University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Using restorative practice community-building activities to meet the social-emotional needs of students

(USC Thesis Other)

Using restorative practice community-building activities to meet the social-emotional needs of students

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

USING RESTORATIVE PRACTICE COMMUNITY-BUILDING ACTIVITIES TO MEET
THE SOCIAL-EMOTIONAL NEEDS OF STUDENTS

by

Anna Santa Maria

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

December 2020

Copyright 2020 Anna Santa Maria

ii
Table of Contents
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................. iv

List of Figures ............................................................................................................................. v

Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... vi

Chapter One: Introduction ........................................................................................................... 1
Introduction to the Problem of Practice ............................................................................ 1
Organizational Context and Mission ................................................................................ 1
Organizational Performance Status/Need ......................................................................... 2
Importance of the Organizational Evaluation ................................................................... 3
Organizational Performance Goal .................................................................................... 4
Description of Stakeholder Groups .................................................................................. 4
Stakeholder Group for the Study...................................................................................... 5
Stakeholder Performance Goals ....................................................................................... 5
Purpose of the Study and Questions ................................................................................. 6
Methodological Framework ............................................................................................. 6
Definitions ...................................................................................................................... 7
Organization of the Study ................................................................................................ 7

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ....................................................................................... 9
Shifts in K-12 Practice to Meet the Needs of the Whole Child ......................................... 9
From Response to Intervention and Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports
to a Multi-Tier Systems of Support ...................................................................... 9
Social-Emotional Support in the Classroom ....................................................... 10
Climate and Connectedness: In the School, In the Classroom ........................................ 12
Teacher-Student Relationships ...................................................................................... 13
Restorative Practices in Education ................................................................................. 15
Community-Building ......................................................................................... 16
The Clark and Estes (2008) Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
Framework .................................................................................................................... 17
Teacher Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences ................................... 19
Knowledge and Skills ........................................................................................ 19
Motivation ......................................................................................................... 23
Organization ...................................................................................................... 26
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and Motivation and
the Organizational Context ............................................................................................ 29
Summary ....................................................................................................................... 33

Chapter Three: Methods ............................................................................................................ 35
Participating Stakeholders ............................................................................................. 35
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale ......................................................... 36
Interview Sampling Strategy and Rationale ........................................................ 36
Data Collection.............................................................................................................. 37
iii

Interviews .......................................................................................................... 37
Documents ......................................................................................................... 39
Data Analysis ................................................................................................................ 40
Credibility and Trustworthiness ..................................................................................... 40
Ethics .......................................................................................................................... 41

Chapter Four: Findings ............................................................................................................. 43
Participating Stakeholders ............................................................................................. 43
Research Question 1 ...................................................................................................... 44
Knowledge Findings .......................................................................................... 44
Motivation Findings ........................................................................................... 57
Research Question 2 ...................................................................................................... 63
Organizational Findings ..................................................................................... 63
Summary ....................................................................................................................... 69

Chapter Five: Solutions and Recommendations ......................................................................... 71
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences .......................................... 71
Knowledge Recommendations ........................................................................... 71
Motivation Recommendations............................................................................ 75
Organization Recommendations......................................................................... 77
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan ............................................................. 80
Implementation and Evaluation Framework ....................................................... 80
Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations ................................................ 80
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators ............................................................. 81
Level 3: Behavior .............................................................................................. 82
Level 2: Learning ............................................................................................... 84
Level 1: Reaction ............................................................................................... 87
Evaluation Tools ................................................................................................ 88
Data Analysis and Reporting ......................................................................................... 89
Limitations and Delimitations ........................................................................................ 91
Recommendations for Future Research .......................................................................... 92
Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 93

References .......................................................................................................................... 94

Appendices ........................................................................................................................ 106
Appendix A: Interview Protocol .................................................................................. 106
Appendix B: Document Protocol ................................................................................. 109
Appendix C: Evaluation Preceding Each Training/Professional Development Session . 110
Appendix D: Pre-Training and 12-Week Post Training Community-Building
Questionnaire .............................................................................................................. 112

iv

List of Tables
Table 1. Organizational Mission, Global Goal, and Stakeholder Performance Goals .................. 5
Table 2. Knowledge Influences and Assessments ..................................................................... 22
Table 3. Motivational Influences and Assessments ................................................................... 25
Table 4. Organizational Influences and Assessments ................................................................ 28
Table 5. Participant Years of Experience in Teaching............................................................... 43
Table 6. Participants Years of Experience of Teaching at PCMS .............................................. 44
Table 7. Pseudonyms Used for the Study and the Participants department ................................ 44
Table 8. Knowledge Findings of Needs and Strengths .............................................................. 57
Table 9. Motivational Findings of Needs and Strengths ............................................................ 62
Table 10. Organizational Findings of Needs and Strengths ........................................................ 68
Table 11. Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations ....................................... 72
Table 12. Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations ........................................ 76
Table 13. Summary of Organizational Influences and Recommendations .................................. 77
Table 14. Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes ....................... 81
Table 15. Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation .............................. 82
Table 16. Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors ......................................................... 83
Table 17. Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program ....................................... 86
Table 18. Components to Measure Reactions to the Program .................................................... 87
v

List of Figures
Figure 1. The Interaction of Stakeholder Knowledge and Motivation within Organizational and
Cultural Model and Setting ...................................................................................... 31

Figure 2. Results from California Healthy Kids Survey and California School Staff Survey
Regarding Caring Adults in the District ..................................................................... 47

Figure 3. Sample Dashboard to Report Progress towards Meeting the Stakeholder Goal .......... 90

Figure 4. Sample Comparison Dashboard to Report Progressions Over Time After Each
Training ..................................................................................................................... 90

vi

Abstract
This qualitative study examined the need for restorative practice community-building activities
in the classroom at Painted Canyon Middle School to meet students’ social-emotional needs. The
research questions explored teachers’ knowledge and motivational needs, and the organizational
influences of Painted Canyon Middle School on the implementation of community-building
activities. A modified version of the Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analytic Framework was
utilized and several findings emerged from the study. The teachers at Painted Canyon Middle
School need a better understanding of the influence community-building has on the students and
the school, how to build community with students, and ways to reflect on their effectiveness in
community-building implementation. The teachers understand the value of community building,
but the teachers are not confident in their colleagues’ ability to implement community-building
in the classroom or sure of their colleagues’ willingness to implement. The teachers of Painted
Canyon Middle School revealed a need for professional development and role models to support
site staff in implementation of community-building. An implementation and evaluation plan to
support the implementation of restorative practice community-building activities was developed
using the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Recommendations
to address the needs of the teachers and the organization include professional development,
training, modeling, practice, feedback, and site role models to support the organization and
stakeholders attain their goals.

1
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

Introduction to the Problem of Practice
When teachers build relationships with students and create an environment that students
feel a part of, the social-emotional and academic needs of students are met (Rimm-Kaufman,
2010). Austin et al. (2016) conducted a longitudinal study and found that only 25% of seventh-
grade students felt that there was an adult on-campus who cared about them, demonstrating that
teacher-student relationships and school climate are a problem. The evidence reveals that
personal relationships and a sense of relatedness to teachers and the school are important to a
child’s social-emotional development and academic success (Martin & Dowson, 2009). Students
with positive teacher-student relationships are more apt to meet school behavior and academic
expectations (Boccanfuso, & Kuhfeld, 2011). The use of community-building activities allows
students to build positive relationships with teachers and peers (Vidourek & King, 2014). When
community-building activities are not integrated into the classroom, students’ social-emotional
needs may suffer, which can impact their academic success (Austin et al. 2016; Martin &
Dowson, 2009; Rimm-Kaufman, 2010). Restorative practices prioritize building relationships
and having structures in place to build community (Sanwick et al., 2019). This dissertation
addressed the need for restorative practice community-building activities to meet students’
social-emotional needs.
Organizational Context and Mission
Painted Canyon Middle School (PCMS, a pseudonym), the organization of focus for this
study, is included in the Peak Forest Unified School District (PFUSD). PFUSD is located in
Southern California and has four middle schools in the district. According to the School Report
Card (2018), PCMS serves approximately 950 seventh- and eighth-grade students, 98% of which
2

are Hispanic or Latino. Eighty-seven percent of students are socioeconomically disadvantaged,
30% are English Language Learners, and 12% are students with disabilities. The current mission
of PCMS is to meet the needs of students behaviorally, academically, and social-emotionally
while preparing them for high school, as well as college and career (School Report Card, 2018).
While there are many support staff members at PCMS, the stakeholder group of focus was the
teachers.
Organizational Performance Status/Need
For years, PFUSD has used the California Healthy Kids Survey to determine school
climate. For the 2018-2019 school year, 62% of students in grades 5 and 7 at PFUSD reported
that they felt connected to school (Unified School District, 2019a). The results indicate a 4%
decline, since 66% of students in those grades reported a connection in the 2014-2015 academic
(Unified School District, 2015). Also, 62% of students in grades 5 and 7 reported that they have
an adult at school who cared about them, a decline from the 67% reported in the 2014-2015
school year (Unified School District, 2015, 2019a). PCMS is a seventh- and eighth-grade middle
school campus. Disaggregating the data and looking at seventh graders in the district, 55% of the
students reported that they felt connected to school, and 46% reported having a caring adult on
campus (Unified School District, 2019a). While the data from the California Healthy Kids
Survey is district-wide, it is apparent that there is a need for students to feel connected to their
teachers and their school. According to The Council of State Governments Practice Center, a
change in school climate begins with trusted relationships between students and teachers school-
wide (Morgan et al., 2014).
PCMS was chosen as the school of focus because they had embarked on the journey of
meetings student’s needs social-emotional through restorative practices with their staff, and they
3

have the lowest rate of turnover among teachers when compared to other middle schools in the
district. PCMS has trained select staff members in the practices of transformational learning,
restorative justice, and positive behavior interventions and supports (PBIS). The transformational
learning training that some of the PCMS staff received was the transformational health and
healing of La Cultura Cura, the rite of passage programs El Joven Noble and Xinachtli, and
healing and support circles (PFUSD Board Agendas, 2018-2020). Select staff members have also
been trained in restorative justice practices of community building, games and activities, trauma
sensitivity, restorative dialogue, and harm and conflict (PFUSD Board Agendas, 2018-2020).
Finally, some of the PCMS teachers have received PBIS training on how to implement
the technique school-wide, as well as behavioral and social emotional supports for
prevention/intervention (PFUSD Board Agendas, 2018-2020). The intent of the restorative
practices training was for the trained PCMS staff members to bring their new knowledge back to
the school, share the information with other staff members, and support them until all school
staff were trained in transformational learning, restorative justice, and PBIS. The restorative
practices training emphasized creating a positive school culture and climate. A common theme
for all of the restorative practices was building community in the classroom.
Importance of the Organizational Evaluation
It is important to evaluate the implementation of restorative practice community-building
activities in the classrooms at PCMS for a variety of reasons. Building positive teacher-student
relationships is the first stage in creating a welcoming school climate (Morgan et al., 2014).
Students need to feel that there are adults on campus who are caring and trustworthy.
Additionally, students are more likely to be engaged in instruction and achieve academically if
they have positive relationships with their teachers (Austin et al., 2016). A consequence of not
4

implementing restorative practice community-building activities in classrooms include students
not having their social-emotional needs met, which can impact their academic success. Positive
teacher-student relationships triple the likelihood of engagement, increases academic
achievement, and decreases behavior concerns (Boccanfuso, & Kuhfeld, 2011; Klem & Connell,
2004). Students who have positive relationships with their teachers are less likely to develop
depression or exhibit delinquent behavior (Wang et al., 2013). The use of restorative practice
community-building activities allows students to build relationships with their teachers and
peers, giving them a sense of relatedness and positive connection to the school.
Organizational Performance Goal
The mission of PCMS is to prepare students for high school, college, and career and to
address student’s behavior, academic, and social-emotional needs (School Report Card, 2018).
Meeting the needs of students socially and emotionally requires that teachers know students on a
personal level, through relationship building (Martin & Dowson, 2009). The organizational
performance goal for PCMS is that by June 2021, all teachers will create a classroom
environment that meets the social-emotional needs of their students. The goal is based on results
from the California Healthy Kids Survey (Unified School District, 2019a), which identified that
there is a need for social and emotional support in the classroom.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
The stakeholders involved in the achievement of the organizational goal are
administration, teachers, and students. The principal and assistant principal of PCMS oversee the
implementation of the performance goal with the support of the school district. The teachers are
responsible for implementing restorative practice community-building in their classrooms; it
5

begins with teachers. The students at PCMS contribute to meeting the performance goal because
they need to participate in the community-building activities.
Stakeholder Group for the Study
While the evaluation of all stakeholders is valuable and important, only the teachers of
PCMS were the focus for this study. The teachers at PCMS are the stakeholders that implement
the strategies towards the performance goal of creating a classroom environment conducive to
social-emotional needs. The stakeholder goal for the teachers at PCMS is for 100% of the
teachers to implement restorative practice community-building activities in their classroom. The
goal was chosen to coincide with the PFUSD initiatives to use restorative practices, based on the
ongoing training being provided to middle school teachers. The level of achievement was
determined because all students matter as they contribute to healthy and productive communities.
The stakeholder group consisted of nine middle school teachers who have taught at PCMS for at
least one school year and hold a clear teaching credential. The years of experience as a teacher
and years teaching at PCMS varied from five years to 24 years.
Stakeholder Performance Goals
Table 1 illustrates the mission and goals of the organization and their key stakeholders.
Table 1
Organizational Mission, Global Goal, and Stakeholder Performance Goals
Organizational Mission
The mission for PCMS is to prepare students for high school, college, and career and to address
student’s behavior, academic, and social-emotional needs.
Organizational Performance Goal
By June 2021, all teachers at Painted Canyon Middle School will create a classroom environment
that meets the social and emotional needs of their students.
Stakeholder Goal
6

By December 2020, all teachers will implement restorative practice community-building
activities in their classrooms.

Purpose of the Study and Questions
The purpose of the study was to reveal teachers’ knowledge and skills, motivation, and
organizational needs regarding community-building activities and to determine what is necessary
to reach the organizational performance goal. The analysis began with a generated list of
possible needs and moved to record the experiences of the participants to validate needs and
determine additional systems, as necessary. For practical purposes, the stakeholder group of
focus were the teachers at PCMS. As such, the questions that guided this study are the following:
1. What are the stakeholder knowledge and motivation needs related to 100% of PCMS
teachers implementing restorative practice community-building activities in their
classrooms?
2. What are the interaction between organizational culture and context and teachers’
knowledge and motivation?
Methodological Framework
A modified Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analysis Framework was utilized to determine
the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that teachers need to implement
restorative practice community-building activities in their classrooms. A qualitative approach
was used for this study. Qualitative research examines individuals or groups with a specific
social problem (Creswell, 2014). Merriam and Tisdell (2016) note that qualitative research is
about what is written and focuses on meaning and understanding. The researcher is the main
instrument in the study (Creswell, 2014; Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). An
exploratory case study framework was the preferred qualitative design for the study. The
7

researcher explained how nine teachers at a Southern California middle school were
implementing community-building in their classrooms. The intent was to determine the needs of
teachers at PCMS and find ways to support their implementation of community-building.
Definitions
There are terms frequently used throughout this study that may hold different meanings
to various groups. It is important to define these terms as they will be used in this study.
Community building activities: Activities that take place with a group of people that
allow them to connect and over time create a community with those involved.
Restorative practices: Practices that create a caring culture of positive relationships,
school connectedness, responsibility, and repair of relationships in which harm was caused
(Garnett et al., 2020).
School climate: “The quality and character of school life” (Cohen et al., 2009, p. 182).
School connectedness: “The belief by students that adults in the school care about their
learning, as well as about them as individuals” (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
2009).
Teacher-student relationships: “Teachers’ and students’ aggregated and ongoing
perceptions of one another, affect towards each other, and interactions over time...” (Brinkworth
et al., 2018, p. 25).
Organization of the Study
The study is organized into a five-chapter layout. Chapter One provided the reader with
the problem of practice, mission, stakeholders involved, and the key concepts necessary to
understanding the need for restorative practice community-building activities to meet the social-
emotional needs of students. Chapter Two is a review of the current literature on the use of
8

restorative practices. Topics include a review of multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS), social-
emotional learning, connectedness, teacher-student relationships, restorative practices, and
community-building. Chapter Three reviews the methodology of the study such as the sampling
criteria, validity, reliability, data collection, and data protocols. Chapter Four addresses the data
and results of the study with an in-depth analysis. Chapter Five uses the analysis from Chapter
Four to determine the needs of PCMS and provide possible solutions for the organization.

9

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
The literature review examines the evolution in education to add a focus on social-
emotional learning and introduces the current literature on school climate and teacher-student
relationships. The review of literature concludes with restorative practices and the use of
community-building in the classroom. The focus then shifts to an examination of the Clark and
Estes (2008) Gap Analytic Conceptual Framework and the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences of implementing restorative practice community-building activities in
the classroom.
Shifts in K-12 Practice to Meet the Needs of the Whole Child
Current research has found that there is an increase in children’s mental health disorders,
with one in five children dealing with some form of mental disorder (Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention, 2013). One of the most recent shifts in education has been the implementation of
Multi-Tier Systems of Support (MTSS) to support the whole child. MTSS incorporates the
academic, behavior, and social-emotional needs of students that need to be addressed in the
education system (Adamson et al., 2019). The Every Student Succeeds Act (2015) was signed
into law by President Barack Obama as a revision to the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965, and calls for MTSS for literacy services and evidence-based practices in education
to meet students’ needs. A brief overview of MTSS is necessary before taking a closer look at
the social-emotional supports in schools.
From Response to Intervention and Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports to a
Multi-Tier Systems of Support
Academic instruction is no longer the primary focus of education. Educators must now
meet the needs of the whole child academically, behaviorally, and social-emotionally. As a
10

nation, the United States has determined that academics, school climate, school safety, and
problematic student behaviors need to be a priority (Adamson et al., 2019). A strong emphasis
has been placed on the use of Response to Intervention (RTI) and Positive Behavior
Interventions and Supports (PBIS) in education, but they have been used in parallel rather than
cohesively (Eagle et al., 2015). MTSS was introduced as the referent for combined frameworks,
using data to inform academic and intervention decisions (Adamson et al, 2019; Freeman et al.,
2017). MTSS is defined as “an evidence-based model of education that employs data-based
problem-solving techniques to integrate academic and behavioral instruction and intervention”
(Gamm et al., 2012, p. 4). The MTSS framework encompasses academic, behavior, and social-
emotional learning to meet the needs of every child so teachers can create classroom
environments in which students behave appropriately and meet the academic expectations of the
school.
Social-Emotional Support in the Classroom
For many years, social-emotional learning (SEL) was not a requirement for teachers and
schools to address because academics and behavior have been a primary focus for teachers. The
No Child Left Behind Act (2002) focused on student’s academic progress and PBIS focused on
desired student behaviors, but it was not until the Every Student Succeeds Act (2015) that social-
emotional needs of students were addressed through MTSS. SEL is the process of “acquir[ing]
and effectively apply[ing] the knowledge, attitudes, and skills necessary to understand and
manage emotions, set and achieve positive goals, feel and show empathy for others, establish and
maintain positive relationships, and make responsible decisions” (CASEL, 2012).
Social workers, school counselors, and school psychologists were the mental health
professionals that worked with students within the school systems on social-emotional skills, but
11

the responsibility has broadened to include classroom teachers to implement strategies and
interventions (Franklin et al., 2012). Students who receive SEL instruction improve their social-
emotional skills, behavior, and academic performance (Burroughs & Barkauskas, 2017; Durlak
et al., 2011). Burroughs and Barkauskas (2017) discovered that SEL is most beneficial during a
student’s adolescent years and that students who receive SEL education lead happier and
healthier lives. In the United States, 49 states have SEL standards for preschool, but only 10
states have SEL standards for students in grades K-12 (Dusenbury et al., 2014). California’s
Department of Education has provided educators with a compilation of resources to support their
students with SEL (California Department of Education, 2018).
The teacher needs to meet the social-emotional needs of a student for them to be
successfully engaged in school. One mixed-methods study followed 1,209 students from fifth to
sixth grade to determine perceived teacher care and teacher practice, finding that a lack of
emotional support from teachers can cause students to have negative perceptions and
disengagement (Gasser et al., 2018). The study also discovered that the students were more
likely to have psychological effects, such as depression or destructive behaviors, if their
developmental needs were not met. To improve the social-emotional and behavioral functions of
students and engagement, teachers need to meet the psychological needs of students (Saeki &
Quirk, 2015). The researchers analyzed the engagement, psychological needs satisfaction, and
social-emotional and behavioral functioning of 83 sixth grade students, finding that teachers who
provide opportunities for autonomy, competence, and school connectedness before engaging
students in learning supported student in their social-emotional and behavioral functioning
(Saeki & Quirk, 2015). The shift to MTSS requires that the academic, behavior, and social-
emotional needs of students are met so they can grow into well-rounded adults (Durlak et al.,
12

2011). To meet the needs of the whole child and give students a sense of relatedness to their
school and their teacher, school climate and teacher-student relationships will be reviewed.
Climate and Connectedness: In the School, In the Classroom
Educators need to support students in feeling connected to the staff, their peers, and the
school. Students who have a sense of relatedness to their teachers and peers are more engaged
behaviorally and emotionally (Fredricks et al., 2004). In California, the Healthy Kids Survey,
which focuses on school climate and student well-being, is distributed to students in grades 5, 7,
9, and 11, staff, and parents. A longitudinal study of the California Healthy Kids Survey from
2013 to 2015 revealed that approximately 51% of students in grade 7 have feelings of school
connectedness. This is an alarming percentage because students who do not feel connected to
school can become disengaged and unmotivated to learn (Austin et al., 2016). Students who feel
connected to school are more likely to do well academically and have healthy behaviors (Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention, 2009). The Center for Disease Control and Prevention
(2009) suggests that schools can foster school connectedness by providing adult support,
ensuring students are in a positive peer group, guaranteeing students understand the importance
of education and commit to it, and fostering a positive school climate. Embracing school
connectedness means creating an environment in which students and staff care about one
another’s academic and personal well-being (Rowe & Stewart, 2009).
A positive school climate is created when students feel safe, have relatedness, receive
positive teaching and learning experiences, and learn in a positive external environment (Cohen
et al., 2009). Students perception of school climate decreases in middle school because the
psychological needs and school environment do not meet the students’ needs based on the
changes that take place from elementary school to middle school (Wang & Dishion, 2012). A
13

positive environment is needed for students to have a sense of security and safety in the
classroom and school. A study of 12 public schools, with 68 teacher participants and 960 student
participants, found that in highly emotional supportive classrooms, students were able to create a
sense of relatedness among their peers (Ruzek et al., 2016). Teachers who implement strategies,
such as playing ice breakers, calling a student by their first name, smiling, and using humor, are
more confident in their abilities to help students connect to school (Vidourek & King, 2014).
When students have a positive school climate and are connected to school, it can protect students
from dynamics at home, such as poor social skills and negative functioning families (Foster et
al., 2017; O’Malley & Amarillas, 2011; Ross et al., 2010). An important component of school
climate and school connectedness is the relationship student have with their teachers.
Teacher-Student Relationships
Teachers need to create positive relationships with their students that are authentic and
meaningful, so students can be engaged in school and increase their achievement. Approximately
30% of students in the seventh grade feel they have a close relationship with an adult (Austin et
al., 2016). Sabol and Pianta (2012) discovered that the quality of teacher-student relationships, at
an early age, can determine the student’s engagement and the likelihood of their relationships
with teachers in subsequent years. The researchers also found that high-quality teacher-student
relationships fostered engagement and higher achievement in school (Sabol & Pianta, 2012).
Students who have connections with their teachers are more likely to take academic risks
because of the investment the teacher has put into the relationship (Turner & Morelli, 2017).
Gasser et al. (2018) found that students who were academically disengaged had negative
perceptions of the relationship they had with their teacher. Students in middle school who
reported little support from their teacher were 68% more likely to not be engaged at school
14

(Klem & Connell, 2004). Students who have conflicting relationships with their parents, but have
a positive relationship with their teacher, are more likely to have a decrease in behavioral
problems over time (Wang et al., 2013). When teachers have positive relationships with students,
student engagement increases and students are more likely to succeed academically,
behaviorally, and social-emotionally.
Teacher-student relationships can also impact teachers in their profession. Spilt et al.
(2011) found that stress is induced when teachers are frustrated with a teacher-student
relationship, and it can affect teacher well-being over time. Quality relationships between
teachers and students can positively impact teachers by protecting them from emotional
exhaustion (Taxer et al., 2018). By forming relationships with their students, teachers can
decrease behavior problems and the emotional exhaustion that comes with those problems.
Beaty-O’Ferrall et al. (2010) stated that building teacher-student relationships is part of a
teacher’s classroom management and necessary to reducing discipline problems in the
classroom. Teachers can use strategies in their classrooms to foster positive relationships with
their students and create a classroom climate that is welcoming to all (Rimm-Kaufman, 2010).
Providing students with lessons on social-emotional development, connecting with other students
and social conversations, being available and spending time with students, caring about student’s
ideas and perspectives, and using classroom management strategies that are clear and show
regard for students are ways to build positive teacher-student relationships (Hamre & Pianta,
2006; Rimm-Kaufman, 2010). Having a positive relationship with students can impact a
teacher’s well-being for the better. Students who feel connected to their school and have healthy
relationships with teachers at their school are more likely to be successful in their academic,
15

behavior, and social-emotional well-being. One promising practice that fosters both school
connectedness and teacher-student relationships is the use of restorative practices.
Restorative Practices in Education
Many school districts implement restorative practice programs within their schools to
build relationships between students, peers, and teachers while decreasing suspensions and other
disciplinary actions. Restorative practices derive from restorative justice in that they both focus
on repairing the harm done to another person through dialogue (Kehoe et al., 2018). Restorative
justice is used in the legal system to give all parties involved a voice to discuss the harm that was
caused in a conflict and to seek solutions to right the wrongs (Johnson & Johnson, 2012). Evans
and Lester (2013) state that restorative practices in schools focus on building relationships
instead of punishing for behaviors; it is not about breaking the rules, but about violating a
relationship with a person. Restorative practices are meant to close the racial discipline gap by
giving students a voice while fostering positive teacher-student relationships (Gregory et al.,
2016). Students are given the opportunity to have their voices heard, removing the power and
privilege that takes place in the classroom (Pointer et al., 2020). The use of restorative practice in
schools decreases student misbehavior and promotes a healthy school climate (Evans & Lester,
2013).
One struggle that educational institutions have is getting staff members to shift from a
punitive lens to one of repairing relationships. Vaandering’s (2014) study sought insight into
what restorative practice means to teachers and how they are using it in their schools, finding
that some teachers saw value in restorative practices and the relationships it fostered, while
others felt it was a waste of time because they already had excellent classroom management. To
sustain restorative practices, school cultures need to shift their focus from behavior management
16

to relationship management (Shaw, 2007). Restorative practices need to begin as a proactive
approach and intervene when students need additional services and support. By using a
multifaceted approach, teachers and school staff can best meet the needs of students through
restorative practices such as restorative circles, mentoring, and conversation (Sanwick et al,
2019). The use of restorative practices has been successful for many school districts to create
positive teacher-student relationships and foster school connectedness. To initiate restorative
practices in the classroom, community-building activities are used to provide the structure,
opportunity, and trust that students need to have an equal voice (Pointer et al., 2020).
Community-Building
There are various ways to build community in the classroom; what is most important is
that students feel comfortable and safe. Successful classroom communities allow students to
respect and challenge one another (Greene & Micham, 2012). Wright et al. (2013) used
storytelling dramas to engage students in community-building. Four themes emerged from the
community-building activities: (a) being an individual, (b) being a part of a group, (c) inclusion,
and (d) building relationships. Verma and Anand (2011) examined the use of ice breaker
activities to build rapport and set the climate. Students need relatedness to their peers and for
their teacher to build a community in the classroom. The implementation of the establish-
maintain-restore (EMR) method has helped teachers foster healthy positive relationships with
their students while creating a classroom environment that is safe and welcoming (Cook et al.,
2018). Teachers establish a positive relationship with students, maintain the relationships created
with students, and restore the relationship if a teacher-student conflict took place (Cook et al.,
2018; Duong et al., 2019). Teachers who use the EMR method have significant changes in their
teacher-student relationships (Duong et al., 2019).
17

The use of community circles gives teachers and students the space to build trust with
one another and form relationships (Silverman & Mee, 2018). Pranis (2005) explains that the
different intents of circles range from community-building and support to conflict and
reintegration. Silverman and Mee (2018) maintain that the intent of a community circle is to
meet the social-emotional needs of the students by allowing them the opportunity to express their
feelings in a safe space. A circle is formed to represent equality within the group, and a talking
piece is passed around the circle to signify each individual’s right to speak and others’ obligation
to listen (High, 2017). The facilitator of the circle needs to create a safe container for the group
by holding a circle with a lighter question or topic and ensure that what is said in the circle stays
in that container of space (High, 2017; Silverman & Mee, 2018). Gregory et al. (2016) posits that
proactive circles held on a daily or weekly basis to discuss topics is a preventative approach in
restorative practices that builds community amongst students. Positive outcomes of restorative
community circles include a sense of ownership, improved relationships, disruption in the school
to prison pipeline, meaningful conversations, and constructive ways to deal with conflict (Ortega
et al., 2016). Using community-building activities in the classroom as a restorative approach
strengthens teacher-student relationships and sets students up for academic, behavioral, and
social-emotional success.
The Clark and Estes (2008) Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
Framework
Through the use of the Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analytic Framework, knowledge,
motivation, and organizational needs can be identified and nourished to achieve an outcome of
restorative practice community-building activities being implemented in the classroom. Clark
and Estes (2008) crafted a conceptual framework in which organizational and stakeholder goals
18

are examined so performance needs between an organization’s current functionality and its
performance goals are distinguishable. The framework diagnoses the performance needs(s) and
then determines if the needs are due to stakeholder knowledge, motivation, or organizational
influences (Clark & Estes, 2008). Knowledge of how to achieve the organization’s performance
goals is necessary for stakeholders. Krathwohl (2002) separated knowledge and skills into four
types: (a) factual, (b) conceptual, (c) procedural, and (d) metacognitive. Motivation is the active
choice to work toward the important goals of the organization, while exuding the right amount of
mental effort and confidence (Clark & Estes, 2008). Some motivational principles include self-
efficacy, attributions, interest, value, and goals (Pintrich, 2003; Rueda, 2011). Finally, the
organizational influences that may affect stakeholder performance are alignment, culture, and
settings (Clark & Estes, 2008).
A modified version of the Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analytic Conceptual Framework
was applied to examine teacher’s knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs to meet their
performance goal of all teachers implementing restorative practice community-building activities
in their classrooms. The following section will explain knowledge and skills on a deeper level
and the effects assumed influences may have on the implementation of community-building
activities. Next, the section will closely examine motivational influences and how they could
impact stakeholder performance. Finally, organizational influences assumed influences on
stakeholder performance will be explored. An analysis of the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences on performance will be examined and explained in Chapter Three.

19

Teacher Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
The following section will address the knowledge, motivational, and organizational
influences that the teachers at PCMS need to achieve their stakeholder goal. The stakeholder
goal for PCMS is for all teachers to implement restorative practice community-building activities
in their classrooms.
Knowledge and Skills
Knowledge is a vital component for the teachers of PCMS to achieve their stakeholder
goal. According to Clark and Estes (2008), knowledge and skills are required to complete the
tasks presented in organization’s goals. The authors compiled research data to create a gap
analysis to determine if there is a performance gap within an organization. If a performance gap
is present within the organization, it needs to be determined if the gap is a knowledge and skills,
motivational, or organizational barrier (Clark & Estes, 2008). To obtain the organization’s goal,
stakeholders need to have knowledge, motivational, and organizational support simultaneously
(Clark & Estes, 2008). An examination of the influences of knowledge, knowledge types, and
possible assessments to determine needs are necessary to achieve the stakeholder goal at PCMS.
Knowledge Influences
In a school setting, teachers use tools such as Bloom’s Taxonomy to impart knowledge so
students can complete higher levels of thinking (Bloom et al., 1956; Rueda, 2011). Krathwohl
(2002) added another form of knowledge to Bloom’s structure, creating four types of knowledge:
(a) factual, (b) conceptual, (c) procedural, and (d) metacognitive. Factual knowledge is the
terminology and specifics of the elements that are necessary to know (Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda,
2011). The second type of knowledge is conceptual, which is knowing the elements in a more
complex manner, such as the interrelationships of categories and classifications (Krathwohl,
20

2002). The third type of knowledge is procedural, or the how of doing something; the steps,
techniques, or criteria required to complete a task (Krathwohl, 2002). The final type of
knowledge is metacognitive; awareness of one’s thinking and knowing when adjustments are
needed to achieve the desired goals (Krathwohl, 2002).
For the implementation of community-building activities in the classroom, there are three
types of knowledge influences that were addressed: (a) conceptual, (b) procedural, and (c)
metacognitive. These knowledge types are the basis for determining the necessary approaches
and assessments needed to increase teacher knowledge. Teachers need to know the impact
community-building activities has on students, how to implement community-building activities,
and self-reflection of their effectiveness in implementing initiatives to achieve their stakeholder
goal.
Influence of Community-Building on Students
The first knowledge influence that PCMS teachers need is understanding the impact
community-building has on their students. This knowledge is conceptual because teachers need
to understand the complexities of building community, and how it starts with teacher-student
relationships and evolves into the classroom and school connectedness. Students that feel
connected to school look forward to coming to school and interacting with their peers and
teachers (O’Malley & Amarillas, 2011). Teacher-student relationships can influence students in a
positive or negative matter (Brinkworth et al., 2018). According to Martin and Collie (2019),
students who have a more positive than a negative relationship with their teachers are more
likely to be engaged in school. Clark and Estes (2008) recommend providing training, job-aids,
or education for knowledge and skills that employees lack. Education can be in the form of
professional development sessions or online courses. The teachers at PCMS need to understand
21

the influence community-building has on students and the school to support teacher motivation
to implement community-building activities.
Knowledge of How to Implement Community Building Activities
The second knowledge influence the teachers of PCMS need is the procedural knowledge
of how to implement community building activities. According to the California Standards of the
Teaching Profession, teachers need to implement routines, procedures, norms, and supports so
that students can have a safe learning environment (Commission on Teacher Credentialing,
2009). Employees who do not have procedural knowledge need training that allows them to
learn the necessary skills and have a chance to practice the skills with corrective feedback (Clark
& Estes, 2008). Aguinis and Kraiger (2009) suggest utilizing an assessment of prior knowledge
to maximize the benefits of the training and to set the appropriate goals. Trainers can then apply
theory-based learning principles to their training design and delivery, such as allowing the
trainees to assist in organizing the training content or opportunities for trainees to make errors
and learn from their errors by receiving real-time feedback (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009). The
teacher of PCMS need the knowledge of how to implement community building activities in
their classrooms to support their student’s social-emotional needs.
Knowledge of Effectiveness
The final knowledge influence PCMS teachers need to know is how to reflect on their
effectiveness in the implementation of community-building activities. The intent of the
stakeholder goal is for teachers to use community-building activities to meet students’ social and
emotional needs. Fredricks et al. (2004) found that students who had a sense of relatedness to
their teachers were more engaged behaviorally and emotionally. To evaluate the effectiveness of
the implementation of community-building activities, teachers need to use metacognition. Baker
22

(2006) states that metacognition is necessary to ensure that the learner is choosing the most
relevant and appropriate strategies for the task. Metacognition is thinking about what you have
learned, and then applying it in the correct manner. Duong et al. (2019) trained teachers with
simple strategies, had teachers reflect on their relationships with students, and then strategically
planned strategies to use with those students, yielding significant results. Teachers need to be
able to judge the strategies and resources they are using to gauge the effectiveness of
community-building activities they are implementing.
Table 2 states the overall mission, global goal, and stakeholder goal of the organization.
In addition, the knowledge influences, knowledge types, and knowledge influence assessments
are addressed and given in detail.
Table 2
Knowledge Influences and Knowledge Assessment
Organizational Mission
The mission for PCMS is to prepare students for high school, college, and career and to
address student’s behavior, academic, and social-emotional needs.
Organizational Global Goal
By June 2021, all teachers at Painted Canyon Middle School will create a classroom
environment that meets the social and emotional needs of their students.
Stakeholder Goal
By December 2020, all teachers will implement restorative practice community-building
activities in their classrooms.
Knowledge Influence Knowledge Influence Assessment
Teachers need to understand the influence
community-building has on students.
(Conceptual)
Interview Questions:
● What effect do you think community
building activities have on students in
your class?
● What effect do you think community-
building activities have on the school
as a whole?
● Do you think implementation of
community-building activities has
impacted school assertive discipline,
suspensions, and student absences?
How so?
23

Teachers need to know how to implement
community-building activities. (Procedural)
Interview Questions:
● How do you build community with
your entire class? Can you share some
examples?
Teachers need self-reflect on their own
effectiveness in implementing community-
building activities. (Metacognitive)
Interview Question:
● How do you know if you have built
community with your classes?

Motivation
Motivation is the second factor examined in the analysis. Motivation, like knowledge, is
essential to understand and foster within an organization. Clark and Estes (2008) define
motivation as the active choice of deciding to work toward a goal, persistence to work on the
most important goals, and the mental effort put forth based on our confidence level. Teachers
need to achieve motivation towards their stakeholder goals so the organizational goal of an
environment in which all students are supported is provided. Motivation is important to PCMS
because the teachers need to want to build community in their classrooms.
Pintrich (2003) and Rueda (2011) identify five motivational concepts: (a) self-efficacy,
(b) attributions, (c) interest, (d) value, and (e) goals. For this research, the following section will
focus on self-efficacy and utility value. Self-efficacy is the belief that one has about their
capabilities and expectations; the higher the self-efficacy, the more motivated one will be to
persist and work hard on a task (Rueda, 2011). Value is the importance a task has to a person,
and it can be further broken down into importance value, intrinsic value, utility value, and cost
value (Rueda, 2011).
Utility Value
The primary motivational influence that teachers at PCMS need to meet their stakeholder
goal is utility value. Utility value is when one sees the usefulness and how it can help them meet
their future goals (Eccles, 2006). If the teacher can see the value of the task and how it will
24

benefit them, they are more likely to be intrinsically motivated to complete the task. Eccles
(2006) offers two questions one must ask themselves to determine motivation: Can I do the task?
and Do I want to do the task? If a person does not feel they can do the task, they are not likely to
complete it. For the second question, do they want to do the task, if the answer is no, it is not
likely the person will complete the task. Often, teachers do not realize the impact community-
building has on students and that it creates positive teacher-student relationships, so they could
feel it is not their responsibility to carry the activity out (Kiefer et al., 2015). Davis (2006)
suggests that seeing relationships form with students and the benefits that they entail is
motivating for teachers. Teachers need to see the value of implementing community-building
activities so they will be motivated to implement the activities.
Self-Efficacy Theory
The second motivational influence that PCMS needs to focus on to meet its performance
goal is self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is the belief in one’s abilities and capacity to generate results
(Pajares, 2006). When people believe that the hard work that they are exuding will pay off, they
are more likely to work harder (Mayer, 2011). Self-efficacy is important because teachers need
to have the right amount of confidence for completing tasks. Overconfidence can lead people to
think they are more capable, which can cause them to not change their behaviors, fail to be
prepared, underperform, or not be open to receiving constructive feedback (Pintrich, 2003). The
opposite is also true; if people do not believe they are capable, then they will not be (Pintrich,
2003). Self-efficacy is critical to the teachers at PCMS because they need to believe in their
capabilities and have expectations for themselves regarding implementing community-building
activities. The teachers need to have the right amount of confidence in their capabilities, but also
know what areas they need to continue to work on. Teachers need to believe they can implement
25

community-building with their students. Yoon (2002) states that teachers who have high self-
efficacy are more likely to have positive classroom cultures and positive student relationships.
Self-efficacy can increase if teachers are given similar training and provided feedback during
their implementation (Vandering, 2013). High self-efficacy will support teacher implementation
of community-building activities.
Table 3 shows the organization’s motivational influences, as well as the assessments used
in the study. The organizational mission, global goal, and stakeholder goal are reiterated for
background knowledge as to the reasons the motivational influences were selected.
Table 3
Motivational Influences and Motivational Influence Assessments
Organizational Mission
The mission for PCMS is to prepare students for high school, college, and career and to address
student’s behavior, academic, and social-emotional needs.
Organizational Global Goal
By June 2021, all teachers at Painted Canyon Middle School will create a classroom environment
that meets the social and emotional needs of their students.
Stakeholder Goal
By December 2020, all teachers will implement restorative practice community-building
activities in their classrooms.
Assumed Motivation Influences Motivational Influence Assessment
Utility Value (Expectancy Value Theory) -
Teachers need to see the value in
implementing community building activities.
Interview Question:
● How important are community building
activities for your classes?
Self-Efficacy - Teachers need to believe they
are able to successfully build community in
their classroom.
Interview Questions:
● How confident are you in building
community in your classroom?
● What contributes to your confidence in
building community?
● What would increase your confidence in
building community?

26

Organization
The final factor to consider for the analysis was organizational influences. Clark and
Estes (2008) point out that all organizations have their own culture and the change processes
brought forth should be compatible with the culture. It is likely that there will be performance
problems if the goals, policies, and procedures of the organization do not align with the
organizational culture (Clark & Estes, 2008). A brief explanation of the organizational influences
of cultural model and settings will be reviewed. Specific cultural models and settings that are
relevant to the stakeholder goal will be presented and how they might impact implementation of
community-building activities by PCMS teachers.
Cultural Models and Settings
The culture of an organization can be perceived by its cultural models and cultural
settings (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Cultural models are the unspoken values, beliefs, and
attitudes of the people within the organization (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Schein (2004)
believes the researcher needs to look at the organization’s current cultural model along with their
cultural settings. Cultural settings are the visible activities of people uniting to achieve something
(Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001).
Schools and districts employ staff members who are diverse in their values, beliefs, and
attitudes, which together, create unique cultural models and settings within each district and
school. To get teachers at PCMS to implement community-building activities in classrooms, the
cultural model of resistance will be examined along with the cultural setting of role models.
Organizational Acceptance and Willingness
The first organizational influence that PCMS needs to recognize is whether there is a
cultural model of acceptance and willingness to build community with students. Agocs (1997)
27

claims that all leaders who have implemented change have been met with some form of
resistance. Schein (2004) refers to organizational resistance as anything that challenges a group’s
basic assumptions. Group members may show resistance in the form of anxiety or defensiveness
due to fear of losing what is already in place in the organization, rather than looking at the
change as a gain (Moran & Brightman, 2000; Schein 2004). In a school setting, a fear of failure
can affect the engagement of teachers (Martin & Dowson, 2009). Moran and Brightman (2000)
state that to get a change underway, the leader needs to involve as many people as possible to
create acceptance and willingness in the organization. Harbar and Sakade (2009) claim that using
education to control has been deeply embedded in school systems, causing those in education to
resist a change to the status quo. Zimmerman (2006) suggests creating a sense of urgency to
implement a change with teachers. PCMS needs to foster the belief amongst teachers that
restorative practice is valuable to their work.
Professional Development and Role Models
The final organizational influence that was examined at PCMS is the use of professional
development and role models as a cultural setting. Gallimore and Goldberg (2001) suggest that
cultural settings may be limited to existing systems in the environment. In addition, the settings
that are in place are not usually as productive as desired because they lack clarity. Professional
development regarding restorative practice and community-building activities would refine
teachers’ skills over time and give them a better understanding on the intent and implementation
of restorative practice community-building activities. The teachers at PCMS currently have
professional development time set aside for two hours a month. Mayworm et al. (2016)
concluded that using a consultant to provide professional development may be best suited to train
teachers in restorative practice. While there is little research on the use of consultants for
28

restorative practice, there is vast research on the use of consultants in other aspects of teaching
(Mayworm et al., 2016). By combining professional development and role models, teachers will
receive professional development in restorative practice and use role models to guide and
improve their practice.
Role models in an organization are people who are completing the task or activity in a
manner that aligns with the organization’s desired outcomes (Moran & Brightman, 2000). Role
models can also be mentors to the teachers. Role models in a school setting allow teachers to see,
in practice, teachers who have successfully implemented community-building and to have a
person with whom they can discuss the practice. Teachers need to be given the time and
opportunity to observe role models and have conversations with them about how they
implemented community-building activities. Moran and Brightman (2000) defer to a more
structured coaching model to help employees learn and make changes to their practices. In a
school setting, role models allow more flexibility for teachers to speak with their mentor as
needed and they can see multiple role models, rather than being coached using a specific method
or cycle.
Table 4 displays the overall mission, global goal, and stakeholder goal of the
organization. The table explains the assumed organizational influences and the assessments that
coincide with them.
Table 4
Organizational Influences and Organizational Influence Assessments
Organizational Mission
The mission for PCMS is to prepare students for high school, college, and career and to
address student’s behavior, academic, and social-emotional needs.
Organizational Global Goal
By June 2021, all teachers at Painted Canyon Middle School will create a classroom
environment that meets the social and emotional needs of their students.
29

Stakeholder Goal
By December 2020, all teachers will implement restorative practice community-building
activities in their classrooms.
Assumed Organizational Influences

Organizational Influence Assessment
Cultural Model Influence: The organization
needs to have a culture of acceptance and
willingness to build community with
students.
Interview Question:
● Do you feel your school is willing to
implement community-building
activities?
Cultural Setting Influence: The
organization needs to have professional
development and role models at the school
site to support teachers.
Interview Questions:
● Are there role models at this school that
use community-building activities?
● Do they talk about their activities with
the staff? What do they share?
● Do they allow other teachers to observe
them implementing community-building
activities?
● Have they come into your classroom or
are they willing to come into your class
to model how to implement community-
building activities?
● Does your school site or district provide
professional development or training to
you regarding restorative practice or
other community building strategies?
● What does that look like?

Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and Motivation and
the Organizational Context
A conceptual framework explains what is to be studied and the relationships between the
variables that support the research presented (Maxwell, 2013). The conceptual framework
intends to bring isolated influences together and demonstrate how they interact through the use
of literature, personal experiences, and thought experiments (Maxwell, 2013). Using previous
research and data, a theoretical framework builds on existing theory or it modifies theory while
establishing how the topic of study can contribute to increased knowledge on the topic (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). The theoretical framework presented in this paper considered previous research
30

on the importance of meeting the social-emotional needs of students and how community-
building activities in the classroom can support meeting those needs. The framework compiled
current research on community-building activities along with the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences, and used an evaluation model to determine the possible needs of
PCMS so that an equitable classroom environment that nurtures students’ social-emotional needs
can be crafted. Utilizing previous research and understanding the needs of the organization, the
most appropriate methods were selected by the researcher for PCMS. The following worldview
and framework informed the present study.
A pragmatic worldview shaped this study. A pragmatic worldview believes in multiple
philosophies and realities merged to apply an approach that will provide solutions to the problem
(Creswell, 2014). The researcher focuses on the research problem itself rather than the methods
to use (Creswell, 2014). While trying to create a deeper understanding of the problem, the
researcher seeks practical solutions that meet the needs of a specific situation. Pragmatism is the
freedom to choose the methods, techniques, and procedures needed to understand the research
problem from various aspects (Creswell, 2014). For this framework, there is a concern of
application, what strategies will work, and plausible solutions for the implementation of
community-building activities.
The knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences of implementing community-
building activities are presented separately using a modified version of the Clark and Estes
(2008) Analytic Framework; however, the elements are not separate from one another, rather the
elements work together simultaneously to achieve the desired outcomes and goals. The
conceptual framework presented clarifies how the knowledge and motivation of teachers work
together within the organizational contexts of cultural models and settings to achieve the global
31

goal of 100% of all PCMS teachers implementing community-building activities in their
classroom. Figure 1 illustrates the conceptual framework.
Figure 1
The Interaction of Stakeholder Knowledge and Motivation within Organizational a Cultural
Model and Settings

Painted Canyon
Middle School

Cultural Model:
Organizational
acceptance

Cultural Settings:
Professional
development and
role models

Stakeholder Goal

100 % of teachers
will implement
restorative practice
community-building
activities in their
classrooms.

Key

Goal

Organization

Stakeholder
Influences

Coinciding

Interaction
leads to

Classroom Climate that Meets Students’
Social-Emotional Needs

Teacher Motivation
Utility value: Importance
of community-building
activities
Self-efficacy: Believe they
can build community with
their classes

Teacher Knowledge
Declarative
/Conceptual: Influence
community-building has
on students
Procedural: How to
implement community-
activities
Meta-Cognitive: Self-
reflection on
effectiveness in their
implementation
32

Figure 1 demonstrates the organizational influences that are related to the teacher’s
knowledge of community-building relationships, teacher’s motivation to conduct community-
building, and how these influences can lead to a social-emotional safe classroom environment.
The blue rectangle represents Painted Canyon Middle School as the organization in the study,
along with the cultural models and settings of the organization. Painted Canyon has a cultural
model of organizational acceptance (Agocs, 1997; Harbar & Sakade, 2009; Martin & Dowson,
2009; Mohamed, 2008; Moran & Brightman, 2000; Schein, 2004, Zimmerman, 2006) and the
cultural settings of organizational professional development and role models (Mayworm et al.,
2016; Moran and Brightman, 2000; Wang & Lee, 2019).
Within the organization are the stakeholder knowledge and motivational influences
regarding restorative practice community-building activities. There are three knowledge
influences addressed: (a) the conceptual knowledge of the influence community-building has on
students (Anguinis & Kraiger, 2009; Brinkworth et al., 2018; Hunzicker, 2011; Kirshner et al.,
2006; Krathwohl, 2002; Martin & Collie, 2019; O’Malley & Amarillas, 2011); (b) the procedural
knowledge of how to implement community-building activities (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009; Clark
& Estes, 2008; Commission on Teacher Credentialing, 2009; Cook et al., 2018; Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006); and (c) the metacognition of self-reflection on implementation effectiveness
(Baker, 2006; Duong et al., 2019; Fredricks et al., 2004). In addition, the motivational influences
identified are the utility value of implementing community-building (Davis, 2006; Eccles, 2006;
Kiefer et al., 2015; Liberante, 2012; Pintrich, 2003) and the teacher self-efficacy of believing
they can build community (Mayer, 2011; Pajares, 2006; Pintrich, 2003; Rueda, 2011;
Vaandering, 2014; Yoon, 2002). To meet the global goal of the organization, the influences of
knowledge and motivation need to work simultaneously (Clark & Estes, 2008), as identified by
33

the parallel black rectangles inside the larger blue rectangle in the figure. Teachers need to
understand the influence community-building activities have on students and be motivated by
their understanding, as well as believe they can build community and implement the community-
building activities, simultaneously. Self-reflection on effectiveness should take place throughout
the interactions. The double black arrow in the figure denotes that both knowledge and
motivation are coinciding and equally important.
The knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences work together to meet the
stakeholder goal of all teachers implementing restorative practice community-building activities
in their classrooms. The stakeholder goal is identified in the figure within the orange circle.
Hence, the theoretical framework provides the theory that if teacher’s knowledge and motivation
of community-building activities are implemented and the organizational cultural issues are
addressed simultaneously, the stakeholder goal of all teachers being able to implement
community-building activities will be achieved. The single black arrow pointing from the
organization as a whole to the stakeholder goal shows the flow of the influences to meeting the
stakeholder goal. Furthermore, meeting the stakeholder goal will lead the organization to meet
their global goal of all teachers creating classroom environments that meet students’ social-
emotional needs.
Summary
The purpose of this study was to determine the needs of the teachers and the organization
to implement restorative practice community-building activities so that students’ social-
emotional needs can be met. The review of literature examined the shifts in K-12 practices and
the need for a positive school climate, school connectedness, and teacher-student relationships.
The review also examined the use of restorative practice in the education system and the use of
34

community-building. The literature review led the study to use a modified version of the Clark
and Estes (2008) Gap Analytic Conceptual Framework to identify the assumed knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences on performance related to the stakeholder goal of all
teachers implementing restorative practice community-building activities in their classrooms.
The knowledge influences include teacher conceptual knowledge of how community-building
activities impact students, the procedural knowledge of implementing community-building
activities, and the metacognition of effective implementation. The motivational influences
include the utility value of implementing community-building activities, as well as teacher self-
efficacy that they believe they can implement community-building activities with their students.
Finally, the organizational influences presented were a need for acceptance, professional
development, and role models to support implementation. Chapter Three will focus on the
methodological approach applied for this study.
35

CHAPTER THREE: METHODS

The study focused on teacher’s knowledge and motivation of the implementation of
community-building activities and the organizational influences at PCMS. For practicality, the
stakeholder group of focus was teachers with clear credentials at PCMS. Chapter Three presents
the research design of the study and the methods used for data collection and analysis. The
research questions to be addressed were:
1. What are the stakeholder knowledge and motivation needs related to 100% of PCMS
teachers implementing restorative practice community-building activities in their
classrooms?
2. What are the interaction between organizational culture and context and teachers’
knowledge and motivation?
The chapter presents the sampling criteria and strategies for the interviews and an explanation of
how the interviews and documents were used in the study. It is followed by how the data was
analyzed, the credibility and trustworthiness of the study, and how the study met ethical
guidelines.
Participating Stakeholders
The stakeholder group of focus for the study was the teachers at PCMS. The teachers
were the focus because they implement community-building activities. There are approximately
40 teachers at PCMS and six departments (English Language Arts, Math, Science, Social
Studies, Physical Education, and Electives). A pragmatic approach was taken for this study,
utilizing a qualitative approach to come to a deeper understanding of the problem so the most
appropriate solutions are generated (Creswell, 2014). The next section includes the sample
criteria and rationale for the interviews that were conducted in the study.
36

Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale
The qualitative approach of purposeful selection was used to conduct the interviews. A
smaller sample of teachers were invited to participate based on the criteria provided.
Criterion 1
Must be a classroom teacher at PCMS. The rationale for being a teacher in the classroom
and working at PCMS is that there are some staff members at PCMS that have teaching
credentials but do not hold teaching positions. Also, the teachers involved in the study need to
teach at PCMS because this is an evaluation model for PCMS.
Criterion 2
The teacher must hold a clear California teaching credential, meaning all participants will
have a minimum of two years of teaching experience. The rationale for teachers having a clear
teaching credential is that teachers will have some experience working with students to build
classroom community.
Criterion 3
The teacher must have taught at PCMS for a minimum of one full school year. The
criterion is important because, to answer questions related to the organization’s cultural model
and setting, the teacher needs to have worked within the PCMS environment for at least one
school year.
Interview Sampling Strategy and Rationale
A purposeful sampling of maximum variation networking sampling and convenience
sampling was used for the interviews. Convenience sampling alone is not credible, so
networking sampling was used by asking for recommendations for additional participants who
the researcher should invite to participate in the study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). An email
37

inviting teachers to be interviewed was sent by the Principal of PCMS. Initially, five teachers
volunteered and met the criteria to participate in the interviews. During the interviews, teachers
were asked if they could suggest another teacher from their school to participate in the
interviews. Four additional teachers agreed to volunteer for an interview. Nine credentialed
teachers from PCMS participated in the study. The interviews took place from April 2020 until
June 2020.
Data Collection
Qualitative data was compiled from existing documents. Analysis of documents is
necessary because there is already data produced by the district and state regarding school
climate and perceptions. These documents were reviewed after teacher interviews to compare
responses to student responses and all PFUSD middle school teacher responses, and to see if
alignment occurred with district initiatives. Conducting interviews with teachers from PCMS
allowed the researcher to address the teacher’s knowledge about the implementation of
community-building activities and their motivation to implement the activities in their
classrooms.
Interviews
The use of interviews allowed the researcher to gain a deeper understanding of the
participant’s knowledge and motivation about community-building activities. Nine interviews
were conducted for this study.
Interview Protocol
A semi-structured protocol was utilized because it allowed the researcher to ask probing
or follow-up questions to gain additional insight when necessary. For each interview, a 12-
question protocol was used, and follow-up questions were asked at the discretion of the
38

researcher. Sometimes participants did not fully address the question or their response was not
what the researcher was seeking. There was at least one question for each influence in the
interview. An example question regarding teacher knowledge was How do you build community
with your entire class? Can you share some examples? Patton (2002) categorizes this type of
question as experience and behavioral because it asks the respondent to explain how they do
something for someone who did not observe the experience.
Interview Procedures
Interviews were conducted between April 2020 and June 2020 at the end of the school
year to provide sufficient time to implement community-building activities. Interviews were
conducted with the teachers because they are responsible for implementing community-building
activities in their classroom. One interview was conducted with each participant. The interviews
lasted approximately 15-30 minutes per participant, and no more than six hours in total for all
interviews. There were nine teacher participants in the interviews and they held varying
viewpoints.
The interviews were informal because they were conducted by a researcher who was
familiar with the teaching staff. The researcher made sure the teachers felt as comfortable as
possible, reminding them that their participation was voluntary and that identifiers would be
removed for confidentiality. Due to unforeseen circumstances from COVID-19 school closures,
all interviews took place online using Zoom. Data was collected by video recording and was
transcribed by the researcher. Maxwell (2013) states that using recordings and transcribing the
interview allows for more detail, leading to richer data.

39

Documents
Documents give an understanding of why the school and the school district need
community-building activities. Two documents were reviewed for this study: (a) the California
Healthy Kids Survey and (b) the California School Staff Survey. Both documents collect data
from all of the middle schools in the district; it is not limited to PCMS. These documents are
public record and can be obtained through the California Department of Education website under
the category of data and statistics. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) point out that the researcher is not
altering the data when conducting a document review, which is a benefit to the research process.
Data was used from the 2018-2019 school year because data reporting is one year behind the
present school year. The documents were reviewed after interviews to validate teacher responses
or to reveal discrepancies with the interactions between the organizational culture and context
and the knowledge and motivation of the teachers at PCMS. In addition, agendas and minutes
from the PCMS board meetings were reviewed for their guidance and direction on the
implementation of restorative practice community-building activities at the middle school level.
Documents specific to PCMS that were reviewed were the Panorama School Climate
Secondary Student Survey (Fall 2019), the Panorama Staff Survey (Fall 2019), and the Panorama
MTSS Survey for Staff (Spring 2020). The Panorama School Climate Secondary Student Survey
is a school survey given to students on the school climate and students’ social-emotional
wellbeing. The Panorama School Climate Secondary Student Survey data was examined to
determine if restorative practice community-building activities have had an impact on students
and the school as a whole. The Panorama Staff Survey was reviewed to determine PCMS’s staff
perspective of school climate. The Panorama MTSS Survey for Staff was reviewed to determine
the amount of training teachers have received regarding social-emotional learning. The
40

Panorama Survey data was provided to the researcher by the school principal and permission to
use documents from the Panorama Survey was obtained from the PFUSD’s Assistant
Superintendent.
Data Analysis
Data analysis took place after each interview. Once the researcher completed each
interview, the interview was transcribed and the first phase of coding ensued. A thematic
approach was taken, leading the researcher to take three steps during data analysis. The first
phase of analysis was open coding, looking for words and phrases that related to teacher’s
knowledge and motivation and the organizational influences in relation to the conceptual
framework. The second phase of analysis occurred after all interviews were conducted, and
words and phrases were aggregated to determine patterns among the interviews using
analytic/axial codes. In the third phase of data analysis, the researcher identified themes that
emerged related to the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences of the teachers
interviewed. The researcher reviewed documents from the district and external sources to
support or dispute what teachers reported during the interviews.
Credibility and Trustworthiness

Researchers may be asked why their qualitative study results should be considered
credible or valid. Qualitative data analysis is not about finding the absolute truth or correct
answer, it is about finding a plausible explanation (Maxwell, 2013). To increase the credibility
and trustworthiness of the study, Maxwell (2013) suggests the researcher uses various strategies.
For this study, the strategies of rich data, searching for discrepant evidence and negative cases,
and respondent validation were used.
41

To ground the study, the researcher collected rich data. The researcher recorded all
interviews and transcribed them, giving the researcher detailed transcripts of the interviews.
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) state that the researcher may seek out interviewees that hold
negative views, but it is necessary to keep the analysis of data more credible. The researcher
attempted to find an array of participants for the study by asking volunteers for recommendations
of other teachers with varying viewpoints. The researcher evaluated the documents, such as the
California School Staff Survey, and included both positive and negative results in the results
portion of the study.
The researcher is familiar with some of the teachers at PCMS, which could have made
teachers who are part of the interviews feel that they could not answer candidly. To ensure the
analysis of the responses given by the teacher is correct, the researcher conducted respondent
validation. First, the interviews of the teachers were recorded. The interviews were then
transcribed, and each teacher was given a pseudonym for use during coding and for data
analysis. After analysis, each interviewed teacher was given their analysis, along with their
pseudonym, so they could determine if the interviewer captured their responses correctly.
Ethics
The researcher used a qualitative approach to enhance the understanding of the
importance of the topic and to answer the research questions (Creswell, 2014). The researcher
remained ethical throughout the research process to ensure that the data was reviewed without
bias. Data such as the California Healthy Kids Survey and Staff Survey are public documents
and accessible from the California Department of Education website. To ensure that the school
site data from the Panorama Survey was kept confidential, the data was given to the researcher
by the site Principal with no identifiers available.
42

The internal review board (IRB) was consulted before data collection began to ensure the
study protocols were appropriate for participants. For the interview data collection, the
researcher gave volunteers an interview informational sheet before interviews took place. Glesne
(2011) stresses the importance of informing the participants that their participation is voluntary,
if there is anything in the study that may affect them, and that they are free to leave the study at
any time. The participants were notified that their information and personal responses would not
be shared with district administration (Rubin & Rubin, 2012). The participants were also made
aware of the researcher’s role within their organization. It is important to be overt in disclosing if
the researcher is a part of the organization being studied (Glesne, 2011). Teachers who
participated in interviews were gifted a $10 gift card at the conclusion of their interview to thank
them for their time.
The researcher was interested in whether the implementation of community-building
activities impacted school connectedness and teacher-student relationships to achieve the
ultimate organizational goal of creating a classroom environment that met the social-emotional
needs of students at PCMS. The findings and recommendations from this study will be shared
with the school and the school district to help the school to continue to grow. A researcher needs
to analyze the data ethically by revealing the actual data, not what the researcher wants the data
to be (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Whether the data is in favor of the school or not, the researcher
needs to report the findings.
43

CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS
The purpose of this study was to conduct a needs analysis in the areas of knowledge and
skills, motivation, and organizational resources for teachers to build community at Painted
Canyon Middle School (PCMS) to reach their ultimate organizational goal of creating an
environment that supports students' social-emotional needs in the classroom. The study utilized a
modified version of the Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analysis Framework and a qualitative study
design. Chapter Four reviews the participating stakeholders in the study and outlines the findings
from the teacher interviews. The findings from the interviews are corroborated using document
review related to the study’s research questions.
Participating Stakeholders
The stakeholder group of focus for this study was the teachers of PCMS. There are 40
teachers at the school, of which 36 have a clear California teaching credential and have been at
the school site for one year or more. The gender of participants and specific teaching assignment
are not disclosed and are referred to using a gender-neutral pseudonym, as well as a range of
departments. The ethnicity of the interviewees was not collected to keep identities confidential at
their small school site. The demographics of the interview participants are listed in the tables:
Table 5
Participant Years of Experience in Teaching
Years of Experience Participants
1 to 5 years 0
6 to 10 years 1
11 to 15 years 2
16 to 20 years 4
21 to 25 years 2

44

Table 6
Participant Years of Experience Teaching at PCMS
Years at PCMS Participants
1 to 5 years 1
6 to 10 years 3
11 to 15 years 3
16 to 20 years 2

Table 7
Pseudonyms Used for the Study and the Participant’s Department
Pseudonym
Department
Alexis English Language Arts/Math
Drew
English Language Arts/Math
Jordan
Science/Social Studies
Lee Science/Social Studies
Morgan Science/Social Studies
Payton
English Language Arts/Math
Rene
English Language Arts/Math
Sam English Language Arts/Math
Taylor Science/Social Studies

Research Question 1: What are the stakeholder knowledge and motivation needs related to
100% of PCMS teachers implementing restorative practice community-building activities
in their classrooms?
Knowledge Findings
The first research question for this study sought to determine the teachers’ needs
regarding their knowledge to implement restorative practice community-building activities in
their classrooms. According to Krathwohl (2002). there are four types of knowledge influences:
(a) factual, (b) conceptual, (c) procedural, and (d) metacognitive. The knowledge influences
45

explored in this study were conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge, and metacognitive
knowledge.
Finding 1: The PCMS Teachers Need a Better Understanding of the Influence Community-
Building Activities have on Students and the School
For the teachers of PCMS to understand the influence community-building has on their
students, they need to understand the concept of what community-building is. According to
Rueda (2011), knowing the principles, model, or generalizing falls under conceptual knowledge.
As part of the interviews, the PCMS teachers were asked about the effect community-building
activities have on their students. All nine teachers were able to explain the impact of community-
building on their students; however, the teachers had different outlooks on what the effects were.
Taylor emphasized respect:
I think it makes the students, they’re more receptive to you and listen to you if they think
that you respect them. If they don’t think that you respect them, they’re going to not
respect you and then you have this back and forth.
Taylor believed that if the teacher shows the students respect, the students will reciprocate;
however, if the students do not think the teacher respects them, the students will not be
respectful. Sam mentioned, “It gives them a sense of ownership, but also that gives them an
opportunity to discuss what they feel is important.” Sam felt that building community in the
classroom gave students a voice and a sense of belonging.
Teacher-student relationships was a theme mentioned by the teachers. Eight of the nine
teachers were able to identify that community-building forms a relationship between the student
and the teacher. When asked what effect community-building has on students, Rene stated, “It
definitely builds the relationships between each other and then as a teacher builds my
relationships with them.” Payton had a similar response, noting, “It gives them, you know,
46

relationships, and it also gives a better teacher student relationship as well.” Rene and Payton felt
community-building allows teacher-student relationships to form. Alexis, Jordan, Lee, Morgan,
and Payton shared the idea of rapport building as being key. Alexis said, “Once you have that
rapport in that relationship, they’ll do anything for you basically.” Alexis felt that having a
teacher-student relationship increased student’s likelihood to do what the teachers ask of them.
Taylor referred to having “that bond” with students. Lee mentioned:
They are more willing to share things with you, more personal things. And once you get
connected on that personal level, they work more for me in my class, you know, I build a
good rapport with my students, and most of them do everything I ask them to do. It
creates a better learning environment.
Lee’s response echoed that of Alexis, in which having a positive relationship with students will
increase the changes that the student will do what the teacher asks them to do.
Six of the nine teachers interviewed revealed students gain a sense of connectedness or
belonging when community-building takes place. Payton stated the class feels like a “family
unit.” Alexis mentioned a reduction in behavior problems in the classroom because of the
connections. Alexis said community-building activities “reduce behavior issues because kids feel
like they belong, and you are able to connect with your students.” Drew stated students “are a
part of something bigger, you know, like it’s not just about them.” Drew felt that students have a
sense of belonging in the classroom when they have community-building activities. Jordan said,
“When we do community-building, the students feel more comfortable automatically to be in
your classroom. They’ll get to know you; they’ll get to know their classmates. I feel like their
stress levels or their anxiety starts coming down.” Jordan believed that once students get to know
each other and the teacher that the student’s stress level is reduced, and they are more
comfortable in class.

47

Figure 2
Results from California Healthy Kids Survey and California School Staff Survey Regarding
Caring Adults in the District

Note. Adapted from Unified School District.
a
California Healthy Kids Survey, 2018-19: Main Report. WestEd Health &
Human Development Program for the California Department of Education.
b
California School Staff Survey, 2018-
19: Main Report. WestEd Health & Human Development Program for the California Department of Education.

Community-building activities allow students and teachers to build relationships with one
another and feel connected to their peers (Silverman & Mee, 2018). When students feel a sense
of community in the classroom, they are more likely to be engaged in school and have school
connectedness (Center for Disease Control & Prevention, 2009; Sabol & Pianta, 2012). The
responses from the interviews indicated that the teachers do not have a clear understanding of the
influence community-building currently on their school. Three of the nine teachers felt that
community-building has had a negative impact on the school overall, and three were not sure of
48

the impact, indicating that a clearer picture of the influence community-building has on the
school is needed.
Taylor felt that community-building efforts have impacted the school in a positive
manner. Taylor referenced the school's use of restorative practices:
Well I do know that the implementation of restorative justice at our site really helped,
especially with the female group circles. I saw some significant improvement with the
girls in terms of their overall behavior, in terms of their attitudes, in terms of their
academic efforts. When they got into the circles and had that safe space to share all of the
things that they were going through they felt like they had a place to kind of to be
themselves and therefore they felt better when they got into the classroom.
Lee was unsure about how community-building has impacted the school as a whole, stating “It’s
hard to tell. I think so. I would say yes. Um, but it’s hard to tell.” Lee was unable to specifically
identify the influence community-building had on the school. Alexis and Rene were not sure of
the impact community-building has had on the school. Alexis stated, “I haven’t had experience
with that.” Rene responded that “I can’t really tell overall.” Morgan expressed a negative impact
on the school when trying to build community. “When we’re asking for support from the top,
there’s really not much going on there, so it gives the kids a sense of free rein.” Morgan voiced
concern that administration was not giving teachers support, so students felt they could do
whatever they want.
Drew, Morgan, and Sam felt that there has been an abuse of the use of restorative
practices for community-building by students at the school level. Sam responded:
As far as the restorative justice, if that’s the first step that they’re going to take, I see a
number of students, maybe like five percent of the population that are maybe using it,
shall we say, as an opportunity to avert any kind of consequences. So, I figure as a whole,
the school, I think it’s a strong approach.
49

Sam felt the overall implementation of restorative justice is a move in the right direction for the
school, but they were concerned with the students who were not taking it seriously. Morgan
echoed Sam’s concern of misuse of the program by students:
I think there’s been a misconstruction or misunderstanding of restorative practice where
like the kids do something bad, just get a slap on the wrist or they get forgiven and then
say, oh, everything’s okay just join us at circle time and you’re all good.
Drew felt students were getting into trouble intentionally so they would be placed in a circle
because “if you are in a school circle you get out of class the whole period.”
One theme reverberated by six of the nine teachers was the need for the majority of
teachers at PCMS to participate in community-building in general so it can impact the entire
school. Jordan commented that “teachers in general need some sort of cohesion. The students in
general need to feel like they belong to a bigger whole. The classified staff also needs to see their
part.” Jordan agreed, noting, “We cannot survive as individual entities and try to run a school
that performs unless all parts are there and all parts see value in what they do.” Jordan expressed
a need for staff members at the school site to have sense of belonging before expecting students
to have school connectedness because they are all linked to one another. Sam agreed,
responding, “It’s difficult to have 100% of the personnel on board, but the more that would
participate, I think you’d have a stronger program as a whole.” Sam felt if more staff members
were willing to implement community-building, then it would impact the school on a larger
scale. Payton expressed that being trained together as a staff many years ago “gave us a sense of
belonging, as a school staff…that was our best year because of the rapport we had with the kids
because it was a language that was universal.” Payton did not elaborate on how long ago the
training staff-wide was completed, but they felt that having all of the staff trained together had
the most impact on the students and the school. Rene felt that the school could do better if more
50

teachers implemented community building. “We’re seeing our scores in our culture just kind of
level off, you know, there’s no real drive to move forward and I think that’s because a lot of
teachers haven’t done community building.” Lee voiced that “maybe there are some teachers
who don’t do some of those extra steps to try to foster those relationships.” Drew shared that
community-building activities are used in their class but, “I feel like I’m the one doing all the
work, you know, the kids need to meet me halfway.”
Most of the teachers mentioned teacher-student relationships as an effect of community-
building activities. The teacher interview responses aligned with the California School Staff
Survey, in which 79% of middle school staff in the school district felt the adults cared for
students (Unified School District, 2019b). According to the Panorama School Staff Survey, 90%
of school staff reports that PCMS was an inviting and supportive learning environment for
students. There are similarities between the teacher’s perception of the learning environment and
caring relationships.
There is a discrepancy between the teacher’s perception and student’s perception of
caring relationships. Only 46 % of 7
th
graders in PFUSD felt there was an adult on campus who
cared about them (Unified School District, 2019a). The Panorama School Climate Secondary
School Survey, given to PCMS students in the Fall of 2019, reported that 63% of students felt
connected to the school. The teachers and staff also struggled with school connectedness. Forty-
eight percent of the staff at PCMS felt a sense of belonging at the school as an adult (Panorama
Staff Survey, 2019). The data reveals that there is still much work to be done in the classroom to
support students’ feeling connected to the school, but also there is a need for the staff to feel
connected to the school and each other.
51

Based on the teacher interviews and staff survey responses, the PCMS teachers have an
undeveloped understanding of the influence community-building has on their students and the
school. Sandwick et al. (2019) suggests the use of restorative practice as a schoolwide approach
with an emphasis on community-building. While four teachers mentioned the school’s
implementation of restorative justice, only one teacher had knowledge of the impact the
restorative justice community-building circles had on students’ school-wide. One teacher felt that
restorative justice was a good approach, but they were concerned with the small percentage of
students that did not take the practice seriously. The use of restorative practices school-wide is
addressed in the organizational findings. The initial research question pursues the teachers’
knowledge needs regarding the implementation of restorative practice community-building
activities and the interviews revealed that the teachers need conceptual knowledge of the
influence community-building has on students and the school to meet their stakeholder and
organizational goals.
Finding 2: The PCMS Teachers Cannot Articulate in Detail How to Build Community in the
Classroom
Procedural knowledge is the “how to” construct (Rueda, 2011), and is necessary for the
PCMS teachers to meet their stakeholder and organizational goals. Teachers at PCMS need to
articulate how to implement community-building activities and apply their knowledge in the
classroom. There are various community-building activities and strategies that can be utilized, so
teachers were asked how they build community in their classroom and if they can give examples
of the strategies or activities they use. While all nine teachers referred to building teacher-student
relationships as a way they build community, only Alexis shared a strategy used to build the
relationships. Alexis gave the example:
52

One girl who’s very tall, she said, you know, I hate that I’m tall, and I said you know I
wish I was I said because, and then I just throw it back at her like, because then I
wouldn’t be so fat.
Alexis went on to say, “We get to know each other more, we get to joke, get to have fun.”
Alexis used the idea of joking around and having fun with the students as a strategy to build
relationships with students.
Jordan, Lee, Payton, and Rene mentioned the strategy of using games to build
community. Jordan explained how to implement the “name game” and “touch the wall
activities”:
The name game is a simple one that helps teachers and students learn. Everyone is in a
circle and the person says their name and the name of all the people that went before
them…there’s also the touch the walls activities where if I see that students are falling
asleep, I’ll say, okay, get up and go touch two walls in the classroom. Or you’ll say, Oh,
go high five somebody that’s wearing the same color shoes.
Jordan’s explanation of the name game was simple, stating that the intent of the game is to learn
names. When Jordan explained the touch the wall activity, one of the examples given was to get
students to make small connections with classmates. Rene described an activity that starts as an
individual writing assignment and then becomes an activity with a partner:
Where they just write a paragraph about themselves, a one paragraph. And then they find
somebody in the class that has just one thing in common. Even if they mentioned the
word family in their paragraph. They have to find somebody else that has family and they
just start talking back and forth, and then they build projects together.
Rene starts the assignment independently and then students connect with a classmate who has a
similarity to them, setting students up for relatedness. Lee said, “We play games together.”
Payton referenced “a lot of getting to know you games,” but neither elaborated on the specific
games, nor continued to talk about other strategies they use.
The teachers provided other examples of strategies and activities that a few were using,
but not the majority. Rene, Sam, and Taylor revealed that they used class discussions to build
53

community. Sam stated that, through discussions, “they realize that not only are their concerns
important, but maybe how their concerns impact others within the classroom.” Sam felt that class
discussions allowed students to have their concerns validated. Taylor said, “I have used Socratic
seminars to bring up issue that are things going on in the classroom or outside.” Taylor did not
explain how to implement a Socratic seminar and was not prompted for an explanation. Lee and
Taylor shared the creation of social contracts with their students. Lee explained, “The kids, you
know, decide how they’re going to treat each other, how they’re gonna treat the teacher, how
they want to be treated by the teacher, and we all sign it.” Taylor explained the process simply as
“everybody comes up with norms and they sign them.” Lee and Taylor’s explanations of the
social contract elude to students coming together as a class to agree how they want to be treated
and how they will treat each other. Morgan stated, “I greet them at the door and make sure that I
make eye contact.” Morgan felt that the strategies used were about building relationships rather
than using activities from a program. “So, it’s not that I do the activities, I guess as prescribed by
restorative justice, it’s more that I just build relationships with my kids.” Drew also shared
greeting students at the door, “I stand at the door every period and I give them fist bump or high
five.” Morgan and Drew felt that giving students individualized attention at the door as they
enter helps to build community with their classes. Alexis was the only teacher to reveal the use
of restorative practice circles:
We also do the restorative justice circles, maybe once a month, maybe twice a month.
And we go around with the talking piece, you know, put something in the middle that’s
sacred in the classroom. We talk about the talking piece and then I always pose the first
question.
Alexis’ description of restorative justice circles shows the class coming together to focus on each
speaker who has the talking piece. Alexis also mentioned using “Good News” where “kids share
you know their good news.”
54

The responses from the teachers’ interviews suggest that the teachers can name activities
or strategies, but most of the responses were surface level and did not provide deeper or more in-
depth responses. It was unclear if teachers have the procedural knowledge of how to implement
community building activities due to their inexplicit answers. According to the PFUSD board
agendas and minutes from May 2018 to June 2020, one-third of the middle school teachers,
counselors, and administrators across the district were scheduled to attend a comprehensive
restorative justice training that included two days dedicated to community-building. In addition,
some middle school teachers attended an introduction to restorative justice during summer
professional development. Throughout the interviews with the PCMS teachers, six teachers
referred to being trained in restorative practice, but they did not indicate to what degree. More
information regarding teacher training is reviewed and discussed in the organizational findings.
Based on the responses given by the PCMS teachers, a shared procedural knowledge of
implementing community-building activities was unlikely. While teachers may have their own
approach to build community within their classroom, it is imperative that the PCMS teachers are
able to demonstrate the procedures they use to build community to reach the stakeholder and
organizational goals of this study.
Finding 3: The PCMS Teachers Need to Self-Reflect on their Effectiveness of Community-
Building Implementation
The final knowledge construct addressed in the study is the metacognitive knowledge
PCMS teachers need to achieve the stakeholder and organizational goals. Mayer (2011) defines
metacognition as the learner’s awareness of how they learn and how they control their learning.
Teachers need to reflect on best practices for specific students before implementation and
determine the effectiveness of their implementation (Duong et al., 2019). The teachers of PCMS
55

need to self-reflect to determine the best strategies and activities to use with their students and
gauge their effectiveness of community-building implementation.
Self-reflection on effectiveness is essential for the teachers of PCMS so they can
determine next steps in building community. When asked how they know a community has been
built with their classes, eight of the nine teachers articulated that connections are present if you
have built a community with students. Jordan felt, “You can look a student in the eye and see
them looking back at you.” Jordan’s response illustrates the knowledge of their own
effectiveness when Jordan sees the deep connections that they have made with a student. Drew
said, “We can have a normal conversation that has nothing to do with school.” Drew indicated
that talking with students about topics other than school shows them that they are being effective
in their community-building. Sam explained that it is the students who let you know because
“students will forthright come out and just tell you that…they feel more comfortable.” Rene
stated that when a community is built, “kids are willing to share about themselves or willing to
give a solution.” Rene suggests that they know they are effective when the students speak up and
share more about themselves.
Drew, Jordan, Morgan, Payton, and Taylor all mentioned mutual respect. Jordan said,
“When students address me and they talk to me without offending me, without trying to put me
down, without anger, for me, that’s how I know that we’re on the same page.” Jordan said the
first part of the school year is spent building respect between the teacher and student and the
second half of the year is “let’s now treat each other the same way me and you would treat each
other.” Jordan’s explanation of mutual respect demonstrates they have reflected on how they
know a relationship has been built with students. Taylor has the same sentiment as Jordan,
noting, “Watching the kids interact with each other, if the kids feel like they’re in a comfortable
56

space and they feel like they are being respected, they’re going to treat each other with respect,
even in a middle school setting.” Taylor also added being able to “pull them aside” for a
discussion and it not being important to the students. Taylor’s responses demonstrated reflection
on student outcomes based on Taylor’s effectiveness. Payton knows a community has been built
“if students are respectful to me and one another.” If a student is not being respectful, Payton
stated, “I need to reach that kid better.” Payton realized, through reflection, that if a student is
being disrespectful, they need to find a different approach to support that student. Morgan
describes “reciprocal relationships” with students so it is not “a one-way street.”
Throughout the interviews, there was minimal self-reflection by the teachers, other than
the specific question about how the teachers know they are being effective with community-
building. Taylor reflected that not enough community-building activities are used in their
classroom, stating, “I don’t do a lot of those things. So that’s the area that I would feel I need to
improve.” Rene reflected on the impact of community-building activities in the classroom. “I’m
finding that the more I do that [social-emotional], the more successful it is in my class.” Jordan
thought about the use of role models and commented, “I would even admit myself that I don’t
take advantage of it as much as I should.” Lee mentioned that they might be doing a better job
than other teachers because of the approach taken:
I find it you make actual connections with kids; you’ll get more out of them. They’ll want
to try more for you. Kids open up, so I feel like I may be doing a better job at it than
some of the other [teachers] could be doing.
The teachers’ responses to how they know community has been built demonstrates self-
reflection when prompted, but self-reflection was not evident during the interviews. The
teachers’ knowledge of their own effectiveness is needed to support the teachers of PCMS in
57

meeting their stakeholder and organizational goals. Table 8 reiterates the needs of the knowledge
findings.
Table 8
Knowledge Findings of Needs and Strengths
Knowledge Influence Finding Needs Strengths
Conceptual Knowledge The PCMS teachers do not fully
understand the influence
community-building activities
have on students and the school.
X
Procedural Knowledge The PCMS teachers cannot
articulate in detail how to build
community in the classroom.
X
Metacognitive
Knowledge
The PCMS teachers need to reflect
on their effectiveness of
community-building
implementation.
X

Motivation Findings
Knowing the motivation of the PCMS teachers is critical to stakeholder and
organizational goal attainment. Motivation is defined as choosing to engage, persisting with the
most important goals, and exuding the right amount of mental effort (Clark & Estes, 2008). For
students’ social-emotional needs to be met, the teachers of PCMS need to choose to consistently
build community in their classroom. Even when it becomes difficult, the teachers of PCMS need
to persist and provide the right mental effort towards the stakeholder holder goal so that the
overall organizational goal can be achieved. It is important to understand PCMS teachers’
motivational influences of utility value and self-efficacy towards building community in their
classrooms.
Finding 4: The PCMS Teachers Recognize the Value in Community-Building Activities
58

Utility value refers to the worth a task has towards meeting the larger goal (Rueda, 2011).
Building community in the classroom allows teachers to work toward the larger goal of a
classroom environment that meets students’ social-emotional needs. Initially, teachers need to
see the value of building community, so they are motivated to implement the practice of
community-building in their classrooms.
During the interviews, the PCMS teachers voiced the value they put on building
community in the classroom. The teachers were asked how important community-building
activities are for their classes. Seven of the nine teachers used words that indicated importance.
Jordan said students will not allow you to push them, so community-building is imperative:
They’re pretty vital, um, if the kids do not form a certain relationship, or some type of
trust with the teacher, then they will not tread uncharted waters with you, so they will not
experiment with you, they will not allow you to push them beyond what they think their
limits are unless there is trust in the teacher and a relationship with the teacher.
Sam and Payton agreed that community-building is “very important.” Drew sighed and said,
“They don’t work if they hate you.” Drew did not elaborate on what they meant, other than
referring to students who do not like you, will not be willing to do the work in your class.
All of the PCMS teachers interviewed were able to express the value of community-
building. Six teachers mentioned the personal connection or relationship that is built between the
student and teacher when community is present. Lee shared that connecting with the students
means “you’ll get more out of them; they’ll want to try more for you.” Morgan stated that having
positive relationships with the students provides an opportunity to check in with students at the
door and “get a feeling for their emotional climate of the day.” Rene said, “I think it’s a
necessity. I think it’s something that, not only for the class management skills, but it builds your
relationship with your kids, not just the teacher, but it also builds the relationships between
students.” Rene felt that using community-building assists with managing the classroom.
59

The majority of the teachers also articulated that community-building gave students a
sense of belonging or connectedness to the classroom. Jordan expressed that when students feel
they belong they will “use each other as support as they’re learning.” Alexis associated a
reduction in behavior issues in the classroom. “They’re very important in my classroom because
they reduce behavior issues because kids feel like they belong, and you are able to connect with
your students.” Payton had a similar sentiment, sharing, “I think they’re very important; I think it
brings a sense of belonging to the classroom.”
The teachers interviewed from PCMS believe that community-building activities are
valuable and help achieve the larger goal of a classroom environment that meets students' social-
emotional needs. Throughout the interviews, teachers identified that restorative practices are an
initiative in their district. The district’s board agenda from December 2018 confirms restorative
practices are a priority, evidenced through an informational presentation that stated the
expectation is for teachers to begin community-building and games in their classrooms. If you
designate the time and provide opportunities for restorative practices, it shows you value the
effort (Sanwick et al., 2019). The teachers reference to building relationships and connectedness
in the classroom demonstrates that the teachers value practices that are restorative. The value
teachers have for community-building at PCMS is a strength in motivation.
Finding 5: The PCMS Teachers are Not Confident in Their Colleague’s Ability to Build
Community
The motivational influence of self-efficacy is essential because teachers need to feel
confident in their abilities to build community in their classroom. Self-efficacy is one’s belief
about their abilities and competence (Pajares, 2006). If teachers lack confidence in their abilities,
they are less likely to implement the practice. The results of the interviews revealed that eight of
60

the nine teachers are confident in their community-building capabilities. When asked how
confident they were in building community in the classroom, Jordan and Lee said, “I’m pretty
confident.” Alexis and Payton reinforced by stating, “I’m very confident.” Taylor gave
themselves a “solid B plus” because they felt there is always room to grow and improve. Morgan
was “fairly confident” and Rene said what they are doing “well in a sense that it’s working for
me.” Sam did not voice confidence or a lack thereof. Drew said, “I think I’m good at it, but the
kids might not agree.” Drew did not follow up with why the students would not agree. Sam
focused on the idea that “it’s difficult for me because of the student population I have, but in
general, I would like to do more of it.” Earlier in the interview, Sam shared that they work with a
lot of special education students. Sam was concerned with students not using the activities to
build community:
There’s a group of individuals that will take this situation, and I don’t want to call it
downtime, but taken away from their regular curriculum and they will see this as an
opportunity to maybe go in a different direction and maybe not buy into what the others
are doing so we do as much as I can in my class, but it’s difficult from time to time.
All of the teachers, with the exception of Sam, were able to verbalize what contributes to
their confidence. Alexis, Jordan, Lee, and Payton gave credit to the training they had been a part
of, such as restorative justice, transformational learning, PBIS, Capturing Kids Hearts, Friday
Night Live, and special education training. Jordan has participated in a lot of district training and
felt, “my RJ training and I have all of my transformational learning trainings and you know, if
you’re familiar with the programs, that’s a big part but it’s given me a lot of tools.” Jordan
explained that they did not start the “teaching practice with community building. In fact, I have a
whole different aspect of what a teacher-student relationship should look like now.” Lee
attributes confidence to many years of teaching and “Capturing Kids Hearts and restorative
justice with [sic] and also, just the repetition.” Alexis, Jordan, Lee, and Payton also disclosed that
61

they feel they have been trained more than the other staff, indicating that staff may not convey
the same confidence. Payton said, “They may not have got what I got” (in reference to training
Payton mentioned throughout the interview). Payton was concerned that the training that was
offered was only given to some teachers at a time so they might not all be given the same
information:
[Training] it has to be across the board. It can’t be five of you go this week, five of you
go another week, because what I got, they may not have got, or what they got, I may have
not got. It needs to just be, it has to be universal.
Alexis commented, “I’m trained as well, like I have all the training,” in comparison to other
teachers at the school site.
When asked what would increase their confidence, Sam and Taylor responded they
would like to do more community-building activities with their students. Taylor said, “I don’t do
a lot of activities…that’s the area that I would feel I would need to improve on.” Morgan
divulged that “more immediate results with the students” would be a boost in confidence.
Morgan was eluding to the fact that community-building takes a significant amount of time.
Rene has completed research outside of school to find what will work in the classroom. “I’ve sat
through a couple restorative practice type things to transformational learning…but mostly I am
researching on my own and just seeing what would, kind of, naturally fit in my own classroom.”
The findings show the majority of PCMS teachers interviewed are confident in self-
efficacy, but half of those interviewed do not feel the remainder of teachers at the school site
were given the same benefit of training. During the document review of the school’s Panorama
MTSS Survey Spring 2020, 50% of staff respondents said they have not received any training
regarding social-emotional learning from their school site or the district. This information aligns
with PFUSD’s board agenda from August 2019 that reviews the districts blended model of
62

support, which is a combination of PBIS, restorative justice, and transformational learning. The
informational presentation reviews the approximate number of teachers trained in the district to
date. There were 12 middle school teachers trained in restorative justice, along with 49 teachers
in grades 7-12 between August 2018 and August 2019. The board agenda from June 2018 shared
the contract for restorative justice training and indicated that 45-60 teachers were to be trained in
restorative justice between 2018-2020. Training from the organization will be addressed in the
organizational findings. The concern of the interviewees over other teacher’s confidence to build
community in the classroom creates a need for teachers to feel confident to implement
community-building activities in the classroom.
The findings from the interviews, combined with the document analysis of the Panorama
MTSS Survey for Staff and district board agendas, verify that the interviewed teachers value
community-building activities and are confident in their implementation; however, there is
concern in the confidence the interviewees have of their colleagues. Table 9 restates the
motivation findings of needs and strengths.
Table 9
Motivation Findings of Needs and Strengths
Motivational Influence Finding Needs Strengths
Utility Value The PCMS teachers recognize the
value in community-building
activities.
X
Self-efficacy The PCMS teachers are not
confident in their colleague’s
ability to build community.
X

63

Research Question 2: What are the interactions between organizational culture and context
and teachers’ knowledge and motivation?
Organizational Findings
The second research question of this study addressed the organizational cultural model
and setting and the interaction with the teachers’ knowledge and motivation. The goals, policies,
and procedures of an organization need to align with the culture of the organization (Clark &
Estes, 2008). The organizational culture are the values, beliefs, and attitudes of the organization
members (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). The interview questions pursued the organization's
willingness to implement community-building activities and the support that is available within
the organization.
Finding 6: The PCMS Teachers Worry about Other Teacher’s Willingness and Capabilities
The PCMS teachers were asked if they felt their school was willing to implement
community-building activities. Seven of the nine teachers reported that the school, as a whole, is
willing to implement community-building. Sam suggested that the school is in “the primary
stages” of implementation. Lee believes that many of the staff members are attempting to build
community. “I think everybody’s pretty open to that. Most of the teachers I talk to try to at least
start.” Taylor stated the degree of willingness has shifted over the years “because we’ve had so
much turnover.” Three teachers mentioned that there has been turnover in school administration
over the last several years. Morgan does not feel that the school is willing to commit to building-
community.
Drew agreed that the school is willing overall, but the “nay-sayers make the most noise.”
Eight of the nine teachers echoed that not all teachers at the site are willing to implement
restorative practice community-building activities. Alexis explained that it was “a small handful
64

that I don’t see probably will ever do it.” Morgan makes the case for more than a handful of
teachers, stating, “A lot of teachers don’t really have buy-in, which then if we don’t have the buy
in, then we’re not going to do it.” Morgan also commented, “Sometimes we have meetings for
restorative justice, and it all feels like we’re just doing the hokey pokey…it feels like we’re just
doing activities to do them and it’s tiresome.” Payton thinks that some of the unwillingness is
due to lack of training. They stated, “Half the people are on board, half the people are not, but it
depends on the amount of training that was received.” Jordan believes the problem could be that
“some teachers probably don’t understand how to go about it, or the real purpose.” Rene spoke
about teachers who stick to old habits. “I think some teachers are set in their ways and they may
struggle with it, but maybe given the tools, it would be successful.”
The interview responses indicate that there are still staff members who do not buy-in or
do not have the proper knowledge to implement community-building, making it difficult to
achieve the stakeholder and organizational goals. According to PFUSD’s board agendas from
2018-2020, not all middle school teachers have not been trained in restorative practice for
community-building; only a small percentage have received training. There is a need in the
organizational culture of willingness to implement community-building activities at PCMS.
Finding 7: The PCMS Teachers Need Ongoing Professional Development on Restorative
Practices and Other Types of Community-Building to Successfully Implement
Throughout the interviews, some of the PCMS teachers expressed a need or desire for the
organization to receive more training. The teachers were asked if the school or district provides
training on restorative practice or other types of community-building and what that looks like.
All nine teachers responded that the school or district provides training. Some of the trainings
mentioned were restorative justice, transformational learning, Capturing Kids Hearts, El Joven
65

Noble, Boys Town, and building relationships. Jordan shared that this was the first year more
teachers from PCMS were trained, apart from the original group who were trained the year prior,
but there have only been two or three trainings for those teachers so “there isn’t a lot to kind of
work with right now.” Sam said PCMS has had an “enormous” amount of “teacher training” in
the last six months. Payton stated they personally have had “extensive training” that others have
not. When asked if the school or district provides training for community-building, Morgan said
they did. When asked what that looks like, Morgan shared that they have had professional
development for “building a relationship in the classroom for students,” but did not elaborate on
what the training was. Drew said the district puts on training but, “I haven’t been asked to go
yet.” Payton recounted a time when the entire staff was trained on the same program at the same
time so there was community amongst the staff and a universal language:
[The principal] had us go to Capturing Kids Hearts and as an entire school. We were
trained so we learned about one another. And because we had to tell those deep, dark,
intimate things about our past, we had to learn about one another and we walked out of
there after that three-day training of crying to each other and everything…That was our
best year of rapport we had with the kids because it was a language that was universal.
You know like we were all on the same page. We were all using the same language
because we all had the same training at the same time.
Payton did not state when the training took place exactly, but emphasized it was before
administrator turnover began.
Some of the teachers interviewed gave responses with a negative connotation. Taylor
described the training as “mandatory trainings in small batches.” Alexis said, “Only like a chosen
few, they go to them.” Rene’s description of the training attendees was “you start to see the same
teachers” and “there’s been teachers who have reached out and said, hey, I'd really like to be
trained,” but it does not happen. Rene’s intonation in the interview revealed contempt because
only certain teachers were chosen to go to training. Payton said, “Unless we do this across the
66

board, it’s, I think, it’s a waste of money, and it’s not. It helps those that take it in, but it’s not
going to affect schoolwide.” Payton mentioned several times during the interview that whatever
the school decides to do it needs to be done school-wide to make an impact.
There are approximately 140 middle school teachers, counselors, and administrators in
PFUSD. According to the PFUSD board agendas and information items, there are approximately
45-60 middle school teachers, counselors, and administrators who were projected to receive five
days of training in restorative practice, of which two days focus specifically on community-
building. In addition, another 49 teachers in grades 7-12 attended an introduction to restorative
practice during summer professional development. The responses from the interviews and board
agendas show that there is professional development within the organization for restorative
practice, but not all teachers have received the training, creating a need in the organizational
setting, as well as the teacher’s knowledge and motivations.
Finding 8: The PCMS Teachers Need Role Models to Actively Support Teachers in
Community-Building Activities
The final finding is the culture setting of role models. The combination of professional
development and role models allow teachers to be trained and given support along the way. Role
models are those who complete the task in alignment with the desired result (Moran &
Brightman, 2000).
The PCMS teachers agree that there are role models or people who have been trained at
their school. Jordan stated that PCMS has “a lot of experienced teachers” and named two
teachers who are a role model to them. Lee mentioned two teachers by name and said “basically
anybody in my department” can be approached for support. Payton reverted back to everyone
needing to be trained. “Anybody’s welcome to come watch me do group, but it’s more than that,
67

you need to go through the training.” Some teachers listed some of the qualities “teachers who
care” and teachers you “can collaborate with” that makes a person at their school a role model,
indicating that there are not designated role models, but teachers who they see as role models.
After asking if there are role models at the school, Drew followed up by stating that there
are people trained, but “it doesn’t mean they help the rest of us.” The teachers were then asked if
the role models at their school talk about the community-building activities they use with the rest
of the staff. Six of the nine teacher mentioned that at a staff meeting or training, the activities
other’s use has been brought up. Payton said, “We’ve had that.” Morgan said they have had
some training this year where activities were discussed but because of the interruptions in the
school year, “It’s almost taken a backburner sort of thing, so it’s rarely discussed.”
The PCMS teachers were asked if the role models allow teachers to observe them or if
the role models have gone into the teacher’s room to model how to implement community-
building. Six of the nine teachers said if they asked, they could observe the role model’s
community-building, but none of the teachers interviewed took advantage of observations or
modeling. Rene and Taylor refer to an open-door policy, but Rene said, “Well, it’s always said
that teachers can, but teachers really don’t.” Rene admitted they have not observed a teacher or
invited them to model. “Teachers unfortunately really don’t really do that, and I’ll admit, I don’t
do it myself.” Drew stated if they wanted to see someone, they could, sharing, “I mean, if I
wanted to I could, but really I have a million other things going.” Lee seemed surprised by the
question, but said, “If I asked them, I’m sure they’d say yes.” Alexis was adamant that no one
has been invited to the pull-out groups because the students are “the more at-risk students” so
“it’s up to you as the teacher if you want to implement community-building.”
68

The organization has not distinguished role models to support the teachers at PCMS. The
teachers agree that there are teachers and staff at the school site who are trained in community-
building activities and they know who those individuals are, but none of the interviewed teachers
have experienced guidance or support from the teachers who are trained. Some of the teachers
interviewed have been trained in restorative practice community-building, but they have not been
asked to coach or model the activities for other teachers. The contract retrieved from the board
agenda between the restorative practice consultant and school district has training for restorative
trainers in the first year of implementation on the June 2018 contract. None of the teachers
mentioned being a trainer for their school site. There is a need in the organization to have role
models within the organization.
The findings from the interviews and document analysis reveal needs in the
organization’s cultural model and settings. The organization provides training to select teachers,
but additional professional development is needed for all teachers, along with designated role
models who teachers can ask to support them with implementation of community-building
activities. The organizational findings are presented in Table 10.
Table 10
Organizational Findings of Needs and Strengths
Organizational
Influence
Finding Needs Strengths
Willingness of Others
(cultural model)
The PCMS teachers worry about
other teacher’s willingness and
capabilities.
X
Professional
Development (cultural
setting)
The PCMS teachers need ongoing
professional development on
restorative practice and other types
of community-building to
successfully implement.
X
Role Models (cultural
setting)
The PCMS teachers need role-
models to actively support
X
69

teachers in community-building
activities.

Summary
The findings from the PCMS teacher interviews and the document review of the
California Healthy Kids Survey, California School Staff Survey, Panorama School Climate
Secondary Student Survey, Panorama Staff Survey, Panorama MTSS Survey for Staff, PFUSD
board agendas, and PFUSD board minutes demonstrate a need for teacher support in community-
building. While the school and district have taken steps for teachers to build community in the
classroom, the findings reveal that the efforts have not made a significant impact on community
in the classroom or the school. The interview results, combined with data from the California
Healthy Kids Survey and California School Staff Survey, indicate that there is a need for teacher
knowledge and clarity of the influence community-building has on students and the school. The
teachers believe they know how to build community with their students, but the activities and
strategies given were not supported with examples or detail, revealing a need for procedural
knowledge. The teachers provided some metacognitive knowledge of their implementation
effectiveness, but it was not evident throughout the interviews; only when prompted did the
teachers self-reflect. The interviews exposed that the teachers of PCMS need conceptual,
procedural, and metacognitive knowledge of community-building activities.
The teachers conveyed value in community-building. While the interviewed teachers
were confident in their own community-building implementation abilities and willingness, they
did not express the same confidence in their colleagues and voiced concern about the teachers
who did not have the skills or were not willing to implement community-building. The PCMS
70

teachers recognized the need for role models and additional professional development to further
their knowledge and motivation to implement community-building activities.
Chapter Five provides recommendations for practice to address the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational needs discovered in this chapter, with the ultimate goal of
creating classroom environments conducive to meeting the social-emotional needs of PCMS
students.

71

CHAPTER 5: SOLUTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The previous chapter presented the findings of teacher interviews and document analysis
in an effort to address the study’s research questions about the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences at Painted Canyon Middle School (PCMS). Chapter Five proposes
recommended practices based on the study’s findings and provides an implementation and
evaluation plan based on the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
The recommendations are organized by the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences that have been presented throughout the study. The intent of this chapter is to provide
recommendations and an implementation and evaluation plan that PCMS can apply at their
school site to increase teacher implementation of restorative practice community-building
activities to meet the social-emotional needs of their students.
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
Knowledge Recommendations
The assumed knowledge influences for the teachers of PCMS and their needs are listed in
Table 11 based on the informal interviews and document analysis that has been reviewed. Using
the Gap Analysis Framework by Clark and Estes (2008), the conceptual, procedural, and
metacognitive influences are a need and high priority for attaining the stakeholder’s goal of all
teachers implementing restorative justice community-building activities. The collection of data
in Table 11 shares the theoretical principles and recommendations that would benefit the
teachers of PCMS based on teacher responses during interviews.

72

Table 11
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Knowledge
Influence

Principle and Citation Context-Specific Recommendation
Teachers need to understand
the influence community-
building has on students. (C)
Effective learning requires the
learner to be engaged
meaningfully in their learning
and schema development
(Kirshner et al., 2006).
Provide information through a professional
development session to review the school’s data
regarding student’s sense of belonging and
having an adult on campus that cares about them
and the correlation to community-building.
Teachers need to know how
to implement community-
building activities. (P)
Mastery derives from gaining
skills, application practice, and
knowledge of when it is
appropriate to use the skills
(Schraw & McCrudden, 2006).
Provide training with opportunities for trainees
to practice and learn from their mistakes through
immediate feedback (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009).
Teachers need to know how
to self-reflect on their own
effectiveness in
implementing community-
building activities. (M)
Learning is facilitated when
metacognitive strategies are
utilized (Baker, 2006).
During training, provide opportunities for
teachers (learners) to self-monitor and self-
assess. After observations, give teachers the
opportunity self-assess (Baker, 2006).

*Indicate knowledge type for each influence listed using these abbreviations: (C)onceptual;
(P)rocedural; (M)etacognitive.
Increasing Teacher Knowledge on School Data and the Impact of Community-Building on the
School as a Whole
The data revealed that the teachers at PCMS do not know the influence community-
building has on students in the school as a whole. An effective recommendation derived from
cognitive load theory is used to address this need. Kirshner et al. (2006) found that effective
learning requires the learner to be engaged meaningfully in their learning and schema
development. Kirshner’s findings suggests that teachers need background knowledge to
construct their thinking to support their learning. The recommendation is for PCMS to provide
all teachers with data and give concrete examples of the influence community-building has on
students in the school. For example, teachers would be provided professional development on
73

student reporting a sense of belonging and having an adult on campus who cares about them, and
teachers would correlate the data with the school’s efforts in community-building.
Educators need to feel their professional development is relevant and authentic for
learning to take place (Hunzicker, 2011). To make teacher professional development authentic
and relevant, teachers need data based on their school. The best way to relay information is to
relate the information to prior knowledge and the experience of the learner and to provide
concrete examples (Anguinis & Kraiger, 2009; Clark & Estes, 2008). The evidence shows that
teachers need to have relevant and meaningful information presented to them before they can
make a connection to the changes that have taken place due to community building.
Teachers Need Training, Time to Practice Skills, and Feedback
The data showed that PCMS teachers need additional procedural knowledge of how to
implement community-building activities in their classrooms. Information processing system
theory informs the recommended strategies for the procedural knowledge implementation need.
Schraw and McCrudden (2006) explain that mastery derives from gaining skills, application
practice, and knowledge of when it is appropriate to use the skills. Training allows people to gain
new knowledge and time to practice the knowledge so they can determine when it would be
appropriate to use in context. The recommendation is that PCMS teachers need to be provided
training on specific ways to build community in the classroom, given time to practice the skills,
and receive feedback on their application. For example, after teachers have been trained in
restorative justice community-building activities, they can practice the community building
activities with their colleagues and in some of their classes. Then, they can be observed to
determine if a transfer of training taken place and determine what additional training or support
is needed.
74

Training provides learners with the “how to” knowledge and skills, but the learner also
needs to be able to demonstrate their ability to complete the skill while learning from their
mistakes through immediate feedback (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009; Clark & Estes, 2008). Cook et
al. (2018) studied the implementation of the establish-maintain-restore (EMR) method to foster
positive teacher-student relationships. Using a treatment and control group, Cook et al. (2018)
found that teachers in the treatment group had significant positive changes in their teacher-
student relationships and classroom environment due to their training in the EMR method and
practical application with support from the trainer. The study supports the recommendation that
teachers need to be provided with training and practice, as well as additional support after the
training.
Teacher Need Opportunities to Self-Reflection on their Effectiveness
The findings from this study indicate that the teachers of PCMS do not self-reflect on
their effectiveness of community-building implementation unless prompted. A principle rooted
in informational processing system theory was selected to support the need for self-reflection.
Learning is facilitated when metacognitive strategies are utilized (Baker, 2006). When teachers
use metacognitive strategies, they will learn from their reflection (Baker, 2006). The
recommendation is to provide opportunities for teachers (learners) to self-monitor and self-assess
during training and observation. As an example, after training and allowing time to practice
facilitating a new community-building activity, teachers will self-reflect on how effective they
were in implementation. Teachers will facilitate the activity again and be asked to self-monitor
their effectiveness by participants responses and body-language during the activity.
Duong et al. (2019) conducted a study and found that reflecting on the use of strategies
can enhance future implementation. Twenty teachers and 190 students were part of the
75

implementation of the EMR method in which teachers created relationships with students,
maintained those relationships, and restored relationships that needed repair. After attending the
three-hour training on EMR, teachers attended professional learning communities bi-weekly and
discussed the strategies they use to establish relationships with students. Ten teachers were given
no further instruction, and ten teachers were asked to reflect on the relationship they have with
their students, plan interventions to use with students, and reflect on the effectiveness of the
strategies used (Duong et al., 2019). The results indicated that the teachers who reflected on
student relationships and provided interventions with the students had a larger decrease in
student behavior and a higher increase in student achievement (Duong et al., 2019). The study
suggests that teacher reflection throughout the implementation process is necessary to increase
desired outcomes.
Motivation Recommendations
The assumed motivational influence for the teachers of PCMS is listed in Table 12. Using
a modified version of the Gap Analysis Framework by Clark and Estes (2008), the self-efficacy
influence was validated to support the stakeholder goal of all teachers implementing restorative
justice community-building activities in their classrooms. The teachers of PCMS find the value
of community-building activity implementation, so no recommendations are provided. The
teachers of PCMS need to believe in their own capabilities to implement the activities. The
theoretical principles and recommendations that would best meet the needs of the teachers of
PCMS are provided in Table 12.

76

Table 12
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Motivation Influence Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation
Teachers need to believe they are
able to successfully build
community in their classroom.
(Self-efficacy)
Self-efficacy is enhanced through
feedback and modeling (Pajares,
2006).
During training, provide
modeling of how to implement
community-building activities
and then provide teachers a
chance to practice community-
building facilitation. Provide
feedback to teachers. Repeat in a
classroom setting by modeling
community-building activities
and then teachers practice
implementation with their other
class periods and feedback can be
received after each class period.

Increase Self-Efficacy of All Teachers in Implementation of Community-Building Activities
While seven out of eight of the teachers interviewed personally felt confident in their
ability to build community in their classroom, only four of those teachers attributed their
confidence to training and felt that other teachers did not receive the same benefits. A
recommendation in self-efficacy theory has been selected to address this motivational need.
Pajares (2006) found that self-efficacy can increase through feedback and modeling. Pajares’
work suggests that providing learners with modeling and scaffolding support, including practice
and feedback, would increase their self-efficacy. The recommendation is for PCMS to provide
modeling of how to implement community-building activities and provide teachers a chance to
practice community-building facilitation with feedback. Modeling would take place in a
classroom setting by modeling community-building activities. Teachers would practice
implementation with their other class periods and feedback can be received after each class
period.
77

Vaandering (2014) studied restorative justice and the implementation of restorative
justice in schools. The study used data collected from teacher observations, policies, and teacher
interviews. What emerged from the study was an inequality in training and implementation,
suggesting that all teachers need to be trained in a similar manner and provided feedback on their
implementation to ensure they are on the right path.
Organization Recommendations

The organizational influences and recommendations for the teachers of PCMS are listed
in Table 13. The Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analysis Framework was used with some
modifications to determine the need for acceptance and willingness, as well as professional
development and role models. PCMS teachers need to accept that community-building needs to
take place in classrooms and they have to be willing to try to build community with their
students. The teachers also need professional development on how to build community and the
opportunity to have role-models to support their efforts in the classroom. The theoretical
principles and recommendations that would best meet the needs of the teachers of PCMS are
provided in Table 13.
Table 13
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Organization
Influence
Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation
The organization needs to have a
culture of acceptance and
willingness to build community
with students. (Cultural Model
Influence)
Build a momentum of change by
involving as many people as
possible (Moran & Brightman,
2000).
Use those trained to assist
implementation by speaking with
staff about the power of that
change agent.
The organization needs to have
professional development and
role models at the school site to
support teachers. (Cultural
Setting Influence)
A coaching model helps
employees learn and make
changes to their practices (Moran
& Brightman, 2000).
Provide teachers professional
development using the current
PD schedule using role models to
guide and improve their practice.

78

Teacher Willingness to Implement Community-Building
The results and findings of this study indicated that seven out of eight participants believe
that the majority of the teachers are willing to implement community-building activities;
however, all of the participants were concerned that many teachers are unsure how to implement
community-building activities. A principle rooted in organizational change theory has been
selected to address this need. An organization can build a momentum of change by involving as
many people as possible (Moran & Brightman, 2000). According to Moran and Brightman
(2000), including as many people as possible in the change will allow the organization to start
moving forward with the change. The recommendation is to have staff trained in community-
building assist implementation by speaking with staff about the power of community-building
activities. Then, the organization will train as many staff as possible in community-building and
ask that the activities be incorporated into the staff’s work. For example, staff members will talk
with teachers about the restorative justice community-building they have done with students at
PCMS and how it has impacted those students. The school will prioritize restorative justice as an
essential training and once trained, the teachers will be required to include community-building
activities in their weekly lesson plans.
Moran and Brightman (2000) state that a critical mass needs to be achieved so that a
momentum of change takes place. In the case of teachers, many teachers at the school site need
to be involved in the change process so that change will take place. The research of Zimmerman
(2006) revealed that a sense of urgency needs to be created amongst teachers, and when they see
the need for change, enlist a small group of teachers to develop a vision for the school and have
them use their influence on others. Mohamed (2008) found that teachers need to see the
79

correlation between what is taught and what is learned. As such, the literature supports the need
to address teacher willingness to implement community-building in their school and classrooms.
Provide Professional Development and Role Models
The findings indicate that all the participants feel professional development is needed for
all teachers and that role models need to be utilized at the school site to support teachers. By
providing professional development, self-efficacy and teacher knowledge will also improve.
Organizational change theory is the principle that will help address the need of professional
development and role models. Moran and Brightman (2000) indicate that a coaching model helps
employees learn and make changes to their practices. This suggests that having a coach or role
model to support the teacher can improve their practice. The recommendation is to give teachers
professional development and use role models to guide and improve their practice. For example,
teachers will receive professional development in restorative justice, and then use role models
who have been using restorative justice already to guide and improve their practice of
community-building implementation through conversation and observation during the
predetermined weekly professional development and professional learning community time built
into their schedules.
Wang and Lee (2019) explored what was gained by educators using the restorative
practice strategy of responsive circles. Using mixed methods, 22 responsive circle observations
and 40 staff interviews were conducted to see how schools were using responsive circles. The
study indicated that the educators found great benefit to using the responsive circles, but the
educators felt they needed support through training and coaching (Wang & Lee, 2019). The
research supports the recommendation that teachers need to be provided with professional
development and role models available at the school for support in their implementation.
80

Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) informed this
implementation and evaluation plan. The New World Kirkpatrick Model uses an updated version
of the four levels of training evaluation and the levels are inverted to maximize impact and
results (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The model begins with the end in mind by focusing on
the desired outcome for the organization. The model emphasizes the application of training while
on the job and the need to monitor and adjust throughout application. The next level to address is
the learning that takes place in the training by ensuring those trained are receiving the necessary
knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence, and commitment to apply the new learning to their job.
The final level focuses on the participant engagement, relevance, and the satisfaction by
attending the training, also known as their reaction. Starting the evaluation process with the
desired outcome allows the organization to have a clear view of what is important and critical
throughout the implementation process (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations
The mission of PCMS is to meet students’ academic, behavioral, and social-emotional
needs while preparing them for high school and beyond. The students of PCMS will one day
contribute to the community in which they live, making it necessary to focus on student’s well-
being. The study examined teachers’ knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational
influences of implementing community-building activities in the classroom to support students'
social-emotional needs. The recommendations for PCMS is to provide teachers with relevant
community-building training and activities that provide trainees opportunities to practice, self-
81

assess, be given feedback, and to utilize role models to build capacity for the desired outcome of
students’ social and emotional needs being met.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Table 14 shows the recommendations for Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
through outcomes, metrics, and methods based on external and internal outcomes for PCMS. It is
intended that if the outcomes are met, the stakeholders will also meet their stakeholder goal of
100% of the teachers at PCMS implementing restorative justice community-building activities in
their classrooms.
Table 14

Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes

Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
1. A decrease in the
number of students
needing mental health
services.
The number of referrals for
minors to mental health services
from PCMS.
Data from the local mental
health department.
2. Increase school
satisfaction rates.
Number of faculty who report
job satisfaction.
Number or students who report
school climate satisfaction.
Number of parents who report
satisfaction with educational
experience of their child.
Track frequency parents
give feedback to the district
about PCMS.
Internal Outcomes
3. Increase in the number
of students with positive
relationships with their
teachers.
The number of students
reporting they have an adult at
school that cares about them.
Solicit data from the
Panorama Survey,
California Healthy Kids
Survey, and informal
conversations.
4. Increase in number of
students with a sense of
school connectedness.
The number of students
reporting they feel connected to
school.
Solicit data from the
Panorama Survey,
California Healthy Kids
Survey, and informal
conversations.
82

5. Increase in student
attendance.
The number of students
attending school daily.
Daily and weekly
attendance reports as
compared to previous years.
6. Increase in student
academic achievement.
The number of students that pass
the CAASPP.
Solicit data from the CA
Department of Education
7. A decrease in student
suspensions and office
referrals.
The number of suspensions and
office referrals.
Daily and weekly discipline
reports as compared to
previous years.

Level 3: Behavior
Critical Behaviors
The stakeholders of focus are all of the teachers at PCMS. The first critical behavior is
that the teachers can articulate how they build community in their classroom. The second critical
behavior is that teachers can demonstrate how to implement community-building activities. The
third critical behavior is that the teachers will self-reflect on their effectiveness in implementing
community-building activities in their classroom. The specific metrics, methods, and timing for
each of these outcome behaviors appear in Table 15.
Table 15

Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
Teachers can articulate how they
build community in their
classroom.
Self- assessment of
teachers
1. Teachers will receive ongoing
training and data will be solicited
through post-training surveys.
By
December
2020
Teachers can demonstrate how to
implement community-building
activities.
Observation and
informal
conversations
2. Teachers will receive ongoing
training on community-building.
By
December
2020

2a. Teachers will have access to
training activity resources.
By
December
2020

2b. Teachers will include community-
building on their weekly lesson plans.
By January
2021

2c. Teachers will be observed by
school role models and be given
feedback.
By March
2021
Teachers will self-reflect on their
effectiveness in implementation of
community-building activities.
Self-assessment of
teachers
3. Teachers will be given time during
staff meetings to self-reflect and journal
on their implementation effectiveness.
By January
2021
83

Required Drivers
PCMS teachers require the support of their administration and leadership team to
reinforce what is learned in training and to support the application of community-building
activities in the classroom. The four categories for critical drivers are: reinforcing, encouraging,
rewarding, and monitoring. Table 16 shows the recommended drivers to support the critical
behaviors of the teachers at PCMS.
Table 16
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical Behaviors
Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Reinforcing

Staff meetings and professional development that focus on
community-building.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3
Job aid of the restorative justice community-building activities
already learned.
Ongoing 1, 2
Staff meetings and professional learning communities where
role models and teachers establish goals and time frames.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3
On the job training of community-building activities with
external consultant or role models in the classroom with the
teacher.
Quarterly 1, 2, 3
Leadership team meeting to collaborate on additional training
and support needed.
Monthly 1, 2
Encouraging

Mentoring from role models. Ongoing 1, 2
Modeling during staff meetings and professional development. Ongoing 1, 2
Rewarding

Recognition of teachers that demonstrate community-building
activities in the classroom.
Ongoing 2
Recognition of teachers that share the impact of community-
building in their classroom with other staff members.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3
Monitoring

One-on-one meetings with the Director of CWA to discuss
community-building practices.
Quarterly 1, 2
Observations of teachers implementing community-building
activities.
Monthly 1, 2
Staff meetings to touch base on implementation of community- Quarterly 1, 2, 3
84

building activities.

Organizational Support
The leadership team at PCMS will ensure teachers are supported by offering training
about community-building, provide community-building activity directions, and create a culture
that includes role models and opportunities to build community amongst staff and students.
Administration needs to ensure that community-building activities are part of staff meetings and
professional development, and that all teachers are trained in restorative justice community-
building. Teachers that serve as role models need to be provided incentives for their coaching
and training. The PCMS leadership team will meet to ensure that the school’s Single Plan for
Student Achievement (SPSA) aligns to the school goal of meeting the social-emotional needs of
students through community-building.
Level 2: Learning
Learning Goals
After the teachers and organization complete the recommended solutions, PCMS teachers
will be able to:
1. Articulate the influence community-building has on students (Conceptual knowledge)
2. Articulate the influence community-building has on the school (Conceptual knowledge)
3. Implement community-building activities (Procedural knowledge)
4. Reflect on their implementation effectiveness for community-building activities
(Metacognitive knowledge)
5. Articulate confidence that they are able to successfully build community (Motivation:
Self-efficacy)

85

Program
The recommended learning program includes professional development, training,
modeling, practice and feedback, and role model support as prescribed by the school leadership
team. It is recommended that the teachers at PCMS receive professional development by school
administration to review the school’s data, such as discipline, attendance, and how the data
reveals the need for community-building. The data can be reviewed during the school’s existing
professional development time of one hour and can be completed within one or two professional
development sessions over a one-month period.
The teachers of PCMS will also receive training in restorative justice, planned by the
leadership team. The PCMS staff already trained in restorative justice will provide the training to
build capacity, and support will be given by the restorative justice consultant with whom the
district and school have been working. The training will give teachers background knowledge in
restorative practices and provide strategies and activities for community-building to use in the
classroom. During the training, teachers will be afforded multiple opportunities to practice
facilitation of the activities and strategies so they can receive immediate feedback. Teachers will
also be given time to self-reflect during the training to self-monitor and self-assess their
knowledge and skills through the use of journaling. Training will be provided throughout the
school year and teachers will be provided a substitute teacher so that training can take place
during the school day. The total time for completion of the training is 40 hours. At the end of
each training session, teachers and trainers will collaborate to establish goals and timelines for
implementation before their next training session. After each training session, teachers will be
provided job aids for the activities and strategies learned so they can quickly reference the
materials for classroom implementation.
86

Between each training session, the trainers from the school will serve as role models and
along with the restorative justice consultant, will schedule times to go into the classroom to
provide on the job training by modeling community-building activities and they will observe
teacher implementation and provide feedback to build capacity. Teachers will also be able to
schedule a time to visit a role model’s classroom to observe implementation of community-
building activities. The leadership team will meet monthly to discuss overall progress and to
determine if additional time and resources are needed for community-building activities.
Evaluation of the Components of Learning
It is important to evaluate the knowledge, skills, attitudes, confidence, and commitment
of the training participants (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The teacher’s conceptual,
procedural, and metacognitive knowledge of community-building needs to be evaluated. The
teachers need to value community-building training to increase their likelihood of classroom
implementation. In addition, the teachers need to have confidence in their ability to apply the
knowledge and skills in their classroom and be committed to implementing community-building
activities. The evaluation of the components of learning for the program are included in Table
17.
Table 17
Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”

Knowledge checks through discussions such as “think-
pair-share” and table talk.
Periodically during professional
development and training.
Knowledge checks using quizzes such as Kahoot or a
Google Form.
After essential skills have been taught
in professional development and
training.
Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”

Demonstration in groups of using the community-
building activities taught in the training.
During professional development,
staff meetings, and training.
87

Quality of the feedback from peers during group
sharing.
During professional development,
staff meetings, and training.
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”

Trainers’ observation of teachers’ statements and actions
demonstrating their understanding of the benefits of
community-building activities.
During professional development,
staff meetings, and training.
Discussions about the value of community-building in
their classrooms.
During professional development,
staff meetings, and training.
Survey after professional development or training to
gauge their understanding of the benefits of community-
building activities.
At the end of each professional
development or training session.
Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”

Discussions with teachers during the professional
development or training sessions.
During professional development or
training.
Opportunities to share success stories during staff
meetings.
During staff meetings.
Survey items used scaled items. At the end of each professional
development or training session.
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”

Discussions following practice and feedback. During professional development,
staff meetings, training, and
classroom observations.
Teachers will incorporate community-building activities
into their weekly lesson plans.
Weekly lesson plans.

Level 1: Reaction
Level 1 is the reaction participants have to the training (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
It is important to gauge the reactions of the PCMS teachers regarding restorative justice training
at the school site. The components to measure reactions to the program are listed in Table 18.
Table 18
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement

“Check-ins’ during staff meetings. Bi-weekly
“Check-ins” during one-on-one meetings with
administration.
Ongoing
Observation by trainers and administration. During professional development and
training
88

Professional development and training evaluations. After each professional development and
training
Relevance

“Check-ins’ during staff meetings. Bi-weekly
Professional development and training evaluations. After each professional development and
training
Customer Satisfaction

Professional development and training evaluations. After each professional development and
training
Observation of body language and listen to teacher
commentary.
During professional development and
training

Evaluation Tools
Immediately Following the Program Implementation
Evaluation will take place during each training and at the conclusion of each training.
Level 1 reaction will be assessed during professional development and training by the school
administration and trainers during check-ins, asking teachers if they feel the information and
presentation is valuable. The school administration will also observe the teacher’s body language
and listen to comments made by teachers when the administration is walking around the room.
At the end of each training session, Level 1 and Level 2 will be evaluated through the use
of a survey. The principal will ask each teacher to complete a survey that will measure the
teacher’s engagement, the material relevance, and teacher satisfaction with the training and
professional development that has been provided during the session (Level 1). The survey will
also include questions to measure teacher’s knowledge, attitude, confidence, and commitment to
implementing community-building activities in their classrooms (Level 2). The survey will
include five Likert scale questions and six free response questions (Appendix C).

89

Delayed for a Period After the Program Implementation
Twelve weeks after teachers have received training, teachers will be given a more
extensive questionnaire, containing Likert scale questions and free response questions. The
questionnaire seeks to understand the teacher's perception of the training relevance and
satisfaction, the value of the training, teacher’s confidence to apply the skills, and
implementation of community-building activities. The questionnaire includes nine questions
using a 5-point Likert scale and seven free response questions (Appendix D).
Data Analysis and Reporting
The desired outcomes of the Level 4 goals for implementing restorative justice
community-building activities consist of decreased student mental health referrals, increased
positive school climate, and increased student achievement. Progress towards meeting the
stakeholder and organizational goal needs to be visible to make the greatest impact. After each
training has been provided and teachers have completed their surveys online, the findings can be
accessed through the school’s learning management system using real-time dashboards. School
administrators can use the survey findings to guide their future training planning. For delayed
implementation, questionnaires can also be administered online and displayed using a dashboard
in real time. School administration can use this data to see if there has been an increase in teacher
engagement, relevance, and satisfaction over time so that adjustments can be made to the training
and modeling taking place. Figure 3 demonstrates an example of how the dashboard can
illuminate data for staff and administration regarding training. Similar dashboards can be created
for Levels 1 and 3 by the site administration.

90

Figure 3
Sample Dashboard to Report Progress towards Meeting the Stakeholder Goal

Figure 4
Sample Comparison Dashboard to Report Progressions Over Time After Each Training

91

Limitations and Delimitations

There are advantages and disadvantages to each methodological approach. Clark and
Estes (2008) provided a framework that explores the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences of an organization. While the framework offered a structure and rationale as to why an
individual or group of individuals may have needs in their knowledge or motivation, a limitation
of the framework kept the focus of the study limited to only the knowledge, motivation, and
organization. Studies are often conducted based on assumptions or hypotheses, but the KMO
framework narrowed the scope in which the researcher could make assumptions, possibly
causing the researcher to miss opportunities to identify other influences or needs of the
organization. Another limitation of the study was the small number of participants from PCMS.
The teaching staff has 40 teachers; however, only 36 teachers are fully credentialed with at least
one year of experience at the school site. An additional limitation of the study was the period in
which the data was collected. While waiting for approval from the institutional review board, the
coronavirus virus swept across the nation, causing shelter in place orders and school closures.
Schools were closed for in-person instruction from March 2020 until the end of the school year
in June 2020. Observations were initially part of the data collection plan, but because of school
closures, observations were removed from the study. Without observations, the study was limited
to teacher explanation of procedural knowledge during the interviews. If replicated, the study
could be improved by using additional school sites within the school district to determine if each
school site is implementing restorative justice community-building activities at the same rate or
if they are in different stages. If additional schools are included, the study could include race,
ethnicity, and gender data to determine if the participants’ culture affected the participants
responses. Another addition to the study would be the use of mixed methods research to enhance
92

the understanding of the training and support teachers have received.
While no framework is perfect, the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis did compliment
research in the field of education. Delimitations of the study was the use of PCMS teachers for
interviews and the interview questions asked. The researcher chose PCMS as the school of focus
because the school resides within the PFUSD; a district that was in its second year of
implementation of restorative practices. PCMS had the least staff turnover, compared to the other
middle schools in the district, making the training offered to the teachers more consistent. The
researcher crafted the interview questions to address the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences of PCMS implementation of community-building activities. Since the
interviews were casual and semi-structured, the researcher had the authority to ask additional
probing questions to allow the data gathered to be richer and more complete. The
recommendations for the study could be implemented by different organizations if they were to
implement community-building activities with their staff to enhance manager-employee
relationships and a sense of belonging amongst staff members within the organization.
Recommendations for Future Research
This research study was limited to the teachers at one middle school in Southern
California. Five additional areas to consider for future research are prominent. An expansion of
the current study to include additional middle schools in the district would strengthen the
research in the study by including more teacher viewpoints. Another consideration for future
research is to expand the current study to include student perceptions of community-building
activities to indicate how students feel about community-building activities. A longitudinal study
of the impact community-building activities has on students would capture how much of an
impact community-building has on students and whether an improvement to student’s social-
93

emotional well-being has taken place. Future research needs to include observations of teacher
implementation along with teacher interviews to compliment teacher reporting of their
procedural knowledge. The final recommendation for future research is to explore possible
programs that focus on community-building to implement in schools to support restorative
practices.
Conclusion
This study evaluated the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences related to
the needs of the teachers at PCMS to implement restorative justice community-building activities
in the classroom to nurture students’ social-emotional needs. An interrelatedness between the
influences was revealed in the findings; having more knowledge creates more efficacy and
willingness to implement. PCMS, like all schools in the United States, is undergoing a
transformational shift to a multi-tier system of support that requires teachers to support students
on a social-emotional level. It is even more crucial for PCMS to find ways to meet the social-
emotional needs of students due to their continuous decline in student reports of caring adult
relationships at school and school connectedness. The findings reveal that the teachers of PCMS
need additional supports to implement restorative justice community-building activities in their
classrooms ranging from training to role models. Teachers need to be given the necessary tools
to help their students thrive, but the tools are no good if teachers are not explicitly taught how to
use them effectively.
There is a national call for schools to provide students with social-emotional support. All
stakeholders need to shift their focus from academic gains to meeting the needs of the whole
child. When the social-emotional needs of a child are met in school, they will be more likely to
meet the behavioral and academic expectations of education.
94

References
Adamson, R. M., McKenna, J. W., & Mitchell, B. (2019). Supporting all students: Creating a
tiered continuum of behavior support at the classroom level to enhance schoolwide multi-
tiered systems of support. Preventing School Failure, 63(1), 62-67. https://doi.org/
10.1080/1045988X.2018.1501654
Agocs, C. (1997). Institutionalized resistance to organizational change: Denial, inaction, and
repression. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 917-931.
Aguinis, H., & Kraiger, K. (2009). Benefits of training and development for individuals and
teams, organizations, and society. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 451–474.
https://doi.org/ 10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163505
Austin, G., Polik, J., Hanson, T., & Zheng, C. (2016). School climate, substance use, and student
well-being in California, 2013-2015: Results of the 15
th
biennial statewide student
survey, grades 7, 9, and 11. WestEd Health & Human Development Program.
Baker, L. (2006). Metacognition. Education.com. https://www.education.com/reference/article/
metacognition/
Beaty-O'Ferrall, M. E., Green, A., & Hanna, F. (2010). Classroom management strategies for
difficult students: Promoting change through relationships. Middle School Journal, 41(4),
4-11.
Bloom, B. S., Englehard, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy
of educational objectives: Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. David McKay.
Boccanfuso, C., & Kuhfeld, M. (2011). Multiple responses, promising results: Evidence-based,
nonpunitive alternatives to zero tolerance. Child Trends, 2011(9).

95

Brinkworth, M. E., McIntyre, J., Juraschek, A. D., & Gehlbach, H. (2018). Teacher-student
relationships: The positives and negatives of assessing both perspectives. Journal of
Applied Developmental Psychology, 55, 24-38.
Burroughs, M. D., & Barkauskas, N. J. (2017). Educating the whole child: Social-emotional
learning and ethics education. Ethics and Education, 12(2), 218-232. http://doi.org/
10.1080/17449642.2017.1287388
California Department of Education. (2018). Social and emotional learning in California: A
guide to resources. https://www.cde.ca.gov/eo/in/documents/selresourcesguide.pdf
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2009). School connectedness: Strategies for
increasing protective factors among youth. U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services. https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/protective/pdf/connectedness.pdf
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2013). Mental health surveillance among children –
United States, 2005—2011. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 62(Suppl 2):1-38.
Clark, R. E. & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Cohen, J., McCabe, L., Michelli, N. M., & Pickeral, T. (2009). School climate: Research, policy,
practice, and teacher education. Teachers College Record, 111(1), 180-213.
Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. (2012). 2013 CASEL guide:
Effective social and emotional learning programs preschool and elementary school
edition. https://casel.org/overview-sel/
Commission on Teacher Credentialing. (2009). California Standards for the Teacher Profession.
https://www.cde.ca.gov/pd/ps/

96

Cook, C. R., Coco, S., Zhang, Y., Fiat, A. E., Duong, M. T., Renshaw, T. L., & Frank, S. (2018).
Cultivating positive teacher-student relationships: Preliminary evaluation of the establish-
maintain-restore (EMR) method. School Psychology Review, 47(3), 226-243.
http://doi.org/ 10.17105/SPR-2017-0025.V47-3
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Sage Publications.
Davis, H. A. (2006). Exploring the contexts of relationship quality between middle school
students and teachers. Elementary School Journal, 106(3), 1-32.
https://dx.doi.org/10.1086/501483
Duong, M. T., Pullmann, M. D., Buntain-Ricklefs, J., Lee, K., Benjamin, K. S., Nguyen, L., &
Cook, C. R. (2019). Brief teacher training improves student behavior and student–teacher
relationships in middle school. School Psychology, 34(2), 212-221. https://doi.org/
10.1037/spq0000296
Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The
impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of
school-based universal interventions. Child Development, 82(1), 405-432.
https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01564.x
Dusenbury, L., Weissberg, R. P., Goren, P., & Domitrovich, C. (2014). State standards to
advance social and emotional learning: Findings from CASEL's state scan of social and
emotional learning standards, preschool through high school, 2014. Collaborative for
Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. https://casel.org/wp-
content/uploads/2016/06/casel-brief-on-state-standards-january-2014.pdf

97

Eagle, J. W., Dowd-Eagle, S., Snyder, A., & Holtzman, E. G. (2015). Implementing a multi-
tiered system of support (MTSS): Collaboration between school psychologists and
administrators to promote systems-level change. Journal of Educational & Psychological
Consultation, 25(2-3), 160-177. https://doi.org/10.1080/10474412.2014.929960
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory. Education.com.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/
Evans, K. R. & Lester J. N. (2013). Restorative practice in education: What we know so far.
Middle School Journal, 44(5), 57-63.
Every Student Succeeds Act, 20 U.S.C. § 6301 (2015).
https://www.congress.gov/114/plaws/publ95/PLAW-114publ95.pdf
Foster, C. E., Horwitz, A., Thomas, A., Opperman, K., Gipson, P., Burnside, A., Stone, D. M., &
King, C. A. (2017). Connectedness to family, school, peers, and community in socially
vulnerable adolescents. Children and Youth Services Review, 81, 321-331.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2017.08.01
Franklin, C. G. S., Kim, J. S., Ryan, T. N., Kelly, M. S., & Montgomery, K. L. (2012). Teacher
involvement in school mental health interventions: A systematic review. Children and
Youth Services Review, 34(5), 973-982.
https://dx.doi.org//10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.01.027
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the
concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109.
Freeman, J., Sugai, G., Simonsen, B., & Everett, S. (2017). MTSS coaching: Bridging knowing
to doing. Theory into Practice, 56(1), 29-37.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2016.1241946
98

Gallimore, R., & Goldberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45-56.
Gamm, S., Elliott, J., Halbert, J. W., Price-Baugh, R., Hall, R., Walstron, D., Uro, G., &
Casserly, M. (2012). Common core state standards and diverse urban students: Using
multi-tiered systems of support. Council of the Great City Schools.
Garnett, B., Moore, M., Kidde, J., Ballysingh, T. A., Kervick, C. T., Bedinger, L., Smith, L.C., &
Sparks, H. (2020). Needs and readiness assessments for implementing school-wide
restorative practices. Improving Schools, 23(1), 21-32.
http://doi.org/10.1177/1365480219836529
Gasser, L., Grütter, J., Buholzer, A., & Wettstein, A. (2018). Emotionally supportive classroom
interactions and students' perceptions of their teachers as caring and just. Learning and
Instruction, 54, 82-92. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.08.003
Glesne, C. (2011). Chapter 6: But is it ethical? Considering what is “right.” In Becoming
qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.) (pp. 162-183). Pearson.
Greene, K., & Mitcham, K. C. (2012). Community in the classroom. English Journal, 101(4),
13-15.
Gregory, A., Clawson, K., Davis, A., & Gerewitz, J. (2016). The promise of restorative practices
to transform teacher-student relationships and achieve equity in school
discipline. Journal of Educational & Psychological Consultation, 26(4), 325-353.
http://doi.org/ 10.1080/10474412.2014.929950

99

Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2006). Student-teacher relationships. In G. G. Bear, & K. M.
Minke (Eds.), Children's needs III: Development, prevention, and intervention (pp. 59-
71). National Association of School Psychologists.
Harber, C., & Sakade, N. (2009). Schooling for violence and peace: How does peace education
differ from "normal" schooling? Journal of Peace Education, 6(2), 171-187.
High, A. J. (2017). Using restorative practices to teach and uphold dignity in an American school
district. McGill Journal of Education (Online), 52(2), 525-534.
Hunzicker, J. (2011). Effective professional development for teachers: A checklist. Professional
Development in Education, 37(2), 177-179.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2010.523955
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2012). Restorative justice in the classroom: Necessary roles
of cooperative context, constructive conflict, and civic values. Negotiation and Conflict
Management Research, 5(1), 4-28. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-4716.2011.00088.x
Kehoe, M., Bourke-Taylor, H., & Broderick, D. (2018). Developing student social skills using
restorative practices: A new framework called H.E.A.R.T. Social Psychology of
Education: An International Journal, 21(1), 189-207. https://doi.org/ :10.1007/s11218-
017-9402-1
Kiefer, S. M., Alley, K. M., & Ellerbrock, C. R. (2015). Teacher and peer support for young
adolescents' motivation, engagement, and school belonging. RMLE Online, 38(8), 1-18.
Kirkpatrick, J.D., & Kirkpatrick, W. (2016). Evaluation blunders and missteps to avoid. Training
and Development, 36-40.
Kirschner, P., Kirschner, F., & Paas, F. (2006). Cognitive load theory. Education.com.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/cognitive-load-theory/
100

Klem, A. M., & Connell, J. P. (2004). Relationships matter: Linking teacher support to student
engagement and achievement. Journal of School Health, 74(7), 262-273.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice,
41, 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Liberante, L. (2012). The importance of teacher–student relationships, as explored through the
lens of the NSW quality teaching model. Journal of Student Engagement: Education
Matters, 2(1), 2-9.
Martin, A. J., & Collie, R. J. (2019). Teacher–student relationships and students’ engagement in
high school: Does the number of negative and positive relationships with teachers matter?
Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(5), 861-876. http://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000317
Martin, A. J., & Dowson, M. (2009). Interpersonal relationships, motivation, engagement, and
achievement: Yields for theory, current issues, and educational practice. Review of
Educational Research, 79(1), 327-365.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3
rd
ed.). SAGE.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Pearson Education.
Mayworm, A. M., Sharkey, J. D., Hunnicutt, K. L., & Schiedel, K. C. (2016). Teacher
consultation to enhance implementation of school-based restorative practice. Journal of
Educational & Psychological Consultation, 26(4), 385-412.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10474412.2016.1196364
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4
th
ed.). Jossey-Bass.

101

Mohamed, N. (2008). "I have been doing things this way for so many years; why should I
change?" Exploring teachers' resistance to professional learning. New Zealand Studies in
Applied Linguistics, 14(1), 19-35.
Moran, J., & Brightman, B. (2000). Leading organizational change, Journal of Workplace
Learning: Employee Counseling Today, 12(2), 66-74.
Morgan, E., Salomon, N., Plotkin, M., & Cohen, R. (2014). The school discipline consensus
report: Strategies from the field to keep students engaged in school and out of the
juvenile practice system. Council of State Governments Practice Center.
http://csgpracticecenter.org/youth/school-discipline-consensus-report
No Child Left Behind Act, Pub. L. No. 107-110, § 101, Stat. 1425 (2002).
https://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/107-110.pdf
O’Malley, M. D., & Amarillas, A. (2011). What works brief #4: School connectedness. WestEd.
http://californias3.wested.org/tools/1
Ortega, L., Lyubansky, M., Nettles, S., & Espelage, D. L. (2016). Outcomes of a restorative
circles program in a high school setting. Psychology of Violence, 6(3), 459-468.
https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/vio0000048
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. Education.com.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/self-efficacy-theory/
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Chapter 7: Qualitative interviewing. In Qualitative research & evaluation
methods (3
rd
ed.). SAGE Publications.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 667–686.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667
102

Pointer, L., McGoey, K., & Farrar, H. (2020). The little book of restorative teaching tools:
Games, activities, and simulations for understanding restorative justice practices. Good
Books.
Pranis, K. (2005). The little book of circle processes: A new/old approach to peacemaking. Good
Books.
Rimm-Kaufman, S. (2010). Improving students' relationships with teachers. American
Psychological Association. http://www.apa.org/education/k12/relationship
Ross, A. G., Shochet, I. M., & Bellair, R. (2010). The role of social skills and school
connectedness in preadolescent depressive symptoms. Journal of Clinical Child and
Adolescent Psychology, 39(2), 269-275.
Rowe, F., & Stewart, D. (2009). Promoting connectedness through whole-school approaches: A
qualitative study. Health Education, 109(5), 396-413.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09654280910984816\
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Chapter 6: Conversational partnerships. In Qualitative
interviewing: The art of hearing data (3
rd
ed.) (pp. 85-92). Sage Publications.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. Teachers College Press.
Ruzek, E. A., Hafen, C. A., Allen, J. P., Gregory, A., Mikami, A. Y., & Pianta, R. C. (2016).
How teacher emotional support motivates students: The mediating roles of perceived peer
relatedness, autonomy support, and competence. Learning and Instruction, 42, 95-103.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.01.004
Sabol, T. J., & Pianta, R. C. (2012). Recent trends in research on teacher-child
relationships. Attachment & Human Development, 14(3), 213-231. https://doi.org/
10.1080/14616734.2012.672262
103

Saeki, E., & Quirk, M. (2015). Getting students engaged might not be enough: The importance
of psychological needs satisfaction on social-emotional and behavioral functioning
among early adolescents. Social Psychology of Education: An International
Journal, 18(2), 355-371. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s11218-014-9283-5
Sandwick, T., Hahn, J. W., & Hassoun Ayoub, L. (2019). Fostering community, sharing power:
Lessons for building restorative practice school cultures. Education Policy Analysis
Archives, 27(145). https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.27.4296
Schein, E. H. (2004). Organizational culture and leadership (3
rd
ed.). Jossey- Bass.
Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory. Education.com.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory/
Shaw, G. (2007). Restorative practices in Australian schools: Changing relationships, changing
culture. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 25(1), 127-135. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/crq.198
Silverman, J., & Mee, M. (2018). Using restorative practices to prepare teachers to meet the
needs of young adolescents. Education Sciences, 8, 1-6.
Spilt, J. L., Koomen, H. M. Y., & Thijs, J. T. (2011). Teacher wellbeing: The importance of
teacher-student relationships. Educational Psychology Review, 23(4), 457-477.
https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10648-011-9170-y
Taxer, J. L., Becker-Kurz, B., & Frenzel, A. C. (2019). Do quality teacher-student relationships
protect teachers from emotional exhaustion? the mediating role of enjoyment and anger.
Social Psychology of Education: An International Journal, 22(1), 209-226.
https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11218-018-9468-4

104

Turner, S. L., & Morelli, C. A. (2017). Five essential relationships every new teacher needs to
build. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 53(3), 134-137.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00228958.2017.1334486
Unified School District. (2015). California healthy kids survey, 2014-15: Main report. WestEd
Health & Human Development Program for the California Department of Education.
Unified School District. (2019a). California healthy kids survey, 2018-19: Main report. WestEd
Health & Human Development Program for the California Department of Education.
Unified School District. (2019b). California school staff survey, 2018-19: Main report. WestEd
Health & Human Development Program for the California Department of Education.
Vaandering, D. (2014). Implementing restorative practice in schools: What pedagogy
reveals. Journal of Peace Education, 11(1), 64-80. https://dx.doi.org
/10.1080/17400201.2013.794335
Verma, N., & Anil, A. P. (2011). Using appreciative intelligence for ice-breaking. Journal of
Workplace Learning, 23(4), 276-285. https://doi.org/10.1108/13665621111128682
Vidourek, R. A., & King, K. A. (2014). Enhancing school connectedness: Teachers' perceived
confidence in positively connecting students to school. International Journal of School &
Educational Psychology, 2(2), 85-94. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683603.2013.876949
Wang, M., Brinkworth, M., & Eccles, J. (2013). Moderating effects of teacher-student
relationship in adolescent trajectories of emotional and behavioral
adjustment. Developmental Psychology, 49(4), 690-705. https:/doi.org/
10.1037/a0027916
105

Wang, E. L., & Lee, E. (2019). The use of responsive circles in schools: An exploratory study.
Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 21(3), 181-194.
https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1098300718793428
Wang, M., & Dishion, T. J. (2012). The trajectories of adolescents' perceptions of school
climate, deviant peer affiliation, and behavioral problems during the middle school
years. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 22(1), 40-53.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7795.2011.00763.x
Wright, C., Diener, M. L., & Kemp, J. L. (2013). Storytelling dramas as a community building
activity in an early childhood classroom. Early Childhood Education Journal, 41(3), 197-
210. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s10643-012-0544-7
Yoon, J. S. (2002). Teacher characteristics as predictors of teacher-student relationships: Stress,
negative affect, and self-efficacy. Social Behavior and Personality, 30(5), 485.
Zimmerman, J. (2006). Why some teachers resist change and what principals can do about
it. National Association of Secondary School Principals. NASSP Bulletin, 90(3), 238-249.

106

Appendix A
Interview Protocol
Interviewees that are interested in participating in the study will be sent an email by the
researcher thanking them for agreeing to be a part of the study and will provide a brief
explanation of the study. The researcher will also explain that a pseudonym will be used for the
school and the district, and the interviewee’s personal information and participation will be kept
confidential.
The following script will be used as a guide for the interviewer so they can explain the
intent of the study and thank the participant for being a part of the study.
Interview Script
I appreciate you taking the time to complete today’s interview. This study is about the
implementation of community-based activities in the classroom and how they can foster a
welcoming classroom climate. If you do not want to answer a question or if at any time you
decide you would like to end the interview, please let me know. I want you to know that your
responses are anonymous as well as your participation in the study. I would like to record
today’s session so that I can review the materials again in the future. Would that be all right with
you? Thank you, are you ready to begin?
Interview Questions
Transition: I am going to begin by asking you some questions about your general experience.
1. How long have you been teaching? How long have you taught in middle school?
(Background)
2. How long have you been in this school district? (Background)
107

Transition: This study is interested in the use of community building activities, so the remainder
of the questions will focus on community building.
3. How important are community-building activities for your classes? (M1)
4. Do you feel your school is willing to implement community-building activities? (O1)
5. What effect do you think community-building activities have on students in your class? (K1)
6. What effect do you think community-building activities have on the school as a whole? (K1)
● Do you think implementation of community-building activities has impacted school
assertive discipline, suspensions, and student absences? How so?
7. How do you build community with your entire class? Can you share some examples? (K2)
8. How confident are you in building community in your classroom? (M2)
● What contributes to your confidence in building community?
● What would increase your confidence in building community?
9. How do you know if you have built community with your classes? (K3)
10. Are there role models at this school that use community-building activities? (O2)
● Do they talk about their activities with the staff? What do they share?
● Do they allow other teachers to observe them implementing community-building
activities?
● Have they come into your classroom or are they willing to come into your class to model
how to implement community-building activities?
11. Does your school site or district provide training to you regarding restorative practices or
other community building strategies? (O2)
● What does that look like?
108

12. Would you allow me to come into your classroom to observe your use of restorative practice
community-building activities? (Will only be asked if participant is using restorative practice
community-building activities)
End of Interview: I want to thank you for your time today. Do you have any questions about the
study or the questions I asked you today?

109

Appendix B
Document Protocol
The California Healthy Kids Survey and California School Staff Survey documents will
be obtained through the California Department of Education website under the category of data
and statistics. Both documents collect data from all of the middle schools in the district; it is not
limited to PCMS. Data that will be used is from the 2018-2019 school year and it will serve as a
baseline of the district’s organizational culture and context. An analysis of the interactions
between the organizational culture and context and the knowledge and motivation of the teachers
at PCMS was used while reviewing the documents along with teacher interviews.
The school board minutes are posted on the district website and are made public. The
minutes will be reviewed to see the initiatives that are to be implemented at PCMS and their
intent. The document specific to PCMS that will be analyzed is the Panorama Survey that was
given to students in the Fall of 2019. The Panorama Survey will be examined to determine the
school climate and students’ social-emotional wellbeing. The documents will reiterate the needs
of the organization and address the motivation of teachers needing to see the utility value in
community-building and find ways to build their self-efficacy. The Panorama Survey data was
accessed as a pdf from the site Principal; the Assist Superintendent of Educational Services
granted permission for access to the data without identifiers.

110

Appendix C
Evaluation Preceding Each Training/Professional Development Session
Please circle the rating for each question based on the criteria below:
1 2 3 4 5
Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree

Engagement
1. Today’s session held my interest.
1 2 3 4 5
2. I was provided enough time to practice the skills presented today.
1 2 3 4 5
Relevance
3. What I learned today will help me in the classroom.
1 2 3 4 5
4. I am clear about what is expected of me in the classroom.
1 2 3 4 5
Satisfaction
5. I would recommend this session to my colleagues.
1 2 3 4 5
Additional Comments:
6. Was there information in today’s session that was unnecessary? (Relevance)
7. List at least two activities or strategies you can use to implement community-building
activities. (Knowledge)
8. Describe an activity or strategy in detail you will use to implement community-building
activities. (Procedural)
111

9. What is the importance of applying today’s learning in your classroom? (Attitude)
10. What additional support will you need to implement community-building activities in your
classroom? (Confidence)
11. List one thing you plan to implement from today’s training and briefly explain how you will
implement it in your classroom. (Commitment)
112

Appendix D

Pre-Training and 12 Week Post Training Community-Building Questionnaire
Question Never or
very rarely
true
Rarely
true
Sometimes
true
Often
true
Very often
or always
true
There has been occasion in my classroom to
implement what I learned from training. (L1)
1 2 3 4 5
What I have learned in training has been
relevant to use in my classroom. (L1)
1 2 3 4 5
Looking back, this training was a good use of
my time. (L1)
1 2 3 4 5
I have been able to apply in my classroom
what I learned in training. (L3)

If you circled a 4 or below, please indicate the
reasons:
• I do not have the necessary skills or
knowledge.
• I do not clearly know what is expected of
me.
• I do not have the necessary resources.
• I do not have the support to apply what I
have learned.
• I do not have the confidence to apply
what I have learned.
• I don’t think what I learned will work.
• Other (please explain):

1 2 3 4 5
I have received support in order to apply what
I learned successfully. (L3)
1 2 3 4 5
I have seen an impact in my teacher-student
relationships due to my application of this
training. (L4)
1 2 3 4 5
I have seen an impact in student to student
relationships due to my application of this
training. (L4)
1 2 3 4 5
I have seen an impact in the school climate
due to my application of this training. (L4)
1 2 3 4 5
This training has positively impacted our
school. (L4)
1 2 3 4 5
113

Addition Comments:
What information from the training has been the most relevant to your job?
Was there any information in this training that is NOT relevant to your job? If so, what?
Looking back, in what ways could this training be improved?
How have you used this training in your classroom or around campus?
What else do you need to successfully perform the skills you learned in this training while in the
classroom?
What impact do you think this training has had on the school as a whole?

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Practices supporting newcomer students

PDF

School connectedness and teacher reflective practices

PDF

Teacher as nurturer: perceptions of elementary teachers integrating social and emotional learning practices

PDF

Implementation of restorative justice in schools from a teacher's perspective

PDF

Nourish to flourish: strengthening social emotional wellness of teachers to mitigate stress, enrich engagement, and increase efficacy: an evaluation study

PDF

Analyzing middle school teachers’ implementation and sustainability of professional development regarding non-exclusionary discipline practices

PDF

The role of the principal in schools that effectively implement restorative practices

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

School-based support for students with ADHD in general education classrooms

PDF

Multi-tiered system of support as the overarching umbrella: an improvement model using KMO gap analysis to address the problem of school districts struggling to implement MTSS

PDF

Building strong school communities through authentic conversations: a restorative practices curriculum for teachers

PDF

The knowledge, motivation, and organization influences affecting the frequency of empathetic teaching practice used in the classroom: an evaluation study

PDF

Foreign-language teachers' needs to achieve better results: the role of differentiated instruction

PDF

Equitable schooling for African American students: an evaluation study

PDF

Sustained mentoring of early childhood education teachers: an innovation study

PDF

Reconstructing the literary canon: an innovation study

PDF

Learning the language of math: supporting students who are learning English in acquiring math proficiency through language development

PDF

Investigating how general education middle school teachers support the social inclusion of students with special needs

PDF

Teachers' experiences implementing social and emotional learning in the elementary classroom

PDF

An evaluation of general education faculty practices to support student decision-making at one community college

Asset Metadata

Creator Santa Maria, Anna (author)

Core Title Using restorative practice community-building activities to meet the social-emotional needs of students

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 10/19/2020

Defense Date 09/18/2020

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

Tag community-building,OAI-PMH Harvest,restorative justice,restorative practice,school climate,school connectedness,social-emotional,teacher-student relationships

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Hirabayashi, Kimberly (committee chair), Boveja Riggio, Marsha (committee member), Datta, Monique Claire (committee member)

Creator Email acsantam@usc.edu,jimmy4anna@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-382237

Unique identifier UC11666466

Identifier etd-SantaMaria-9050.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-382237 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-SantaMaria-9050.pdf

Dmrecord 382237

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Santa Maria, Anna

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