS teaching staff as well as
a plan for the conveyance of procedural knowledge. These recommendations, when delivered
through effective training modules, will help address the validated knowledge influences in the
study.
Table 9
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed
Knowledge
Influence
Validated?
Yes, Partial or No
(V, P, N)
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Teachers lack
knowledge of
appropriate literacy
skills secondary
students need.
(D)
P Targeting training
and instruction
between the
individual’s
independent
performance level
and their level of
assisted performance
promotes optimal
learning (Scott &
Palincsar, 2006).
CVJCS teachers will
receive professional
training provided by
ERS Curriculum
Specialist and
Literacy Coach on
the three key
elements of proficient
secondary readers to
address the gaps in
their declarative
knowledge of
appropriate literacy
skills of secondary
students.

Teachers need
knowledge of the
appropriate literacy
Y To develop mastery,
individuals must
acquire component
ERS Curriculum
Specialist and CVJCS
Literacy Coach will
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 116

instructional
methods.
(D)
skills, practice
integrating them, and
know when to apply
what they have
learned (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).

Modeled behavior is
more likely to be
adopted if the model
is credible, similar
(e.g., gender,
culturally
appropriate), and the
behavior has
functional value
(Denler, Wolters &
Benzon, 2014).

Feedback that is
private, specific, and
timely enhances
performance (Shute,
2008).
provide professional
training on effective
literacy instructional
practices, that
includes multiple
opportunities to
practice with peers
and students,
classroom coaching
with feedback, and
planning aids.
Teachers need
knowledge of how to
develop appropriate
literacy instructional
units.
(P)
P Continued practice
promotes
automaticity and
takes less capacity in
working memory
(Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006)

Modeled behavior is
more likely to be
adopted if the model
is credible, similar
(e.g., gender,
culturally
appropriate), and the
behavior has
functional value
(Denler et al., 2014).
ERS Curriculum
Specialist and
Literacy Coach will
model how to
develop appropriate
literacy instructional
units and then have
teachers practice
developing literacy
instructional units
with feedback during
a six weeks coaching
cycle.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 117

Feedback that is
private, specific, and
timely enhances
performance (Shute,
2008).

Teachers need
knowledge of how to
implement
appropriate
secondary literacy
units of study.
(P)
Y Modeled behavior is
more likely to be
adopted if the model
is credible, similar
(e.g., gender,
culturally
appropriate), and the
behavior has
functional value
(Denler et al., 2014).

Feedback that is
private, specific, and
timely enhances
performance (Shute,
2008).

Continued practice
promotes
automaticity and
takes less capacity in
working memory
(Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006)

ERS Curriculum
Specialist and
Literacy Coach will
model how to
implement
appropriate literacy
instructional units
and then have
teachers practice
implementing literacy
instructional units
with feedback during
a six weeks coaching
cycle.

*Indicate knowledge type for each influence listed using these abbreviations: (D)eclarative;
(P)rocedural; (M)etacognitive
Declarative knowledge solutions, or description of needs or assets. CVJCS teachers
need to have a clear understanding of appropriate secondary literacy skills students need.
Therefore, when considering professional learning opportunities to address the gap in declarative
knowledge of appropriate literacy skills students need, Scott and Palincsar (2006) assert that
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 118

professional learning and training should target the individual’s independent learning
performance level and level of assisted performance for optimal learning. CVJCS teachers
should receive professional training provided by the ERS Curriculum Specialist and Literacy
Coach on the three key elements of proficient secondary readers to address the gaps in their
declarative knowledge of appropriate literacy skills of secondary students. Furthermore, the
professional learning should be driven by data that reveals the CVJCS teachers independent
learning performance level and level of assisted performance based on their specific knowledge
gaps revealed from data analysis.
In a meta-analysis of studies on the best practices for professional development, Stewart
(2014) concluded that adjusting professional learning opportunities based on a needs assessment
of the participants of the professional learning produced greater gains in professional learning
and implementation of new knowledge. Considering that Scott and Palincsar (2006) point to the
importance of providing learning activities aimed between an individual’s independent and
assisted learning levels, Stewart (2014) would support providing professional learning that
addresses the specific individual gaps in knowledge. Based on analysis of the CVJCS teachers’
declarative knowledge, Stewart’s (2014) meta-analysis supports professional learning targeted on
the specific needs of the CVJCS teachers’ declarative knowledge gap.
Procedural knowledge solutions, or description of needs or assets. CVJCS teachers
need procedural knowledge of how to develop appropriate literacy instructional units. Denler et
al. (2014) found that modeling to-be-learned behaviors improved learning and performance. In
addition, Schraw and McCrudden (2006) note that continued practice builds automaticity,
enhancing the learning. In order to reinforce the learning and enhance learning, Shute (2008)
recommends that when practicing a new behavior, it is important to provide specific and timely
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 119

feedback. The recommendation for the CVJCS teachers is that the ERS Curriculum Specialist
and Literacy Coach will model how to implement appropriate literacy instruction and provide
opportunities for CVJCS teachers to practice implementation with specific feedback during a six-
week coaching cycle.
Snyder, Hemmeter and Fox (2015) analyzed data from two experimental design studies
of teachers implementing new instructional practices with embedded coaching cycles with an
instructional coach. Study One included 12 teachers over the course of a 13-16 weeks coaching
cycle and Study Two included 20 teachers over the course of a 12-16 weeks coaching cycle. The
coaching cycles provided modeling of instructional practices, opportunities for teachers to
practice with coaching and specific feedback on their efforts. Snyder et al. (2015) indicate that
professional coaching with modeling, practice and feedback is an important driver to enhance
teacher competence to implement evidence-based instructional practices. The evidence of this
study affirms the recommendation to provide CVJCS teachers with coaching support that
includes modeling, practice and specific feedback.
Motivation Recommendations
Introduction. Clark and Estes (2008) suggested that indicators of motivation include the
stakeholder’s choice to partake in the activity, how much effort to commit, and whether they
want to persist in achieving the goal. The two motivation influences introduced in the study,
self-efficacy and attribution theory were non-validated and identified as not a priority. Data from
the interviews and observations indicated that the CVJCS teachers possess the mental effort and
persistence required to follow through with the process of developing literacy-based units of
study. As indicated in Table 10, the reason for this is that the CVJCS teachers believe they
possess the capabilities to develop literacy-based units of study and attribute the success or
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 120

failure of developing and implementing literacy-based units of study ability to their own effort.
Table 10 suggests recommendations for addressing these influences based on the noted
theoretical principles.
Table 10
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed
Motivation
Influence
Validated
Yes, Partial, No
(V, P, N)
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Self-Efficacy:
CVJCS teachers need
to believe they are
capable of effectively
developing units of
study that address the
four focus areas of
literacy.
N Feedback and
modeling increase
self-efficacy (Pajares,
1996).

ERS Curriculum
Specialist and
Literacy Coach will
provide instructional
support by modeling
the development of
literacy units.
(development.)
Curriculum Specialist
and Literacy Coach
will provide coaching
that allows for
CVJCS teachers to
practice, gain
feedback, and gradual
release of the
development process.
Attribution Theory:
CVJCS teaching staff
needs to attribute the
success or failure of
developing and
implementing literacy
unit of study to their
own efforts.
N Adaptive attributions
and control beliefs
motivate individuals
(Pintrich, 2003).

Provide feedback that
stresses the process
of learning, including
the important of
effort, strategies, and
potential self-control
of learning.
(Anderman &
Anderman, 2006).

CVJCS
Administration team
will conduct multiple
check-ins with
CVJCS teachers to
discuss the success or
failure of the
development and
implementation of the
unit of study with
feedback that stresses
teacher reflection on
learning, effort and
self-control.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 121

Self-Efficacy. CVJCS teachers need to believe they are capable of effectively
developing units of study that address the four focus areas of literacy. Pajares (1996) suggests in
order to build self-efficacy, individuals need effective feedback and modeling to increases their
confidence in their capabilities to complete assigned tasks. Although the data did not validate
self-efficacy as an influence affecting the CVJCS teachers attaining their stakeholder goal, in
order to strengthen CVJCS teachers’ self-efficacy it is recommended that the CVJCS teachers
receive specific feedback and modeling of how to effectively develop and implement quality
literacy-based units of study.
In a meta-analysis of 43 research studies involving 9216 teachers on Teacher Self-
Efficacy (TSE), Klassen and Tze (2014) argued that STE is strongly related to teacher
performance. Klassen and Tze (2014) highlight that TSE had a significant impact on student
achievement and positive teacher performance evaluations. The meta-analysis data from Klassen
and Tze’s (2014) highlights the importance of implementing Pajares (1996) recommendations to
build TSE by providing modeling and effective feedback.
Attribution Theory. Data analysis revealed the CVJCS teaching staff attributes the
success or failure of developing and implementing literacy unit of study to their own efforts.
Pintrich (2003) states that adaptive attributions and control beliefs motivate [individuals] to
perform and complete tasks. Furthermore, Anderman and Anderman (2009) assert that
individuals need feedback that stresses the process of learning, including the important of effort,
strategies, and potential self-control of learning. Therefore, in order to continue this trend with
the CVJCS teachers, it is recommended that the CVJCS teaching staff receive multiple check-ins
with the administration team to discuss the success or failure of the development and
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 122

implementation of the unit of study with feedback that stresses teacher reflection on learning,
effort and self-control in order to adapt teacher attribution of success.
An empirical study of 523 teachers on the combined effects of TSE and Attribution
Theory revealed that teachers with strong TSE and attributed success to their own self-control
and ability to assert control were effective instructors (Wang, Hall, & Rahimi, 2015). Highlights
of Wang et al.’s (2015) study include that higher teacher self-efficacy for motivating students
predicted better adjustment in their instruction and supporting programs that address both TSE
and attributions enhanced teacher performance. Wang et al.’s (2015) findings support Anderman
and Anderman (2009) recommendations that individuals need a process of learning with
effective feedback loops that allow teachers to adapt how they attribute success or failure as they
learn and grow, enhancing their self-efficacy.
Organization Recommendations
Introduction. Table 11 represents the organizational influences validated through the
data analysis process. Clark and Estes (2008) found that performance problems are likely to
occur when organizational goals and policies conflict with organizational culture. Rueda (2011)
suggested that there are usually multiple, rather than one, influences that result in a gap in
stakeholder performance. Therefore, it is necessary to examine organizational policies,
structures, and practices that contribute to the gaps that exist. Table 11 indicates three
organizational influences that have been validated and carry a high priority for achieving the
stakeholders’ goal. Table 11 also lists the recommendations for these influences derived from
theoretical principles.

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 123

Table 11
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed
Organization
Influence

Validated
Yes, Partial, No
(V, P, N)
Principle and
Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation
CVJCS teachers need
to receive
professional
development
opportunities to gain
literacy instruction
knowledge.

N Effective change
efforts ensure that
everyone has the
resources (equipment,
personnel, time, etc)
needed to do their
job, and that if there
are resource
shortages, then
resources are aligned
with organizational
priorities (Clark &
Estes, 2008).
CVJCS
administration team
will provide the time
and resources for
CVJCS teachers to
receive professional
development
opportunities to gain
literacy instruction
knowledge aligned
with the
organizational goal of
improving student
ELA SBAC
performance.
CVJCS teachers need
to receive clear
directives of the
vision and goals for
literacy instruction.

Y Effective
organizations insure
that organizational
messages, rewards,
policies and
procedures that
govern the work of
the organization are
aligned with or are
supportive of
organizational goals
and values (Clark &
Estes, 2008).

Effective leaders
utilize strong public
speaking skills to
communicate ideas
and a vision to the
organization and
larger
public circle
CVJCS
administration team
will provide clear
communication to
effectively
communicate
CVJCS’ vision and
goals for literacy
instruction with all
stakeholders.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 124

(Conger, 1991;
Denning, 2005;
Lewis, 2011).
CVJCS teachers need
to experience
effective feedback on
their instructional
practices.

Y Effective leaders
understand the
intricacies of
organizational
communication
(Conger, 1991; Fix &
Sias, 2006; Lewis,
2011).

Effective leaders
know how to build
strong
communication skills
among
members of an
organization in order
to
build capacity
(Fix & Sias, 2006).

CVJCS
administration team
will provide effective
feedback to the
CVJCS teachers on
their instructional
practices in order to
build their capacity to
develop and
implement literacy-
based units of study.

Cultural Settings: Professional Development. CVJCS teachers need to receive
professional development opportunities to gain literacy instruction knowledge. Clark and Estes
(2008) argue that effective change efforts ensure that everyone has the resources (equipment,
personnel, time, etc.) needed to do their job, and that if there are resource shortages, then
resources are aligned with organizational priorities. The primary resource that the CVJCS
teachers need in order to meet their stakeholder goal is knowledge on how to develop and
implement literacy-based units of study. The recommendation is that the CVJCS administration
team should provide the time and resources for CVJCS teachers to receive professional
development opportunities to gain literacy instruction knowledge aligned with the organizational
goal of improving student ELA SBAC performance.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 125

Clark and Estes (2008) state that when a task requires a higher level of knowledge than
what a job aid can provide, then the stakeholders should be provided with training. To gain
knowledge on how to develop and implement literacy-based unit of study requires
demonstration, guided practice and effective feedback. Data from this study reveal that CVJCS
teachers lack of knowledge mirrors Gagnon et al.’s (2012) position that JCS teachers are
neglected as an important component of dismantling the school-to-prison pipeline and do not
receive adequate and effective professional development. Gagnon et al. (2012) assert that JCS
teachers need training opportunities that contextualizes new knowledge within the JCS setting.
Thus, supporting the recommendation that the CVJCS teachers need professional development
opportunities in order to meet their stakeholder goal.
Cultural Models: Vision and Goals. CVJCS teachers need to receive clear directives of
the vision and goals for literacy instruction. An element of effective organizations is that they
insure that organizational messages, rewards, policies and procedures that govern the work of the
organization are aligned with or are supportive of organizational goals and values (Clark &
Estes, 2008). Furthermore, researchers have found that effective leaders utilize strong public
speaking skills to communicate ideas and a vision to the organization and larger public circle
(Conger, 1991; Denning, 2005; Lewis, 2011). Based on the aforementioned research, it is
recommended that the CVJCS administration team provide clear communication to effectively
communicate CVJCS’ vision and goals for literacy instruction with all stakeholders.
In a meta-analysis of strategic vision and values in top leaders’ communication,
Mayfield, Mayfield and Sharbrough (2014) examined how motivating language theory (MLT)
affected stakeholder performance. Mayfield et al. (2015) identified that top leaders utilize MLT
by creating channels of communication with stakeholders that include direction-giving language,
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 126

meaning-making language and empathetic language. What Mayfield et al. (2015) discovered in
their analysis of the literature is that by constructing a strong vision and stakeholder goals using
the language of MLT, stakeholders had a clear understanding of the vision and goals, recognized
their importance to the organization and were energized to attain both the stakeholder and
organizational goals. The meta-analysis of literature addressing leaders communication utilizing
MLT supports the recommendation that the CVJCS administration needs to provide clear
communication of CVJCS’ vision and goals for literacy instruction.
Policies/Procedures: Effective Feedback. CVJCS teachers need to experience effective
feedback on their instructional practices. Effective leaders understand the intricacies of
organizational communication and know how to build strong communication skills among
members of an organization in order to build capacity (Conger, 1991; Fix & Sias, 2006; Lewis,
2011). Based on the research of Conger (1991), Fix and Sias (2006) and Lewis (2011) it is
recommended that CVJCS administration team will provide effective feedback to the CVJCS
teachers on their instructional practices in order to build their capacity to develop and implement
literacy-based units of study.
In a theoretical study on effective feedback for teachers, Voerman, Meijer, Korthagen
and Simons (2015) conducted an evaluation of a theory-based trajectory for professional
development called FeTiP (Feedback-Theory into Practice) that aims to have an observable
effect on teacher classroom behavior. Voerman et al. (2015) emphasized Hattie and Timperley’s
(2007) assertion that feedback should close the gap between a current level of understanding or
performance and a goal and should provide the information necessary to close this gap. A key
conclusion of Voerman et al.’s (2007) study was that teachers did change their classroom
behavior and implement new practices from their professional development opportunities.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 127

Voerman et al.’s (2007) theoretical study and results supports the recommendation that CVJCS
teachers need to experience effective feedback on their instructional practices in order to assist
them attain their stakeholder goal.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
The implementation and evaluation plan utilized in this section is the New World
Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The New World Kirkpatrick model
suggests that evaluation plans begin with the desired results, or Level Four, and work backward
from that to the other three levels. These “leading indicators” can be either external or internal
and help to monitor progress of implementation plans, identify barriers to success, focus
employees on desired behavior, and provide important data connecting training to job
performance (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Once the goals or outcomes are set, it is easier
for an organization to determine what critical behaviors are necessary to achieve those goals,
what learning occurred during the training activity, and the satisfaction of organizational
members with the learned strategies. By viewing the evaluation plan upside-down, with a focus
on results, an organization is less likely to waste time and money on training and change that has
no real focus or purpose. Using the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick,
2016) ensures that training is directly connected to performance and then results for programs
that are vital to an organization.
Organizational Purpose, Needs and Expectations
The mission of CVJCS is to provide high-risk students an alternative educational setting
where they can develop the social, academic, and life skills to be transitioned successfully back
to their home schools or to complete the general equivalency diploma (GED) requirements.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 128

Based on CVJCS’ mission statement and demographics, CVJCS role is significant in the
development of the literacy skills necessary to successfully return to a traditional high school
setting in order to reduce the likeliness of recidivism for their student population. This study
examined the knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences that contribute to
inconsistent development and implementation of quality literacy-based units of study. The
recommendations to address the problem are a comprehensive training program, increased
teacher collaboration through professional learning communities, revised organizational policies
and procedures, and enhanced communication. These proposed solutions should produce the
desired outcome, which is the CVJCS teachers developing and implementing six quality literacy-
based units of study.

Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Table 12 indicates the proposed Level 4: Results and Leading indicators, noting internal
and external outcomes, metrics, and methods for Central Valley Juvenile Court Schools. If the
internal outcomes are achieved because of the proposed recommendations, it will lead to the
fulfillment of the external outcomes indicated.

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 129

Table 12
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes

Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
1. Student academic
performance
increases.
Student performance on
standardized assessments.
(Student cohorts are single
year cohorts. Student
demographics and make up
will vary from year to year.)
SBAC, NWEA, ELPAC
2. Reduction in student
failures.
Number of students failing
courses.
Compare quarterly grading
period data from current
school year with previous
school years regarding
percentage of students with
failing grades.
3. Increase in student
credit recovery.
Number of students on track
with appropriate number of
earned credits for grade level.
Compare quarterly grading
period data from current
school year with previous
school years regarding
percentage of students with
appropriate number of earned
credits for their grade level.
4. Increase in student
reinstatement to
comprehensive high
school.
Number of students reinstated
to a comprehensive high
school.
Compare yearly data of the
number of students who are
successfully reinstated into a
comprehensive high school.
5. Increase in student
graduation rate.
5a. Number of students who
graduate with a certificate or
diploma from CVJCS.
Compare yearly graduation
data with previous years
graduation data.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 130

5b. Number of reinstated
students who graduate with a
certificate or diploma from a
comprehensive high school

Internal Outcomes
1. Teachers develop
quality literacy-based
units of study.
Number of documents
collected indicating teachers
developed quality literacy-
based units of study.
Administration team will
review unit plans as a part of
the formal evaluation process
and discuss how the teacher
developed the units at post-
observation conferences.
2. Teachers implement
quality literacy-based
units of study.
Pacing guides and unit plans
indicating teachers
successfully implemented
quality literacy-based units of
study.
Administration team will
review teacher pacing guides
across departments each
quarter and elicit data from
teachers at faculty meetings.
3. Improved literacy
instruction due to
implementation of
well-developed
literacy-based units of
study.
Number of documents
collected indicating improved
instruction with well-
developed quality literacy-
based units of study.
Administration team will note
the impact of changes in
instruction based on classroom
instruction observations and
student work data.
4. Increase focus on
student literacy
needs.
Number of student documents
and unit plans that are adjusted
based on student literacy
needs.
Administration team will
review unit plans to assess the
level of adjustments made to
the plan based on student
literacy needs.

Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. The stakeholders of focus are the CVJCS teachers who are being
trained on how to develop and implement quality literacy-based units of study. The specific
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 131

critical behaviors, metrics, methods and timing for each critical behavior are included in Table
13.
Table 13
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metric(s) Method(s) Timing
1.Develop literacy-
based units of study
based on appropriate
literacy skills that
secondary students
need.
1a. Percentage of
CVJCS teachers’ unit
plans that reflect
design based on
literacy skills that
secondary students
need.
1a. Administration
team will review unit
plans and assess if the
plans were designed
around appropriate
literacy skills that
secondary students
need.

Every 6 six weeks
when new units are
scheduled to begin.
1b. Percentage of
CVJCS teachers’ unit
plans that reflect a
variance of teaching
distinct literacy skills
secondary students
need throughout the
school year.
1b. Administration
team will review unit
plans and assess if the
plans were designed
around teaching
distinct appropriate
literacy skills that
secondary students
need.

Every 6 six weeks
when new units are
scheduled to begin.
2. Develop literacy-
based units of study
based on appropriate
literacy instructional
methods.
2a. Percentage of
CVJCS teachers’ unit
plans that reflect
design based on
appropriate literacy
instructional
methods.
2a. Administration
team will review unit
plans and assess if the
plans were designed
around appropriate
literacy skills that
secondary students
need.

Every 6 six weeks
when new units are
scheduled to begin.
2b. Percentage of
CVJCS teachers’ unit
plans that reflect a
variance of
appropriate literacy
instructional methods
2b. Administration
team will review unit
plans and assess if the
plans were designed
around a variance of
appropriate literacy
instructional methods
Every 6 six weeks
when new units are
scheduled to begin.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 132

needed throughout
the school year.
throughout the school
year.

3. Adjust literacy
instructional methods
based on the needs of
the JCS population.
3a. Percentage of
CVJCS teachers’
unit/lesson plans that
reflect an adjustment
made of the
appropriate literacy
instructional methods
based on the needs of
the JCS student
population needed
throughout the school
year.

3a. Administration
team will review
unit/lesson plans and
assess if the plans
were adjusted based
on the needs of the
JCS student
population.
Weekly when lesson
plans are submitted.
3b. Number of times
CVJCS teachers
adjust appropriate
literacy instructional
methods based on
JCS population.
3b. Administration
team will review
unit/lesson plans and
assess if the plans
were adjusted based
on the needs of the
JCS student
population.

Quarterly check-in
meeting with
administration team.

Required drivers. CVJCS teachers require the support of their administration team and
their colleagues to reinforce acquired learning from training and to encourage them to implement
new knowledge in their unit development and implementation. Administrators will need to
monitor teachers’ unit and lesson plans to assess progress toward performance goals and provide
rewards when goals are achieved. The administration team will participate in the trainings as
participants and when available, attend training of trainers in order to provide support for their
teaching staff. Table 14 shows the recommended drivers to support critical behaviors of the
CVJCS teaching staff.

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 133

Table 14
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing Critical Behaviors Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Reinforcing
Job Aid that includes
appropriate literacy skills that
secondary students need.
Ongoing 1
Job Aid that includes how to
apply appropriate literacy
instructional methods.
Ongoing 2, 3
Job Aid that includes how to
design and develop literacy-
based units of study.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3
Faculty meetings to provide
job-embedded training on
developing literacy-based units
of study.
Weekly 1
Faculty meetings to provide
job-embedded training on
implementing literacy-based
units of study.
Weekly 1, 2, 3
Professional Learning
Communities for teachers to
discuss strategies for
developing literacy-based units
of study.
Monthly 1
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 134

Professional Learning
Communities for teachers to
discuss strategies for
implementing literacy-based
units of study.
Monthly 1, 2, 3
Encouraging
Professional Learning
Communities where teachers
can discuss development of
literacy-based units of study.
Monthly 1
Professional Learning
Communities where teachers
can discuss implementation of
literacy-based units of study.
Monthly 2, 3
Feedback and support from
content area administrator.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3
Rewarding
Public acknowledgement at a
faculty meeting to recognize
development of quality literacy
unit of study.
Monthly 1
Public acknowledgement at a
faculty meeting to recognize
the implementation of quality
literacy unit of study.
Monthly 2
Public acknowledgement at a
faculty meeting to recognize
the adjustment of literacy
instructional method based on
the need of JCS student
population.
Monthly 2, 3
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 135

Monitoring
Administration team will
monitor teacher unit/lesson
plans to evaluate development
and implementation of
literacy-based units of study.
Weekly 1, 2, 3
Administration team can ask
teachers to discuss recent unit
development and
implementation of literacy-
based units of study.
Quarterly 1, 2, 3
Supervisor can note
adjustments of literacy
instructional practices during
formal and informal classroom
observations as well as through
unit/lesson plans.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3

Organizational support. To support teachers’ critical behaviors, the organization will
prioritize professional learning opportunities to focus on supporting teachers in their efforts to
develop and implement literacy-based units of study. This will include training at faculty
meetings, department meetings, and ongoing communication with colleagues in professional
learning communities. Organizational support is crucial for teachers to be able to apply the
knowledge required during training and achieve measurable results.
Level 2: Learning
Learning Goals: After completion of the recommended solutions, especially the initial
training, the teachers will be able to:
1. Recognize appropriate literacy skills for secondary students. (D)
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 136

2. Identify JCS students’ literacy skills deficiencies. (D)
3. Recognize appropriate literacy instructional methods for secondary classrooms. (D)
4. Identify appropriate literacy instructional methods for the needs of JCS student
population. (D)
5. Apply appropriate literacy skills instruction when developing literacy-based units of
study. (P)
6. Design appropriate literacy skills instruction based on needs of JCS student
population. (P)
7. Apply appropriate literacy instructional methods when implementing literacy-based
units of study. (P)
8. Differentiate appropriate literacy instructional methods based on the needs of JCS
student population when implementing literacy-based units of study. (P)
9. Attribute success or failure of developing quality literacy-based units of study to
their own efforts. (Attribution Theory)
10. Attribute success or failure to implement quality literacy-based units of study to their
own efforts. (Attribution Theory)
Program. The learning goals indicated in the previous section will be achieved with a
training program that thoroughly examines the development and implementation of quality
literacy-based units of study. The learners, teachers, will learn about various topics related to
effective development of literacy-based units of study that focus on appropriate literacy skills
that secondary students need, appropriate secondary literacy instructional practices and how to
implement them in the classroom. The program is blended, with three in-person workshops, two
e-learning modules, and multiple follow up application trainings during meetings and in-class
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 137

coaching. The entire training will take place over the period of one school year and will last
1860 minutes (31 hours).
During the introductory in-person trainings, there will be three distinct sections of
training: appropriate literacy skills secondary students need, appropriate literacy instructional
practices, and how to develop and implement literacy-based units of study. Each of the three
trainings will take place for the entirety of an in-service day and will be broken into a morning
session and an afternoon session. The morning session will focus on the teacher acquisition of
the declarative and procedural knowledge. This portion of the training will focus strongly on the
“why”, not just the what and provide open opportunities for discussion and activities where
participants can share questions or concerns. The afternoon session will be utilized for
developing action plans to apply their newly acquired knowledge in their classroom.
After the initial training session, teachers will be required to complete an e-learning
module. During the modules, teachers will be provided with a job aid each module. The first
module will focus on the key elements needed to develop a quality literacy-based unit of study.
The second module will focus on the key element of quality literacy instruction. The key
elements of developing and implementing quality literacy instruction will be demonstrated using
video and will present classroom scenarios of successful development and implementation.
After each video, the learners will be asked questions to check for understanding. At the end of
the entire module, teachers will be presented with multiple choice questions that assess teacher
understanding of the main principles of the training module.
During the ongoing trainings during faculty and department meetings, the focus will be
for teachers to apply information from the initial training session and follow up e-learning
module. These trainings will utilize role-playing, collaborative discussions, and peer modeling
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 138

to reinforce newly acquired declarative and procedural knowledge of how to develop and
implement quality literacy-based units of study. An academic coach who has demonstrated
successful development and implementation of quality literacy-based units of study will discuss
the value of utilizing the learned knowledge to increase student literacy performance. Teachers
will reinforce these strategies by supporting one another in their ongoing professional learning
network and department meetings.
Evaluation of the Components of learning. Before learners can apply knowledge to
solve a problem, they must demonstrate acquisition of the necessary declarative knowledge.
During trainings, it is then essential to assess learning for both declarative and procedural
knowledge. Learners also need to believe the training as an important initial step to using their
acquired learning and skills in their job. The training is important in building the learner’s
confidence that they can successfully implement the knowledge and skills that were taught as
well as their commitment to using them on the job. Table 15 indicates the evaluation methods
and timing for these components of learning.

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 139

Table 15
Evaluation of the Components of Learning..
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”
Knowledge checks using multiple choice. After videos in the e-learning module as well
as at the end of the entire module.
Checks for understanding through pair and
small group discussions as well as online
backchannel discussions.

From time to time during the initial training as
well as follow-up implementation trainings.
Documented by notes and recorded
backchannel responses and questions.
Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”
Multiple choice questions using scenarios in
asynchronous module.
At the end of module.
Demonstration in groups of using the guiding
principles and job aid strategies to
successfully perform the skills.
During the workshops.
Responses and feedback from teachers
during the training, especially during small
group sessions.
During the workshops.
Individual application of the skills in the
classroom as documented in observations.
At the end of the workshop.
Pre- and post-test assessment survey asking
participants about their understanding and
level of proficiency before and after the
training.
At the end of the workshop.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 140

Collaborative analysis and report out of goals
created for Professional Learning
Communities.
At the end of the workshop.
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Observation of participants’ feedback and
actions to the value of newly introduced
strategies and practices.
During the workshops.
Discussions of the value of what they are
being asked to do in the classroom.
During the workshops.
Pre- and post-test assessment item. After the initial training.
Confidence “I think I can do it on the
job.”

Survey items assessing confidence levels
after seeing videos or live modeling of
strategies.
Following each video in the e-learning module
as well as through backchannel during in-
person training sessions.
Discussion after practice and feedback.

During the workshops.
Pre- and post-test assessment item. After the initial training.
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”
Discussions after practice and feedback. During the workshops.
Create an individual action plan as well as
goals for professional learning community.

During the workshops.

Pre- and post-test assessment item. After the initial training.

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 141

Level 1: Reaction
After training sessions take place, it is important to get immediate feedback about the
quality of the program and instructor. Table 16 below lists the methods or tools used to evaluate
all three components of Level 1 Reaction: engagement, relevance, and customer satisfaction.

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 142

Table 16
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program.
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Completion of online backchannel
questions.
Ongoing during synchronous portion of the
course.
Completion of e-learning module. Ongoing during asynchronous portion of the
course.
Observation by instructor/administrator. During the workshops.
Training course evaluation. Immediately after workshop and two weeks later.

Relevance

Check in using questions during online
module and backchannel during
workshops.
After every video/module and after major
workshop activities.

Training Course evaluation. Immediately after workshop and two weeks later.

Customer Satisfaction

Check in using questions during online
module and backchannel during
workshops.
After every video/module and after major
workshop activities.

Training Course evaluation. Immediately after workshop and two weeks later.

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 143

Evaluation Tools
Immediately following the program implementation. During the initial and follow-up
workshops, teachers will have access to an online backchannel which will be used both to answer
multiple choice survey questions and as a discussion board. This data will indicate engagement
with the content of the training. Additionally, the instructor or administrator responsible for the
training will observe engagement and discuss with the teachers the relevance of the content to
the teachers’ work. After the initial training and the e-learning module, a survey will be
administered that assesses satisfaction and relevance of the training (Level 1) and their
knowledge, confidence, and value of the training (Level 2). The instrument can be found in
Appendix C.
During the asynchronous part of the training, there will be set times for teachers to pause
and answer questions about the relevance of the material as well as their overall satisfaction with
the content and means of delivery of the training. The learning management system will provide
data about the amount of time spent on the learning modules and when they are completed by
participants. This information will reveal the engagement with the training content.

Delayed for a period after the program implementation. Approximately eight weeks
after the initial training, and then again at 16 weeks, administration will distribute a survey
containing both open and scaled items utilizing the Blended Evaluation Approach. The goal of
the survey is to glean information from the participant regarding: satisfaction and relevance of
the training (Level 1), the participant's confidence in applying the training and the value assigned
to it (Level 2), application of the training to their grading practices (Level 3), and the extent to
which teachers’ grading practices align with organizational standards and drive instruction
(Level 4). The instrument can be found in Appendix D.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 144

Data Analysis and Reporting
The level 4 goal for teachers is measured by the level of adherence to developing and
implementing quality literacy-based units of study. Each week, administration and the academic
coach will track the development and implementation of quality literacy-based units of study
during observations. The report card below in Table 17 will report the data on CVJCS teachers
developing and implementing quality literacy-based units of study, including elements from all
four levels of Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2016) New World Model.

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 145

Table 17
Accountability Report Card.
100-90%

89-80% 79-65% <65%
Level 4 – Results
Teachers developing quality literacy-based
units of study.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Teachers implementing quality literacy-based
units of study.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Improved literacy instruction due to the
implementation of well developed quality
literacy-based units of study
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Increased focus on student literacy needs.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Level 3 – Behavior
Develop literacy-based units of study based
on appropriate literacy skills that secondary
students need.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Develop literacy-based units of study based
on appropriate literacy instructional methods
for secondary students.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Adjust literacy instructional methods based on
the needs of JCS student population.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Level 2 – Learning
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 146

Teachers that demonstrated knowledge of
developing and implementing quality literacy-
based units of study in post-assessment.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Teachers indicating they can implement
newly acquired knowledge on the post-
assessment.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Teachers indicating value of developing and
implementing quality literacy-based units of
study.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Teachers indicating confidence that they can
develop and implement quality literacy-based
units of study.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Teachers indicating commitment to
developing and implementing quality literacy-
based units of study.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Level 1 – Reaction

Teachers indicating engagement in the initial
training program.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Teachers indicating that the initial training
was relevant.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Teachers indicating that the training was
useful.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽

Summary
The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) was used to plan,
implement, and evaluate the recommendations for CVJCS to achieve its stakeholder goal of
developing and implementing six quality literacy-based units of study in order to increase
student performance on the SBAC assessment. The model is useful in that it focuses on whether
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 147

the training met expectations for all four levels of evaluation: results, behavior, learning, and
reaction. Furthermore, the model emphasizes that it is not necessary to wait until after the
training is completed to begin collecting data to assess the impact of the program, but rather, to
do so in an ongoing fashion. In doing this, CVJCS can modify and adapt the training to ensure
that it is meeting the expectations of both the organization and the participants. This systematic
data analysis will both increase the potential success of the program and enable organizations to
maximize the impact of future trainings and initiatives (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). By
continuously evaluating the effectiveness of CVJCS professional development and training on
developing and implementing quality literacy-based units, CVJCS will see an increase in the
effectiveness of teachers developing and implementing quality literacy-based units of study. The
achievement of the stakeholder goal of developing and implementing six quality literacy-based
units of study predicates the achievement of the organizational goal of increasing student ELA
performance on the SBAC assessment.
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach
The methodological approach utilized for this study was the Clark and Estes (2008)
KMO framework in order to evaluate the problem of practice related to the stakeholder goal of
developing and implementing six literacy-based units of study. As with all methodological
approaches, the Clark and Estes (2008) KMO framework has both strengths and weaknesses. In
this study, the Clark and Estes (2008) KMO framework provided an appropriate approach to
address the stakeholder goal, as it provided three distinct influences that could affect the
stakeholders’ ability to attain their stakeholder’s goal. By examining the stakeholders’
knowledge, motivation and organizational influences, the researcher was able to make a
comprehensive evaluation in order to validate, partially validate or not validated if the assume
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 148

influences affected the stakeholders’ ability to attain their stakeholder goal. In this study, the
researcher’s analysis of the data resulted in some influences being validated, partially validated
and not validated. By applying the Clark and Estes (2008) KMO framework, the researcher was
able to make recommendations that directly address the validated gaps that affect the
stakeholders’ ability to attain their stakeholder goal.
The limitations of utilizing the Clark and Estes (2008) KMO framework, is that the
comprehensive nature of the framework requires an in-depth inquiry that necessitates time,
resources, and more comprehensive approach to each of the KMO influences. This case study
was conducted under a tight time frame, limited resources and did not take a comprehensive
approach to each of the KMO influences. The researcher would recommend employing the
Clark and Estes (2008) KMO framework in a longitudinal study that is designed to conduct an
extensive, comprehensive study of each component of each KMO influence that affects an
organization or stakeholder’s ability to attain their goal. Furthermore, the researcher believes
that in order to attain greater accuracy, completeness, validity and reliability, and stakeholder
participation, the Clark and Estes (2008) KMO framework should be employed in longitudinal
studies versus short term case studies.
Limitations and Delimitations
The study used a qualitative approach that included interviews and classroom
observations. As noted in Chapter Three, the researcher conducted the interviews and classroom
observations. Two possible, limitations of the study are based on a power dynamic that exists
between the researcher and participants. The CVJCS teachers that participated in the study are all
employed by the same COE as the researcher. The first possible limitation, given that the
researcher is an administrator within the COE, this power dynamic could have contributed to
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 149

participants being hesitant to being completely honest when answering interview questions.
Although the information form clearly indicated that the study was anonymous with no
possibility of relation or reprisal, however, this information may not have been perceived as
truthful. The second possible limitation was a possibility that the follow up observations could
have led participants to demonstrate what they thought the researcher wanted to observe, rather
than natural routines, behaviors, and interaction with students.
Furthermore, since the study utilized a transformative model (Creswell, 2014), the
researcher recorded reflections after the interviews and observation to avoid slipping into the role
of researcher as an advocate for the participants as he reviewed data, conducted analysis and
reported findings. By relying on the reported data, triangulation of the data, and peer review, the
researcher focused on being cognizant of his biases (Creswell, 2014; Maxwell, 2013; Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). The researcher asked clarifying questions of the participants when he needed
more information on the participants’ insights, perspectives, and understanding on the topic of
the question. The researcher followed up each observation with clarifying questions with each
participant to ensure accurate field notes of the observed behaviors.
Data collection was completed over a six-week period and limited to teacher
perspectives. These delimitations were necessary to complete the study in the allotted time
frame but impacted the study. Administration, academic coaches, parents, and especially
students would have provided different and important perspectives about the development and
implementation of literacy-based units of study that were not included in the study. Furthermore,
the study was limited to a small, rural area JCS. Since teacher perspectives and practices on
developing and implementing literacy-based units of study in a JCS setting vary between schools
(Shippen et al., 2014), the recommendations of this study could be implemented by other
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 150

juvenile court schools only if they have a similar demographic population to Central Valley
Juvenile Court School.
Future Research
Considering the limitations and delimitations of the study, several recommendations for
future research emerged. The first recommendation would be to conduct a longitudinal study
that includes teachers, administrators and parents in multiple JCS settings on the topic of quality
literacy instruction for the JCS student population. This research would allow for more in-depth
research that would be individualized through surveys, interviews and observations that occur
over time. This approach would create added value by collecting and analyzing data from
multiple perspectives on the development and implementation of literacy-based units of study. It
is important to understand what quality literacy instruction means to the various stakeholders and
how they utilize literacy-based units of study to improve student performance in the JCS setting.
The recommendations in this study suggest that improving teacher knowledge of appropriate
literacy skills and instructional practices would benefit student achievement. To determine the
actual impacts of quality literacy instruction by developing and implementing literacy-based
units of study it would be necessary to collect additional data on the effectiveness of increased
teacher knowledge of the appropriate skills and instructional practices.
According to Houchins et al. (2009) a lack of resources and professional learning
opportunities combined with restrictions on how to interact with the student population creates
barriers for teachers within the JCS to develop and implement quality literacy instruction.
Therefore, the second recommendation for future research would be an exploratory inquiry into
the various professional learning opportunities that exist for JCS teachers and administrators,
specifically, professional learning opportunities on literacy instruction for the JCS student
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 151

population. It is important to examine professional learning opportunities for both
administrators and teachers, as administrators are the primary line of support for teachers. If JCS
teachers are to play a critical role in the academic success of juvenile offenders, this will require
professional learning opportunities and resources in order to provide quality literacy instruction
and interventions to meet the needs of their student population (Kirkland, 2017; Leone et al.,
2005; Leone & Wruble, 2015; Shippen et al., 2014).
Finally, Gagnon et al. (2012) point out that often, teachers and correctional officers are in
direct conflict with one another in how to engage with students served by JCS. It is
recommended that a case study of the relationship between JCS staff and the juvenile corrections
and probation staff collaborate with one another in order to meet the needs of the JCS student
population. According to Garcia et al. (2012), teacher and student safety is a key focus of
correctional officers, not best practices for instruction. Therefore, it is important to determine
how the relationship and possible conflicting goals impact JCS teachers’ ability to provide
quality literacy instruction and impact on student performance.
Conclusion
At Central Valley Juvenile Court School, and other JCS across the state of California,
developing and implementing quality literacy-based units of study are essential for student
academic success. This study set out to evaluate the development and implementation of
literacy-based units of study by the CVJCS teachers and its impact on student academic
performance on the SBAC assessment. Teachers were selected as the primary stakeholder as
they are responsible for the development and implementation of the literacy-based units of study.
To assess where a potential performance gap may exist, Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis
model was used to generate and analyze knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 152

on teachers. Using this framework, data revealed that teachers possess motivation (self-efficacy
and attribution theory) to develop and implement literacy-based units of study, but partially
validated gaps in teacher knowledge and validated gaps in organizational supports led to the
CVJCS teachers not being able to attain the stakeholder goal. Recommendations to address
these knowledge and organizational issues include improved and increased professional learning
opportunities, coaching, enhanced communication of vision and goals, and effective feedback in
order to ensure stakeholder success.
This study has helped Central Valley Juvenile Court School assess the teaching staff’s
ability to develop and implement six literacy-based units of study and the value of literacy
instruction on student learning. It identified gaps in performance with teacher knowledge and
organizational supports that could be addressed through future collaborative efforts focused on
quality literacy instruction for the unique challenges within the JCS setting. Furthermore, the
results of this study could impact juvenile court schools across the state of California that
struggle with the development and implementation of literacy-based units of study. Since
literacy instruction is the foundation for academic success (Swanson et al., 2016), juvenile court
schools that implement empirically based literacy instruction (literacy-based units of study)
should experience increased student performance (Bloomberg & Pesta, 2017). Furthermore,
quality literacy interventions in JCS settings have shown to be effective in closing the academic
achievement between JCS students and their non-incarcerated peers (Wanzek et al., 2015).
Perhaps, the most significant reason in which to develop and implement quality literacy-based
units of study is that quality literacy instruction has a direct impact on juvenile recidivism, thus
reversing the school-to-prison-pipeline (Metsala et al., 2017; Thompson & Morris, 2016).
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 153

References
Alexander, D., and Lewis, L. (2014). Condition of America’s Public-School Facilities: 2012–13
(NCES 2014-022). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for
Education Statistics. Retrieved [date] from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch.
Allington, R.I., and McGill-Franzen, A. (2014). Comprehension Difficulties Among Struggling
Readers. Israel, S. E., & Duffy, G. G. (Eds.). Handbook of research on reading
comprehension. Routledge.
Anderman, E., & Anderman, L. (2009). Attribution theory. Retrieved May 15, 2015.

Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational behavior and
human decision processes, 50(2), 248-287.
Bandura, A. (2005). The evolution of social cognitive theory. In K. G. Smith & M. A. Hitt
(Eds.), Great minds in management (pp. 9–35). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Baumann, J.F. (2014). Vocabulary and Reading Comprehension: The Nexus of Meaning. Israel,
S. E., & Duffy, G. G. (Eds.). Handbook of research on reading comprehension.
Routledge.
Blomberg, T. G., & Pesta, G. B. (2017). Education and Delinquency. The Encyclopedia of
Juvenile Delinquency and Justice.
Borgogni, L., Russo S. D., & Latham, G. P. (2011). The relationship of employee perceptions of
the immediate supervisor and top management with collective efficacy. Journal of
Leadership and Organizational Studies, 18(1), 5–13.
Brinson, D., & Steiner, L. (2007). Building Collective Efficacy: How Leaders Inspire Teachers
to Achieve. Issue Brief. Center for comprehensive school reform and improvement.
California Department of Education. (2015-16). https://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/eo/jc/
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 154

Christie, C. A. & Yell, M.L. (2008). Preventing youth incarceration through reading remediation:
Issues and solutions. Reading & Writing Quarteriy_, 24, 148-176.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Clark, H.G., Mathur, S. R., Brock, L., O’Cummings, M., & Milligan, D. (2016). Transition
Toolkit 3.0: Meeting the Educational Needs of Youth Exposed to the Juvenile Justice
System. Washington, DC: National Evaluation and Technical Assistance Center for the
Education of Children and Youth Who Are Neglected, Delinquent, or At Risk (NDTAC).
Conger, J. A. (1991). Inspiring others: The language of leadership. Academy of Management
Perspectives, 5(1), 31-45.
Conley, M. (2014). Improving Adolescent Comprehension: Developing Comprehension
Strategies in the Content Areas. Israel, S. E., & Duffy, G. G. (Eds.). Handbook of
research on reading comprehension. Routledge.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Strategies for qualitative data analysis. Basics of Qualitative
Research. Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory, 3.
Council of State Governments Justice Center. (2015). Locked Out: Improving Educational and
Vocational Outcomes for Incarcerated Youth. New York: The Council of State
Governments Justice Center.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Crosby, S. D., Day, A. G., Baroni, B. A., & Somers, C. L. (2015). School Staff Perspectives on
the Challenges and Solutions to Working With Court-Involved Students. Journal of
school health, 85(6), 347-354.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 155

Davey, N. (2017). On “becoming”—The “educational” quandary of teaching incarcerated
youth. Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies, 39(4), 391-409.
Denler, H., Wolters, C., & Benzon, M. (2014). Social cognitive theory.
Denning, S. (2005). The leader's guide to storytelling: Mastering the art and discipline of
business narrative (Vol. 269). John Wiley & Sons.
Elmore, R. F. (2007). Local school districts and instructional improvement. The keys to effective
schools: Educational reform as continuous improvement, 189-200.
Faggella-Luby, M. N., Ware, S. M., & Capozzoli, A. (2009). Adolescent literacy—Reviewing
adolescent literacy reports: Key components and critical questions. Journal of Literacy
Research, 41(4), 453-475.
Fink, A. (2013). How to conduct surveys: A step-by-step guide (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Fix, B., & Sias, P. M. (2006). Person-centered communication, leader-member exchange, and
employee job satisfaction. Communication Research Reports, 23(1), 35-44.
Fujimoto, E., Garcia, Y., Medina, N., & Perez, E. (2014). Alternatives to the school-to-prison
pipeline: The role of educational leaders in developing a college-going
culture. Association of Mexican American Educators Journal, 7(3).
Gagnon, J. C., Houchins, D. E., & Murphy, K. M. (2012). Current juvenile corrections
professional development practices and future directions. Teacher Education and Special
Education, 35(4), 333-344.
Garcia, P. A., Catania, K., & Nofziger, S. (2012). Court Schools: Embracing a Culture of
Learning. Leadership, 42(1), 28-30.
Glesne, C. (2011). Chapter 6: But is it ethical? Considering what is “right.” In Becoming
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 156

qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.) (pp. 162-183). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Graham, S., Liu, X., Aitken, A., Ng, C., Bartlett, B., Harris, K. R., & Holzapfel, J. (2017).
Effectiveness of Literacy Programs Balancing Reading and Writing Instruction: A Meta-
Analysis. Reading Research Quarterly.
Green, K., Shippen, M., & Flores, M. (2017). An Examination of the Writing Skills of
Incarcerated Male Youth. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 1-11.
Gregory, A., Skiba, R.J., & Noguera, P.A. (2010). The achievement gap and the discipline gap:
two sides of the same coin?. Educational Research, 39(1), 59-68.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77,
81–112.
Heller, R., & Greenleaf, C. L. (2007). Literacy instruction in the content areas: Getting to the
core of middle and high school improvement. Alliance for Excellent Education.
Hirsch, R. A., Dierkhising, C. B., & Herz, D. C. (2018). Educational risk, recidivism, and service
access among youth involved in both the child welfare and juvenile justice
systems. Children and Youth Services Review, 85, 72-80.
Houchins, D. E., Puckett-Patterson, D., Crosby, S., Shippen, M. E., & Jolivette, K. (2009).
Barriers and facilitators to providing incarcerated youth with a quality
education. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and
Youth, 53(3), 159-166.
Houchins, D. E., Shippen, M. E., & Murphy, K. M. (2012). Evidence-based professional
development considerations along the school-to-prison pipeline. Teacher Education and
Special Education, 35(4), 271-283.
Jacobs, V. (2008). Adolescent literacy: Putting the crisis in context. Harvard Educational
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 157

Review, 78(1), 7-39.
Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2015). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative,
and mixed approaches (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE. Chapter 9.
Josephs, N. L., & Jolivette, K. (2016). Effects of Peer Mediated Instruction on the Oral Reading
Fluency Skills of High School Aged Struggling Readers. Insights into Learning
Disabilities, 13(1), 39-59.
Jolivette, K., Scheuermann, B., & Parks Ennis, R. (2015). Multi-tiered systems of support within
secure residential juvenile facilities.
Kamil, M. L., Borman, G. D., Dole, J., Kral, C. C., Salinger, T., & Torgesen, J. (2007).
Improving Adolescent Literacy: Effective Classroom and Intervention Practices. IES
Practice Guide. NCEE 2008-4027. National Center for Education Evaluation and
Regional Assistance.
Kezar, A. (2001). Theories and models of organizational change. Understanding and facilitating
organizational change in the 21st century: Recent research and
conceptualizations. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, 28(4), 25–58.
Kirkland, D. E. (2017). A Dance of Bars: Rethinking the Role of Literacy Education in the Age
of Mass Incarceration. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 60(4), 467-470.
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation.
Alexandria, VA: ATD Press.
Klassen, R. M., & Tze, V. M. (2014). Teachers’ self-efficacy, personality, and teaching
effectiveness: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 12, 59-76.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice,
41(4), 212–218.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 158

Lai, K.M., McNaughton, S., Amituanai-Toloa, M., Turner, R., and Hsiao, S. (2013). Sustained
Acceleration of Achievement in Reading Comprehension: The New Zealand Experience.
Alvermann, D. E., Unrau, N., & Ruddell, R. B. (2013). Theoretical models and processes
of reading (Vol. 978, No. 0-87712). International Reading Assoc.
Langley, G., Moen, R., Nolan, K., Nolan, T., Norman, C., & Provost, L. (2009). The
improvement guide (2nd ed.). Chapters 1 and 2, pp. 15–47.
Leone, P. E., Krezmien, M., Mason, L., & Meisel, S. M. (2005). Organizing and delivering
empirically based literacy instruction to incarcerated youth. Exceptionality, 13(2), 89-
102.
Leone, P. E., & Wruble, P. C. (2015). Education services in juvenile corrections: 40 years of
litigation and reform. Education and Treatment of Children, 38(4), 587-604.
Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J., Castek, J., & Henry, L. A. (2017). New literacies: A dual-
level theory of the changing nature of literacy, instruction, and assessment. Journal of
Education, 197(2), 1-18.
Lewis, L. (2011). Organizational change: Creating change through strategic communication
(Vol. 4). John Wiley & Sons.
Lipsey, M. W. (2009). The primary factors that characterize effective interventions with juvenile
offenders: A meta-analytic overview. Victims and offenders, 4(2), 124-147.
Lipsey, M. W., Howell, J. C., Kelly, M. R., Chapman, G., & Carver, D. (2010).
Improving the effectiveness of juvenile justice programs. Washington DC: Center for
Juvenile Justice Reform at Georgetown University.
Mallett, C.A., (2016) The School-to-Prison Pipeline: From School Punishment to Rehabilitative
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 159

Inclusion, Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth,
60:4, 296-304.
Mallett, C. A. (2016). The school-to-prison pipeline: A critical review of the punitive paradigm
shift. Child and adolescent social work journal, 33(1), 15-24.
Marchand-Martella, N. E., Martella, R. C., Modderman, S. L., Petersen, H. M., & Pan, S. (2013).
Key areas of effective adolescent literacy programs. Education and treatment of
children, 36(1), 161-184.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Mayfield, J., Mayfield, M., & Sharbrough III, W. C. (2015). Strategic vision and values in top
leaders’ communications: Motivating language at a higher level. International Journal of
Business Communication, 52(1), 97-121.
McCray, E. D., Ribuffo, C., Lane, H., Murphy, K. M., Gagnon, J. C., Houchins, D. E., &
Lambert, R. G. (2018, April). “As real as it gets”: A Grounded Theory Study of a
Reading Intervention in a Juvenile Correctional School. In Child & Youth Care
Forum (Vol. 47, No. 2, pp. 259-281). Springer US.
McDaniel, S. (2015). A Self-determination intervention for youth placed in a short-term juvenile
detention facility. The Journal of Correctional Education, 66(3), 5-15.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Metsala, J. L., David, M. D., & Brown, S. (2017). An Examination of Reading Skills and
Reading Outcomes for Youth Involved in a Crime Prevention Program. Reading &
Writing Quarterly, 1-14.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 160

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods
Sourcebook. 3rd.
Moran, J., & Brightman, B. (2000). Leading organizational change, Journal of Workplace
Learning: Employee Counseling Today, 12(2), 66-74.
Morris, E.W. & Perry, B.L. (2016). The Punishment Gap: School Suspension and Racial
Disparities in Achievement. Social Problems, 63, 68-86.
Nance, J. P. (2016). Dismantling the School-to-Prison Pipeline: Tools for Change. Ariz. St.
LJ, 48, 313.
Nelson, C. M., Jolivette, K., Leone, P. E., & Mathur, S. R. (2010). Meeting the needs of at-risk
and adjudicated youth with behavioral challenges: The promise of juvenile
justice. Behavioral Disorders, 36(1), 70-80.
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of educational
research, 66(4), 543-578.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667–686.
Pyle, N., Flower, A., Fall, A.M. & Williams, J. (2016). Individual-level risk factors of
incarcerated youth. Remedial and Special Education, 37(3).
Quinn, M. M., Rutherford, R. B., Leone, P. E., Osher, D. M., & Poirier, J. M. (2005). Youth
with disabilities in juvenile corrections: A national survey. Exceptional Children, 71, 339–
345.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Chapter 6: Conversational partnerships. In Qualitative
interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.) (pp. 85-92). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Publications.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 161

Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Sailors, M. (2008). Improving comprehension instruction through quality professional
development. Handbook of research on reading comprehension. New York: Routledge.
Scott, S. & Palincsar, A. (2006). Sociocultural Theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/sociocultural-theory/
Schein, E. H. (2004). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory. Retrieved
from http://www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory/.
Sealey-Ruiz, Yolanda. (2011). Dismantling the School-to-Prison Pipeline
Through Racial Literacy Development in Teacher Education. Journal of Curriculum and
Pedagogy, 8:2, 116-120.
Shanahan, T. (2014). Research Synthesis: Making Sense of the Accumulation. Handbook of
Reading Research, 3, 209.
Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to adolescents: Rethinking
content-area literacy. Harvard Educational Review, 78(1), 40-59.
Shippen, M. E., Houchins, D. E., & Lockwood, S. (2014). Juvenile Correctional Professional
Development: From Conceptualization to Evaluation. Journal of Correctional
Education, 65(1).
Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research,
78(1), 153–189.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 162

Snow, P. C., & Woodward, M. N. (2017). Intervening to address communication difficulties in
incarcerated youth: A Phase 1 clinical trial. International journal of speech-language
pathology, 19(4), 392-406.
Snyder, P. A., Hemmeter, M. L., & Fox, L. (2015). Supporting implementation of evidence-
based practices through practice-based coaching. Topics in Early Childhood Special
Education, 35(3), 133-143.
Steele, J.L, Bozick, R. & Davis, L.M., (2016) Education for Incarcerated Juveniles: A Meta-
Analysis, Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR), 21:2, 65-89.
Stewart, C. (2014). Transforming professional development to professional learning. Journal of
Adult Education, 43(1), 28-33.
Svensson, I., Fälth, L., Persson, B., & Nilsson, S. (2017). The Effect of Reading Interventions
among Poor Readers at a Forensic Psychiatric Clinic. Psychiatry, Psychology and
Law, 24(3), 440-457.
Swanson, E., Wanzek, J., McCulley, L., Stillman-Spisak, S., Vaughn, S., Simmons, D., &
Hairrell, A. (2016). Literacy and text reading in middle and high school social studies and
English language arts classrooms. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 32(3), 199-222.
Thompson, K. C., & Morris, R. J. (2016). Juvenile delinquency and disability. In Juvenile
Delinquency and Disability (pp. 31-39). Springer International Publishing.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2007). The differential antecedents of self-efficacy beliefs
of novice and experienced teachers. Teaching and teacher Education, 23(6), 944-956.
United States Department of Justice. (2015). https://www.bjs.gov/
Vaughn, S., Roberts, G., Swanson, E. A., Wanzek, J., Fall, A. M., & Stillman-Spisak, S. J.
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 163

(2015). Improving middle-school students’ knowledge and comprehension in social
studies: A replication. Educational Psychology Review, 27(1), 31-50.
Voerman, L., Meijer, P. C., Korthagen, F., & Simons, R. J. (2015). Promoting effective teacher-
feedback: From theory to practice through a multiple component trajectory for
professional development. Teachers and Teaching, 21(8), 990-1009.
Wang, H., Hall, N. C., & Rahimi, S. (2015). Self-efficacy and causal attributions in teachers:
Effects on burnout, job satisfaction, illness, and quitting intentions. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 47, 120-130.
Wanzek, J., Swanson, E. A., Roberts, G., Vaughn, S., & Kent, S. C. (2015). Promoting
acceleration of comprehension and content through text in high school social studies
classes. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 8(2), 169-188.
Wexler, J., Reed, D. K., Barton, E. E., Mitchell, M., & Clancy, E. (2017). The Effects of a Peer-
Mediated Reading Intervention on Juvenile Offenders’ Main Idea Statements About
Informational Text. Behavioral Disorders, 0198742917703359.
Wilkerson, K. L., Gagnon, J. C., Mason-Williams, L., & Lane, H. (2012). Reading instruction
for students with high incidence disabilities in juvenile corrections. Preventing School
Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 56, 219–231.
Wilkerson, K. W., Gagnon, J. C., Melekoglu, M. A., & Cakiroglu, O. (2012). Reading
instruction in secondary day treatment and residential schools for youth with emotional or
behavioral disorders. Remedial and Special Education, 33, 78–88.
Wilson, H. (2014). Turning off the school-to-prison pipeline. Reclaiming Children and
Youth, 23(1), 49.
Wolford, B. I. (2000). Juvenile justice education: Who is educating the
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 164

youth? Richmond, KY: Eastern Kentucky University, Training Resource Center.

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 165

Appendix A
Interview Protocol
Introduction:
Good morning and thank you for participating in this interview. The purpose of the
interview today is to help me discover how juvenile court school teachers are equipped and
supported to develop and implement literacy units of study in their classes. This study is the
focus of my dissertation with the intent that what I learn, will assist me in creating better
opportunities for professional learning to support teachers in their work, so all information will
be confidential and anonymous. Once my analysis of data is complete, all information shared
with me will be destroyed. Before we start, I want to remind you that this interview is done
voluntarily and if at any point in the interview you would like to cease participation, that is ok.
If you don’t mind, I need to gain your permission to participate in the interview…please sign
here. And, can I have your permission to audio record our interview? The audio file will be
erased and destroyed after the data is analyzed. Any questions for me before we begin?
Knowledge:
I would like to start off by asking you some questions about literacy-based units of study.
1. In your opinion, what do you think are the fundamental elements that should be
included in a literacy-based unit of study?
2. What steps do you think a teacher should take to develop a quality literacy-based unit
of study, from start to finish?
3. How often are you able to complete all the steps when developing a literacy-based
unit of study?
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 166

4. Suppose you had a new unit to teach, how would you proceed in introducing that unit
to your students?
I would like to ask you a couple of questions about informal assessment and how it informs
implementation.
5. Thinking of your student population, how do you informally assess your students’
literacy skills?
6. After an informal assessment, how do you use that information gathered from the
assessment to inform your implementation of a new unit of study?
7. In your opinion, what kind of adjustments do you think teachers should make based
on information gathered through an informal assessment before implementing a new
unit of study?
8. How often do you think juvenile court school teachers are doing that? What stands in
the way?
Motivation:
I am going to shift the questions now to focus more on your personal experiences in developing
and implementing literacy-based units of study.
9. How equipped do you feel you are to develop literacy-based units of study?
10. When considering your student population, what challenges do you anticipate as
teacher that you will need to address in developing literacy-based units of study?
11. Think about a time when you had to make an unexpected adjustment in your delivery
of a literacy-based lesson. Walk me through what happened.
Organization:
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 167

For our final set of questions, the focus will be centered around systems of support for
developing and implementing literacy units of study.
12. What kinds of professional development/learning opportunities have you had to
participate in on the topic of literacy?
13. Please share in detail about a recent professional development/learning opportunity
you participated in that informed your understanding of quality literacy instruction.
14. When developing literacy-based units of study, what resources do you typically use?
15. Please describe the support systems in place to assist you in developing literacy-based
units of study.
I would like to ask just a few more questions that focus on teaching literacy in a juvenile court
school setting.
16. Thinking of working in a juvenile court school, what types of professional
development/learning have you had that had a focus on the needs of the student
population in a juvenile court school? (If none, skip to question 18)
17. Please share in detail about a recent professional development/learning opportunity
you participated in that informed your understanding of the needs of juvenile court
school students?
18. How are student learning and literacy goals communicated to the teaching staff?
19. Can you share with me the type of feedback you receive about your instructional
practices?
20. Finally, is there any question you feel I should have asked you during this interview?

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 168

Appendix B
Observation Protocol
Observation Record

Location
CVJCS School Site:
Date/Time

Observer

Meeting description

Description of room set-up

Materials

Participants

Time Notes Comments

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 169

Time Notes Comments

Explain any noteworthy interactions observed during the meeting [domains of support: norms,
brokering, using tools, scaffolding/filtering, modeling, facilitating dialogue, observations, goal
setting]:

Explain any noteworthy participant responses to data observed during the meeting [no reaction,
instrumental, conceptual, symbolic, signaling]:

Other Notes

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 170

Appendix C
Initial Training Workshop Evaluation
The purpose of this survey is to evaluate the training provided regarding the development
and implementation of quality literacy-based units of study. Your input and feedback is
important to assess the quality of the training as well as ongoing supports that are needed to
reinforce your learning. Future training will include consideration of your responses to this
survey.
Level 1 – Engagement STRONGLY STRONGLY
DISAGREE AGREE
This program and the instructor held my
interest.
❍ 1 ❍ 2 ❍ 3 ❍ 4
My participation was encouraged by the
facilitator.
❍ 1 ❍ 2 ❍ 3 ❍ 4
Level 1 – Relevance
What I learned from this training will help me
develop quality literacy-based units of study.
❍ 1 ❍ 2 ❍ 3 ❍ 4
What I learned from this training will help me
implement quality literacy-based units of study.
❍ 1 ❍ 2 ❍ 3 ❍ 4
I am clear about what is expected of me when I
get back to my job.
❍ 1 ❍ 2 ❍ 3 ❍ 4
Level 1 - Customer Satisfaction
I would recommend this workshop to others
❍ 1 ❍ 2 ❍ 3 ❍ 4
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 171

Level 2 – Knowledge
I clearly understand the elements of quality
literacy-based units of study.
❍ 1 ❍ 2 ❍ 3 ❍ 4
I clearly understand how to apply the elements
of quality literacy-based unit of study in order
to develop my own units of study.
❍ 1 s❍ 2 ❍ 3 ❍ 4
I clearly understand the elements of
implementing quality literacy-based units of
study.
❍ 1 s❍ 2 ❍ 3 ❍ 4
I clearly understand how to apply the elements
of implementation in order to implement my
own units of study.
❍ 1 s❍ 2 ❍ 3 ❍ 4
Level 2 – Attitude
I believe that developing quality literacy-based
units of study will make a difference in
promoting student learning.
❍ 1 ❍ 2 ❍ 3 ❍ 4
I believe that implementing quality literacy-
based units of study will make a difference in
promoting student learning.
❍ 1 ❍ 2 ❍ 3 ❍ 4
Level 2 – Confidence
I believe that I can effectively develop quality
literacy-based units of study.
❍ 1 ❍ 2 ❍ 3 ❍ 4
I believe that I can effectively implement
quality literacy-based units of study.
❍ 1 s❍ 2 ❍ 3 ❍ 4
Level 2 – Commitment
I will develop quality literacy-based units of
study for all of my classes.
❍ 1 ❍ 2 ❍ 3 ❍ 4
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 172

I will implement quality literacy-based units of
study daily in all of my classes.

❍ 1 ❍ 2 ❍ 3 ❍ 4

1. What did you like about this program?
2. How could it be improved?
3. Please describe the elements of a quality literacy-based unit of study.
4. Please describe how you would implement a quality literacy-based unit of study in your
classroom setting.

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 173

Appendix D
Program Evaluation
The purpose of this survey is to evaluate the ongoing training and professional
development you have participated in regarding the development and implementation of quality
literacy-based units of study. Your responses will assist us in understanding your level of
satisfaction, your level of learning, how you have implemented the training in your position, and
how successful the program has been in helping you develop and implement quality literacy-
based units of study that further student learning.
L1: Reaction STRONGLY STRONGLY
DISAGREE AGREE
What I learned in the workshop has been useful
in developing quality literacy-based units of
study.
❍ 1 ❍ 2 ❍ 3 ❍ 4
What I learned in the workshop has been useful
for implementing quality literacy-based units
of study.
❍ 1 ❍ 2 ❍ 3 ❍ 4
This program has been a good use of my time.
❍ 1 ❍ 2 ❍ 3 ❍ 4
L2: Learning
I find that the strategies learned in the
workshop help me develop and implement
quality literacy-based units of study.
❍ 1 ❍ 2 ❍ 3 ❍ 4
L3: Behavior
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 174

In my PLC, I discuss with my colleagues the
development of quality literacy-based units of
study that I have implemented in the
classroom.
❍ 1 ❍ 2 ❍ 3 ❍ 4
L4: Results
My development of quality literacy-based units
of study help students develop mastery of the
content.
❍ 1 ❍ 2 ❍ 3 ❍ 4
My implementation of quality literacy-based
units of study help students develop mastery of
the content.
❍ 1 ❍ 2 ❍ 3 ❍ 4

1. What early signs of success have you noticed from your efforts?
2. How could this program have been improved?
3. What information from this program has been the most relevant to your job?
4. How have you used what you learned in training and professional development on the job?
5. What has helped you implement what you learned?

QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 175

Appendix E
Accountability Report Card
100-90%

89-80% 79-65% <65%
Level 4 – Results
Teachers developing quality literacy-based
units of study.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Teachers implementing quality literacy-based
units of study.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Improved literacy instruction due to the
implementation of well developed quality
literacy-based units of study
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Increased focus on student literacy needs.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Level 3 – Behavior
Develop literacy-based units of study based
on appropriate literacy skills that secondary
students need.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Develop literacy-based units of study based
on appropriate literacy instructional methods
for secondary students.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Adjust literacy instructional methods based on
the needs of JCS student population.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Level 2 – Learning
QUALITY LITERACY INSTRUCTION IN JCS 176

Teachers that demonstrated knowledge of
developing and implementing quality literacy-
based units of study in post-assessment.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Teachers indicate they can implement newly
acquired knowledge on the post-assessment.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Teachers indicating value of developing and
implementing quality literacy-based units of
study.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Teachers indicating confidence that they can
develop and implement quality literacy-based
units of study.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Teachers indicating commitment to
developing and implementing quality literacy-
based units of study.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Level 1 – Reaction

Teachers indicating engagement in the initial
training program.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Teachers indicating that the initial training
was relevant.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽
Teachers indicating that the training was
useful.
◽ ◽ ◽ ◽

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Early literacy intervention

PDF

Implementing standards-based grading in the era of common standards: an evaluation study

PDF

Overcoming the cultural teaching gap: an evaluative study of urban teachers’ implementation of culturally relevant instruction

PDF

News media literacy among communication majors at Christian University: an evaluation study

PDF

The role of international school teacher leaders in building leadership capacity within their teams

PDF

Using mastery learning to address gender inequities in the self-efficacy of high school students in math-intensive STEM subjects: an evaluation study

PDF

Making a case for teaching religious literacy in Ethiopian schools: an innovation study

PDF

Equitable schooling for African American students: an evaluation study

PDF

Bridging the empathy gap: a mixed-method approach to evaluating teacher support in bullying prevention and intervention at an urban middle school in India

PDF

Teachers assumptions on the importance of executive function: a gap analysis evaluation study

PDF

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

PDF

The racially responsive facilitator: an evaluation study

PDF

Representation in the teaching force: recruitment of teachers of color

PDF

A field study of juvenile recidivism in Los Angeles

PDF

Spiritual persistence of high school alumni: an evaluation model

PDF

Collaborative instructional practice for student achievement: an evaluation study

PDF

An evaluation of project based learning implementation in STEM

PDF

Impact of mindfulness on early education teacher well-being: an evaluation study

PDF

The impact of culturally responsive teaching on the suspension rate of African American students: an evaluation study

PDF

Social work faculty practices in writing instruction: an exploratory study

Asset Metadata

Creator Pierce, Edward Scott (author)

Core Title Quality literacy instruction in juvenile court schools: an evaluation study

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 04/26/2019

Defense Date 02/27/2019

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

Tag juvenile court school,juvenile incarceration,literacy instruction,OAI-PMH Harvest,recidivism

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Datta, Monique (committee chair), Picus, Lawrence (committee member), Robles, Darline (committee member)

Creator Email epierce@usc.edu,scott.pierce.mohs@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-149156

Unique identifier UC11660322

Identifier etd-PierceEdwa-7288.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-149156 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-PierceEdwa-7288.pdf

Dmrecord 149156

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Pierce, Edward Scott

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