University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

College preparation coursework opportunities for students of color at the secondary level

(USC Thesis Other)

College preparation coursework opportunities for students of color at the secondary level

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

College Preparation Coursework Opportunities for Students of Color at the Secondary
Level
by
Caitlin Lavin Boline

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

May, 2021

© Copyright by Caitlin Lavin Boline 2021
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Caitlin Lavin Boline certifies the approval of this Dissertation

David Cash
Alison Muraszewski
Kimberly Hirabayashi, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2021

iv

Abstract
This study applied Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory (1979) to understand the impact
of environmental factors that influenced a student of color’s access to college preparation
coursework and programs. The purpose of this study was to explore how district and school
administrators implemented purposeful efforts to increase the number of students of color
enrolled in college preparation and coursework and programs at Mount Greenwood Public
Schools (a pseudonym for a public-school district in Washington state). This study employed a
qualitative analysis approach including interviews and document analysis to capture data that
identified the influential factors that contribute to access for students of color. This study
collected qualitative interview data from twelve district and building administrative staff
members as well as district wide data on course completion, graduation rates, etc. using
document analysis. This data was used to identify and validate assumed outcomes of access for
students of color to college preparation coursework and programs. The findings of this study
resulted in calibration between district office and school building, disaggregating all data by
race, and accessibility to college preparation for all students. Based on these findings, research-
based recommendations were identified to address the organization’s challenges to equitable
access to students of color to college preparation coursework. These recommendations included
creation of authentic partnerships with students, families, and community members of color at
the district and school level, creating accountable, multi-tiered systems of calibration and
collaboration at the district and school level to support accessible outcome for students of color,
and creating district and school policies and procedures to support accessible, culturally relevant
college preparation coursework for students of color.

v

Acknowledgements
I would like to express my sincere and unconditional gratitude to all my friends, family,
colleagues and mentors who supported me through this process. Throughout this process, I have
felt an enormous amount of personal and professional growth that I am so grateful to realize. To
my dissertation chair, Dr. Kimberly Hirabayashi, your calm and consistent guidance was
paramount to my ability to feel capable of completing this task. I was also lucky to have Dr.
Alison Muraszewski on my committee who was my first professor at USC and made me feel
extremely capable of accomplishing a doctoral degree. Finally, Dr. David Cash offered an
incredible amount of wisdom and relevant resources to support my dissertation and I am so
thankful for his valuable input as a member of my committee. Another person who made a
particular impact was Dr. Marc Pritchard whose initial guidance with my dissertation writing
further validated my abilities to accomplish this degree.
To my family and friends who impressed on me the importance of education or supported
me along the way including my parents Kevin and Mary Lynn Boline, siblings Michael, Patrick,
and Bridget Boline, and grandparents Mike and Maureen Lavin. To my extended family and
friends who have understood the sacrifices of time that this process has meant, I appreciate you
waiting for me and encouraging me to reach my goals.
To my personal support system at home, my husband Dr. Patrick Dospoy, who has
supported with every goal I have had. Being married to a full-time educator and doctoral student
has not been easy and Pat supported me in so many unselfish and thoughtful ways. I am not sure
what I did to deserve you, but I am lucky to have you. Life with you and Penny is the best and I
am happy to have even more time now for our growing family.

vi

Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... v
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... viii
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ ix
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................................................................. 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................ 1
Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................... 3
Significance of the Study .................................................................................................... 3
Definition of Terms............................................................................................................. 4
Organization of the Study ................................................................................................... 8
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature .......................................................................................... 9
Literature Review Level One Heading #1 .......................................................................... 9
Literature Review Level One Heading #2 ........................................................................ 13
Literature Review Level One Heading #3 ........................................................................ 16
Literature Review Level One Heading #4 ........................................................................ 19
Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................... 24
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 28
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 27
Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 29
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 29
Overview of Design .......................................................................................................... 29
Research Setting................................................................................................................ 30

vii

The Researcher.................................................................................................................. 31
Data Sources ..................................................................................................................... 31
Validity and Reliability ..................................................................................................... 36
Ethics …………………………………………………………………………………….36
Chapter Four: Findings ................................................................................................................. 39
Participants ........................................................................................................................ 37
Results Research Question One ........................................................................................ 41
Results Research Question Two ....................................................................................... 64
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 71
Chapter Five: Discussion .............................................................................................................. 75
Findings............................................................................................................................. 75
Recommendations for Practice ......................................................................................... 76
Future Research ................................................................................................................ 90
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 91
References ..................................................................................................................................... 93
Appendix A: Questions ............................................................................................................... 105

viii

List of Tables
Table 1: Administrator Participant Background Data 38

ix

List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework 27
Figure 2: Data Sources 30

1

Chapter One: Overview of the Study
Access to college preparation coursework and program opportunities for all students is
crucial to post-secondary success as many employers require and seek highly qualified
candidates who have both post-secondary degrees and skill sets (Paolini, 2019). To be prepared
for post-secondary opportunities, students need access to college level knowledge and skills
defined as “having the knowledge and support to successfully plan for and enroll in
postsecondary institutions and pursue careers” (Uy et al., 2019, p. 415). Research indicates this
can be achieved by offering students a combination of content knowledge, cognitive strategies,
learning skills and dispositions, and specialized content knowledge (Bromberg & Theokas,
2016). To support students accessing knowledge that will prepare them for college, it is
necessary to expose them to college preparation coursework and programs. However, in the 2016
report of the Education Trust, transcript outcomes of high school graduates showed that only
51% of Black students and 63% of Latinx students were provided with learning opportunities
that reflected college preparation as compared to their White peers at 82% (The National Center
for Education Statistics [NCES], 2016). This study explores college preparation coursework and
program opportunities accessible to students of color in public school settings, specifically in
grades 9-12 as research indicates minority groups are deprived of opportunities of which they are
capable, which poses “substantial barriers to achieving parity” for students of color as compared
to their White peers (Klugman, 2013, p. 2).
Background of the Problem
Green and Forster (2003) define minimum college readiness as receiving a high school
diploma (or equivalent), completing basic academic college prerequisites, and having the ability
to demonstrate basic literacy skills. According to Carey and Roza (2008), many 6th to 12th grade
2

public schools in the United States do not have equitably planned and funded pathways to
support college preparation for all students through coursework and programming opportunities.
The specific organization used for research in this dissertation is Mount Greenwood Public
Schools (MGPS), a pseudonym, which includes approximately 25,000 students and seven high
school sites with approximately 70% of students identifying as an ethnicity other than white,
60% of students living in low socioeconomic status (SES) homes and 20% of students whose
primary language is not English (Washington Department of Education, 2020). Despite recent
surging graduation rates, from about 70% in 2012 to about 90% in 2019 (MGPS, 2019), MGPS
currently graduates students of color who are accessing college preparation coursework at lower
rates (approx. 40%) than White students (approx. 70%) (MGPS, 2020). Because these students
are accessing less coursework to prepare themselves for post-secondary experiences,
environments such as MGPS widen the achievement gap for students of color.
Students who are enrolled in college preparation courses are better positioned to achieve
in post-secondary environments. Greene and Forster (2003) examined the gap in academic
achievement between White, Asian, and upper-income students as compared to Black, Latinx,
and low-income students concluding White and Asian students were enrolled in college
preparation coursework at twice the rate of black peers and more than twice the rate of Latinx
peers. Additionally, Musu-Gillette et al. (2017) identified the percentage of students enrolled in
Advanced Placement (AP) and International Baccalaureate (IB) programs was higher for Asian
(72%) and White (40%) students compared to other racial and ethnic groups such as Black
(23%), Latinx (34%), and Multi-Race (34%). According to research by Mount Greenwood
Public Schools (MGPS, 2017), the percentage of graduated White students who completed a
post-secondary degree in 2017 was approximately 60%, which surpassed all subgroups except
3

Asian students, who had about a 65% postsecondary completion rate. Latinx students completed
a post-secondary degree at about a 45% rate and Black students at about a 40% rate (MGPS,
2017). Additionally, access disparities for students of color versus White students are often
founded on disproportionate funding models providing lower allocations for education than their
White peers (Carey and Roza, 2008). Such barriers to college preparation coursework and
programs require a shift in practice and advocacy for the systems that promote equitable policies
to promote equitable college preparation coursework and program access for all students.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to explore how school and district administrators are
implementing focused efforts to increase the number of students of color enrolled in college
preparation coursework and programs. It examines the conditions in public school systems to
support the structures that prepare students of color for college preparation coursework and
programs as well as the challenges administrators face and how they address these challenges.
1. How are school/district administrators working to increase the proportion or number of
students of color in college preparation coursework/programs?
2. What challenges do school/district administrators encounter and how do they address
them?
Significance of the Study
This study is important because the annual income difference between Americans who
have obtained a college degree as compared to those with a high school degree or equivalent
went from $12,500 in 1965 to over $33,000 in 2007 (Haskins & Kemple, 2009). According to
research by Carnevale et al. (2015), 6.6 million employment opportunities have been created
since 2010 and 2.9 million of those jobs are considered “good jobs” with 97% filled by college
4

graduates. There are a variety of societal and individual benefits to having a college degree
(Chan, 2016). Individual benefits include improved health and life expectancy, greater rates of
employment, increased personal status, and less likely to experience poverty, while societal
benefits include reduced crime rates, increased community service, higher rates of blood
donation and voting, and reduced rates of smoking.
Data shows that students of color in the United States are disproportionately placed in
“lower-tracked” classes or, in under-funded schools, which equates to reduced access to college
preparation coursework and programs, quality teachers and support staff, and smaller class sizes
which places them at an immediate disadvantage than their White peers from an early stage
(Farmer-Hinton, 2008). Without the ability to access college preparatory coursework or
programs, students of color face barriers to benefits commonly equated to post-secondary
success.
Definition of Terms
The following definitions will assist with better understanding the design, concepts, and
the problem of practice in the following study.
Advanced Placement (AP)
AP is the placement of a student into a high school course at the college-level that offers
college credit once successfully completed. This often includes a qualifying exam (Minnesota
Department of Education, 2012).
Advancement via Individual Determination (AVID)
AVID is a framework which seeks to foster a “safe and open” learning environment, sets
high expectations for both teachers and students, and focuses on collaboration within all
5

classrooms (AVID, 2020). While AVID is a framework all students can use, it was originally
designed to support students of color becoming first generation college students (AVID, 2020).
Cambridge Assessment International Education Program (CAIEP)
CAIEP, or “Cambridge” as it is referred to in MGPS, is a four-stage program designed to
lead students through their “pre-university” years. The program cites subject experts and current
educational research as the foundation for an academically rigorous program (Cambridge
Assessment, 2020).
College Preparatory Courses
Courses of study which are designed to qualify and prepare students for college
admission (Merriam-Webster, 2020). For the purposes of this study this includes AP, IB, and
honors level coursework.
College and/or Career Readiness
According to the Nebraska Department of Education (2009), students who are both
college and/or career ready can capitalize on their strengths, education, and experiences to bring
value to their school or workplace and the community. This performance is founded on
responsibility, performance, skills, ethics, and diligence. This prepares them for the next post-
secondary step (either college or career readiness) in their life.
International Baccalaureate (IB)
IB is a framework that provides academic preparation for college by teaching students to
think “critically and independently” (International Baccalaureate, 2020).

6

Organization of the Study
This study is organized into the following five chapters. Chapter One provides a brief
introduction to the problem of practice, as well as an overview of the study. Chapter Two
reviews the existing literature as it relates to promising practices that aim to increase accessibility
to college preparation programs and pathways for students of color. Chapter Three introduces the
research methodology, as well as an analysis of collected data. Chapter Four provides and
explores the results of the study, as well as shows what was found from the data collected.
Chapter Five discusses the implications of the results, the limitations from the data collected, and
what the study means for the future of college preparation and accessibility for students of color.

7

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
Inequities for Students of Color in Graduation and College Preparation
Inequities exist for people of color as it relates to graduation and college preparation.
Sequentially, this section discusses these inequities. The review begins with an examination of
historically disproportionate high school and college graduation rates of White students
compared to students of color. Next, the review explores the disproportionate accessibility of
college preparation coursework that students of color receive as compared to White peers.
Finally, the review concludes by identifying specific college preparation coursework
opportunities available to students and how the limited access to these opportunities that students
receive suggests a trajectory that puts students of color at a disadvantage as compared to their
White peers.
Disproportionate Graduation Rates
In the United States, students of color exhibit disproportionately low high school and
college graduation rates as compared to their White peers (Cooper et al., 2018). In 2008, the
NCES reviewed high school graduation rates over a 20-year span by student ethnicity. White
students graduated high school at rates of 83% (1972), 78% (1982), and 74% (1992); Black
students graduated at a rate of 9% (1972), 13% (1982), and 12% (1992); Latinx students
graduated at a rate of 3% (1972), 8% (1982), and 10% (1992) (NCES, 2016). In 2010, 18% of
Black students and 12% of Latinx students earned a baccalaureate degree as compared to their
White (30%) and Asian (50%) peers (Carnevale and Strohl, 2010). It is important to note that
despite outperforming students of color by overall graduation rate, White students decreased in
their graduation rate while both Black and Latinx students increased their graduation rates
highlighting that students of color are just as academically capable as their White peers (NCES,
8

2016). In similar data collected in the 2010 U.S. Census, 88% of White students graduated from
high school while 30% graduated from college. Comparatively, 63% of Latinx students
graduated from high school and 14% from college, along with 77% and 13% for Native
Americans (U.S. Census, 2010). One exception from this data was that Black students graduated
at an overall 84% high school graduation rate (most aligned to White peers), but that their
college graduation rate was merely 20% (Cooper et al., 2018). With students of color
consistently graduating at disproportionate rates of their White peers, it is important to identify
strategies to support proportionate rates of coursework support and opportunities for these
students.
Disproportionate Access to College Preparation
The path to completing a baccalaureate degree begins prior to college in secondary high
school settings where, across the United States, there is a lack of college preparation and
coursework opportunities for students, specifically students of color. Black and Latinx students
in the United States have less access to academically rigorous college preparation coursework as
compared to their White peers (Ahram et al., 2011; College Board, 2014; Education Trust, 2014;
Ford, 2013). Banks (2008) suggests that learning environments, along with curriculum, within
classrooms for students of color fail to positively reflect contributions made by people with
similar backgrounds. To be prepared and ready for college level work, it is important that
students of color graduate high school proportionately to their White peers and have direct access
to academically rigorous, college preparation coursework at the secondary level that is
representative of their population (Banks, 2008). Access to equitable college preparation courses
is important for the post-secondary plans off all students and school transcripts serve to
understand the type of courses that students of color are accessing.
9

Inequities to college preparation coursework accessibility exist in the transcripts of
students of color as compared to their White peers. In examining root causes through data, the
Education Trust in 2016 (NCES, 2016), reported that only 51% of Black and 63% of Latinx high
school transcripts reflected college readiness as compared to their White peers at 82%. In similar
research conducted by Greene and Forster (2003), White and Asian students enrolled in college
preparation coursework at twice the rate of Black and Latinx peers. In 2016, the percentage of
students enrolled in AP and IB coursework was higher for Asian and White students than Black,
Latinx, and Multi-Race (Musu-Gillette et al., 2017). Transcripts serve as a way for schools to
identify gaps in accessibility to college preparation for students of color and further identify the
content specific college preparation courses that students of color may not be accessing.
Content specific college preparation courses play an important role in college access,
often serving as “gatekeeping” courses (Flennaugh et al., 2017). According to The Education
Trust West (2013), only 1 in 20 Black kindergarteners in the state of California will graduate
from high school and complete their college degree from a 4-year university. Flennaugh et al.
(2017) highlights the lack of rigorous, culturally competent coursework that would more aptly
prepare all students for high school and beyond. Their research points out that, in California,
only 21% of Black students are proficient in Algebra, which is typically a course that serves as a
gateway to accessing college level math classes (Flennaugh et al., 2017). In research conducted
by Gamoran and Hannigan (2000), 77% of White students accessed Algebra level courses in
high school, while 9 % of Black and 10% of Latinx students accessed such courses. In similar
research, Kelly (2009), concluded that Black students enrolled in lower level math classes
(Algebra I or less) was at a 56% rate, with enrollment in higher level math classes
(Geometry/Algebra II level or higher) at a 44% rate. White students enrolled in lower level math
10

classes (Algebra I or less) at a 35% rate, with enrollment in higher level math classes
(Geometry/Algebra II level or higher) at a 65% rate. In addition to the preparatory courses,
access to AP and IB programs are equally critical.
AP classes not only prepare students for college but also provide students with credits
they can use toward their college transcript. Classes such as AP and/or IB are specifically
designed to support students who “seek to gain admission into selective colleges and/or earn
credits toward the college degree” (Iatarola et al., 2011). In demographic data collected from the
state of Texas in 2000, student enrollment in AP classes was greatly disproportionate by race
(Klopfenstein, 2004a). White students enrolled in AP classes in Texas were overrepresented by a
rate of 1.30% with Asian students overrepresented by a rate of 2.10%. Meanwhile, students of
color were underrepresented by 59% (Black) and 61% (Latinx) in AP classes. Despite
disproportionate representation in college preparatory classes, the percentage of students who
pass AP exams tend to show little disproportionality.
Capability of Students of Color in College Preparation Courses
Students of color pass AP exams at a proportional rate to other students (Dougherty et al.,
2005, Sadler, 2007). AP exam results in the state of Texas indicated 65% of White students
passed their AP exams, 54% of Latinx, and 53% of Black. In the state of Indiana, research
conducted using a diverse student sample indicated that students who were enrolled in AP
classes, regardless of race, were found to attain higher college GPAs (Sadler, 2007). When given
the ability to access college preparation classes, students of color do not significantly
underperform as related to their White peers (Dougherty et al., 2005). Disparities in AP classes
like the example highlighted below have prompted legal action. In 1999, a lawsuit filed by the
American Civil Liberties Union against the State of California (Daniel v. California, 1999)
11

challenged the disparity of student participation in AP and honors courses (Geiser & Santelices,
2004). The American Sociological Review (2009) research suggested social class has a “direct
and persisting impact” on both access and enrollment to postsecondary success (Alon, 2009).
Despite graduating and participating in college coursework at lower rates than White peers,
students of color perform at the same level when provided the support, opportunity, and access.
Therefore, accessing such coursework better positions students to receive the benefits that this
participation provides.
Benefits of College Preparation and Coursework for Students of Color
College preparation and coursework benefits students in their post-secondary plans.
Sequentially, this section explores the definition of college and career readiness and identifies
college preparation and/or coursework as essential to being prepared for college. Next, the
review establishes various reasons as to why students who access college preparation coursework
are better positioned to both enroll and complete college. Finally, the review explores financial
benefits that being prepared for and completing college affords individuals. The review, in its
totality, does not represent a comprehensive list of all benefits that exist for students of color as it
relates to accessing college preparation and coursework.
Importance of College Preparedness
There are many benefits to accessing college preparation and coursework. For students to
be prepared for and complete college, they require access to college preparatory coursework to
support this postsecondary success (Farmer-Hinton, 2008). College (and career) preparedness is
defined by Mueller and Gozali-Lee (2013) in three areas: academic preparedness, expected
attitudes/behaviors or “soft skills,” and college/career knowledge. Academic preparedness means
that a student will have the knowledge and skills necessary to do college-level coursework
12

without remediation. Expected attitudes/behaviors is having the mindset (beliefs, attitudes, and
values) and behaviors needed to succeed at a postsecondary institution including perseverance,
self-efficacy, and organizational habits (Mueller & Gozali-Lee, 2013). College/career knowledge
includes having the information and knowledge (e.g., entrance exams, applications, financial aid,
etc.) needed from start to finish to plan, enroll, and complete college (Uy et al., 2019). By
accessing skills to prepare them for college, all students are better equipped to access college
material once they are enrolled in college.
Access in College Preparation Increases Access in College
Students who access college preparation coursework and/or classes are better positioned
to enroll in and attend college (Iatarola et al., 2011). Enrollment and participation in these classes
both enhance academic skills and knowledge needed to navigate and prepare students for college
(Haskins & Temple, 2009). Haskins and Temple (2009) determined that college preparation
coursework positions students to master new academic learning goals and increase their grade
point averages (GPA), develop behavioral skills such as organization and study habits, helps
them to meet the minimum requirements needed to enter college, and supports students in
passing college entrance exams (SAT and ACT). According to Adelman (1999), the impact of an
academically rigorous college preparation curriculum had a greater impact on Black and Latinx
students than for White students. Black and Latinx students who progressed to math classes
beyond Algebra II had improved degree completion rates by 27.5% (Black) and 18.5% (Latinx).
White students who progressed to math classes beyond Algebra II had improved degree
completion rates at a lower rate of 10.4%. Students who have accessed college preparation
material, which then better prepares them for college-level coursework, are further supported to
successfully complete their college degree.
13

Students who are prepared for college, through college preparation coursework and/or
programs, are better positioned to complete college (Sadler, 2007) and benefit personally from
this accomplishment. According to Chan (2016), individual benefits to completing a college
degree include improved health and life expectancy, greater rates of employment, improved
working conditions, higher likelihood of attending graduate school, and more likely to raise
children with higher IQ levels. Additionally, there are a variety of financial benefits to
completing a post-secondary degree.
Financial Benefits for College Graduates
According to research by Haskins and Kemple (2009), students who complete college
make, on average, $33,000 more per year in entry level jobs (and overall 66% higher salaries) as
compared to students who have earned only a high school diploma. In addition to higher salaries,
further positive financial impacts include better work benefits and decreased likelihood of
experiencing poverty (Appendix B) (Chan, 2016). In research conducted by Carnevale et al.
(2015), out of the 6.6 million jobs that were created since the Great Depression, 2.9 million of
these are considered “good” jobs. Out of those jobs, 2.8 million (97%) have been filled by
workers with at least a bachelor’s degree. “Good” jobs are defined by the researchers as “the
upper-third by median wages of occupations in which they are classified” (Carnevale et al.,
2015). Finally, students who enroll in and succeed at obtaining a college degree are better
positioned to complete a terminal degree (Sanderson et al., 1999). While benefits exist for
students of color who have access to college preparation, there are challenges and barriers when
students of color do not have access to this coursework.
14

Challenges and Barriers to Inequitable Access and Enrollment for Students of Color
When given limited access to college preparation coursework, students of color are faced
with challenges and barriers that could limit their post-secondary success. Sequentially, this
section discusses those challenges and barriers. The review begins with data that highlights the
correlation between schools with higher percentages of minority students and fewer AP courses
being offered. Next, the review identifies disproportionate funding models that exist within
public school districts at the student level, depending on status. Finally, the review explores
additional challenges and barriers that immigrant and refugee students and families face due to a
lack of familial knowledge about enrolling in and attending college. The review, in its totality,
does not represent a comprehensive list of all challenges and barriers that exist for students of
color as it relates to accessing college preparation and coursework.
Less College Preparation Access for Students of Color
Students of color face significant challenges and barriers with accessing and enrolling in
college preparatory courses. In research conducted by Klugman (2013), high schools serving
White and Asian students had higher percentages of AP course offerings and enrollments as
compared to high schools serving predominantly Black and Latinx students. Schools serving
minority students were less likely to offer AP courses altogether as compared to schools with a
predominantly White population (Conger et al., 2009). This promotes inequitable access because
AP courses are “marks of distinction valued by selective colleges” (Geiser & Santelices, 2006;
National Research Council, 2002). Access disparities are not limited to AP classes. Data
documented from previous studies show that enrollment in other college preparation courses
(e.g., honors math, college preparatory tracks) were predominantly filled by White, Asian, and
female student groups compared to other groups (College Board, 2008; Klopfenstein, 2004b;
15

Planty et al., 2007; Reigle-Crumb, 2006; Zeitz & Prathibha, 2005). Access to college preparation
is provided inequitably to schools with majority white students vs. schools with majority students
of color. This is not surprising considering funding models that determine these schools’
funding distribute less funds overall to schools with majority students of color vs. their majority
white peer schools.
Disproportionate Funding Models
Access and enrollment of college preparatory coursework is significantly affected by
disproportionate funding models utilized both nationally and at the state level (Biddle &
Berliner, 2002). In a study of the 2008-2009 fiscal expenditures of public schools in 25 states,
districts in the 95th percentile received, on average, $21,844 per students while districts in the
5th percentile received $8,205 per student, for a difference of over $13,000 per student
depending on demographic (NCES, 2016). Disparities also exist between similar schools.
Research conducted by Carey and Roza (2008) examined the funding of two schools (Cameron
School in Virginia and Ponderosa School in North Carolina) of similar student enrollment size,
and percentage of low-income students attending, less than 350 miles from one another.
According to Carey and Roza (2008), due to different funding algorithms set by the state level,
there was a $7,267 disparity between Ponderosa ($6,773) and Cameron ($14,040) per student
when combining the total allotment per student based on funding from federal, state and local
funding sources. Schools with more resources can provide more resources to students and those
with less can (and then, ultimately, will) provide less (Carey & Roza, 2008). Due to disparate
funding models, schools with large percentages of students of color are typically provided with
less funds to finance programmatic pieces such as college preparatory coursework. Funding
16

models that support disproportionate accessibility of resources have significant implications for
communities of color.
Public schools in the United States work through a system in which the quality of a
school is shaped by the amount of wealth in its school district (Kozol, 1991; Slavin, 1999;
Condron & Roscigno, 2003). Funding disparities significantly affect students of color and school
communities with high percentages of students of color. At the federal level, schools that have an
enrollment of 90% or more students of color spend at least $733 less per student per year than
schools that have an enrollment above 90% White students due to federal funding structures
(Spatig-Amerikaner, 2012). For other schools that do not fall over or above the 90% levels, at
least a full $344 more is spent on every White student than on students of color. Access to
college preparation is not equitably funded for all students, with students of color accessing the
least. For students and student of color from immigrant families, there are further challenges that
limit college preparation access.
Additional Challenges for Immigrant Families
Finally, immigrant students of color face additional, unique barriers to accessing and
enrolling in college. Cooper et al. (2018) considered the “academic pipeline problem” that limits
the pathway that immigrant, low socioeconomic, and racial minority students face in accessing
higher education. As of 2015, 1 out of every 4 Americans was an immigrant or had an immigrant
parent and this number will continue to rise (Wambu et al., 2017). For immigrant families,
adjusting to their new culture and learning a new language are challenges that are often difficult
and confusing to navigate. Some of these immigrants are undocumented, with this number
representing 65,000 students in classrooms across the country (Kantamneni et al., 2016).
According to Kantamneni et al. (2016), undocumented students face many barriers due to their
17

unique status when attempting to access resources needed to prepare for an enroll in college.
Only 5-10% of this population attend college, due to being unable to afford tuition, and inability
to provide proof of legal residency, and gaps in knowledge about how to prepare and enroll in
college (Kantamneni et al., 2016). In a study by Alon (2009), research indicated that social class
had a “direct and persisting impact on enrollment and access...to postsecondary success.” Other
barriers that may affect both immigrant and nonimmigrant students of color include a lack of
familial knowledge about attending college and navigating the application and enrollment
process (Alon, 2009; Uy et al., 2019; Wright & Boun, 2011). In summary, Farmer-Hinton (2008)
points out that, due to policies and practices that are racialized, families of color have been
disproportionately affected as it relates to educational access and attainment. Because of this,
students of color and their families have been left without personal networks that can share with
them the detailed and specific expertise and resources they need to enroll and access
college (Farmer-Hinton, 2008). It is important to identify viable and authentic strategies and
interventions to support this lack of accessibility.
Strategies and Interventions to Address Equitable Enrollment in College Preparation
Coursework and Programs
There are a variety of strategies and interventions to address the equitable access in
college preparation coursework and programs. Sequentially, this section discusses those
strategies and interventions. The review begins with school districts to focus on the expansion of
college preparation course offerings (e.g., AP IB, etc.) through an identification of funds to
support post-secondary success. Next, the review focuses on the importance of engaging the
community to create personal networks for students of colors that counteract deficit-oriented
perspectives. Finally, the review explores engaging communities of color to identify strategies
18

and interventions that will be relevant and helpful in this area. The review, in its totality, does not
represent a comprehensive list of all strategies and interventions that exist for students of color as
it relates to accessing college preparation and coursework.
Expanding College Preparation Access for Students of Color
School communities across the United States are considering and creating actionable
strategies and interventions to address inequitable access and enrollment in college preparation
coursework and programs (Levine & Zimmerman, 2010). The strategies and interventions
discussed will outline how this can be done through addressing school funding disparities,
creating school models with college preparatory coursework and resources, considering career
academy environments that promote both college and career skill building knowledge, focused
support from high school counselors, and developing of a culturally relevant and responsive
environment that is informed by student voice. Through consideration of these strategies, schools
will be better positioned to provide access to college preparation coursework to all students. One
model focused on building equity and sustainability for students of color is Equal Opportunity
Schools.
Equal Opportunity Schools (EOS) is a program for school districts which is founded on
the Action for Equity (A4E) multi-phase model which is designed to support students of color
and low-income students towards successful experiences in their first AP and/or IB course
(Equal Opportunity Schools, 2021). Of the schools which have chosen to work with EOS
through the A4E model, about 80% of schools continue their partnership with the organization.
According to EOS (2021), this exposes schools to additional strategies and best practice models
which are designed to remove barriers and create welcoming environments specifically for first-
19

time and/or low-income students of color. This includes, but is not limited to, the equitable
expansion of AP classes within diverse schools (Spatig-Amerikaner, 2012).
AP classes are common college preparation coursework opportunities for high school
students (Minnesota Department of Education, 2012). In 2009, the U.S. Department of Education
encouraged school districts to utilize stimulus money to fund the expansion of AP course
offerings to students and to also support with the remedial coursework that may be needed to
prepare students for the rigor of these classes (Klugman, 2013; U.S. Department of Education,
2009). While school reform for funding models at the federal, state, and local level would be
helpful and would alleviate many funding inequities between schools and school districts, it is
important for school districts to identify academic priorities and consider how this aligns to the
funding being provided (Spatig-Amerikaner, 2012). By identifying available funds to support the
post-secondary success of students, school districts will be better positioned to provide
accessibility to students and form school models that provide a community of support.
Personal Networks for Communities of Color
Students of color often lack the personal networks and resources to properly prepare and
enroll in college (Farmer-Hinton, 2008). As such, schools must develop networking and
community models to support students with this knowledge and these models must immerse
students in an environment focused on both academics and social-emotional supports (Farmer-
Hinton, 2008). Research conducted by Means (2019) identifies three implications for highly
supporting students. The first is capitalizing on support from many areas including family,
teachers and school staff, and community/youth-based organizations to encourage students to
prepare, plan, and attain information needed to fulfill college and career aspirations (Means,
2019). Next, Means (2019) stresses that all educators (administration, teaching staff, support
20

staff) must consider how their learning community will disrupt practices and policies that are
grounded in “deficit-oriented perspectives” of students of color and their families. Finally,
educators, community members, and policymakers must redesign college preparatory curriculum
to be more rigorous and comprehensive for students of color at a younger age (Means, 2019).
Additionally, as the need for college preparatory classes increases, districts should also rethink
how they are encouraging low-income students and students of color to enroll in and complete
these courses (Haskins & Kemple, 2009). By creating models to immerse students in academic
and social-emotional support and consider the redesign of culturally relevant curricula,
communities can facilitate the creation of learning environments that support students of color
and their families.
Engaging and Including Communities of Color to Support Students of Color
It is important to include communities of color when determining how to best support
communities of color (Farmer-Hinton, 2008). The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) of 2015
includes an expectation of school district and state agencies to prepare students for both college
and career (Hackmann et al., 2018). In an education environment where there is a continued need
to prepare students for both college and career, some school districts are exploring career
academy models to support the attainment of both skill sets (Brand, 2009). Brand (2009), career
academies are defined as smaller learning environments that typically adhere to the following
guidelines: (a) students take career-focused courses for a minimum of two years which are taught
by a teaching team of varying disciplines, (b) students learn from a college preparatory
curriculum which is aligned to a career focus so students can apply real-world applications, and
(c) students have the ability to interact and learn from other entities in the community such as
local employers, and higher education agencies. Under these conditions, career academies can
21

enhance student learning outcomes and increase employment success for all students, including
students of color (Kemple, 2008). While systems, such as career academies, are important to
providing systemic elements to promote college preparation access, it is equally important that
the people supporting these systems, such as counselors, have the knowledge to support students
through these systems.
School counselors need to be prepared to support the development of the following
domains of every student: academic, college/career, and personal/emotional (Perusse et al.,
2015). Through facilitation of college and career activities that prepare students of color for post-
secondary success, counselors can support students with disseminating information needed to
foster a college-going culture (Mayes & Hines, 2014). Mayes and Hines (2014) identified eight
activities and tools that school counselors can use to prepare students of color and their families
for college: (a) college aspirations, (b) academic planning for college and career readiness, (c)
enrichments and extracurricular engagement, (d) college and career exploration and selection
process, (e) college and career assessments, (f) college affordability planning, (g) college and
career admission processes, and (h) transition from high school graduation and college
enrollment.
To create a learning environment that promotes culturally relevant and responsive
teaching practices, it is important to listen, learn, and act based on the population you are serving
(Jackson & Knight-Manuel, 2019). Therefore, Jackson and Knight-Manuel (2019) identify eight
components which educators who teach students of color must include in their practice. These
components support teachers to develop culturally relevant practices which promote increased
student success in college and career readiness classes. Included in these eight components are
cognitive strategies evaluating sociocultural inequities, transition knowledge linked to strategies
22

for overcoming students’ barriers to access and success, and content knowledge connected to
sociopolitical contexts impacting students of color. Other ways to develop a culturally relevant
and responsive teaching environment include working alongside students to co-create practices
to support students of color. Research shows that by including students in creating changes and
practices to the school environment, schools have seen improved results in social emotional
development (e.g., leadership skills, problem solving skills, life skills, relationship-building)
(Bradshaw et al., 2014). To support the problem of inequitable college preparation for students
of color, it is important to consider these strategies to promote ways to intervene and support
students and families of color.
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework developed for this study builds from the theoretical
framework developed by Bronfenbrenner (1979) and the research and accompanying literature
within this chapter. According to Bronfenbrenner (1979), this theory relies on the biology of the
student as the primary environment that powers their development. Bronfenbrenner’s theory
(1979) highlights the quality and context of the student’s environment as highly impactful to the
student’s development and, as the student develops, their interactions with this environment
results in a complex identity. Due to the student’s growth and change in this environment,
complex circumstances may appear due to the everchanging physical and cognitive structures
within the student’s environment (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). The conceptual framework allows for
the exploration and understanding of the factors influencing the relationship between the family,
school, and community. Within the ecological systems framework, there are many layers that
influence and affect an individual and, in this study, these layers interact to create the culture of
accessibility to college preparation at school as they pertain to this study. This study will
23

primarily focus on the relationships and contexts within the microsystem, mesosystem, and
exosystem of a student’s environment.
Microsystem and Mesosystem
Within the microsystem of the student’s environment, the relationships closest to the
student in their everyday life are critical to their development (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). In this
study, the people in this environment are a student’s family members, school staff, and
community members, including friends and people in personal networks (Farmer-Hinton, 2008).
The relationships between these people all operate within the mesosystem. Elements of the
student’s life which lie within the mesosystem include the personal networks accessible to the
student (Farmer-Hinton, 2008) and the level of engagement within communities of color that
exist (Jackson & Knight-Manuel, 2019) between the family, school staff, and other close
members of the student’s community. Additionally, the intentional expansion of college
preparation coursework (Spatig-Amerikaner, 2012) at the school/district level, paired with the
belief in the capability of students of color to take and successfully complete college preparation
coursework (Sadler, 2007; Dougherty et. al, 2005) within this system aligns with
Bronfenbrenner’s theory (1979). The people within the microsystem and the relationships with
and between these people within the mesosystem are important to understand in the examination
of the situational challenges which operate within the exosystem of the student’s environment.
Exosystem and Macrosystem
The exosystem examines the situational challenges and elements within a student’s
environment (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). In this study, the exosystem layer will highlight factors at
play that affect a student’s accessibility to equitable college preparation coursework and
programs. The elements which operate in the exosystem of this study include the benefits of
24

college preparation access for students of color including increased finances (Haskins & Kemple,
2009) and the evidence that access to college preparation increases accessibility to college
enrollment (Iatarola et al., 2011). Also operating in the exosystem are challenges which include
disproportionate funding models for college preparation coursework by race (Biddle & Berliner,
2002) to support the current disproportionate accessibility for students of color (Klugman,
2013).
In addition to understanding the situational challenges a student faces in the exosystem, it
is equally important to consider these challenges by examining the student’s identity through the
macrosystem. In the macrosystem, cultural identities of the students, such as access to teaching
staff representing the student’s background and the outcomes for students based on this
background, highlight elements that coincide with the macrosystem as aligned to
Bronfenbrenner’s theory (1979). For the purposes of this study, these elements further highlight
components which also lie within the exosystem and macrosystem, including less access to
quality of programs, curriculum, and course pathway opportunities (Spatig-Amerikaner, 2012),
often significantly affected by school funding models in alignment with Affirmative Action
practices (Klugman, 2013). Additional components within this model include systemic barriers
that immigrant families and families of color historically face, such as low wage jobs and
inequitable accessibility to diverse teaching staff and programs, and funding models that prevent
immigrants and families of color from socioeconomic mobility, further highlighting the historical
shifts that affirmative action practices promote (Cooper et. al, 2018; Klugman, 2013;
Kantemneni et. al, 2016). By considering the layers outlined above, this study will focus on the
elements coinciding within the microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, and macrosystem layers as
outlined by Bronfenbrenner (1979).
25

Chronosystem
The chronosystem examines the transitions and historical racial shifts that have occurred
(and continue to occur) for populations of color as it relates to education. According to the New
York Times, in 2018 the Trump administration reversed policies set by the Obama administration
to call on universities to include race as a consideration for admittance in order to diversify their
student populations on campus. The Trump administration defended the dissolution of these
seven Obama administration-created guidelines which supported affirmative action and stated
they were “beyond the requirements of the Constitution.” (New York Times, 2018). Factors,
such as the ones stated above, create changing climates that students and families of color and
schools need to navigate to best prepare students of color for success after high school.

Figure 1
Conceptual Framework

26

Summary
Communities of color have received inequitable access to college preparation courses
which inevitably affect preparedness for post-secondary success (Ahram et al., 2011; College
Board, 2014; Education Trust, 2014; Ford, 2013). This is important because there are a variety of
professional and personal benefits that can result from access to college preparation coursework
and programming (Farmer-Hinton, 2008; Haskins & Kemple, 2009; Sanderson et al., 1999).
Without access to these opportunities, the achievement gap widens, and students of color are
further limited access to these benefits and are faced with challenges to adequate college
preparation (Cooper et al., 2018; Kantemneni et al., 2016; Klugman, 2013). Through identifying
and employing strategies to directly support the college and post-secondary preparation of
students of color in secondary settings, school districts will be better positioned to identify root
causes and create equitable accessibility for all students (Brand 2009; Farmer-Hinton, 2008;
Jackson & Knight-Manuel, 2019; Klugman, 2013; Mayes & Hines, 2014; Spatig-Amerikaner,
2012).
By examining this study through Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory (1979), the
many layers that influence a student’s educational world and access to college preparation will
be examined as it relates to college preparation. Chapter Three presents the study’s
methodological approach and includes a description of the validation process of the assumed
contextual layers that influence this study.

27

Chapter Three: Methodology
This study focused on the accessibility of college preparation and coursework for
students of color at the secondary level. This chapter outlines the research questions and
overview of design, research setting, researcher background, data sources, validity, reliability,
ethics considerations, and limitations/delimitations of the study.
Research Questions
The following questions guided this study:
1. How are school/district administrators working to increase the proportion or number of
students of color in college preparation coursework/programs?
2. What challenges do school/district administrators encounter and how do they address
them?
Overview of Design
The design of the research study was a series of interviews using a qualitative approach
to support and contradict the topic of research (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). School and district
leaders of varying racial backgrounds and job titles participated in interviews which were
transcribed and organized to identify challenges and interventions. This approach supported the
identification of practices and strategies to promote accessibility to college preparation
coursework for all secondary students.
The specific problem of practice of this study is secondary students of color’s equitable
accessibility to college preparation coursework and pathways. The study was conducted within a
single school district and analyzed from a secondary (9th - 12th grade) context. In addition,
district and school leaders were asked about their backgrounds and personal experiences with
28

this problem and were asked for ideas they have that may help support the accessibility and
enrollment of students of color in college preparation coursework.

Figure 2
Data Sources

Research Questions Interview
Method
Document
Analysis
1: How are school/district administrators working to increase the
proportion or number of students of color in college preparation
coursework/programs?
X X
2: What challenges do school/district administrators encounter
and how do they address them?
X

29

Research Setting
This study was conducted in Mount Greenwood Public Schools (MGPS), a pseudonym, a
medium-sized school district in Washington State which employs approximately 3,000 staff
members to serve approximately 25,000 students. The student population represents over 120
different languages spoken and over 67% of students identify as non-white (MGPS, 2017).
The target population for this interview was school and district leaders of MGPS. This
was an appropriate group because these staff members were able to directly lead and support
school or district efforts to promote equitable enrollment in college preparatory courses for
students of color. Participants were recruited based on their positionality and racial background,
with an effort to collect data from varying ages, positions, and racial backgrounds. Additionally,
recruitment efforts were focused on schools with racially diverse student populations.
The Researcher
The researcher of this study was a building-level administrator employed by
MGPS. Identified issues included positionality and ethics. As a current administrator at MGPS,
the researcher would be asking peers (principals and directors) as well as supervisory level staff
(executive and chief-level employees) to participate in the interview process. This was mitigated
because the researcher did not often work directly with many of the targeted participants.
However, because they were peers in the same district, the researcher did have the advantage of
having previously known participants, which was important for a culturally responsive
evaluation (Robinson & Leonard, 2019). Additionally, according to Merriam and Tisdell (2016),
all the participants who were interviewed were at the same supervisory level or higher than the
participant, which eliminated concerns of power and positionality.
30

Data Sources
Interviews
According to Merriam and Tisdell (2016), an interview collecting qualitative data
generally follows a less formalized process, which allows flexibility and the opportunity for a
more natural flow. This framework also allows the opportunity of including follow-up questions
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Administrators were interviewed from six secondary schools and
multiple departments within the MGPS school district. Virtual (due to COVID-19 social
distancing guidelines) individual interviews were anonymously conducted over a two-week
timespan by the researcher and transcribed to study and organize the collected data.
Patton (2002) shares six types of interview questions: experience and behavior questions;
opinions and values questions; feeling questions; knowledge questions; sensory questions; and
background/demographic questions. For this study, the researcher sought to understand the
process and planning methods that secondary school and district administrators employed (or did
not employ) to support college preparation for students of color. The researcher also sought to
organize data based on the participant’s personal experiences and exposure to college
preparation. To collect this information, the types of questions that were used were demographic
questions, opinions and values questions, and sensory questions. Research by Patton (2002)
explains that demographic questions establish the participants’ age, education, and occupation
and identify characteristics of a participant. Additionally, opinion and values questions support
understanding the cognitive and interpretive processes of individuals as it relates to their
opinions, judgments, and values. Finally, sensory questions help identify what is “seen, heard,
touched, tasted, and smelled” and allow the interviewer to enter the sensory experiences of the
respondent (Patton, 2002). These three question types supported the thought process,
31

motivational influences, and environmental influences that shape the establishment of process
and planning methods as it relates to access to college preparation for students of color. All three
types of questions provided a foundation of information in response to the research questions of
the study.
Participants. Participants of this study included district/school level leadership and staff
members who influenced how students were enrolled in courses. This sampling included twelve
administrator-level staff members of varying job positionalities in the district and their
demographic background, with equal representation of White administrators to administrators of
color. These participants made up purposeful sampling that will be recruited based on their
relationship with the researcher and the current district focus on this topic.
Instrumentation. The interview process for this study was conducted by utilizing the
Bronfenbrenner theory and collected qualitative data from individuals to study the level of
impact of group efficacy as it pertained to supporting the enrollment of students of color in
college preparatory coursework (Bandura, 2006). The eighteen interview questions (see
APPENDIX A) collected anecdotal data and sought to identify patterns of practice of district
leaders as it pertained to the support of equitable systems to support college preparation access
for students of color. The content of the interview process collected knowledge of identification
of district utilized strategies, resources, and processes which supported enrolling students of
color in college preparatory courses at equitable rates based on enrollment.
Data collection procedures. The data collection method used in this qualitative study
was conducted interviews. This interview process was conducted in online interviews with
identified participants as the interviewees and the researcher as the interviewer. Interviewees
were recruited based on their direct support and knowledge of the studied work in hopes to
32

cultivate responses that were grounded in validity. The researcher recruited participants (both
building and district administration) by leveraging both the positive relationship of the researcher
with the team as well as the district focus on this topic. The researcher sent a personal email to
each administrator using her personal email with a message that had been previously approved
by MGPS district administration. When needed, the researcher recruited staff through convenient
sampling methods.
Each confidential interview was conducted remotely, via an online conferencing
application, to adhere to COVID-19 social distancing restrictions. Interviews were approximately
one hour in length and answers to questions were transcribed from audio recording. This method
allowed for the interviewee to share detailed descriptions of their experiences, opinions, feelings,
and knowledge (Patton, 2015) as it pertains to the problem of practice in a way that may not have
been as thoroughly collected through a quantitative approach.
Data analysis. Data analysis is a multidimensional process and one that provides
meaning to the data that was collected (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). For the conducted interviews,
data analysis began during data collection. The researcher documented their thoughts, concerns,
and initial conclusions about the data in relation to the conceptual framework and research
questions. Once the researcher left the field, interviews were transcribed and coded. In the first
phase of analysis, the researcher used open coding, looking for empirical codes and applied a
priori codes from the conceptual framework. A second phase of analysis was conducted where
empirical and a priori codes were aggregated into analytic/axial codes. In the third phase of data
analysis, the researcher identified pattern codes and themes that emerged in relation to the
conceptual framework and study questions.
33

Document Analysis
The researcher identified, through the process of interviews, key documents to review
and collect data regarding student access and completion of college preparation coursework by
using the content analysis method (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This process, as described by
Merriam and Tisdell (2016), is one of the most often used processes to collect documents and an
“unobtrusive” technique that allows researchers to analyze data that may be unstructured in the
content it may contain or the role it plays in the lives of the students it will track. After being
provided with permission and access to the necessary data platforms, the researcher, over a
week’s time, collected, organized, and reviewed anonymous relevant documents such as student
transcripts and schedule planning documents provided to the researcher without any identifiers.
Participants. Participants of this portion of the study consisted of twelve building and
district administrators with eight serving as building-level administrators and four as district-
level administrators. Additionally, six of the administrators identified as people of color and six
identified as White. Finally, nine of the administrators were female and three were male. For the
data collection of this study, interviews were conducted for qualitative analysis. An email request
to participate in the interview process was sent to twenty administrators by the researcher with
the expectation that, perhaps, not all would be interested in participating. Of these twenty, a
diverse group of twelve administrators responded to the email stating they would like to
participate, so further recruiting was not conducted. For each interview, there were eighteen
questions asked as well as additional follow-up questions when deemed appropriate by the
interviewer. All interview respondents were administrators at MGPS school district and all
interviews were conducted within three weeks of one another. The interviews were conducted
via a live virtual setting and responses were reported without personal identifiers. Responses to
34

the questions, as well as the virtual session, were recorded and transcribed by the researcher. The
results have been placed in a secure location and have not been shared with any external parties.
The responses were analyzed for the qualitative findings of the study.
Data Collection Procedures. The data collection method that was used in this qualitative
study was content analysis associated with the coursework taken and completed by students of
color, such as student transcript and course enrollment data without student identifiers. Relevant
documents were collected from interviewed participants and from school online websites pages.
This information was collected by organizing the guiding questions through qualitative coding
methods to identify patterns of practice to see utilized strategies.
Data Analysis. For this study, the researcher used the content analysis method (Merriam
& Tisdell), to analyze documents aligned to understanding the access that students of color had
to college preparation coursework. The researcher analyzed documents and artifacts for evidence
consistent with the concepts in the conceptual framework.
Validity and Reliability
According to Salkind (2017), validity identifies whether data collection instruments are
measuring the appropriate items. In qualitative research, there are several methods that can be
used to determine validity, including triangulation and member checking (Creswell, 2018). To
maximize credibility, the researcher triangulated their qualitative findings through interviews,
observations, and documents (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Additionally, the interviews were
conducted as anonymously to protect the interviewers and to also support responses that were as
honest and accurate as possible. Participants were chosen based on their direct support and
knowledge of the studied work in hopes to cultivate responses that were grounded in validity.
35

Reliability is also an important consideration in a qualitative research study as it analyzes
the stability of the instrument and the consistency of the respondents’ answers (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). Additionally, reliability examines the consistency of the study results and whether
there was consistency in how the study was administered and how data was collected (Creswell,
2014). For the purpose of this study, there may have been discrepancy in the data when relying
on administrators to self-report processes and access within the district or their building.
According to Bowling (2005), social desirability bias speaks to the “over-reporting of desirable
behaviors, and the under-reporting of undesirable behaviors”. Given that the researcher was
collecting additional data points (e.g., document analysis) and the identities of the interviewees
remained anonymous, these approaches aimed to offset this bias (Bowling, 2005).
Ethics
It was essential that during the data collection and analysis process, the researcher
adhered to established ethical standards (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). According to Glesne (2011),
ethical codes guiding the research process include the concepts of informed consent, voluntary
participation, and minimization of unnecessary risk. An essential element of this study was
closely following the guidelines of informed consent. For this study, the researcher provided
their proposal to the Institutional Review Board (IRB) for approval. Prior to this, the researcher
received permission from MGPS to conduct the intended research within their school district.
The researcher explained the purpose of the study and did not coerce or force participation, as
participation was understood by the stakeholder group as voluntary (Creswell, 2014).
Consent was established with the participants during the interview process. Additionally,
a request to access documents was also shared with district leadership to receive consent. The
researcher worked with the superintendent’s office to communicate with administrators and ask
36

for voluntary participation. When conducting interviews, the researcher explained that
participation in the study was voluntary and that the participant could stop the interview at any
time and end their participation in the research study (Glesne, 2011). Once the participant agreed
and was willing to participate, the researcher reviewed an information sheet with the participant
with the goal of receiving their consent. Once consent was collected, the researcher proceeded
with the qualitative interview.
There were other factors during the data collection process that were considered. The
researcher demonstrated respect for both the participants and the interview site, was honest and
transparent in all communications and interactions (direct and non-direct) with study
participants, and practiced self-awareness and respect for any power imbalances (Creswell,
2014).

37

Chapter Four: Findings
This chapter presents the findings of the qualitative research study conducted in Mount
Greenwood Public Schools (MGPS), a medium-sized, urban public-school district implementing
purposeful efforts to increase the number of secondary students of color enrolled in college
preparation coursework and programs. The analysis focused on the access that secondary students
of color have to college preparation coursework and the strategies and challenges that district
administrators employ and face when creating this accessibility. While a complete study would
include all stakeholders, for practical purposes, the stakeholder group on which this analysis
focused was building and district-level administrators leading within the same public-school
district.
As such, the following research questions guided this study:
1. How are school/district administrators working to increase the proportion or number of
students of color in college preparation coursework/programs?
2. What challenges do school/district administrators encounter and how do they address
them?
Participants
Data for the participants in this study can be found in Table 1.

38

Table 1
Administrator Participant Background Data
Participant Gender Race Identity Administrator
Abbott Female Member of
Minoritized Group
Building
Burke Female Member of
Minoritized Group
Building
Carr Female Member of
Minoritized Group
Building
Durkin Female Member of
Minoritized Group
Building
Evans Male Member of
Minoritized Group
District
Fitz Female White Building
Geraghty Male White Building
Hayes Female White District
Ingle Female Member of
Minoritized Group
District
Jackson Female White District
Karp Male White Building
Lynch Female White Building

39

Research Question 1: How are school/district administrators working to increase the
proportion of students of color in college preparation coursework/programs?
The first research question asked, how are school/district administrators working to
increase the proportion or number of students of color in college preparation
coursework/programs? Through interviews and reviewed student transcripts, the findings
emerged in the following categories: (a) calibration and collaboration, (b) disaggregating all data
by race, and (c) accessibility to college preparation courses/programs for all students. While
other systems and structures for support were shared during the interview process, these findings
were consistent throughout the data analysis. As such, they will be mentioned only in relation to
the three prominent categories: calibration and collaboration, disaggregating all data by race, and
accessibility to college preparation courses/programs for all students.
Finding 1: Calibration Between District Office and School Buildings
Calibration between school district administrators and individual building administrators
is essential to creating college preparation coursework accessibility to secondary students of
color. For an organization to be successful in creating accessible opportunities for all students, it
is important that the organization is calibrated regarding the systems they have in place to
implement these opportunities. This finding will uncover the areas in which MGPS
administrators are calibrated in their efforts, as well as areas in which this is still
evolving. These areas include district and building alignment, utilizing the “courageous
conversations” framework, site equity leadership team (SELT), counseling and college/career
support staff, partnership with students, partnership with families, and partnership with
additional communities of color.
District and Building Alignment

40

As indicated by school district administrators, to create an aligned system that is
calibrated on shared outcomes for students, it is important that district and building leadership
are aligned and working together. This is important to be sure that individual buildings are not
engaging in isolated practices, which can create discourse in equitable student access to college
preparation coursework. Of the administrators interviewed, 12 out of 12 (100%), identified
calibration between the district and schools as a common district practice. When asked about
collaborative practices, while 8 out of 12 (67%) of all administrators identified collaboration as
an overall district practice, 4 out of those 12 (33%), all of which were building administrators,
felt there were areas for continued improvement in relation to how authentic collaboration
practices were. Participant Carr shared, “I have worked in four other districts, and I have never
before been a part of a system that is so aligned. It feels good to know we are all working toward
the same goals.” Participant Karp agreed and shared, “As a seasoned educator in this district, I
have never felt clearer and more aware of what our collective goals are and how we are getting
there.” Participant Hayes highlighted the district’s strategic plan as the guiding force of the
calibration. “Everything we do goes back to that document, and we are finally at a place where
no one is confused about that. It is a driving force that was created by over 2,000 stakeholders.”
“It is obvious when building leaders are not aligned. I think this is a testament to our overall
commitment to be a calibrated organization,” shared Participant Evans. The identification of
highly calibrated efforts to align as a system further highlights the focus to create accessible
outcomes for students as it relates to college preparation coursework. “If you are an
administrator in MGPS, there shouldn’t be confusion about what we are trying to accomplish
here. Our focus is equity for all of our [students] and commonality in how they navigate and
benefit from our opportunities, regardless of race,” Participant Burke shared. Participant Lynch
41

further stated, “Our number one goal is to be sure that our [students] are successful after high
school in whatever path they choose. We know that happens through focused efforts to eliminate
barriers for them while they are in high school to access the necessary information they need to
succeed.” “I very rarely enter conversations with other administrators where we are on different
pages about the end goal. This is due to a concerted effort by the district leadership to get us all
on the same page. It elevates the work and gets us to solutions quicker,” Participant Geraghty
shared. Participant Abbott shared,
We meet consistently as a secondary administrator team in regard to what courses
we are offering and who is accessing them. And we have to answer to that and
identify what practices our teams are putting into place to continue to emphasize
opportunities for our students who are disproportionately accessing.
Practices identified by both district and building administrators that fostered calibration
include: common norms at the beginning of all meetings, work grounded and guided by
research-based practices, leadership book studies, use of multiple common data sources,
principal-led school improvement presentations, and tight alignment to the MGPS strategic plan.
As indicated through administrator interviews and the identification of aligned practices
to support student college preparation course accessibility, MGPS administrators highlighted the
benefits of being in a calibrated system to support this work.
“Courageous Conversations” Framework
MGPS identifies “courageous conversations” as an adaptive approach for leaders to use
when engaging in conversations with staff to support the “why” behind calibration (MGPS,
2020). As highlighted by 7 out of 12 (58%) of administrator interviews, this is a practice that has
been supported by the school district as evidenced by conference trainings, funding for district
42

and building leadership teams, and in administrator professional development during
leadership/principal meetings. Additionally, 8 out of 12 (67%) administrators interviewed
identified the need to have courageous conversations with their department and building teams
and cited a district focus on equity as the driving force behind their ability to do so. This was
identified as a strategy that needs to work hand in hand with conducting conversations around
race as it applies to student access at the course level. Participant Burke shared,
As [woman of color], I can talk to you about the inequities of our data all day.
But, I am having these conversations with a teaching population that is mostly
White, so the learning I have done around conducting courageous conversations
helps me to feel better prepared to frame the conversation.
Similarly, Participant Karp, a White leader, shared “I have grown so much over the years in my
abilities to have conversations around race. I used to fear a courageous conversation, and now I
welcome them. With kids at the heart of the work, I am able to more clearly convey my ‘why’,
which I credit to our work around courageous conversations.” “This is work that moves
buildings, and it is helpful to be supported by the district with continual opportunities to engage
in this learning,” Participant Geraghty shared.
As identified by 9 out of 12 (75%) interviewed administrators, reviewing school or
district data, while framing these conversations in ways that support staff to understand the
“why” of the work, the courageous conversation framework has supported their leadership and
equity teams in better positions to focus on the right data points that drive change in the classes
students of color are accessing. “Our team sticks closely to the framework. We are clear about
the ‘why’ we are doing this work and we root it in research and accurate data around our students
43

who are accessing college preparation opportunities,” Participant Abbott shared. Participant
Durkin added,
I am proud of the work our staff is doing to call out the ‘why’ this work is
necessary. By framing our conversations around race, and this not being a
surprise, we are able to clearly outline our next steps to connect the right students
to opportunities.
The remaining three administrators did not specifically mention courageous conversations as a
strategy their team used, but this does not eliminate the possibility they do.
Framing the “why” in authentic ways, using courageous conversations, is a strategy that
administrators identified as important to guide equity and accessibility work in buildings. This is
important as the district adjusts building leadership practices to more intentionally guide building
equity work.
Site Equity Leadership Team
As indicated through administrator interviews, a promising practice that has emerged
from the 2020-2021 school year is a directive by the superintendent that building principals and
assistant principals combine their site-based leadership team and equity team (historically two
separate teams) to operate as one functioning team called the site equity leadership team (SELT).
Of the administrators interviewed, 10 out of 12 (83%) administrators identified this practice as
being an important shift that will support current and future work to create more well-defined
systems for students of color to equitably access college preparation coursework. This change,
Participant Ingle stated, “...is a direct acknowledgement that equity must be part of the work, not
‘in addition to’.” Participant Lynch shared that this team “must work together to cultivate an
instructional setting that considers equity at the heart of what they do and the decisions that are
44

made for the learning environment.” Participant Fitz stated “This shift highlights that the work
cannot be siloed. Instruction and equity must go hand-in-hand and should not be reviewed in
isolation.” “Making targeted shifts to ensure that instruction and equity are the focus together,
and not separately, is creating much more of a laser focus to this support problem,” Participant
Hayes added. The 2 out of 12 (17%) administrators who did not specifically highlight this shift
were district-level administrators who are not currently leading a building leadership and/or
equity team.
With a shared commitment to merge these teams, MGPS leadership will be able to
collaborate around professional development and processes to promote alignment between
SELTs. As this work grows, it will further support other systems which support calibration and
collaboration between important school teams including the counseling and college and career
specialists’ teams. One way this work is being supported is by representation of counseling staff
on the SELT.
Counseling and College/Career Support Staff
Partnership with staff members who have strong relationships with students is an
essential practice to support accessibility to college preparation. As identified by 12 out of 12
(100%) MGPS administrators interviewed, counselors have direct impacts on the courses that
students access over the course of their high school career and play a direct role in filling classes,
creating schedules, and tracking data as it pertains to college preparation coursework
accessibility for all students. “My counselor team is an essential part of connecting students,
especially students of color. They have relationships and insight into courses that students need
access to in order to support their postsecondary success,” Participant Abbott shared. Participant
Lynch stated,
45

I realized over the years that [counselors] kind of serve as gatekeepers into the
courses and sequences that students take and the advising around those…this is
why we have created alignment in our advising materials...it is all the same
information to eliminate...so it’s not up to chance for people to be doing things
differently. It’s not perfect...but we are well underway in this work.
Participant Carr, a building-level administrator, added “Counselors directly impact the classes
that [students] access. So we, as the administrators, need to be sure we are working in
collaboration with these staff members to further support outcomes.” One way that participants,
specifically 75% of school administrators, highlighted the ways that counselors impacted the
work was to serve on the SELT. “Not only are we no longer isolating instruction and race, but
we have knowledgeable people at the table to speak to and highlight this work at the [student]
level,” Participant Geraghty shared.
Counselors in MGPS meet monthly with the College and Career department and are
trained in both technical and adaptive skills to support students. The principals to whom they
report are also made aware of and receive the same training, so they can support and have
calibrated expectations of how counselors are serving students in many areas, including
accessibility to college preparation supports and programs. In collaboration with this team, the
position of college and career specialist also supports student-focused outcomes as it pertains to
college and career readiness. While 10 out of 12 (83%) administrators identified counselors as
positively impacting student college preparation accessibility outcomes, only 2 out of 12 (17%)
administrators, both building level, identified their counselors as having this ability, but might
not be maximizing this role in their work. Of the ten administrators interviewed who identified
counselors at their school as having positive impacts on student access, they shared similar
46

perspectives which indicated that the counselors at their sites (or district-wide) had the narrowest
focus on individual students and the courses they were taking at that time. Of the administrators
who work in a school setting, 75% (6 out of 8) identified that they have scheduled, consistent
check-ins with their counseling teams to review student enrollment data and determine possible
shifts in classes. These same administrators also identified that they had strong counselors who
were familiar with their students and families. “I don’t know what we would do [without the
counselor]. She is committed to our kids and creates strong relationships that help us to gently
push kids to experiences they may not have otherwise sought out,” Participant Lynch shared.
Of the administrators leading specifically at the district level, 75% (3 out of 4) identified
that, in collaboration with college and career specialists, the counseling department worked
collaboratively with the teaching for learning (TFL) department to create the district course
catalog and identify areas where there was misalignment of course offerings across the district.
Many of these shared practices were a historical shift from years before when counselors
primarily worked in isolation and most of their work was to support the emotional well-being of
students instead of both the emotional and academic, as shared by 12 out of 12 (100%)
administrators interviewed. “This is a very exciting shift, because our counselors have a valuable
perspective that must be included to inform our academic practice [and] the gains we have seen
in practice indicate that,” Participant Hayes shared.
While strong relationships with school counseling staff play an important role in student
accessibility to college preparation coursework, also important are the partnerships that schools
form with the family of the students they support.
Partnership with Students
47

As directed by the superintendent during the 2019-2020 school year, all school sites must
have a student advisory team that meets on a consistent basis to allow students the opportunity to
provide feedback and actively support the planning of improvement measures for the school. As
identified by 12 out of 12 (100%) administrators interviewed, this practice was informative to
their work in creating multiple access points for students to engage in college preparation
coursework and programs. Furthermore, 11 out of 12 (92%) administrators shared that students
have a direct role, when possible, in determining the courses that the school offers. Participant
Burke shared “Our course planning starts with [students]. What classes do they want to take?
This year we offered AP Art Design. It was important to students that any student could access
and take this college-level course.” “After consulting with our [students], my team is always
amazed at the perspective we were lacking. This includes the courses we offer. Often there are
solutions we hadn’t considered that [students] are able to provide viable solutions for,”
Participant Fitz shared. Participant Durkin said,
Our partnership with [students] provides solutions to the problems we collectively
face. I have students of color who are interested in AP classes, but the academic
pathway chosen for them from middle school, and sometimes earlier, has
prevented them from taking the required prerequisite courses. We are tackling
this head on and identifying solutions with students at the table.
Of the 11 out of 12 (92%) administrators who identified that they included students in
course planning, the same administrators also identified this practice as a strategy to strengthen
the relationships between school administration and student leaders and shared that this process
provides valuable perspectives that administrators must consider when supporting both student
academic and emotional needs. “We always say we learn so much when we talk to our kids. But
48

we get busy. When we prioritize this time, it comes back to us twofold and incredibly influences
the way we lead,” Participant Lynch shared.
As identified by the administrators interviewed, partnerships with students either
increased college-level courses offered or has provided viable solutions to present additional
opportunities like this in the future. In addition to partnerships with students, administrators
identified the need to partner with families.
Partnership with Families
Partnership with families is an essential practice to support accessibility to college
preparation. As identified by 12 out of 12 (100%) administrators interviewed, there are district
aligned strategies that are facilitated district-wide to intentionally partner with families around
student success and accessibility for college and career readiness and preparation. The district
supports these opportunities in a variety of ways.
Student Led Conferences, or “SLCs”, are a twice-yearly practice at all MGPS schools
that replaced previous traditional parent teacher conferences. In this model, the student is the
facilitator of the conversation around their progress and the teacher is there to provide support
and context. In the 2019-2020 school year, MGPS had 99% participation district-wide (MGPS,
2020). “SLCs are an important time for us to interact positively with families and share with
them the opportunities that we have available to their students,” said Participant Karp.
Participant Geraghty shared, “It is helpful to have this established practice because we try to
maximize this opportunity with parents to teach about opportunities, but also collect feedback
from them.”
Another practice that MGPS uses district-wide to partner with families around college
preparation is a variety of yearly events designed to educate and engage students and their
49

families about post-secondary education and experiences. These events, as shared with families
on the district website and included in promotional materials (posters, flyers, emails) include
Life after High School, District Senior Support Nights, College and Trade Career Panels, Maia
Learning Drop-In Nights, College Virtual Visits, FAFSA Nights, and High School Planning
Night (MGPS, 2020). “These informational nights are so well done we promote as much as
possible to families that have as much information as possible to support their child,” Participant
Fitz shared.
Finally, families must have the opportunity to engage in two-way communication with
their schools and provide feedback on needs. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the MGPS
superintendent mandated that all MGPS principals would engage in twice a month Parent Zooms
to share updates and provide direct feedback on what the school community could improve on.
Additionally, the superintendent has also conducted twice a month session of their own. “These
sessions have been so eye-opening, and I can’t imagine discontinuing them after we return to
schools,” Participant Abbott shared. “The amount of informative feedback I receive to improve
our school is invaluable to our team.”
Engaging families is a practice that promotes partnership with the home to support
college preparation. While authentic relationships with families is an important partnership, the
most invaluable relationship we have is with the students we serve.
Partnership with Additional Communities of Color
Partnership with communities of color is an essential practice to support accessibility to
college preparation coursework. As identified by 12 out of 12 (100%) administrators
interviewed, there are district aligned strategies that are facilitated district-wide to intentionally
partner with communities of color around student success and accessibility for college and career
50

readiness and preparation. While the goal is for district staff members to provide comprehensive
support and advocacy of students of color, there are additional community-based organizations
that district secondary schools partner with to provide an additional level of support to students
of color.
The most prominent organization that partners with all MGPS secondary schools is non-
profit Communities in Schools (CIS). CIS is an organization that works directly inside individual
schools to build meaningful relationships that empower students (focusing on students of color)
to succeed both in and out of school (CIS, 2021). This support is accomplished through a
caseload of students (primarily students of color) assigned to the coordinator. Administrators
identified that CIS coordinators assigned to their sites supported students in a variety of ways
including serving on the master scheduling team, working directly with administration to support
goals for students of color, identifying and supporting barriers to attendance with students on
their caseload, and locating resources to support low-income families of with basic needs. “What
I appreciate most about CIS is the true partnership my team has with our coordinator. We work
in collaboration to identify barriers and empower student voice and outcomes,” Participant
Lynch shared. Participant Abbot added “We work hard to create opportunities for students of
color to provide input on decisions, including course offerings. There are times we are more
successful because we partner with CIS [to gather student input].” “CIS is a true partner in the
work at [my school]. There are times their support gets us just a bit closer to meeting our goals to
partner with students about course offerings,” Participant Durkin also shared.
Finding 2: Disaggregating All Data by Race
As highlighted in the MGPS Strategic Plan (2020) core beliefs, the district states that
“We believe that we must intentionally collaborate and use data as a guide to improve our
51

practice” (MGPS, 2020). This section will unpack the various ways that MGPS staff, at both the
district and building level, use disaggregated data to inform decision making and processes that
impact students’ preparedness for college in the areas of graduation rates, transcript tracking and
course enrollment, and student attendance and participation.
Graduation Rates
Since the year 2012, MGPS has seen consistent growth over an 8-year period in student
graduation rates, with the district graduating 70% of students (who entered as freshman) in 2012,
to 88% in 2020 for an overall total growth rate of 18% (MGPS, 2020). This data, which is
disaggregated by race, is used at the both the district and building level to inform decision-
making and create next steps to support continued growth in this area across all races.
“This work begins in the Superintendent’s office. Cabinet level staff meet to review both
historical and current trend data and then make recommendations for goals across district
departments and schools,” Participant Ingle shared. All district-level participants (4 of 4)
indicated that this data is reviewed throughout the calendar year to determine where areas of
support are needed to positively impact both building and district graduation rates. “We take this
data very seriously and work to identify what resources we can use to ensure we are supporting
students where they are at individually. We then work in collaboration with the buildings to
understand where we can provide support,” Participant Ingle further shared. Next, identified
cabinet-level district leaders lead graduation assurance meetings at each secondary building each
month to review this data at the building level. Participant Jackson also shared that during these
meetings, district and building leadership, as well as the building counselor and college and
career specialists, meet to review historical graduation data, current trend graduation data, and
the common tools used to track this work. Each month, building leaders and support staff have
52

deliverables to share, which include updated building graduation trend data (as indicated via the
tracking tool), in order to collaborate on next steps for the coming month. Processes and
conversations are race-based, as reflected by the action steps and goals determined by the team.
Of the six secondary school tracking tools reviewed, 6 out of 6 (100%) included goal statements
specifically around race data. “The goals are then shared with the superintendent and the cycle
continues each month,” Participant Ingle stated.
As shared by the interviewed participants, to create a clear and organized system for
collecting and sharing data that is accessible by many administrators to engage in this work, the
MGPS assessment team creates uniform spreadsheets on the Microsoft Teams platform. This
document folder allows all leadership-level staff (including cabinet, department, building, and
SELT) to access and review the data that each school shares. These spreadsheets are utilized and
additionally reviewed during graduation assurance meetings that include district- and building-
level staff. This process is then recreated by the building principal at their site equity leadership
team (SELT) meeting.
Once collaboration occurs between district and building leaders, building administrators
continue this cycle with their SELT, as shared by Participant Evans. “Student achievement and
graduation trend data, broken down by race, is consistently reviewed by the SELT, as prepared
by the district assessment department, to create building goals and to inform next steps around
instruction, student access, and achievement,” he shared. Of the eight building administrators
interviewed, seven (88%) indicated that this data was consistently reviewed. “Reviewing data by
race is the expectation and that is because that is the only way we are uncovering the targeted
work that needs to be done,” Participant Fitz shared. Participant Abbott also shared, “Guiding
our teams to do this did not happen overnight. But it is now just ‘what we do’ and our goals and
53

strategies to get there are so much more strategic and successful to support all [students].” “I
have been in this district for [a long time] and it was when we started prioritizing this work to the
race and student level that I saw us making real, authentic moves toward [student] success,”
Participant Lynch shared. Participant Geraghty, the remaining building administrator who
identified his team as not yet fully engaged in this work to create school improvement goals
indicated, “We would like to get there. I am finding that I am still onboarding my primarily
White teacher team to understand the ‘why’ conversations like these need to occur. I wish we
were further along.”
Another area where district and building leaders collaborate is around retention rates of
former students who attend post-secondary schools. “The reason I know what we are doing is
working is that my team is seeing continued success in the number of students who are entering
and staying in a post-secondary school environment,” Participant Fitz, a building administrator,
shared. Of the eight building administrators interviewed, 5 out of 8 (63%) identified this data as
informative to their work, while 3/8 did not mention this data point whatsoever in their
experiences. This data collected and shared with district and building leaders, by race, provides
an additional layer to the graduation growth successes to show that, not only are more students
graduating, but the students that are graduating are also succeeding in their post-secondary
experiences at higher rates. Participant Jackson, a district leader, shared “This is not a data point
that we are obligated to collect, but we wanted to be sure that the successes we were seeing were
valid. Our goal is not only to graduate kids, but to be sure they can succeed on their own once
they graduate.”
By focusing on the graduation rates of students throughout the year by race, MGPS is
focusing efforts to create action plans for all students. This work begins at the district level
54

which then supports the facilitation at the building level and continues throughout buildings as
led by building administration. Another layer to this work occurs through continued
collaboration at the district and building level focusing on student transcripts.
Transcript Tracking and Course Enrollment
As highlighted by district transcript data and participant interviews, transcripts serve as a
resource to identify gaps of inaccessibility within a school system as well as identify the specific
courses/programs that students of color may not be accessing (MGPS, 2020). As identified by
the Education Trust in 2016 (NCES, 2016), inequities to access college preparation coursework
exist within student transcripts. To eliminate inequities at this level, participants highlighted that
they must directly focus on these gaps and create action plans to change course within their
learning environments.
According to MGPS transcript data pulled for the 2019-2020 school year, provided to the
researcher by the MGPS assessment department, 87% of MGPS high school students had
transcripts that reflected college preparation coursework. Of this 87%, only 43% represented
students of color who had transcripts that reflected college preparation courses, despite 67% of
students identifying as a race other than White. Of the twelve administrators interviewed, all
participants, when provided with this data by the researcher, identified this as an equity issue
within the district and highlighted emerging practices which were started prior to the COVID-19
pandemic and are continuing to occur at both the district and building level.
In the 2018-2019 school year, after reviewing this data with district leadership and
identifying this as an equity issue, the MGPS school superintendent contracted a consultant to
support MGPS district and SELT teams to identify inequities at the transcript level and create
action steps to eliminate these gaps within their departments/schools, as shared in participant
55

interviews. When prompted, this was shared by all interviewed participants who were employed
by the district during this school year. According to participant interviews, prior to social
distancing requirements due to COVID-19, district and building administrators at the secondary
level met with the consultant quarterly to engage in cycles of inquiry concerning transcripts of
students across the district and in individual schools. Also evident from the interviews, this work
has been particularly significant to the administrators interviewed as 12 out of 12 (100%)
participants highlighted this work as impactful to the work of their leadership and master
schedule teams. Participant Abbott shared, “We first reviewed national data and then zoomed in
to our local MGPS data. Our data was embarrassing and highlighted the extreme inequities that
exist for our students here at MGPS.” Participant Jackson, a district-level administrator, stated,
The first time we went through the exercise of looking through [student]
transcripts by race to identify patterns of course taking, it was very unsettling.
Why had we not done this before? I was very uncomfortable sitting with the data
in front of me. It represented our work. It highlighted for us the inequities that we
were supporting within our own school and caused us to rethink how we were
connecting [students] with courses.
In each of the interviews it was clear that this work caused administrators to reflect on the
practices within their departments and schools and replicate these cycles of inquiry with their
SELT. Of the school administrators interviewed, 6 out of 8 (75%) reported that, by focusing on
student experiences at the individual transcript and schedule level, teams were better prepared
and focused to create master schedules that allowed for multiple entry points for students of
color to access college preparation coursework and programs. Participant Burke, a building-level
administrator, shared,
56

We had to rewrite how we did this work. Clearly our previous practices, though
well intended, were harming our kids of color. We took this new information and
reconstructed how we built our master schedule and how we considered our kids
of color through each component of the master scheduling process.
“Our principal teams knew we could not return back to our buildings and create siloed practices.
We worked first in collaboration with one another to determine how we would then support this
work in our buildings,” Participant Carr stated. Participant Geraghty highlighted, “This work
created a jolt of energy in our admin team and we knew we needed to shift practice in a big way.
So that’s what we did and are continuing to do.”
Reviewing student transcripts by race is an emerging practice that 12 out of 12
administrators (100%) identify as impactful to the work they are leading at school sites. Another
practice that all building-level participants identified to support student success, by race, is
tracking enrollment of students in college preparation coursework in individual classes.
In addition to tracking student access to college preparation coursework at the transcript
level, 7 out of 8 (88%) building administrators identified that their building teams additionally
collaborate to review racial enrollment data in courses to track and identify which students are
taking which classes to better identify areas where class enrollment is disproportionate by race.
Though this process, as reported by individual building leaders, varies in practice at each
building, 7 out of 8 (88%) building administrators identified that this process informs and
prompts conversations and next steps to right-sizing enrollment in individual classes. Participant
Carr shared, “We meet monthly as an admin team and counselors to review data and determine
‘Who’s on first’ to have conversations with individual students. We often find that students
thought [a particular class] ‘wasn’t for them.’” Of the administrators interviewed, 7 out of 8
57

(88%) also shared that reviewing this data for trends allows them to have conversations at the
student level to provide students with the option of a class it is believed they would be successful
in. The remaining building administrator did not highlight this as a practice at their school, but
also did not indicate it wasn’t happening, either.
By identifying individual classes where individual students may be successful and having
direct conversations to support their enrollment, secondary schools in MGPS are attempting to
right-size disproportionate class enrollment by race. Another important factor to this work
closely is monitoring student attendance and participation in all classes, including those classes
which prepare them for college.
Student Attendance and Participation
As identified by MGPS administrators, attendance data is an additional important data
point used by building teams to identify whether students are accessing the necessary
information needed to prepare them for college. As previously mentioned, MGPS identifies data
as a guide to improve practice. This core belief acknowledges that multiple data points are
necessary to unpack the full range of student needs (MGPS, 2020). If students are not engaged
and participating in school, then their chances of succeeding will be significantly impacted
(Banks, 2008). To collect comprehensive data in these areas, MGPS collects and collaborates on
the following attendance data: daily attendance, student led conferences, and college and career
events.
In accordance with district policy and as identified by 12 out of 12 (100%)
administrators, each of their school sites has a functioning attendance team which meets monthly
to review student attendance data, by race, and create individualized action plans for students
who are not attending or who need support to attend school more regularly, as indicated by the
58

MGPS Attendance Team Handbook. The individualized plans are documented and reviewed, in
cycles, at monthly attendance meetings. “This team consists of school administrators, a district
liaison, support staff, and teaching staff,” Participant Geraghty shared. From this meeting often
comes opportunities to partner with the student and their family to review their class schedule
and determine next steps for support. This data is also presented twice a year to the
superintendent’s team, by the school principal, to identify areas of success and areas of growth
for each building site. This practice, as identified by principal participants, helps to drive areas
of improvement in their attendance data. “It is a priority of our district to have our [students]
coming to school. This is a data point I am held accountable for and that I hold my team
accountable for,” Participant Karp shared.
Another data point to which schools are held tightly is student-led conference (SLC) data.
As previously mentioned, with a yearly goal of 100% attendance, school teams are encouraged to
intentionally work together to engage students and their families in focused conversations about
student success and support. Additionally, attendance at district college and career events is also
tracked to monitor the families who are participating so school teams can provide additional
outreach, if needed. Participant Hayes shared,
At all these events, we have district college and career staff who take attendance,
by name, at all entry points. This information is then shared directly with the
building college and career specialist at each site, so they can follow up with
those who attended and, more importantly, meet with those who did not attend to
share the information they missed.
Tracking attendance and participation and planning for how to engage families when they
attend events is a promising strategy to provide families with information they may need to
59

support their student to pursue college readiness opportunities. However, schools must also have
accessible entry points for all students to be able to access college preparation coursework and
programs.
Finding 3: Accessibility to College Preparation for All Students
As highlighted by participant interviews and district documentation, to participate in
college preparation coursework and programs, all students must have accessible ways to engage
in this work with equitable entry points. One way to accomplish this is to have direct access
points for students of color to enroll in these types of courses and/or programs. This section
discusses the opportunities and access points that have been established and highlights key
components of this structure including a guaranteed and viable curriculum, district course
catalog, and whole district/school college preparation frameworks.
Guaranteed and Viable Curriculum
Of all the administrators interviewed in this study, 12 out of 12 (100%) identified the
district guaranteed and viable curriculum (GVC) as a strategy that ensures all students receive a
fair and accessible education. A GVC provides students access to a comprehensive, equitable,
rigorous, and standards-based curriculum in core content subjects that is consistent across all
traditional school sites. “Our GVC really helped to ‘even’ the playing field in regard to the
instruction and embedded strategies that all students receive. It ensures consistency of content
that we were previously lacking as a system,” Participant Ingle shared. Over the past five years,
MGPS’ curriculum department has worked alongside district departments and teachers to create
and implement a GVC. The MGPS GVC is a district-wide curriculum for core content classes
that was created by district teachers for district teachers (MGPS, 2020). This ensures that district
students, regardless of the school they attend, receive access to the same curriculum and
60

strategies and follow a two-week pacing guide so that, should they need to move between
schools, they will be no more than two weeks ahead or behind content they are familiar with. All
traditional schools in the district utilize the GVC as their main curriculum resource as this is a
tightly-held agreement based on shared decision-making between district leadership and the local
teacher’s union. While the GVC is not yet adopted for the honors or AP-level classes, it provides
all students with a rigorous curriculum to prepare them for college. Additionally, 8 out of 12
(67%) participants specifically highlighted this as an equity issue that the district faced in the
past. Participant Hayes shared, “Prior to developing our GVC, schools across our district used
various curriculum sources and sequences. This created so many inequities of programming for
so many kids, especially students of color.”
By considering and executing a multi-approach system to support all students with
college preparation opportunities, the district ensures college preparation skill building,
regardless of the level of the classes. This is done by considering the district-wide and school-
wide approaches, as well as curriculum, to support all students.
District Course Catalog
During the 2018-2019 school year, MGPS created and implemented a comprehensive
district course catalog which is available to all families, printed in many languages, and serves as
an anchor for district-wide offerings. This ensures consistent communication regarding
opportunities for all students across four comprehensive traditional high schools and 6
comprehensive traditional middle schools. While there may be some variance between individual
schools, all courses have been formally approved and courses cannot be changed, altered, or
removed without a formal approval process, which varies greatly from the process prior to the
formal adoption of the course catalog.
61

Evident from the interviews, the district course catalog is a guiding document strictly
followed by all administration and master scheduling teams in the process of creating a yearly
master schedule. Of the administrators interviewed, 10 out of 12 (83%) identified the course
catalog as an essential, non-negotiable resource that their master schedule teams closely follow
when determining course options for students so that courses are aligned as a district. The two
remaining building leaders did not explicitly mention this as a resource their teams use, but this
is to be inferred as only courses within the catalog can be included in master schedules. “I
appreciate the consistency in courses now. Before, high schools were all over the place with
what they were offering, and it felt competitive. We didn’t know how to keep up,” Participant
Fitz shared. Participant Abbott echoed, “Having consistent and clear course offerings provides
equitable opportunities and better positions us to say, ‘The high school closest to you provides
just as many opportunities to succeed and participate in college readiness.” This consistency
allows for students, regardless of the school they attend in the district, the opportunity to access
the same courses titles and curriculum as their peers. This work, combined with the transcript
tracking efforts previously mentioned, ensure alignment between courses offered and the
processes that schools are putting in place to ensure students of color are directly provided with
the knowledge, opportunity, and accessibility to take college-level courses.
Accessible individual course offerings are one aligned strategy that promotes equitable
access to college preparation coursework, but college readiness cannot occur within isolated,
independent courses. Schools must determine programmatic approaches to support all students
toward college preparedness.
Whole District and School College Preparatory Frameworks
62

Whole district and whole school frameworks prioritize a commitment to supporting all
students with accessibility to college preparedness. In the 2020-2021 school year, MGPS adopted
the Advancement via Individual Determination (AVID) program as a district-wide approach to
supporting all students become college and career ready. The AVID framework creates highly
collaborative, safe learning environments for students with high expectations for students and
staff (AVID, 2020). Prior to the 2020-21 school year, each traditional secondary school had
adopted AVID in varying degrees at their school sites, but in the 2020-21 school year, the
superintendent launched a committed approach to utilizing AVID strategies in a systemized way
across all secondary schools. To promote and support this commitment, district professional
development for teachers and principals has embedded AVID strategies to model the strategies
outlined within the AVID framework. “I am glad we are finally launching AVID as a non-
negotiable support to students. These are strategies I have seen make a difference and prepare
diverse students to apply and stay in college,” Participant Jackson shared. Participant Abbott
echoed, “This was the push we needed to really commit to this framework. With so much going
on it is hard to prioritize what is best and I think our efforts here will go far.”
Each traditional secondary school in MGPS has historically adopted a college and career
“whole school” framework between the district-sanctioned options of Cambridge Assessment
International Education Program (CAIEP) or International Baccalaureate (IB). Typically, the
adoption is based on the home high school with feeder pattern middle schools choosing the same
program and the decision making around the selected program is specific to the school site.
These college preparation programs, although different, provide a whole school approach to
supporting students with college preparation strategies and curriculum. Of the twelve
administrators interviewed, nine identified these frameworks as a focused resource to support
63

student college preparation. The remaining three, though familiar and/or running these
frameworks at their sites, did not specifically highlight these frameworks. “There is some
valuable work happening within the Cambridge and IB programs. The district is committed to
supporting the professional development opportunities for school staff to support these
frameworks,” Participant Ingle, a district administrator, shared. Participant Fitz, a building
administrator, shared, “...these frameworks are a great launch pad for including all students in
this work.”
While a consistent, whole district and school framework focused on college preparation
outcomes is a notable strategy, it is important to note this resource also requires many
considerations for building leaders, including other college preparation coursework opportunities
and availability in the master schedule. Another layer of support is found in the curriculum that
is offered to all students in core subjects.
Research Question 2: What challenges do school/district administrators encounter and how
do they address them?
The second research question asked, What challenges do school/district administrators
encounter and how do they address them? Through interviews, observations, and reviewed
artifacts, the findings emerged in the following categories: (a) collaboration, (b) master schedule,
and (c) meeting individual student needs. While other challenges were present, these findings
were consistent throughout the data analysis. Since these findings were consistent between most,
but not all, interviews, they will be mentioned only in relation to the three prominent categories
of collaboration, master schedule, and meeting individual student needs.
64

Finding 1: Collaboration
Building administrators of MGPS expressed dissatisfaction with the collaboration
between district and building leaders, specifically as it applied to connecting students with
college and career preparation opportunities. While 8 out of 8 (100%) building administrators
highlighted a strong sense of calibration with district leaders, 6 out of 8 (75%) identified
collaboration as an area that they felt was lacking to be able to properly support their buildings.
Participant Burke, a building administrator, shared, “I understand and know what my district
expects from me. However, there are intricacies at some buildings that don’t always align fully,
and I don’t always feel there is a commitment to understand those differences.” Participant
Durkin agreed that they wished “there were more authentic opportunities to intentionally
collaborate with district leadership so that calibration can be even more genuine.” Participant
Abbott echoed, “There hasn’t been an intentionality I have experienced to bring the principal’s
voice to the table. Yet, we are the ones trying to determine how to create opportunities and that is
difficult without clear direction.” “District leaders meet often with principals, but it is rigid, and
the ‘protocol’ guides discussion to be controlled by the district leaders. I don’t feel I can freely
share my needs and that is frustrating,” Participant Geraghty stated. Meanwhile, 4 out of 4
(100%) district administrators shared they felt that there were strong collaboration opportunities
between district and building leaders. “Everything we do is grounded in collaboration,” stated
Participant Ingle, a district administrator. “There are rarely decisions that are made that do not
include stakeholder voice. It’s just now how we do things.” Participant Evans, another district
administrator echoed, “We cannot do this work without principal voice. We need to be sure we
are considering all barriers that schools may be facing.”
65

This disparity of the data and perspectives between district and school administrator
experiences, regarding authentic collaboration, highlights a clear challenge with all district
administrators feeling a strong sense of collaboration with building leaders and most building
administrators not feeling the authentic collaboration. One specific area of building administrator
feedback called attention to challenges around the master schedule as a tool to support
accessibility to college preparation courses to all students.
Finding 2: Master Scheduling
A secondary school master schedule is a complex system which must incorporate
and consider many components including the number of course offerings a school can offer
students, as well as when they occur during a school week/day. Of the administrators
interviewed, 8 out of 8 (100%) MGPS school leaders identified their building’s master schedule
as a key challenge to providing accessibility to college preparation courses for all students due to
the way the schedule is built, established pathways and tracks they must support, and a lack of
direction from the district office.
Building a Master Schedule
A building master schedule affects the overall course offerings that a school has available
to its student population. Just a few considerations that a master schedule at a school must have,
as it relates to this problem of practice, include number of periods, established whole school
frameworks, and honors/AP level class offerings. Of the building administrators interviewed, 5
out of 8 (63%) interviewed shared that their building master schedule is built as a team effort,
with multiple staff members supporting the process including administrators, department heads,
and counselors. “There are no surprises,” Participant Abbott shared. “We create a skeleton and
then have a clear process for department heads to weigh in. With everyone at the table, staff can
66

better understand the intricate process and understand why decisions are made.” Participant Carr
shared, “This is a multilayered process and we do our best to support all those layers by bringing
people to the table.” Meanwhile, 3 out of 8 (38%) building administrators reported that their
building master schedules are typically built in isolation by the principal and select staff
members review and provide feedback. “I want to get creative, but feel my hands are tied to so
many competing factors,” Participant Durkin stated. “In the end there is only so much I can fill
in, so it is not the collaborative process I would like.” Of the district administrators interviewed,
2 out of 4 (50%) admitted they had a surface level understanding of how master schedules were
built at individual school sites, but said they had a general understanding of how a school
schedule would be created. “I would say I am somewhat removed from this process. I also have
not yet created a master schedule before,” Participant Hayes shared. The remaining 2 out of 4
(50%) district administrators shared they had previously engaged in building a master schedule
in their career.
Despite course offerings intended to be equitable across all grade bands within the
district, the way in which schools are offering courses, within their master schedule, varies
significantly. With the ability, at this current time, to determine the number of periods a student
accesses within a day happening at the building level, there are different practices between
schools. Of the four comprehensive high schools in the district, two have a “four-by-four”
schedule which is an 8-period schedule spread out in every other day fashion, while the other
two have all periods (one with 6, one with 7) offered within a day, according to participant
interviews. This variance in scheduling creates a disparity in total minutes to core content, as
well as access to total minutes of college preparation coursework. Students attending all classes
everyday results in increased access to all content. The same is also true for middle schools in the
67

district. With middle schools offering anywhere from six to eight classes within a given school
day, students then have varied access to core content and college preparation coursework. While
building administrators acknowledge this disparity, they also highlighted the challenges
attributed to this problem.
“It is so difficult to fit everything in. With so many competing factors and a responsibility
to serve them all, something must give. The 4x4 schedule allows us to fit in the greatest number
of classes a student can take so that is what we have to go with,” Participant Abbott shared.
Participant Fitz also shared, “Our state standards for graduation is to complete twenty-four
credits, but in our district, it is twenty-seven. This ensures rich opportunities for our [students]
but then we also must consider the other pathways and tracks that make it difficult…” Participant
Lynch stated, “We are told to make it work, but very few of our direct superiors have worked at
the secondary level, and we can’t just do that. So often we have to cut essential opportunities
because of a lack of support from up top.” Of the eight building administrators interviewed, 5 out
of 8 (63%) agreed with similar responses.
This variance in practice and understanding of how a master schedule is built highlighted
an autonomy that building leaders later expressed frustration with, preferring a top-down model
for how to include all competing factors into an equitable master schedule offering for all
students. An additional challenge, in relation to master schedule challenges, that administrators
identified was the creation of tracks within college preparation pathways.
Supporting Pathways: Tracking and Cost
As shared earlier in the findings, all secondary schools in MGPS are expected to support
the AVID framework as well as one school-selected college preparation program of IB or
Cambridge. Often, although not always, middle schools choose the program that is supported by
68

their feeder high school. These frameworks/pathways require course offerings that school must
fit into their school schedules. Three challenges of these framework/programs, as identified by
building administrators, are the early tracking of students prior to high school, student navigation
of these pathways, and the lack of calibration between schools of how to offer these programs
with fidelity.
Prior to high school, most, but not all, middle school students have access to AVID and
their school selected college preparation program (IB or Cambridge). However, beginning in the
6th grade, some students can take higher level math and ELA classes in alignment to these
programs, based on elementary standardized test scores. These classes serve as tracks that often
divide students academically throughout middle and high school, as highlighted by 6 out of 6
(100%) traditional middle or high school administrators. “By the time they get to ninth grade, so
often their academic trajectory has been set. So, the notion that everyone starts high school with
an even clean slate is inaccurate,” Participant Durkin shared. Participant Lynch shared, “We
really do try our best to review test scores and move students we feel are ready. But, often, they
come to middle school with levels or course pathways in place.” “Inequities exist from the
moment they walk through the door as ninth graders. We are sent a crop of white kids
performing at higher levels than our students of color,” Participant Carr shared. Of the traditional
building administrators interviewed, 6 out of 6 (100%) identified a need to undo the tracking that
happens within elementary and middle school. “The issue is, so many of these tracks are
perpetuated by the college preparation pathway that is supposed to be in place to support all
students...but that is not what we are ending up with,” Participant Karp shared. While 6 out of 6
(100%) traditional building administrators identified both IB and Cambridge as celebrated
69

programs within their schools, they highlighted unintended equities that result from the way
students are accessing these programs. Participant Fitz stated,
So much of how these program offerings show up in our master schedule are due
to the work that is done prior to high school. We then must support the tracks in
place and be sure the sequential offerings of classes students need are within our
schedule. Not offering them would prevent opportunities. It is a cycle we struggle
with, and ultimately students struggle in.
Another concern highlighted by 9 out of 12 (75%) administrators was how the pathways
additionally affect AP course offerings. “It is difficult to offer a robust AP catalog at your school
where you are, literally, trying to plug in courses wherever you can,” Participant Fitz shared.
Participant Abbott echoed, “By the time we consider department schedules and ensure access to
our AVID and IB/Cambridge courses, AP gets the leftover [time slots] every time...which is sad
considering the topic of this study.” Finally, Participant Burke also shared, “We say [student]
voice matters, and I believe it does. But I have kids of color who are coming to me asking for
specific AP offerings and I cannot honor their requests due to a variety of constraints.”
An additional concern identified by the administrators interviewed is the cost factor
associated with supporting third-party frameworks. As Participant Ingle shared, the district is
committed to supporting professional development opportunities for whole school college
preparation frameworks. However, 5 out of 6 (83%) building administrators who identified these
frameworks as important resources also highlighted the challenges to full implementation. “I am
all in on our chosen program. However, the required ongoing PD requires many resources and
scheduling considerations that I greatly struggle to implement” Participant Fitz shared.
Participant Abbott echoed, “These frameworks are owned by businesses that need to make a
70

profit. So, with the number of staffs needing to be trained, specifically by their businesses, this
causes a gap in staff knowledge and implementation.”
College preparation pathways, and the tracks that are created within them, limit the
access that all students must participate in college preparation and coursework. As a part of, and
in addition to, this challenge, school administrators further identified a challenge in supporting
all students and meeting their individual needs.
Finding 3: Meeting Individual Student Needs
Of the school administrators interviewed, 11 out of 12 (92%) identified meeting
individual student needs, as it relates to access to college preparation coursework, as a challenge.
One challenge to this, they collectively identified, were constraints around master scheduling.
“Because there is so much to fit into the schedule already, there is no time available to offer
interventions or acceleration classes,” Participant Burke shared. Similarly, Participant Abbott
shared, “No matter how we try to make it work, it doesn’t. Time is not a luxury that we have to
be creative to meet individual student needs. And often, it is our students of color who struggle
the most.”
One component, as identified by 9 out of 12 (75%) administrators interviewed, are the
differences between college preparation coursework offered at schools across the district.
“Because there is autonomy within the school site, and feeder patterns don’t always align, the
way schools are offering their programs is not well aligned...that’s a next step we are missing...,”
Participant Jackson, a district administrator, highlighted. Participant Ingle agreed, “There is such
variance between program offerings by school. Some have been doing this work for years and
have great gains to show for it. Others are struggling to begin. Where would you want your child
to go?” “There is where we need more eyes and ears from above,” Participant Lynch, a building
71

administrator shared. “We recognize working in silos is not working to meet the needs of our
kids. Let’s work together to change that.”
An additional concern to supporting individual students is the, at times, rigidity of the
district course catalog as it related to offering new courses. With the various programming
opportunities that MGPS attempts to offer, a course catalog that is “held tight” does not come
without some complications. Of the eight building administrators interviewed, 4 out of 8 (50%)
administrators shared that there are times they would like to use student feedback to get creative
with course offerings, but then are not approved or cannot move forward because the class is not
outlined in the course catalog. “I get it, but it is also frustrating. I meet with students and we
identify a class that would provide a college preparation access point in the area of study with a
lot of interest, but we need to quickly abandon the idea because it is not approved,” Participant
Fitz shared. Similarly, Participant Burke highlighted their frustration around rigid course
offerings. “I want partnerships with students to be authentic. But I do feel like my hands are tied
at times because I am supposed to gather their feedback but then I cannot follow through and I
feel they lose trust”.
Summary
Providing accessible college preparation opportunities for students requires calibration
and collaboration between district and building leadership. By creating authentic ways to align,
school leaders will have a clear and aligned vision to prepare students for college. Additionally,
by disaggregating all data by race, district and building administrators will be better equipped to
identify gaps in access as it pertains to racial groups and strategically allocate resources to meet
student group needs. Finally, using curriculum in core classes to provide equitable access to
content that prepares students for college level work positions the district to offer common
72

experiences that have been approved and refined as needed to support student growth and
success.
Despite having strategies in place to provide access to college preparation coursework for
all students, true accessibility for all students does not come without its challenges. One
challenge MGPS building administrators highlighted was a need for authentic collaboration with
district leadership to create equitable opportunities for students across the district. Next,
administrators cited the lack of flexibility within a secondary master schedule as a barrier to
access for students. This, they said, provided the final challenge of being able to meet individual
student needs.

73

Chapter Five: Discussion
This chapter will discuss findings, based on the research, conducted in this qualitative
study as it relates to college preparation access for secondary students of color. These findings
will include the need for authentic partnerships with families, collaboration and calibration with
accountability, and the need for a master schedule framework that allows students to access a
variety of college preparation course options.
Findings
The findings of this study provided a clear connection between both the literature and the
contextual framework for which this study is based on, as well as provide additional
considerations for this focus of study. Of the three main recommendations for practice, there
were strong connections to prior research to support the findings including the importance of
authentic partnerships with students, families, and communities of color. Further
recommendations include school districts creating accountable systems to support accessible
outcomes for students of color and ensuring that college preparation coursework is culturally
relevant and accessible to all students.
The connection between the authentic partnerships with students and families was
highlighted in both the literature and in the process of how the school district and schools are
creating opportunities for partnership to share and gather feedback from communities of color.
As highlighted by Farmer-Hinton (2008), it is important to include communities of color when
decisions are being made as to how best support them. This was particularly noticeable in
gathering student input on course offerings and frequent opportunities to learn and provide
information about college preparation and coursework to both students and
families. Furthermore, the literature points out that, to create a learning environment that serves
74

the intended population and promotes culturally relevant and responsive teaching practices, it is
important to listen and learn based on the population a district is serving (Jackson & Knight-
Manuel, 2019). As Means (2019) points out, this act of listening and learning to support the
population being served, supports school districts to disrupt practices and policies that are
grounded in “deficit-oriented perspectives” of students of color and their families. These aligned
strategies address the macrosystem, mesosystem, and microsystem of the conceptual framework.
The macrosystem represents the students’ and families’ cultures and the need to partner with
students and families for outcomes specific to students of color. The mesosystem identifies the
importance of relationship and the need to provide opportunity to familial representation on
college access and course outcomes as well as the continued importance to provide opportunities
for authentic partnerships and representation from family and community members. Finally, the
microsystem, which includes family, school staff, and community members, is the environment
closest to the child that is typically most influential and impactful to outcomes in their life.
Next, the finding of school districts needing to create accountable systems to support
accessible outcomes for students of color was supported by the literature by identifying the need
for targeted support from the district and individual buildings as represented in disaggregated
racial data. Despite students of color having proportional capability to perform in college
preparation coursework (Dougherty et al., 2005; Sadler, 2007), there are multiple references
from the literature which highlight the disproportionate graduation rates of students by race in
the United States (Cooper et al., 2018; NCES, 2008; U.S. Census, 2010). Additionally, there are
multiple references from the literature that highlight the lack of access to rigorous, college
preparation coursework by students of color as compared to White peers (Abram et al., 2011;
College Board, 2014; Education Trust, 2014; Ford, 2013). This data helps to serve as individual
75

data points to support the identification of interventions, resources, and supports needed for
individual student racial groups. These strategies, as supported by the research, include creating
accountable protocols for ensuring disaggregated data sets are in all decision making to support
students of color. Examples of this data include reviewing the following data sets by race:
transcript course selection and completion by race, course enrollment by race, graduation rates,
and attendance/participation. The findings also point to ensuring the site equity leadership team
(SELT) creates building goals for this data. These strategies were directly supported with the
chronosystem and exosystem levels of the conceptual framework. The chronosystem identifies
that, due to Affirmative Action, shifts in support for students of color are necessary to change
outcomes for students of color. Next, the exosystem identifies situation challenges that exist for
students of color including accessibility to college prep courses, curriculum, and course
pathways.
Finally, the third finding of the need to create systems to support accessibility for
culturally relevant coursework opportunities for students of color was identified by literature in
the need for flexible pathways to multiple access points for students of color within the master
schedule through culturally relevant college preparation content. Students of color are 25% less
likely than their White peers to hold a school transcript reflecting college readiness and 50% less
likely to be enrolled in college preparation coursework (Musu-Gillette et al., 2017; NCES, 2016).
Because of this, school communities in the United States are exploring actionable strategies and
interventions to address inequitable access to college preparation coursework and programming
(Levine & Zimmerman, 2010). Examples of coursework that MGPS employs to support this
disparity include access to multiple college preparation coursework opportunities including a
guaranteed and viable curriculum (GVC), increased Advanced Placement (AP) course offerings,
76

and three whole-school frameworks of International Baccalaureate (IB), Cambridge (CAIEP),
and Advancement via Individual Determination (AVID). Additionally, the research uncovered
that this problem cannot only be solved by classes being available, but that a viable master
schedule must be in place to support the access to these courses and that processes are needed to
engage and enroll students of color in these courses. This finding is supported by the exosystem
level of the conceptual framework that identifies the need to create accessible, college
preparatory pathways for students of color.
These findings, as aligned to the literature and contextual framework, address the
problem of practice by creating a research-based set of strategies for school districts to consider
supporting equitable outcomes for students of color as it relates to access to college preparatory
coursework. These multi-tiered strategies consider the multiple layers and circumstances within a
student’s learning environment to cultivate authentic and culturally responsive opportunities for
students of color.
Recommendations for Practice
Recommendation 1: Creation of Authentic Partnerships with Students, Families, and
Community Members of Color at the District and School Level
This section recommends strategies that both districts and schools can employ to cultivate
authentic partnerships with students, families, and community members of color regarding
accessing college preparation coursework. The recommendations for the district level include
broad, district-wide opportunities for students and families to engage with college preparation
information course taking opportunities. At the school level, recommendations include both
broad, school-side and direct, personalized strategies to meet individual student and family
needs.
77

Districts must create authentic partnerships with students, families, and communities of
color to support a student’s ability to access college preparatory coursework. As Farmer-Hinton
(2008) points out, it is important to include communities of color when determining how to best
support communities of color. To create a learning environment that promotes culturally relevant
and responsive teaching practices, it is important to listen, learn, and act based on the population
one is serving (Jackson & Knight-Manuel, 2019). Means (2019) highlights that support from
family, school staff, and community partnerships is the most important of three areas that will
highly support students and encourage them to prepare, plan, and attain information needed to
fulfill college and career aspirations. These partnerships are particularly important because they
are represented within three important levels of the student’s environment (exosystem,
mesosystem, and microsystem), including the microsystem, which includes the relationships
closest to the students in their everyday life and is critical to their development (Bronfenbrenner,
1979). In this study, the microsystem is composed of a student’s family, school staff members,
and community members.
Authentic partnerships with students are a critical component of authentically supporting
them to access and succeed in college preparation coursework. The MGPS Strategic Plan (2020)
states that, “We believe that our [students] must have a voice, see themselves in their schooling,
and be connected to the adults that teach them.” Of the data collected from interviewed
administrators, all administrators identified that student advisories to leadership were in place at
the district and building levels and meeting regularly to listen and learn from the students in their
learning environments and to understand the barriers they face. In practice, student advisories are
student groups which meet on a consistent basis with district and school leadership to provide
input regarding how the district and/or school is operating as well as provide feedback on the
78

culture/climate of the district and/or school. They work with administrators to co-create policies
or strategies for the school to implement to support the concerns that are identified. Likewise,
these meetings are also opportunities for students to identify things that are positive and going
well so that administrators can be sure to continue replicating this success. Regarding student
access to college preparation coursework, administrators identified that student feedback from
these meetings was and is used by administrators in a variety of ways, with the strongest
evidence supporting the strategies of rethinking and restructuring access points to curriculum,
informing available course offerings, and participating in course planning. This practice is
supported by the work of Haskins and Kemple (2009) who states that districts should rethink
how they are encouraging students of color to enroll in and complete college preparatory
courses. This work allows students of color to be directly involved in the decision-making
process of systems that directly impact their access to college preparation coursework.
Authentic partnerships with parents and guardians allow them to support access to
college preparation coursework, navigate their child’s education, and allow for informative two-
way communication between the school and home. This is especially true for families of color
who have been disproportionately affected by racialized policies and practices regarding
educational access and attainment (Farmer-Hinton, 2008). As outlined in a pillar of the MGPS
strategic plan (2017) “Safe Climate and Strong Relationships with Families and Community”, it
states that the district (and all staff) will embrace families as essential stakeholders in the
education of all students and that staff will cultivate trust and mutual respect through shared
responsibility and decision making for student success, communication, and stakeholder voice.
Additionally, one of the core beliefs of the MGPS strategic plan is “We believe that our families
are critical partners in each child’s learning” (MGPS, 2020). Of the data collected from
79

interviewed administrators, all administrators identified that there are district facilitated
strategies to intentionally partner with families on student success and accessibility for college
preparation. These strategies include parent advisory to the superintendent (which operates
similarly to the previously mentioned student advisories), twice yearly student led conferences
(SLCs), high school planning night, FAFSA support nights, college virtual nights, Maia Learning
support nights, college and career panels, senior support nights, and “life after high school”
night. These events provide both district and school leaders with the opportunity to engage
directly with families regarding college preparation. Additionally, each building schedules a
twice monthly “Parent Zoom” to share and collect information from parents around how the
school can better support students and families. A few specific topics that administrators collect
feedback on, as it relates to access to college preparation and coursework include input on course
offerings, available pathways and tracks (IB/Cambridge), and advanced placement (AP), as well
as any barriers their student may be experiencing to access courses. Post COVID social
distancing requirements, these meetings will be offered both virtually and in-person. This work
allows families to provide direct feedback to the staff members who are directly responsible to
create access to college preparation coursework.
Authentic partnerships with communities of color is an essential strategy to further
support students and families of color to create meaningful relationships with the school
community. Including community members of color will disrupt practices that are grounded in
“deficit-oriented perspectives” of students of color and their families and will support the work
of creating curriculum and policies that are culturally relevant and comprehensive for students of
color (Means, 2019). Additionally, Farmer-Hinton (2008) highlighted the importance of schools
developing networks and community models that are directly within the environment, to provide
80

students with knowledge and focus on both academics and social-emotional support. Data
collected by all administrators highlighted the additional supports within their buildings that are
directly attributed to “Communities in Schools” mentors who are chosen to represent the
populations they are supporting to mentor and support students and their families as they
navigate school and opportunities within the school system. These mentors are included as a
member of the school staff to support and advocate for students of color. While support and
advocacy for students is the responsibility of all staff of the district, this organization provides an
additional layer of support to be sure students and families are supported. They collect feedback
from families and share this information with the school leadership to strengthen systems within
the school community.
Authentic partnerships with students, families, and community members of color is a
multi-faceted way to collect meaningful feedback to inform access to college preparation
coursework for students of color that is culturally relevant and impactful.
Recommendation 2: Create Accountable, Multi-Tiered Systems of Calibration and
Collaboration at the District and School Level to Support Accessible Outcomes for
Students of Color
This section recommends accountable calibration and collaboration between district and
school leaders to create multi-tiered systems of support for students of color. The
recommendation for all leaders (district and school) is to engage in continuous review of
disaggregated data when making decisions about student success. The recommendations for
district level leaders include creating systems that hold district, school, and staff accountable to
this practice, as well as intentional and collaborative, two-way efforts between district and school
leaders in regard to creating systems that will impact their students the most. At the school level,
81

recommendations include collaborative and focused efforts within building leadership equity
teams to make common goals, using disaggregated data, to support student success outcomes.
All of these recommendations must incorporate accountable metrics to ensure collaboration is
occurring in the recommended ways.
School districts must create accountable, multi-tiered systems of calibration and
collaboration to support accessible outcomes for students of color. As stated throughout the four
pillars of the MGPS strategic plan (2017), it is identified that, as a system, MGPS must
intentionally collaborate, have shared responsibility for student success, establish a clear
standard of professional practice and accountability, foster alignment, and meet individual needs
of each student. Additionally, the strategic plan states one of their core beliefs as “We believe
that race, socioeconomics, language, cultural background, and other exceptionalities should not
be predictors of student achievement” (MGPS, 2020). Students who access college preparation
coursework and/or classes are better positioned to enroll in and attend college (Iatarola et al.,
2011). When given the ability to access college preparation classes, students of color do not
significantly underperform as related to their White peers (Dougherty et. al, 2005). As
highlighted by Alon (2009), despite graduating and participating in college coursework at lower
rates then White peers, students of color perform at the same level when provided with support,
opportunity, and access. Therefore, districts must create collaborative systems that hold
administrators and staff accountable to create targeted support and equitable opportunities for
students of color, using racial equity data to create goals and measure success. In MGPS, these
systems have begun starting with the creation of the district strategic plan. This comprehensive
plan, co-created with stakeholders, provides a theory of action, with expectations, for how
stakeholders (leadership, staff, families, students, and the community) can expect to be
82

communicated with, engaged, and supported by the school district. This foundational document
provides stakeholders with a roadmap of how systems and strategies will be identified and
executed by the school district. These systems and strategies are important because they impact
the chronosystem and exosystem in the student’s environment. The impact on the chronosystem
supports the need to shift support to account for outcomes for students of color due to the
historically inequitable practices of Affirmative Action. Additionally, the exosystem lens
supports the need to address situational challenges that exist for students of color as it relates to
accessibility to college preparatory courses, curriculum, and course pathways.
It is essential that district administrators are calibrated on the “what” and “how” to
support outcomes for all students, but especially students of color. In the MGPS (2020) Strategic
Plan, one of the core beliefs states, “We believe that we must intentionally collaborate and use
data as a guide to improve our practice.” District leadership must be clear on what the outcomes
are and how district staff will work together, collaboratively, to get this done. While most
administrators interviewed identified calibration as a district strength, administrators, specific to
the building level, identified collaboration as an area that needed support in order to create
equitable outcomes for students of color. It is recommended that the MGPS leadership team, and
other teams looking to engage in a similar area of study, work collaboratively with multiple
leadership stakeholders to create collaborative, two-way processes to include building-level
voice in the co-creation of systems needed to authentically collaborate about success for students
of color. These processes must be published, revisited, and utilized as norms for how
collaboration will take place to ensure the goal is met.
Equity and leadership efforts must work in alignment, not separately. Historically, all
individual MGPS schools had a site leadership team (SLT) and a separate equity team, often
83

focused on similar goals, but working as two separate teams. The impact of college preparation
curriculum has a greater impact on students of color than for White peers (Adelman, 1999).
Therefore, school teams cannot discuss academics and college preparation access without also
including the impacts of students of color in the same conversation. As such, all SLT and equity
teams within MGPS merged to create a site equity leadership team (SELT) focused on creating
goals for the success of all students, especially students of color. These school teams meet bi-
monthly to review goals and data and identify actionable next steps to continue to work toward
meeting these goals. Most administrators interviewed identified this shift as an important
practice that will support current and future work to create more well-defined systems for
students of color to equitably access college preparation coursework. The shift of merging
together to create a SELT prioritizes the need to make common goals and metrics for student
success, especially as it relates to equitable outcomes for students of color. Additionally, it is
important that these goals are in alignment with district goals and metrics for success to ensure
collaboration and alignment within the school system.
One way to track and measure the access students of color have to college preparation
coursework is to review transcript data as it relates directly to course enrollment. The Education
Trust (NCES, 2016) reported that in 2016, only 51% of Black and 63% of Latinx high school
student transcripts reflected college readiness as compared to White peers at 82%. It is important
that students of color graduate high school proportionately to their White peers and have direct
access to academically rigorous, college preparation coursework that is racially proportionate to
the student population (Banks, 2008). All administrators interviewed were familiar with and have
engaged in inquiry cycles of reviewing transcripts of their students as it related to access for
students of color. Additionally, some administrators at the high school level identified that they
84

also conduct this practice with their school teams. To make this a district and building wide
focus to support students of color, it is necessary to co-create aligned protocols for secondary
schools to use transcripts and data to collect and review data to inform decisions and next steps
for building practice.
Racially disaggregated data, and the continuous review of that data, must be included
when making all decisions about student success. Students of color graduate both high school
and college disproportionately to their White peers as well as enroll in college preparation
coursework at significantly lower rates (College Board, 2008; Cooper et al., 2018; Klopfenstein,
2004b; Planty et al., 2007; Reigle-Crumb, 2006; Zeitz & Prathibha, 2005). To support students
of color to access college preparation coursework by utilizing multiple disaggregated data points,
data sets should include course enrollment by race, graduation rates, and attendance and
participation, as well as any other relevant data in relation to this topic. Additionally, to support
students of color, accountable, published protocols, aligned to the district strategic plan or
mission/goals, must be co-created to ensure that data sets are in all decision-making processes to
support the success of students of color. These protocols must include the previously mentioned
data sets to support the creation of meaningful goals and must be published, revisited, and
utilized to ensure the data goals are met.
To create accountable systems to support students of color, there must be published
protocols and metrics in place to measure the success of calibration and collaboration as it relates
to supporting students of color to equitably access college preparation coursework. Examples of
this include, but are not limited to, creating published norms of how these protocols would work,
with co-created cycles to check in on progress using data such as meeting minutes, administrator
feedback, and student success outcomes. Organizations must calibrate as a system and work in
85

collaboration with one another to be focused on common goals. Once teams are aligned, they are
then better positioned to utilize data to track their success and areas of growth and hold
themselves accountable to shared goals. This includes identifying common goals that are shared
between district leadership, building leadership, SELT, and building staff as to how teams will
communicate, create goals, conduct cycles of inquiry, create actionable next steps, and review
outcomes to inform future decision-making.
Recommendation 3: Create District and School Policies and Procedures to Support
Accessible, Culturally Relevant College Preparation Coursework for Students of Color
This section recommends the creation of policies and procedures at both the district and
school level that support students of color to access culturally relevant college preparation
coursework opportunities. While individual buildings have college preparatory classes and
programs available to enroll in, the master schedule was identified as a barrier to true
accessibility to all of these college preparation courses and programs. The recommendations for
district leaders include supporting the creation of a viable, district-wide master scheduling tool or
framework to ensure optimal accessibility to classes. It is recommended that school leaders
include students of color in the process of engaging and enrolling students of color in available
rigorous courses that will prepare them for college and beyond.
School districts must create policies and procedures to support accessible, culturally
relevant college preparation coursework for students of color. In research conducted by Conger
et al. (2009), schools serving minority students were less likely to offer AP courses as compared
to schools with a predominantly White population. Additionally, enrollment in other college
preparation courses, such as honors or college preparatory tracks, were predominantly filled by
White and Asian students than students of color (College Board, 2008; Klopfenstein, 2004b;
86

Planty et al., 2007; Reigle-Crumb, 2006; Zeitz & Prathibha, 2005). As such, Levine and
Zimmerman (2010) point out the importance of creating actionable strategies and interventions
to support equitable access and enrollment in college preparation coursework and programs.
Therefore, school districts must create systems to support accessibility for students of color. In
this study, these strategies include the creation of a viable master schedule framework and
collaborative processes for supporting curriculum options for students. This work is important
because it impacts the exosystem level of the student’s environment within the conceptual
framework that identifies the need to create accessible, college preparatory pathways for students
of color.
Accessibility to courses for students is highly controlled by a school’s master schedule.
Therefore, the creation of this system must include multiple stakeholders and align to district
expectations for student course taking opportunities. All building administrators interviewed
identified their school’s master schedule as a barrier to providing students of color with equitable
access to college preparation coursework opportunities. This is because, despite many college
preparation course and pathway opportunities being available to students, the disparity between
how schools deliver these opportunities (via their master schedule), results in accessibility issues
for students. This issue, identified by building administrators, highlighted variance in practice,
such as the number of classes a student could take in one day, the state and district course taking
graduation requirements in place, and prerequisites needed to take certain courses (limiting
access to all students). The solution, many building administrators identified, is the need for
authentic collaboration with district partners to calibrate on district priorities and how to
equitably offer opportunities to students from a district-wide approach. By doing this work,
87

building administrators position themselves to disrupt practices and policies that significantly
affect students of color (Means, 2019).
College preparation coursework opportunities must be available to students of color.
Within MGPS, there are many college preparation coursework opportunities that are reflected
within and significantly impact the master schedule. The first is the guaranteed and viable
curriculum (GVC). The GVC is the general education curriculum that was written by district
teachers for the MGPS student population to include college preparation strategies to build
college going skills. Next, all comprehensive high schools within the district offer AP course
offerings. This is also the case for AVID classes, with all secondary classes embedding AVID
strategies school-wide as well as an AVID elective for students to choose from. Finally, each
secondary school has selected either the IB or Cambridge college preparation framework. While
these opportunities are in place, they also each must have access points to students of color and
allow students of color to engage in their coursework without barrier. While these opportunities
are positioned to support all students to access college preparatory courses, there are identified
barriers in place which significantly impact the availability to all students, especially students of
color.
To create access to college preparation coursework opportunities, college coursework
opportunities must also allow students to access courses with minimal barriers. In 2016, the
percentage of students enrolled in AP and IB coursework was higher for White and Asian
students than students of color (Musu-Gillette et al., 2017). Schools must be wary of
“gatekeeping” courses which prevent students of color from accessing necessary college
preparation coursework at a proportionate rate to the White peers (Flennaugh et al., 2017). While
having opportunities is important, flexible pathways and multiple entry points is essential to
88

provide true access to students of color. For AP courses, it is recommended that students,
including students of color, work with the SELT directly and are included in both the course
selection process and the creation of the prerequisites (if any) needed to enroll in a class.
Administrators must work with students to create processes for engaging and enrolling
other students of color in college preparation courses at a rate that is proportionate to the student
population. Most administrators interviewed expressed a desire to engage in this work but felt
that policies and historical practices prevented this from being achieved. This process will ensure
that students have voice in the courses available and are working directly with administrators to
co-create systems of support to support enrollment of students of color. Next, the
IB/Cambridge/AVID framework courses continue to lack students of color in the stand-alone
elective courses. As with processes needed for AP courses, students of color must be
intentionally engaged to review these coursework options and provide feedback. This feedback
will help administrators to better understand how to support enrollment for students of color and
ensure representation and participation and classes. Finally, schools must work collaboratively to
create intentionally flexible access points within their master schedules to allow for proportionate
course enrollment rates. This process and information must be available and shared with all
families, including families of color so they are aware of their accessible options to take college
preparatory courses.
Limitations and Delimitations
Within this study there were limitations and delimitations to consider during the scope of
the study. Limitations are elements of the study which were not in the control of the researchers
and are included in the method, design, and approach of the study (Nenty & Nenty, 2009). In this
study, a limitation is the limited amount of high school principals within the district as there are
89

only six high school principals in the district. While this is not necessarily a small number of
high school principals to have in a given district, to gather a robust sampling of interviews, there
is a limitation to the information that will be gathered directly from building-level
administration. This limitation was off-set by including assistant principals and other building
administrators who are directly involved in the enrollment process. An additional limitation of
the study is the issue of social desirability, as administrators may want to most closely align
themselves to practices that may not be fully occurring in their building in a desire to align
responses with the perceived socially positive qualities and limiting negative qualities (Preti &
Miotto, 2011). The limitations above were overcome by at least four high school principals
agreeing to participate in the study. In the interview process, school leaders appeared to trust the
process and provided straightforward, honest responses that indicated they trusted the
information shared would be kept confidential, as data from one district would not be
generalizable.
Delimitations are the elements in a research study over which the researcher has control
(Nenty & Nenty, 2009). For this research study, limiting the scope of stakeholder participants
was the positionality they held as it related to the research topic at hand. Perspectives and
insights, based on the context of a participant’s role within the district, will limit their ability to
answer questions comprehensively. These delimitations were overcome by asking questions that
related directly to the participant’s role to collect information that most closely related to their
role within the work of the research topic. Through conducting interviews, this allowed the
researcher to obtain additional information from follow-up questions to collect the most pertinent
information.
90

Recommendations for Future Research
To further address this problem of practice, there are recommendations that the
researcher would like to make. The first is to conduct research on authentic systems that exist at
school districts to create community networks of color to support student learning. This research
will attempt to learn how these networks are created and the process that the district used to do
so. The research will also aim to collect outcome data of the impacts of these networks to support
students of color to college preparation coursework. Next, further research is needed regarding
how students, families, and community members of color feel about the efforts to improve access
for college preparation coursework accessibility for students of color. Questions to frame this
research include “Do students, parents, and community members feel partnerships are strong?”
and “Would they agree that efforts in place meet the needs of their student?” Additionally,
literature from Sadler (2007) and Dougherty et al. (2005) highlighted that students of color are
just as capable of succeeding in college preparation coursework as White peers. As such, further
research is needed regarding how schools are measuring student capability to succeed in college
preparation courses and how they are using this information to support increased college
preparation opportunities for students of color. The research will seek to understand how student
capability is measured and how the data is used to inform next steps for student outcomes.
Finally, additional research is needed to collect examples of districts and/or school methods to
incorporate all college preparation opportunities for students within a comprehensive master
schedule that supports access for students of color. The research will focus on how the master
schedule is created, who is represented when the master schedule is created, and how the master
schedule allows for multiple entry points for students of color as it relates to accessing college
preparation coursework.
91

Conclusion
Secondary students of color have faced significant inequities as it relates to access to
college preparation coursework opportunities in public education. This study explored this
accessibility issue and sought to understand how school administrators are working to increase
the proportion of students of color in college preparation coursework as well as what challenges
they encountered and how they addressed them. Because of the research of how the district was
working to increase accessibility, it was found that, according to district and school leaders, the
district of study had strong calibration between the district and schools, strong systems to review
racially disaggregated data, and there were accessible college course-taking opportunities for
students of color. Regarding challenges they encountered, this included collaboration between
district and school teams, concerns about master schedule as a barrier to students of color, and
meeting individual student needs as it relates to accessibility. In turn, three recommendations for
practice were made. The first was to create authentic partnerships with students, families, and
community members of color. Next, accountable, multi-tiered systems of calibration and
collaboration within the district are needed to support accessible outcomes for students of color.
Finally, systems to support accessible, culturally relevant college preparation coursework for
students or color must be in place to encourage and ensure accessible course taking
opportunities.
This study is important because it highlights the disparity of outcomes, based on race, for
students of color in public education as it relates to equitable access to courses that will prepare
them for college. Accessibility to college preparation coursework supports student success in
college, and there are a variety of benefits for people obtaining a college degree including
improved health and life expectancy, increased earned salary, greater rates of employment, and
92

less likelihood to experience poverty (Chan, 2016). Without change in practice, schools are
directly supporting historically harmful outcomes for their student population, specifically
students of color. This study seeks to highlight these inequitable practices and provide supportive
strategies for districts to employ to interrupt these practices and promote the engagement of
students of color and their families in the process.

93

References
Adelman, C. 1999. Answers in the Tool Box: Academic Intensity, Attendance Patterns, and
Bachelor's Degree Attainment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education
Ahram, R., Fergus, E., & Noguera, P. (2011). Addressing racial/ethnic disproportionality in
special education: Case studies of suburban school districts. Teachers College Record,
113(10), 2233-2266.
Alon, S. (2009). The evolution of class inequality in higher education: competition, exclusion,
and adaption. American Sociological Review, (74), 731-755
A VID (2020). Our beliefs. Retrieved November 30, 2020 from avid.org
Bandura, A. (2006). Self-efficacy in changing societies. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Banks, J. A. (2008). Diversity, group identity, and citizenship education in a global age.
Educational Researcher, 37(3), 129-139.
Biddle, B., & Berliner, D. (2002). What Research Says About Unequal Funding for Schools in
America. University of Arizona, Tempe.
Bowling, A. (2005). Mode of questionnaire administration can have serious effects on data
quality. Journal of Public Health, 27(3).
Bradshaw, C.P., Bottiani, J.H., Osher, D., Weissberg, R.P., & Sugai, G. (2014). The Integration
of Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) and Social Emotional
Learning (SEL). In M.D. Weist, N.A. Lever, C.P. Bradshaw, J.S. Owens (Eds.),
Handbook of school mental health: Research, training, practice and policy (pp. 101-118).
New York, NY: Springer.
Brand, B. (2009). High school career academies: a 40-year proven model for improving
94

college and career readiness. The National Career Academy Coalition.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Press.
Bromberg, M., & Theokas, C. (2016) Meandering toward graduation: Transcript outcomes of
high school graduates. Washington, DC: Education Trust.
Cambridge Assessment (2020). About us. Retrieved February 2, 2020 from
http://www.cambridgeinternational.org/about-us
Carey, K., & Roza, M. (2008). School Funding’s Tragic Flaw. Center on Reinventing Public
Education. University of Washington.
Carnevale, A., P., Jayasundera, T., & Gulish, A. (2015). The good jobs are back: college
graduates are first in line. Washington, D.C.: Center on Education and the Workforce,
Georgetown University.
Carnevale, A., P., Jayasundera, T., & Repnikov, D. (2014). The online college labor market:
Where the jobs are. Washington, D.C.: Center on Education and the Workforce,
Georgetown University.
Carnevale, A.P., & Strohl, J. (2010). “How Increasing College Access Is Increasing
Inequality, and What to Do About It.” In Rewarding Strivers: Helping Low-Income
Students Succeed in College. New York: Century Foundation Press.
Chan, R. Y . (2016). Understanding the purpose of higher education: Examining the social and
economic benefits for completing a college degree. Journal of Education Policy,
Planning and Administration, 6(5), 1-40.
Communities in Schools (2021). Retrieved February 27, 2021 from
https://www.communitiesinschools.org/
95

Condron, D.J., & Roscigno, V .J. (2003) Disparities within: unequal spending and achievement
in an urban school district. Sociology of Education. 76(1), 18-36. American
Sociological Association
Conger, D., Long, M. C., & Iatarola, P. (2009). Explaining race, poverty, and gender disparities
in advanced course-taking. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 28(4), 555-576.
Cooper, C. R., Domínguez, E., Cooper, R. G., Higgins, A., & Lipka, A. (2018). Capital,
alienation, and challenge: How U.S. Mexican immigrant students build pathways to
college and career identities. In C. R. Cooper & R. Seginer (Eds.), Navigating Pathways
in Multicultural Nations: Identities, Future Orientation, Schooling, and Careers. New
Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 160, 75– 87.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Creswell, J.W. (1994), Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods
Approaches. 2nd Ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications
Creswell, J.W. & Creswell, J.D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Dougherty, C., Mellor, L. T., & Jian, S. (2006). The relationship between advanced placement
and college graduation. 2005 AP Study Series, Report 1. The National Center
for Educational Accountability.
Equal Opportunity Schools. (2021). Retrieved February 27, 2021 from https://eoschools.org/
Farmer-Hinton, R.L. (2008). Creating Opportunities for College Access: Examining a School
Model Designed to Prepare Students of Color for College, Multicultural Perspectives,
10:2, 73-81, DOI: 10.1080/15210960802039148
96

Flennaugh, T. K., Howard, T. C., Malone, M., Tunstall, J., Keetin, N., & Chirapuntu, T. (2017).
Authoring student voices on college preparedness: A case study. Equity & Excellence in
Education, 50(2), 209-221.
doi:http://dx.doi.org.libproxy1.usc.edu/10.1080/10665684.2017.1301840
Ford, D. Y . (2013). Recruiting and retaining culturally different students in gifted education.
Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
Gamoran, A., & Hannigan, E. C. (2000). Algebra for everyone? Benefits of college-preparatory
mathematics for students with diverse abilities in early secondary education. Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22, 241-254.
Geiser, S., & Santelices, V . (2006). The role of advanced placement and honors courses in
college admissions. In P. Gandara, G. Orfield, & C.L. Horn (Eds.),
Expanding opportunity in higher education: Leveraging promise. Albany, NY: State
University of New York Press.
Geiser, S., & Santelices, V . (2004). The role of advanced placement and honors courses in
college admission. Research and occasional paper series. Berkeley: Center for Studies in
Higher Education, University of California at Berkeley.
Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.) Boston, MA:
Pearson.
Green, K.L., Apuzzo, M., & Benner, K. (2018, July 3). Trump officials reverse obama’s
policy on affirmative action in schools. New York Times.
Greene, J.P., & Forster, G. (2003). Public high school graduation and college readiness
rates in the united states. New York: Manhattan Institute for Policy Research.

97

Hackmann, D.G., Malin, J.R., & Gilley, D. (2018). Career academies: Effective structures to
promote college and career readiness. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational
Strategies.
Haskins, R, & Kemple, J. (2009). A new goal for America’s high schools: College preparation
for
all. Future of Children, Policy Brief.
Iatarola, P., Conger, D., & Long, M. (2011) Determinants of high schools’ course offerings.
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis (33)3, 340-359.
International Baccalaureate (2020). What is the IB. Retrieved February 2, 2020 from
http://www.ibo.org/about-the-ib/
Jackson, I. & Knight-Manuel, M. (2019). Color does not equal consciousness: educators of color
learning to enact a sociopolitical consciousness. Journal of Teacher Education, (70)1,
65-78.
Kantamneni, N., Dharmalingam, K., Tate, J., Perlman, B., Majmudar, C., & Shada, N. (2016).
Dreaming big: Understanding the current context of academic and career
decision-making for undocumented students. Journal of Career Development,
(43)483-497, doi: 10.1177/0894845316633527
Kelly, S. (2009). The Black-White gap in mathematics course taking. Sociology of Education,
82, 47-69.
Kemple, J.J. (2008). Career academies: long-term impacts on work, education, and transitions
to adulthood. New York, NY: MDRC.
Klopfenstein, K. (2004a). The advanced placement expansion of the 1990s: How did
traditionally underserved students fare? Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12(68),
98

1-13.
Klopfenstein, K. (2004b). Advanced placement: Do minorities have equal opportunity?
Economics of Education Review, (23), 115-131.
Klugman, J. (2013). The advanced placement arms race and the reproduction of educational
inequality. Teachers College Record, 115(5), 1-34. Retrieved from
http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://search-proquestcom.libproxy1.usc.edu/docview/
1651849409?accountid=14749.
Kozol, J. 1991. Savage inequalities. New York: Crown.
Levine, P., & Zimmerman, D. (2010). Targeting investments in children: fighting poverty when
resources are limited. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. (Chapter 3)
Mayes, R. D., & Hines, E. M. (2014). College and career readiness for gifted african american
girls: a call to school counselors. Interdisciplinary Journal of Teaching and Learning,
(4)1.
Means, D. (2019). Crucial support, vital aspirations: The college and career aspirations of rural
black and latinx middle school students in a community- and youth-based leadership
program. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 2019, 35(1).
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design
and implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Merriam-Webster, (2020). College Preparatory. Retrieved February 8, 2020, from
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/college-preparatory
Miles, M. B., and M. Huberman. (994). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of
99

New Methods. 2d Edition. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Minnesota Department of Education (2012). Advanced Placement (AP). Retrieved February 2,
2020, from http://readysetgo.mn.gov/RSG/AP/index.html
Mount Greenwood Public Schools. (2020). Strategic Plan.
Mount Greenwood Public Schools. (2017). Six-year outcomes by race and ethnicity.
Mueller, D., & Gozali-Lee, E. (2013). College and career readiness: A review and analysis
conducted for generation next. Saint Paul, MN: Wilder Research.
Musu-Gillette, L., de Brey, C., McFarland, J., Hussar, W., Sonnenberg, W., & Wilkinson-Flicker,
S. (2017). Status and trends in the education of racial and ethnic groups 2017. NCES
2017-051. (). National Center for Education Statistics, Available from: ED Pubs. P.O.
Box 1398, Jessup, MD 20794-1398. Retrieved from
http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest-
com.libproxy1.usc.edu/docview/1968427961?accountid=14749
The College Board. (2014). Advanced Placement: Report to the nation. New York, NY: Author.
The College Board. (2008). The 4th annual Advanced Placement report to the nation. College
Board.
The Education Trust. (2014). Falling out of the lead: Following high achievers through high
school and beyond. Washington, DC: Author.
The Education Trust West. (2013). Falling out of the lead: Following high achievers through
high school and beyond. Washington, DC: Author.
The National Center for Education Statistics (2008). Digest of Educational Statistics. Institute of
Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, D.C. (NCES 2008-022).
The National Center for Education Statistics (2016). Revenues and expenditures for public
100

elementary and secondary school districts school year 2008-2009.
The National Research Council. (2002) Learning and understanding: Improving advanced study
of mathematics and science in U.S. high schools. Washington, D.C.: National Academy
Press.
Nebraska Department of Education. (2009). Nebraska standards for career ready practice.
Nebraska Summit on Career Readiness. Lincoln, NE: Author. Retrieved from
http://www.education.ne.gov/NCE/documents/2012CareerReadinessBookletWEB.pdf

Nenty, H., & Nenty, H. (2009). Writing a Quantitative Research Thesis. International Journal of
Educational Sciences, 1(1), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/09751122.2009.11889972
The Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction. (2020).
Paquette, D. & Ryan, J. (2001). Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory.
http://pt3.nl.edu/paquetteryanwebquest.pdf. (9.9.2007.)
Paolini, A. C. (2019). School counselors promoting college and career readiness for high school
students. Journal of School Counseling, 17(2). Retrieved from
http://www.jsc.montana.edu/articles/v17n2.pdf
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
Perusse, R., Poynton, T.A., Parzych, J.L., & Goodnough, G.E. (2015). The importance and
implementation of eight components of college and career readiness counseling in school
counselor education programs. Journal of College Access, (1)1, 4.
101

Planty, M., Provasnik, S., & Daniel, B. (2007). High school coursetakings: Findings from the
Condition of Education 2007. NCES 2007-065. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Education, National Center for Educational Statistics.
Preti, A., & Miotto, P. (2011). Self-deception, social desirability,
and psychopathology. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34(1), 37.
doi:http://dx.doi.org./10.1017/S0140525X10002487
Reigle-Crumb, C. (2006). The path through math: Course sequences and academic performance
at the intersection of race/ethnicity and gender. American Journal of Education, 113, 1-17
Robinson S., & Leonard, K. (2019) Designing quality survey questions. Thousand Oaks,
CA. Sage Publications.
Sadler, P., & Tai, R. (2007). Advanced placement exam scores as a predictor of performance in
introductory college biology, chemistry, and physics courses. Science Educator, 16(2).
Salkind, N. J. (2017). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics: Using Microsoft
Excel 2016 (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Sanderson, A. R., Dugoni, B. L., Hoffer, T. B., & Myers, S. L. (2000). Doctorate recipients from
united states universities: Summary report, 1999. Doctorate Data Project, Chicago, IL.
Singleton, G. E., & Linton, C. (2006). Courageous conversations about race: A field guide for
achieving equity in schools. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Corwin Press.
Slavin, R. E. 1999. How can funding equity ensure enhanced achievement. Journal of
Education Finance. 24, 519-528
Spatig-Amerikaner, A. (2012). Unequal Education: Federal Loophole Enables Lower Spending
on Students of Color. Center for American Progress.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Gareis, C.R. (2004) "Principals' sense of efficacy", Journal of
102

Educational Administration, V ol. 42 No. 5, pp. 573-585
U.S. Department of Education. (2009). American recovery and reinvestment act of 2009: using
ARRA funds to drive school reform and improvement. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Education.
Uy, P. S., Kim, S. J., & Khuon, C. (2019). College and Career Readiness of Southeast Asian
American College Students in New England. Journal of College Student Retention:
Research, Theory & Practice, 20(4), 414–436.
Wambu, Grace; Hutchison, Brian; and Pietrantoni, Zachary (2017) "Career Decision-Making
and College and Career Access Among Recent African Immigrant Students," Journal of
College Access (3)2
Wright, W.E., & Buon, S. (2011). Southeast asian american education 35 years after initial
resettlement: research report and policy recommendations. Journal of Southeast Asian
American Education and Advancement, 6(1), 1-77.
Zeitz, J. & Prathibha, J. (2005). Academic choice behavior of high school students: Economic
rationale and empirical evidence. Economics of Educational Review, 24, 297-308.

103

Appendix A: Interview Questions

1. How are school/district administrators working to increase the proportion or number of
students of color in college preparation coursework/programs?
2. What challenges do school/district administrators encounter and how do they address
them?

Hi, _______. Thank you so much for
participating in this interview – I am
so thankful for your participation. I
will be asking you questions regarding
your position with the district and
possible impacts/outcomes that might
have. There is not a wrong answer
and this interview will be completely
confidential. If you have any questions
before, during, or after, then please be
sure to let me know. Before we begin,
is there anything I can do to make sure
you are comfortable or answer any
questions you may have?
Interview Question
Potential Probes RQ Q Type
(Patton)
1. Tell me a little bit about your
personal background.

Are there any other
experiences you’d like to
share?

Demographic
2. Tell me a little about your
professional background and about
your current role in the district.

Are there any other aspects
to your role that you’d like to
share?

Demographic
3. What college preparation
coursework were you enrolled in high
school, if any?

How did you feel that
coursework prepared you for
college?
What was the process to
enrolling in this coursework?

Demographic
104

How has your participation
or non-participation in
college preparation
coursework/pathways
influenced the way you view
these opportunities?
4. Describe for me your main
responsibilities as it relates to
connecting students to district course
offerings?

Are there any other
responsibilities you’d like to
share?
How were these
responsibilities
communicated to you?
What resources are available
to you to support this
responsibility?
Probe about college prep
offerings.
1 Sensory
5. Describe for me your main
responsibilities as it relates to
connecting students of color to district
course offerings?

Are there any other
responsibilities you’d like to
share?
How were these
responsibilities
communicated to you?
What resources are available
to you to support this
responsibility?
Probe about college prep
offerings.

1

Knowledge

6. The percentage of students of
color who are enrolled in a college
preparation coursework at your school/
is ____/The percentage of students of
color who are enrolled in a college
preparation coursework in your district
is ____. What do you think about the
What other factors do you
think contribute to this
percentage(s)?
How do you feel about these
outcomes?
1 Knowledge -
Procedural

Demographic,
Opinions and
Values
105

situation? How do you explain the
percentage?

7. What is the process in your
district and/or school to determine
college preparation course selection for
all students?

How are you aware of this
process? How has this been
messaged to you?
Why do you believe you are
unaware of this
information? What factors
do you believe contribute to
this?
1 Knowledge -
Procedural,
Opinions and
Values
8.
SCHOOL: What strategies are in
place, if any, at the building or district
level to support course selection
processes for students of color?
DISTRICT: What strategies are in
place, if any, at the district level to
support course selection processes for
students of color?
Who is responsible to
employ these strategies?
How is equitability
considered?
1 Knowledge,
Opinions and
Values
9. What support is offered to
families to understand the process and
what opportunities to provide feedback
are available?
What role or significance do
you see families playing in
this work?
1 Demographic,
Opinions and
Values
10.
SCHOOL: Which people from your
school community serve on your
master school committee including the
following distinguishers?
- Job Title
- Stakeholder Position (school staff,
parent, community member, student)
- Racial Background
- Age
What kind of community
representation do you have
on the committee?
What recruitment strategies
does the committee use to
cultivate a diverse group of
stakeholders?
2 Demographic,
Opinions and
Values
106

- Gender (if identified)
DISTRICT: Which people from the
district community serve on
committees that focus on course
selection including the following
distinguishers?
- Job Title
- Stakeholder Position (school staff,
parent, community member, student)
- Racial Background
- Age
- Gender (if identified)

11.
SCHOOL: Describe for me the process
of building a master schedule at your
school as it relates to college
preparation coursework and programs?
DISTRICT: Describe for me the
processes you are aware of that schools
use to build master schedules as it
relates to college preparation
coursework and programs?
When does this occur during
the year?
Who is included?
How is this
organized/created?
1

12.
SCHOOL: What courses at your
school are available for all students to
access an advanced, college
preparation course or program?
DISTRICT: What courses at your
district are available for all students to
access an advanced, college
preparation course or program?
What was the process to
develop these options?
What factors contribute to
having available classes for
all students?
What factors contribute to
not having available classes
for all students?
1 Knowledge
107

13.
SCHOOL: How does your school
support equitable access for students
with being placed in college
preparation classes for which they
qualify?
DISTRICT: How does your district
support equitable access for students
with being placed in college
preparation classes for which they
qualify?
How was the
program/intervention
designed?

Who was involved in the
creation of the
program/intervention
designed?
What is the process?
What factors are considered?
2 Demographic,
Opinions and
Values
14.
SCHOOL: How does your school
support equitable access for students of
color with being placed in college
preparation classes for which they
qualify?
DISTRICT: How does your district
support equitable access for students of
color with being placed in college
preparation classes for which they
qualify?
What is the process?
What factors are considered?
2 Demographic,
Opinions and
Values
15. What resources are available to
increase the proportion of students of
color in college preparation classes?

How were these resources
allocated to increase the
proportion?
2

16. What challenges have you or
your team experienced in regards to
providing accessibility to advanced
coursework for all students?
What are you doing to
address the problem (if they
have a problem)?
Has this positively affected
the outcome? If so, why?
Has this negatively affected
the outcome? If so, why?
2 Opinions and
Values
108

What do you believe are the
root causes to these
challenges?
17. How satisfied are you with
MGPS’s efforts to increase the
proportion of students of color who are
accessing college preparation
coursework?
Is there anything other
information you’d like to
share?
2 Opinions and
Values
18. Is there anything else you feel I
should know in relation to this area of
study as it applies to your current
situation?
Is there anything other
information you’d like to
share?

Opinions and
Values

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

First-generation college students and persistence to a degree: an evaluation study

PDF

Organizational barriers to delaying high school start time in independent schools

PDF

The role of historically underserved students’ perceptions of their high school counselor in overcoming the equity gap in college admissions: an evaluative study

PDF

School-based interventions for chronically absent students in poverty

PDF

Facilitation of postsecondary opportunities for secondary students with special needs: an evaluation study

PDF

Closing the completion gap for African American students at California community colleges: a research study

PDF

Connectedness and distance learning: a study of student, teacher, and parent perceptions

PDF

Leadership in an age of technology disruption: an evaluation study

PDF

The impact of college success program on first generation college students in their preparation for college

PDF

Building leaders: the role of core faculty in student leadership development in an undergraduate business school

PDF

Faculty experiences: sense of belonging for sexual and gender minority college students

PDF

Educational resiliency factors contributing to college success for adolescent mothers

PDF

Curriculum and assessment alignment, instructional practices, and the impact on Hispanic/Latino students advanced placement exam achievement

PDF

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

PDF

Calibrating the college preparation bridgeway for independent study program students at Amazing Independent High School District: a multisite evaluation study through the teachers' lens

PDF

The influence of executive leadership on community college completion rates

PDF

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

PDF

Prior learning assessment portfolios: an evaluation study

PDF

Advancing equity and inclusion in higher education: the role of the chief diversity officer and the institution in creating more diverse campus climates

PDF

Students’ sense of belonging: college student and staff perspectives during COVID-19

Asset Metadata

Creator Boline, Caitlin Lavin (author)

Core Title College preparation coursework opportunities for students of color at the secondary level

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 04/08/2021

Defense Date 03/22/2021

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

Tag access,college preparation,OAI-PMH Harvest,students of color

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Hirabayashi, Kimberly (committee chair), Cash, David (committee member), Muraszewski, Alison (committee member)

Creator Email caitlinboline@gmail.com,cboline@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-438321

Unique identifier UC11666548

Identifier etd-BolineCait-9422.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-438321 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-BolineCait-9422.pdf

Dmrecord 438321

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Boline, Caitlin Lavin

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