University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Closing academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students: an improvement study

(USC Thesis Other)

Closing academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students: an improvement study

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content
CLOSING ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT GAP BETWEEN ECONOMICALLY
ADVANTAGED AND ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS:
AN IMPROVEMENT STUDY

by

Charlene Whilby

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

December 2020

Copyright 2020 Charlene Whilby

ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I must first thank God for giving me the strength and tenacity to pursue and complete this
lifelong dream of mine. To my friend and mentor, Dr. Allisa Shepard, you are one of the best
results of this journey. I am forever grateful for your insights, your enthusiasm, your no-
nonsense approach, and the drive you have for us to succeed. I appreciate you. To my mother
Ruth Whilby, family and friends, your incessant check-ins to ensure that I felt supported on this
journey, was sometimes annoying, but was so assuring knowing I had a whole army standing
with me throughout this process, was the wind I needed to carry on. I appreciate you.
Dr. Allison Murasweski, my chair, thank you for your continued guidance, and insightful
feedback that was so necessary to connect and bring this dissertation to fruition. To my
dissertation committee members Dr. Eugenia Mora-Flores and Dr. Jenifer Anne Crawford, I
appreciate the time you have invested and the depth of invaluable feedback you have added to
this body of work. Professor, Dr. Don Murphy, your words of wisdom and your genuine desire
for your students to succeed are admirable, and yes, necessary- even for adult learners.
Finally, thanks to the members of Cohort X. Your support, insights and collaboration
have made this journey so much more memorable, and the wealth of knowledge and experience I
have garnered will forever be etched in my box of memories and manifested in my life’s work.

iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................... ii
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................vii
List of Figures ......................................................................................................................... viii
Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... ix
Chapter One: Introduction of the Problem of Practice .................................................................. 1
Background of the Problem ..................................................................................................... 2
Importance of Addressing the Problem .................................................................................... 8
Organizational Context and Mission ...................................................................................... 12
Organizational Performance Status ........................................................................................ 13
Organizational Performance Goal .......................................................................................... 14
Description of Stakeholder Groups ........................................................................................ 15
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals .......................................................................................... 16
Stakeholder Group for the Study ........................................................................................... 17
Purpose of the Project and Questions ..................................................................................... 19
Conceptual and Methodological Framework.......................................................................... 20
Definitions ............................................................................................................................ 21
Organization of the Project .................................................................................................... 21
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature...................................................................................... 23
Achievement Gap in Education ............................................................................................. 23
Influences on the Problem of Practice: The Effects of Poverty on Academic Achievement .... 24
Socioeconomic Factors Impacting Student Achievement ................................................... 24
Political Factors Impacting Student Achievement .............................................................. 27
Leadership Practices That Impact Student Achievement ........................................................ 30
The Role of Principals in Closing the Academic Achievement Gap for Low-
Socioeconomic Status Students ......................................................................................... 31
Principals’ Leadership styles in Low Performing Schools.................................................. 33
School Culture and Climate ................................................................................................... 36
The Principals’ Role in Ensuring Effective Professional Development .............................. 37
The Principals’ role in Promoting Parental Involvement .................................................... 39
The Role of Principals in Using Data-Driven Decision Making ......................................... 42
Clark and Estes’ (2008) Gap Analysis Framework ................................................................ 50
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences ...................................... 52
Knowledge and Skills ........................................................................................................ 52
Knowledge influences. ...................................................................................................... 52
Motivation......................................................................................................................... 61
Organization...................................................................................................................... 67
Cultural models. ................................................................................................................ 68
Communication. ................................................................................................................ 69
Trust.................................................................................................................................. 70
Buy-in. .............................................................................................................................. 71
Cultural settings. ............................................................................................................... 72
Resources. ......................................................................................................................... 73
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and Motivation and
the Organizational Context .................................................................................................... 75

iv
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 79
Chapter Three: Methods ............................................................................................................ 80
Purpose of the Project and Questions ..................................................................................... 80
Methodological Approach and Rationale ............................................................................... 81
Participating Stakeholders ..................................................................................................... 82
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale ............................................................................ 83
Criterion 1 ......................................................................................................................... 83
Criterion 2 ......................................................................................................................... 83
Criterion 3 ......................................................................................................................... 83
Criterion 4 ......................................................................................................................... 84
Criterion 5 ......................................................................................................................... 84
Criterion 6 ......................................................................................................................... 84
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale ..................................................... 85
Data Collection and Instrumentation ..................................................................................... 85
Interviews ............................................................................................................................. 86
Interview Protocol ............................................................................................................. 86
Interview Procedures ......................................................................................................... 87
Documents and Artifacts ....................................................................................................... 88
Data Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 89
Credibility and Trustworthiness ............................................................................................. 89
Validity and Reliability ......................................................................................................... 90
Ethics .................................................................................................................................... 91
The Role of the Researcher ................................................................................................... 92
Limitations and Delimitations ............................................................................................... 93
Chapter Four: Results and Findings ........................................................................................... 94
Participating Stakeholders ..................................................................................................... 94
Determination of Assets and Needs ....................................................................................... 96
Results and Findings for Knowledge Causes ......................................................................... 96
Conceptual Knowledge ..................................................................................................... 97
Knowledge influence 1 ...................................................................................................... 97
Knowledge influence 2 .................................................................................................... 104
Procedural Knowledge .................................................................................................... 116
Knowledge influence 3 .................................................................................................... 116
Results and Findings for Motivation Causes ........................................................................ 123
Self-Efficacy ................................................................................................................... 123
Motivation Influence 1 .................................................................................................... 124
Expectancy-Value ........................................................................................................... 134
Motivation Influence 2. ................................................................................................... 134
Results and Findings for Organization Causes ..................................................................... 141
Cultural Models............................................................................................................... 141
Organizational model Influence 1. ................................................................................... 141
Organizational model Influence 2. ................................................................................... 144
Organizational model Influence 3. ................................................................................... 147
Cultural Settings .............................................................................................................. 154
Cultural Setting Influence 1. ............................................................................................ 154
Summary of Validated Influences........................................................................................ 161

v
Knowledge ...................................................................................................................... 162
Motivation....................................................................................................................... 163
Organization.................................................................................................................... 163
Discussion ........................................................................................................................... 163
Chapter Five: Recommendations and Solutions ....................................................................... 166
Purpose of the Project and Questions ................................................................................... 166
Introduction and Overview .................................................................................................. 167
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences ................................................ 168
Knowledge Recommendations ........................................................................................ 168
Introduction. .................................................................................................................... 168
Conceptual knowledge solutions. .................................................................................... 171
Procedural knowledge solutions. ..................................................................................... 174
Motivation Recommendations ............................................................................................. 175
Introduction. .................................................................................................................... 175
Self-efficacy influence written as example above. ........................................................... 177
Expectancy value influence written as example above. .................................................... 179
Organization Recommendations .......................................................................................... 180
Cultural models influence written as example above........................................................ 184
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan ................................................................... 192
Implementation and Evaluation Framework .................................................................... 192
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations .............................................................. 193
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators .......................................................................... 195
Level 3: Behavior ............................................................................................................ 198
Critical behaviors. ........................................................................................................... 198
Required drivers. ............................................................................................................. 201
Organizational support. ................................................................................................... 204
Level 2: Learning ............................................................................................................ 205
Learning goals. ................................................................................................................ 205
Program. ......................................................................................................................... 205
Evaluation of the components of learning. ....................................................................... 207
Level 1: Reaction ............................................................................................................ 208
Evaluation Tools ............................................................................................................. 208
Immediately following the program implementation. ....................................................... 209
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. .................................................. 210
Data Analysis and Reporting ........................................................................................... 210
Summary ......................................................................................................................... 211
Limitations and Delimitations ............................................................................................. 211
Future Research .................................................................................................................. 212
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 213
References .............................................................................................................................. 216
Appendix A Interview and Document Analysis ....................................................................... 232
Appendix B Interview Protocol ............................................................................................... 238
Appendix C Information Sheet for Exempt Research............................................................... 242
Appendix D Call to Action Letter ............................................................................................ 244
Appendix E Observation Protocol ........................................................................................... 245
Appendix F Blended Evaluation .............................................................................................. 247

vi
Appendix G Dashboard Snapshot Sample ............................................................................... 249

vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Organizational Mission, Global Goal and Stakeholder Performance Goals ................... 16
Table 2 Knowledge influences, Types, Assessment for Knowledge Gap Analysis ..................... 60
Table 3 Assumed Motivational Influences and Assessment for Motivational Gap Analysis ....... 66
Table 4 Organizational Influences ............................................................................................. 74
Table 5 Matrix Reflecting Principal Criteria .............................................................................. 95
Table 6 Types of Professional Development Principals Believe Are Important to Closing
Achievement Gap .................................................................................................................... 103
Table 7 Number of Principals and Responses Relating to Instructional Leadership Practices ... 113
Table 8 Number of Principals Engaging in Particular Strategies for Data-Driven Decision
Making ................................................................................................................................... 122
Table 9 Principals Reasons for their Confidence or Lack of Confidence. ................................. 133
Table 10 Number of Principals and the Strategies They Employ to Provide Professional
Development for Teachers ...................................................................................................... 139
Table 11 Assumed Knowledge Influences Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data ........... 162
Table 12 Assumed Motivation Influences Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data ............ 163
Table 13 Assumed Organizational Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data ....................... 163
Table 14 Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations ...................................... 169
Table 15 Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations ....................................... 177
Table 16 Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations .................................... 181
Table 17 Organizational Mission, Global Goal and Stakeholder Performance Goals
(repeated) ................................................................................................................................ 195
Table 18 Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes ...................... 196
Table 19 Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation ............................. 199
Table 20 Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors ........................................................ 202
Table 21 Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program ...................................... 207
Table 22 Components to Measure Reactions to the Program ................................................... 208

viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Conceptual framework: Interaction of stakeholder knowledge and motivation within
organizational cultural models and settings................................................................................ 78

ix
ABSTRACT
The increasing disparity in household income has expanded the academic achievement
gap between students from economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged
households (Hanushek, 2019; Owens, 2018). This improvement study employs the Clark and
Estes (2008) gap analysis framework to examine the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
barriers that prevent K-12 principals from implementing effective strategies to close the
academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged
students. The purpose of this study is to identify the strategies and resources that are necessary to
close the academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and economically
disadvantaged students. A qualitative study in the form of semi-structured interviews and
document analysis was used to gather data from a sample of twelve K-12 principals who serve in
school districts with 40% or more of the student population qualifying for free or reduced meals
(FARMs). The findings from the study will be used to support schools and districts in their quest
to close the academic achievement gap.

1
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION OF THE PROBLEM OF PRACTICE
There is an increasing academic gap between students of high-income families and
students from low-income families (Michelmore, & Dynarski, 2016). Reardon (2011) conducted
a study using multiple surveys to determine gaps in reading and mathematics achievement of
students in the 90
th
and 10
th
percentile of the family income distribution and found that
“achievement gaps among children born in 2001 are roughly 75 percent larger than the estimated
gaps among children born in the early 1940s” (p. 95). Subsequently, in 1974, the students at the
income median were functioning below those at the 90
th
percentile (Hanushek, 2019). Hence, the
achievement gap in standardized test scores between economically disadvantaged students is
currently 40% greater than it was 25 years previously (Reardon, 2011).
Longitudinal data reveal that gaps among economically disadvantaged students are large
(Michelmore, & Dynarski, 2016). Research shows that children born into the top fifth income
distribution bracket are two times more likely to end up in the middle class or better in their
adulthood when compared to those children born in the bottom fifth (Isaacs, Sawhill, & Haskins,
2008). Moreover, a study conducted by the National Assessment of Education (2015) shows that
only one-third of students are proficient in mathematics and reading; low-income students’
achievement revealed a three years gap behind their peers by the eighth grade. Sampson,
Sharkey, and Raudenbush (2008) found that growing up in a highly economically disadvantaged
neighborhood diminished verbal ability by the equivalent of missing a year of school. One of the
ways in which neighborhoods may affect children’s educational achievement is through their
connection to local schools. Reardon’s (2016a) investigation of more than 200 million state
accountability test scores confirm that students in wealthy districts increase one more year of
proficiency than students in the poorest districts. Thus, economically advantaged Americans and

2
economically disadvantaged Americans are residing, learning, and growing their children in
progressively distinct and unequal worlds (Hanushek, Peterson, Talpey, & Woessmann, 2019).
The widening dispersal in household income is enlarging skill gaps between students from
economically advantaged and students from economically disadvantaged families (Hanushek et
al., 2019; Owens, 2018).
Although there has been some improvement in achievement levels of students in under-
resourced and underfunded schools, these students still trail a great distance behind their peers in
meeting basic academic achievement in reading and mathematics (Becker & Luthar, 2002).
Additionally, Owens (2018) noted that there is a large achievement gap between students of low
socioeconomic status and those from high-income families; due to income disparity among
school districts, which generates inequality in the economic and social resources available in
economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students’ school contexts. Thus, the
achievement gap between students of low-income families and students from high-income
families in urban schools continues to widen.
Background of the Problem
There is a great body of research that suggests that an academic achievement gap exists
between economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students. The Supreme
Court’s 1954 Brown v. Board of Education ruling forced policymakers and researchers to closely
examine the trends in school segregation (Reardon & Owens, 2014). However, students are more
separated by income across schools and districts today when compared to 1990 (Reardon &
Owens, 2014). Even though the achievement gap has been in existence from the beginning of
formal public-school education, researchers have uncovered cognitive developmental theories
that are linked to socioeconomic status (Reardon & Owens, 2014).

3
The 1960s War on Poverty propelled Hart and Risley (2003) to embark on a journey in
order to intercept early to cripple the effects poverty was having on children’s academic growth.
Forty-two families participated in the study include; 13 high-income families, 10 families of
middle socio-economic status, 13 of low socio-economic status, and 6 families who receive
welfare (Hart & Risley, 2003). The research revealed that 86% to 98% of words recorded in
children’s vocabulary mirrored the vocabulary of their parents; and that children living in
poverty are exposed to less than a third of the words heard by children of higher income families
(Hart & Risley, 2003). This means that a child from a high-income family will experience 30
million more words within the first four years of life than a child from a low-income household
(Hart & Risley, 2003). Unfortunately, this achievement gap continues to widen as the years
progress, allowing marginal growth for economically disadvantaged children and accelerating
the growth for economically privileged students (Hart & Risley, 2003). Other researchers also
found that children’s early language exposure influences their language skills, cognitive aptitude,
and academic outcomes, and huge gaps in language exposure are linked with family
socioeconomic status (Romeo et al., 2018). Socioeconomic status signifies the social and
economic capitals available to a person or a particular group of people, and students from
economically disadvantaged backgrounds hear fewer and less complex words and sentences than
their more economically advantaged peers (Hart & Risley, 2003; Rowe, 2008). Using at-home,
real-world audio recorders, the researchers simulated behavioral findings that higher
socioeconomic status is associated with greater language experience as well as verbal aptitudes
in children within the age ranges of four and six years (Romeo et al., 2018).
Poverty is an external factor that impacts students’ in-school experiences and the types of
results they produce (Milner, 2013). Employing the critical race theory as an analytic tool,

4
Milner (2013) elucidated how structures of oppression, marginalization, racism, inequity,
dominance, and discrimination are persistently extant, and tightly woven in the fabric of the
policies, practices, organizations, and systems in education that have significant implications for
student achievement. Children learn when opportunities are provided for them to learn; and gaps
in opportunities equate to achievement gaps (Carter & Welner, 2013). Unfortunately, the harsh
reality is that educational practices can neither be considered equal or equitable; due huge
disparities between students’ social, economic, historic, and educational opportunities, which act
as impediments and institutional structures that block opportunities and success, even when
students attempt to work hard (Milner, 2012). Low socioeconomic plays a crucial role in
students’ educational outcomes. The longer economically disadvantaged students remain denied
equal access to opportunities, the inequality exacerbates the unfavorable effects on economically
disadvantaged students, making it difficult to catch up in succeeding generations (Carter &
Welner, 2013). Students living in economically disadvantaged households might be susceptible
to health and nutrition challenges that impact their ability to function in school. These students
have a lower attendance rate than their peers, are more transient, tend to be tardy for school, and
pose difficulty staying focused on learning and interacting with peers (Milner, 2013).
Economically disadvantaged students rely on the school to give them needed resources that they
do not get outside of the school setting to support their growth and development (Delpit, 2012;
Milner, 2013). Research shows that economically disadvantaged students are more reliant on the
schools to assist them with functions such as understanding, navigating and negotiating, and
even how to operate in school; these dependencies are not as common among their economically
advantaged peers (Milner, 2013). Research indicates that these initial gaps in student
achievement have important long-term implications on the academic prowess of students. While

5
schools cannot immediately change the socio-economic status of students, principals play a
pivotal role in ensuring that every student receives high-quality education irrespective of their
background, zip-codes, or the socio-economic status to which they are identified. Therefore, it is
incumbent upon school leaders, in particular school principals, to ensure that schools create and
implement structures, programs, and instructional strategies that are specifically designed to
meet the needs of students and close the academic achievement gap for low-socioeconomic
students within their schoolhouses.
The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 was enacted in response to the growing
need to close the academic achievement gap among groups of students such as those from low-
income families, ethnic minorities, and students with disabilities (Jennings & Renter, 2006).
NCLB sought to increase student achievement among all students and close the academic
achievement gap by setting a goal to have 100% of students proficient in reading and
mathematics by 2014 (Darling-Hammond, Noguera, Cobb, & Meier, 2007). NCLB was credited
for disaggregation of test data by subgroups which placed the spotlight on the poor performance
of students who would have gone unnoticed if only general data were examined (Jennings &
Renter, 2006). Additionally, by mandating schools to ensure all students are taught by qualified
teachers, the law has encouraged recruitment efforts in states where low-income and minority
students have experienced a cyclical exchange of inexperienced, untrained teachers (Darling-
Hammond et al., 2007).
The implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act provided some proof of improved
student achievement within some low-income schools. Research confirmed that students in
concentrated areas of poverty were able to demonstrate academic growth regardless of their
socio-economic status (Masumoto & Brown-Welty, 2009). However, more in-depth analyses

6
have found that rapid gains in education results stirred by 1990s reforms have stalled under
NCLB, with math increases approaching a halt and reading on the decline (Darling-Hammond, et
al., 2007). Moreover, the law failed to address the deep educational disparities that plague the
nation (Darling-Hammond et al., 2007). It did not help that at a time when the percentage of
Americans living in severe poverty has increased to a 32 year high, NCLB’s approach to
improving low-socioeconomic children’s school was by threats and levying sanctions, as
opposed to providing the purposeful investments in education and welfare, such effort warranted
(Darling-Hammond et al., 2007).
Eventually, in December 2015, the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) was signed into
law. This law replaced the No Child Left Behind Act and is designed to hold schools accountable
for student achievement while ensuring educational equity for all students so they can become
productive, engaged citizens, who are prepared for 21st century college and careers (Darling-
Hammond et al., 2016). However, the disparity in the achievement gap among students of low-
socioeconomic status continues to be a permanent fixture in the education realm. Income has
become disproportionately dispersed in the United States in the last generation, and this unequal
distribution has contributed to the academic gap (Hanushek et al., 2019). Research has unveiled a
myriad of factors such as low expectations for student achievement, poor teacher preparation,
and limited family involvement, which contribute to this imbalance, but none has been identified
as the sole culprit (Williams, 2013). Even with the ESSA law in place, students of low
socioeconomic status still continue to fail at alarming rates. Disproportionality exists with the
number of inexperienced teachers serving in economically disadvantaged schools; research
shows that students served by teachers with five or more years of experience are more likely to
demonstrate three to four months gains in reading over the course of an academic year (Milner,

7
2013). Unfortunately, these opportunity gaps do not afford economically disadvantaged students
to experience these gains. Additionally, teachers who work in economically disadvantaged
schools are more prone to be absent more frequently when compared to teachers who work in
other schools; this causes economically disadvantaged students to receive instruction from
substitute teachers who are often not trained in the content matter or possess the pedagogical
skills (Milner, 2013). Oftentimes, teachers who work in economically disadvantaged schools are
not committed and lack persistence; after graduating from college, these teachers serve in these
high poverty schools until other opportunities become available, they transition to “more
desirable” schools (Milner, 2013). Moreover, a disparity exists with the number of teachers who
are teaching outside of their area of certification in economically disadvantaged schools (Milner,
2013).
However, more recent research has revealed that some low-income majority schools have
been able to successfully raise student achievement through intentional practices of school
principals (Beard, 2018). Principals play a key role in creating structures for schools; their
unique position allows them to be able to hire teachers and staff that suit the needs of students,
deploy resources, and provide guidance (Beard, 2018). Principals are responsible for creating
and maintaining the climate and implementing structures necessary for every student to be
successful in school, irrespective of socioeconomic status. School principals play innumerable
roles which have a direct effect on teachers, and the structure and culture of the school (Bellibas
& Liu, 2018). Effective school principals are aware that teachers must be involved in the process
of determining the best approaches necessary to meet school goals, based on the varied needs of
students (Hardie, 2015). These principals build teacher capacity on an ongoing basis because
they share the view that students who are deprived of highly effective instruction from competent

8
teachers, will withdraw from the learning process, even if they still remain in school (Beard,
2018). These principals see parental involvement as crucial to students’ academic success, and
they are cognizant that not all parents are proportionately equipped with the necessary resources
to participate in school (Turney & Kao, 2009).
Importance of Addressing the Problem
The problem of closing the academic achievement gap between economically advantaged
and economically disadvantaged students is important to address for a variety of reasons.
Educational achievement impacts many adults’ trajectories. Over the last decades, there has
been a drastic increase in college-completion rate among children from economically advantaged
families, while the completion rate of students from low-income families reflects slight
movement (Bailey & Dynarski, 2011). Furthermore, students from economically advantaged
families account for the majority of enrollment at the most prestigious universities (Reardon,
Baker, & Klasik, 2012). Additionally, test scores are initial forecasters of educational
achievement and income in adulthood: a difference of a standard deviation in test scores in K-12
schools is equivalent to a five percentage point variance in college attendance and a nine-point
variance in income at age twenty-eight (Chetty, Friedman, & Rockoff, 2011).
Moreover, economically disadvantaged children experience lower levels of educational
achievement than economically advantaged children, and low achievement in school has
negative repercussions on students’ academic prospects and socio-economic status (Erikson,
Goldthorpe, Jackson, Yaishf, & Cox, 2005) and long-term penalties on society (OECD, 2016).
Leveraging longitudinal data from low-income majority Michigan Public Schools, Michelmore
and Dynarski (2016) found that students from low-income families have the lowest test scores
while students from high-income families have higher test scores. The study found that over 50

9
percent of students in low-income families in the eighth-grade score 0.69 standard deviation
lower than students who were never classified as economically disadvantaged. When the
researchers compared students, who were consistently economically disadvantaged, to those
students who were never economically disadvantaged, the academic achievement gap increased
considerably. The difference in test scores between students who were never classified as
economically disadvantaged and those who were consistently disadvantaged was 0.94 standard
deviation (Michelmore, & Dynarski, 2016). Children who stayed one year in low-income
families (as determined by eligibility for free or reduced-price meal) scored one-third of a
standard deviation below those who were never classified as economically disadvantaged
(Michelmore, & Dynarski, 2016). This gap broadens by 0.08 standard deviations for each
additional year the student remains in the economically disadvantaged subgroup (Michelmore, &
Dynarski, 2016). Therefore, if the problem is not addressed, educational success and
achievement gap between high- and low-income children may eventually lead to greater
discrepancies in future outcomes, such as employment opportunities, neighborhood residence,
criminality, and health issues; thus, the income achievement gap has come into view as an
increasing problem that needs to be resolved (Owens, 2018; Reardon, 2011).
Additionally, low academic performance decreases financial stability and promotes
financial discrepancies between those who operate at higher rates in school and those who do not
(Michelmore, & Dynarski, 2016). Using data from Early Childhood Longitudinal Study-
Kindergarten Class of 1998-1999 (ECLS-K) to capture greater disparities in economic resources
and educational performance, Michelmore and Dynarski (2016) postulated that in kindergarten,
students who will spend nine grades in economically disadvantaged subgroup, by eight grade are
already poorer than children who will spend just a few years in the economically disadvantaged

10
subgroup. The study shows that the mean income decreases with each additional year a student
spends in the economically disadvantaged subcategory (Michelmore, & Dynarski, 2016). For
instance, students who were never classified as economically disadvantaged, family income
stands at an average of $112,000 in third grade, while students who are classified for only one
grade, will have an average income of approximately $64,000, whereas, those children who have
been classified as economically disadvantaged for five grades will earn an income of $28,000.
Hence, the number of grades spent in a low-income family serves as a proxy for the level of
income (Michelmore, & Dynarski, 2016). The researchers found that the achievement gap is
comparable to that between children in the 90
th
percentile and 10
th
percentile of the income
distribution identified by Reardon (2011). Accordingly, the result from the survey revealed that
students who are consistently economically disadvantaged, are more susceptible to reside in a
single-family household, share a household with more siblings, and have lower educated parents
compared to students from high-income families (Michelmore, & Dynarski, 2016). Thus, the
achievement gap exists as a result of the presence of opportunity gaps. Therefore, education debt
is the inescapable schooling resources that should have been invested in economically
disadvantaged students, the deficiency of which results in a variety of social problems, primarily
crime, low productivity, and minimal wages (Ladson-Billings, 2006). The structural changes
must be addressed in order to eradicate the education debt which has implications for one’s
standard of living, and the quality of education the public expects for the majority of its children
(Ladson-Billings, 2006). In the words of Ladson-Billings (2006), “the cumulative effect of poor
education, poor housing, poor health care, and poor government services create a bifurcated
society that leaves more than its children behind” (p.10). This evidence highlights the importance
of principals providing students of low-socioeconomic status the opportunities necessary to close

11
the academic achievement gap and prepare students for the success they need to effectively
navigate life. Consequently, if the disparity in education between the rich and the poor persists,
parents will be at risk of bequeathing their children a society in which the American Dream-the
expectation that one can excel through education and hard work is no longer an option (Reardon,
2011). In addition to hard work, family background assists in determining one’s economic and
social hierarchy; thus, children are more likely as adults to wind up in the same income and
status level as their parents; thus, increasing the odds of a generational cycle of poverty (Corak,
2006).
Additionally, if strategies are not implemented to narrow the increasing inequality in
education outcomes—between the economically advantaged and the economically
disadvantaged—schools will no longer be viewed as the symbol of equalizer they are prescribed
to be (Reardon, 2013). While schools cannot exclusively or instantly change the economic status
of students, with proper leadership guiding instructional approaches, deploying resources,
motivating teachers, and engaging parents; school principals can become a part of the solution
(Reardon, 2011). Furthermore, a reduction in the number of low-performing students will allow
schools to achieve their attainment target, thus improving the education system’s performance
and promote educational equity, since low performers disproportionately represent students from
economically disadvantaged families (OECD, 2016). Moreover, economically disadvantaged
students are held to the same academic standards as their economically advantaged peers,
therefore, it is paramount that the academic achievement gap is closed for students of low-
socioeconomic status, in order for schools to foster environments that promote educational
equity so that all students are able to reach the zenith of their potential, irrespective of their
socioeconomic status.

12
Organizational Context and Mission
Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE) serves over 1,400 schools across 24
public school systems. According to the MSDE Report Card, for the school year 2018-2019,
Maryland public schools had an enrollment of 896,837 students and a 93.5% attendance rate.
Additionally, MSDE experienced a graduation rate of 86.86%, while 8.4% of students accounted
for the dropout rate. The student population is very diverse; of the 896,837 students, 2, 379
students are American Indians or Alaska Native; 59, 611 students are Asian; 301, 542 students
are Black or African American; 162, 362 students are Hispanic or Latino; 1,304 students are
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander; 42,131 students are of two or more races, and 327, 508
students are White. The percent of students receiving free or reduced meals (FARMs) for the
school year 2018-2019 was 42.3%. Approximately 24% of students are identified as Title I
students and 1.4% of the population are classified as homeless.
The mission of K-12 schools is to support each student in reaching his or her potential,
through a strong system of accountability to increase academic success for all students and
promote a safe healthy, orderly environment where students’ physical, mental, social, and
emotional well-being are prioritized; while ensuring teachers’ and administrators’ effectiveness.
MSDE endeavors to ensure that all K-12 schools provide each student access to high-quality
education that prepares them to graduate ready for college, successful careers, and success in
society and life. Each school system is operated by a superintendent who is sometimes called the
Chief Executive Officer (CEO), appointed by the County Executives or the Board of Directors,
depending on the jurisdiction; whereas schools are operated by principals. The principals are
required to possess a minimum of a master’s degree and an Administrator II certification, while
the assistant principal must possess a minimum of a bachelor’s degree and an Administrator I

13
certification. Some school systems require principals to pass an Assessment Center before they
can be appointed as principals within the school systems. School districts decentralize tasks such
as hiring, budgeting, and operations to local schools, which places added responsibilities for
school principals especially in schools where there are no assistant principals and the principal is
the lone leader. As a result, it is sometimes difficult for principals to focus on their role as the
academic leaders.
Organizational Performance Status
English Language Arts trend data for 2015-2019 demonstrate that Title I students in high
school perform more than two times worse than students who were not identified as Title I. For
example, in 2016, the PARCC proficiency rate for 10
th
grade English was 44%, compared to
Title I students whose proficiency was 5.6%. The gap decreased marginally when Title I
proficiency increased to 18% in 2017, but this was still significantly lower than the 42.6%
proficiency demonstrated by students who were not identified as Title I. Similar trend was
detected for mathematics between 2015-2019. The proficiency rate for FARMs students across
the state was 25.5% when compared to students who were not identified as FARMs students,
whose proficiency rate for the PARCC assessment was 60.3%. This shows that Title I and
FARMs students are performing well below (more than 50%) their peers in both Reading and
Mathematics. Similar trends were noted for the primary and the middle grades in both Reading
and Mathematics, for example, in 4
th
grade, the achievement gap between FARMs and Non-
FARMs students, Title I and non-Title I students remained consistently wide over the five year
period, with these economically disadvantaged students trailing a minimum of 16.8% to a
maximum of 18.4% in 2019 on the Maryland Comprehensive Assessment Program (MSDE
Report Card, 2019). Cohort graduation trend data for 2015-2019 revealed that FARMs students

14
experienced 77.65%, which reflected a 9.21% difference in graduation rate when compared to
non-FARMs student’s graduation rate of 86.86% for school year 2018-2019. However, over the
five-year period (2015-2019), the graduation rate for Title I and FARMs students has improved
considerably, from 60.5% in 2015 to 73.36% in 2019, but has not made gains enough to close the
13.5% difference that still divides these subgroups of students.
School districts are responsible to implement strategic plans and operate schools
according to the policies of the state of Maryland Education Department. Each year, the state
generates a report card for every school within each of the 24 school districts within the state of
Maryland. The report cards rank schools using a star rating system where a rating of star one
accounts for the lowest-performing schools and a star five rating is assigned to the most effective
schools. Schools and districts are required to set rigorous achievement goals. If the goals are not
met, schools are at risk to earning a one-star rating on the state report card, which could
potentially classify the school as in need of a Comprehensive System of Intervention (CSI),
which mandates the school to be on an intensive intervention plan, and if no improvement is
made after three years, the school could be returned to the state or face closure. School
achievement measures are used to calculate the evaluations for both principals and teachers,
therefore, if the school does not meet its goals, teachers’ and principals’ evaluations would be
negatively impacted.
Organizational Performance Goal
While each school district will have their individualized goals, the Maryland Department
of Education, like other states throughout the United States, aspire to ensure that all K-12 schools
provide all students with access to high-quality education that prepares them to graduate ready
for college, successful careers and success in society and life, therefore, if school districts ought

15
to meet the needs of all students it is important that they focus on implementing effective
strategies to close the academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and
economically disadvantaged students. Each school district within the state of Maryland is
provided with an annual report card that assists stakeholders in measuring student achievement
in each of the 24 school districts. This report uses myriad indicators such as academic
achievement, graduation rate, progress in achieving English Language proficiency, school
quality, and student success for all subgroups of students to include economically disadvantaged
students and the annual progress they are making within each school district and their individual
schools (MSDE Report Card, 2019). The achievement of each school district is measured
externally by the state assessment administered in the spring of each year. Internally, the
progress is monitored and assessed using various benchmark assessments, mid-year, and
summative assessments as well as the School Effectiveness Reviews conducted at intervals by
the districts. At the end of each year, MSDE assigns each school within each of the 24 school
districts a Star Rating, ranging from Star One as the lowest to a Star Five as the highest. With the
implementation of this goal, principals will gain the expertise needed to effectively support
teachers and create conditions necessary for all students to achieve at high levels and close the
academic achievement gap for students of low-socioeconomic status.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
The stakeholder groups include principals, teachers, and students. Principals are
important stakeholders as they are responsible for upholding the mission and vision of the
school. They have the authority to create and implement structures and hold teachers and staff
accountable for effectively implementing strategies and programs that are tailored to meeting the
needs of students while yielding desired outcomes. They also possess the ability to spearhead

16
strategies that are designed to sustain these improvements over time. Teachers are another
important group of stakeholders as they are responsible for both the students and the organization
meeting the performance goal. The teacher is responsible for employing the strategies and
equipping students with the knowledge and skills needed to reap success. They have the most
control over the data as they are responsible for the delivery of the curriculum and programs.
Teachers are also responsible for establishing and maintaining strong communication with
families in order to bridge the gap between the home and school community. It is also important
to examine the role of students as they are the recipient of the knowledge skills and attitudes.
Therefore, it is important to analyze their outcomes in order to determine the effectiveness of
strategies and programs.
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals
Table 1 illustrates the organizational mission, the global performance goal, and the
stakeholders’ goals necessary for the organization to meet its global goal. The state of Maryland
requires that all students demonstrate grade-level proficiency in reading. They operate on the
notion that students must be proficient in reading in order to master other content areas.
Table 1
Organizational Mission, Global Goal and Stakeholder Performance Goals
Organizational Mission
The mission of K-12 schools is to support each student in reaching his or her potential, through a
strong system of accountability to increase academic success for all students and promote a safe,
healthy and orderly environment where students’ physical, mental, social and emotional well-
being are prioritized; while ensuring teachers’ and administrators’ effectiveness.
Organizational Performance Goal
The goal of K-12 schools is to ensure that all students have access to high quality education that
prepares them to graduate ready for college, successful careers and success in society and life.

17
Stakeholder 1 Goal Stakeholder 2 Goal Stakeholder 3 Goal Stakeholder 4 Goal
By May 2021, 100%
of principals will
implement at least six
relevant professional
development sessions
with at least one
focused on data
driven decision
making, in order to
close the achievement
gap among students
of low socioeconomic
status.
By May 2021, 100%
of teachers will
engage in targeted
professional
development and use
data to inform
instructional practices
that will close the
academic
achievement gap as
measured by
formative and
summative
assessments and daily
activities.
By September 2021,
75% of students will
perform at or above
grade level in reading
and mathematics as
measured by
formative and
summative
assessment.

Stakeholder Group for the Study
Although a complete analysis would involve all stakeholder groups, in order to measure
progress towards the stakeholder goal, it was imperative to focus on the knowledge, skills, and
motivation of the principal in order to close the academic achievement gap between
economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students. Principals are important
stakeholders in that they are the ones who have authority over the pedagogical skills that teachers
possess, and they empower teachers through meaningful professional development to improve
student learning. Principals are the primary vehicles that drive change within the schools. They
are tasked with the responsibility to lead teachers and staff, set goals, and monitor structures and
programs to ensure that the educational needs of students are satisfied. In the context of the
school, the principals are viewed as the definitive stakeholder, since they have the power to make
decisions such as deploying resources where needed and are able to assess stakeholders’ actions
and determine what is appropriate or suitable (Lewis, 2011). School principals also display the
attribute of urgency as they often determine the importance of stakeholders’ claims and how

18
initiatives are prioritized (Lewis, 2011). Furthermore, they are responsible for initiating,
implementing, and creating oversight of the change process. They have the power to alter or
highlight the targets of identification for stakeholders based on the type of change to be
implemented (Lewis, 2011). Principals play crucial roles in disseminating knowledge and
counter-knowledge regarding initiatives and draw together various perspectives from varied
stakeholder groups. They broker coalitions amongst stakeholders that may create aligned goals
for the schools (Lewis, 2011).
The stakeholder goal is that by May 2021, 100% of principals will implement at least six
relevant professional development sessions, with one focused on data-driven decision making in
order to close the achievement gap among students of low socioeconomic status. This goal was
created in alignment with the global goal. The knowledge skills and attitude of principals play a
pivotal role in determining the stakeholders’ ability to influence student outcomes efficiently and
effectively. Formal and informal observations are conducted at various intervals to determine
teacher effectiveness. Formative and summative assessments are also provided to students in
order to determine the effectiveness of instruction. Climate Walks are conducted, and a feedback
system is implemented for stakeholders to provide suggestions regarding school improvement. It
is important that the stakeholder achieve the organization’s performance goal as teachers’
instruction is directly correlated to student performance. If the stakeholder’s goal is not achieved,
then student learning suffers, and may result in an expanding achievement gap. This will also
have a negative effect on the stakeholder’s annual evaluation rating, the schools’ annual report
card, and these schools will not be able to accomplish their mission or achieve state mandates.

19
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this study is to conduct a gap analysis to examine the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences that are necessary to assist K-12 principals in reaching
the organizational performance goal of implementing effective strategies to close the academic
achievement gap between economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students.
If all students are expected to attain the organizational performance goal, then this must also
include students of low-socioeconomic status. This goal mirrors the organizational mission to
support each student in reaching his or her potential, through a strong system of accountability to
increase academic success for all students; while ensuring teachers’ and administrators’
effectiveness. The Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework was used to guide this
purpose and assist in identifying the root causes of performance gaps through the analysis of the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences. The analysis began by generating a list of
needs and then moved to examine these systematically to focus on actual or validated needs.
As such, the following questions guided the study which addressed the knowledge and
skills, motivation, and organization resources and solutions for the stakeholder group. The
stakeholder group of focus for this study was K-12 principals.
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs necessary for all
principals to implement at least six relevant professional development sessions with one
focused on data-driven decision making in order to close the achievement gap among
students of low socioeconomic status?
2. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and K-12 school
principals’ knowledge and motivation?

20
Conceptual and Methodological Framework
As mentioned previously, Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis is a systematic, analytical
method that helps to clarify organizational goals and identify the gap between the actual
performance level and the preferred performance level within an organization and was employed
as the conceptual framework. Assumed influences knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences that interfere with organizational goal achievement were generated based on personal
knowledge and related literature. The methodological framework is a qualitative research design
through the use of semi-structured interviews and document analysis. A qualitative approach
design provides insights into how participants derive meaning from their experiences, and how
they build their world around them, and the types of meaning they accredit to their experiences
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Employing a qualitative approach also
allows one to have a more in-depth understanding of the results, and to unearth new viewpoints
and develop new measuring tools (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998). The qualitative approach
allowed the researcher to use tools such as interviews and document analysis to arrive at
perceptual information that would not otherwise be obtained from a quantitative study which
utilizes surveys and closed-ended questionnaires (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The utilization of
a combination of interviews and document analysis assisted the researcher with the process of
triangulation or confirmation of findings using various data sets. Consequently, employing both
tools neutralized weaknesses that were present in each form of data (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
These influences were assessed by using interviews, document analysis, and literature review.
Succeeding the data analysis, research-based solutions were recommended and evaluated in a
comprehensive manner.

21
Definitions
Achievement gap: Achievement gaps are defined as the variances in academic performance on
state and national test scores between groups of students of dissimilar backgrounds (Anderson,
Medrich &Fowler, 2007). This occurs when one group of students (such as students grouped by
socio-economic status, ethnic group, gender) outperforms another group and the difference in
mean scores for the two groups is statistically noteworthy (that is, larger than the margin of
error) (NAEP, 2018).
Advantaged student: A student who is in a better social or financial position than other peers.
Disadvantaged student: Student whose family, social, or economic circumstances hinder their
ability to learn at school (RAND, 2019).
Income gap: Income gap relates to the difference between children whose families are in the
90th versus the 10th percentile of family income (Reardon, 2011).
Low-income: Low-income family refers to persons with an income that is less than twice the
amount of the federal threshold required to meet their basic needs (Koball & Jiang, 2018).
Socio-economic status: Socioeconomic status represents the social and economic capitals
available to a person or a particular group of people (Hart & Risley, 2003; Rowe, 2008).
Organization of the Project
This study is organized into five chapters. Chapter One has provided the reader with the
key concepts and terminologies found in a discussion about the gap in academic achievement
between advantaged and disadvantaged students. Additionally, the organization’s mission, goals,
and stakeholders as well as the initial concepts of gap analysis were introduced. Chapter Two
provides a review of current literature surrounding the scope of the study. Topics of
socioeconomic factors impacting student achievement, political factors impacting student

22
achievement, the role of principals in improving student achievement, leadership styles in low
performing schools, school culture, and climate will be addressed. Chapter Three details the
assumed interfering elements as well as methodology when it comes to choosing participants,
data collection, and analysis. In Chapter Four, the data and results are assessed and analyzed.
Chapter Five provides solutions, based on data and literature, for closing the perceived gaps as
well as recommendations for an implementation and evaluation plan for the solutions.

23
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
This literature review will examine the root causes in closing achievement gaps for
students of low socio-economic status. The review will begin with the broad research on the
importance of implementing strategies to increase student achievement. This is followed by an
overview of literature that highlights the challenges school principals encounter, such as low
parental involvement, lack of resources, and teacher quality, as they implement strategies to
close the academic achievement gap among students of low-socioeconomic status. The review
will encompass a thorough discussion on scientifically based leadership practices that are known
to improve teacher practice and student achievement. This section will also examine current
research on the types of professional learning school principals and teachers need to engage in
order to close the academic achievement gap among students of low-socioeconomic status.
Following the general research literature, the review will draw on Clark and Estes Gap Analytic
Conceptual Framework, more precisely, knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences
on principals’ capacity to implement effective strategies that result in improved student outcomes
among students of low socio-economic status.
Achievement Gap in Education
In December 2015, the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) was signed into law. This
law replaced the No Child Left Behind Act and is designed to hold schools accountable for
student achievement; while ensuring educational equity for all students so they can become
productive, engaged citizens, who are prepared for 21st century college and careers (Darling-
Hammond et al., 2016). However, the disparity in achievement gap among students of low-
socioeconomic status continues to be a permanent fixture in the education realm. Research has
unveiled a myriad of factors that contribute to this imbalance, but none has been identified as the

24
sole culprit (Williams, 2011). Even with the ESSA law in place, students still continue to fail at
alarming rates. If strategies are not implemented to narrow the increasing inequality in education
outcomes between the wealthy and the economically disadvantaged schools will no longer be
viewed as the symbol of equalizer they are prescribed to be (Reardon, 2013).
Influences on the Problem of Practice: The Effects of Poverty on Academic Achievement
Income disparity widens the academic achievement gap between students of low socio-
economic status and students from higher income brackets. As the income gap between high and
low-income families expands, so does the achievement gap between children in high- and low-
income families (Reardon, 2011). The achievement gap between children from high- and low-
income families is estimated to be 30 to 40 percent wider among children born in 2001 as
opposed to those who were born twenty-five years earlier (Reardon, 2011).
Socioeconomic Factors Impacting Student Achievement
During the last 50 years, there have been differential changes in family’s investment
patterns; therefore, high-income families now invest more time and resources in their children’s
cognitive development than do lower-income families (Reardon, 2011). High-income families
are privier to greater socioeconomic and social resources from which their children may benefit
(Reardon, 2011). This increasing emphasis on children’s cognitive development could be as a
result of the enactment of test-based accountability systems (Reardon, 2011). Education policy
progressively centers on standardized test scores to measure school effectiveness; as these scores
rise in the level of importance, families may become more likely to invest in improving their
children’s scores (Reardon, 2011). Increasing income disparity has resulted in greater distinction
in school quality and educational opportunities between the advantaged and disadvantaged
students (Reardon, 2011).

25
Drawing on national data, Owens (2018) argued that family income segregation between
school districts contributes to unequal distribution of vital resources such as high-quality
teachers, school funding, and parents’ social capital needed to bolster students’ academic
achievement. Families depend on income to provide their children’s basic needs such as food,
clothing, shelter, childcare, and other enrichment opportunities (Owens, 2018). Students from
high-income families are likely to outperform students from low-income families because their
family income allows them to access homes in advantageous school districts that low-income
families cannot manage to pay for (Owens, 2018). Therefore, low-income students attend
schools in economically disadvantaged school districts.
Herbers et al. (2012) investigated the relevance of early academic performance on adult
outcomes among 18,011 students categorized by level of socioeconomic risk and found that
homelessness and high mobility affect students of low-socioeconomic status. The authors
claimed that students who experience homelessness or high residential mobility have a higher
absenteeism rate than students from other risk categories. Homelessness and high residential
mobility students scored the lowest average achievement levels followed by students who
received free or reduced-price meals, while the more economically advantaged students scored
the highest average achievement (Herbers et al., 2012). The study found that students in the
general income group demonstrated significantly faster linear progress in comparison to students
in the free and reduced eligible groups (Herbers et al., 2012). The authors argued that
homelessness and high residential mobility students are more susceptible to changing schools;
therefore, every effort should be made to promote their early achievement (Herbers et al., 2012).
This should be synchronized across school districts, shelters, and other community-based
programs to ensure continuity in student early achievement (Herbers et al., 2012). The

26
researchers posited that additional enquiry to inform service provision can also be concentrated
on engaging families at risk due to poverty long before their children begin school. Helping
parents to understand and access the services available to them could reduce overall family
stress, support positive parent–child interactions, and facilitate enrollment of children in early
education programs (Herbers et al., 2012).
Widespread research has categorically shown that children’s social class continues to be
one of most impactful predictors, if not the single most important indicator, of children’s
academic outcome (GarcĆa & Weiss, 2017). Performance disparities by social class begin in the
earliest years of children’s lives and persist in subsequent years, making it difficult to regain lost
skills (GarcĆa & Weiss, 2017). Utilizing data from two kindergarten classes in 1998 and 2010,
GarcĆa and Weiss (2017) examined the correlation between socioeconomic status (SES) and
children’s cognitive and noncognitive aptitude when they begin school. The authors found huge
discrepancies in performance gaps exist between children in the lowest and highest socio
economic status (SES) quintiles and these discrepancies have continued from 1998 to 2010
cohorts (GarcĆa & Weiss, 2017). Although economic inequalities between the two groups of
students have widened, the performance gaps have not increased (GarcĆa & Weiss, 2017).
However, the gaps refused to narrow in spite of marked increase in low-SES parent involvement
in children’s early education. Substantial investment in Pre-K programs can act as the catalyst
for narrowing academic achievement gaps between students of low-socioeconomic status and
their more advantaged peers (GarcĆa & Weiss, 2017). To ensure sustainability in gains made by
students, school principals must focus on the provision of continuous comprehensive academic,
health, nutrition, and emotional support for children throughout their years of schooling, as well
as booting parent and community engagement (GarcĆa & Weiss, 2017).

27
Multiple studies have all arrived at the same conclusion that income disparity creates
income gap between economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students, and
that children’s social class continues to be one of the main indicators of children’s level of
education and educational attainment (GarcĆa & Weiss, 2017; Herbers et al., 2012; Owens,
2018; Reardon, 2011). GarcĆa and Weiss (2017) noted that although there was continuous
expansion in income gap between high income and low-income students, the achievement gap
did not increase or decrease, giving reason for further research to find out how wide the income
gap needs to be before a difference in achievement is noted, and at what point does the income
gap no longer make a difference once the achievement gap exists.
Political Factors Impacting Student Achievement
Despite the laws enacted and the implementation of accountability systems to increase
academic outcomes for all students, there continues to be a discrepancy in academic achievement
between students of low socioeconomic status and their economically advantaged peers. In
December 2015, Congress reenacted the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act
(ESEA) of 1965 under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). ESSA follows several of the
exact education policy goals previously stipulated by the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) policy
(Fairman, Johnson, & Eberle, 2017). These goals focus on enhanced equity of access to
education for all students and improved educational achievement for all students (Fairman et al.,
2017). This is attainable through the implementation of strong state and local education
accountability systems that detect and intercede in underachieving schools, as quantified by
student achievement on statewide tests and high school graduation rates (Fairman et al., 2017).
Additionally, Fairman et al. (2017) posited that school districts are mandated to define local
goals and priorities; thus, they have greater autonomy in how they will allocate federal funds

28
from numerous formula grants to attain their goal, upon state approval. Schools that are
categorized as low performing have more leeway in determining the types of intervention
strategies that best supports their local needs (Fairman et al., 2017). According to Fairman et al.
(2017) with the implementation of ESSA, school districts are more responsible and accountable
for progress; this requires greater stakeholder engagement (via participation in the Local
Education Agencies development plan and report card development) and making sure that all
information is easily comprehended, including by parents.
Williams and Welsh (2017) shared similar views discussed by Fairman et al. (2017) when
they theorized that with the enactment of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), state
education policy is further positioned to have a substantial effect on the effectiveness of school
principals. The authors suggested that although ESSA does not deviate much from the No Child
Left Behind regarding accountability in terms of testing, it does recommend some key shifts in
the attention paid to principals as contributors to students’ academic success. Williams and
Welsh (2017) cautioned that the extent to which contextual factors such as poverty impact how
school principal effectiveness is measured, must be examined to ensure that school principals are
not held accountable for variables outside their realm of control. Therefore, this indicates that
ESSA possesses the ability to preserve the status hierarchy that is present among schools and
districts, which fails to address inequalities among school districts (Williams & Welsh, 2017).
Although ESSA provides more funding to support school principal effectiveness, if districts do
not possess the ability to develop interventions, then they will not be eligible for funding
(Williams & Welsh, 2017). Moreover, this increases the likelihood of expanding existing
inequality for certain school districts that have customarily underperformed and serve a large
population of low in-come students (Williams & Welsh, 2017). Additionally, Williams and

29
Welsh (2017) further asserted that the probability exists that some local education agencies
might relinquish applications for the professional development funds because they are unclear
about the standards for selection. This reality is usually indicative of schools with the least
resources, which forces the researchers to posit that ESSA, as anticipated, might add to the gulf
in student outcomes between high-poverty and low-poverty schools. Thus, schools might not
profit from the full purpose of ESSA (Williams & Welsh, 2017).
Noticeable inequality exists among schools. Districts and schools vary in their ability to
provide evidence-based tiers and implementation of professional development opportunities
(Williams & Welsh, 2017). A block grant might assist schools that lack capacity, which might
potentially shrink social and economic inequalities among schools and districts (Williams &
Welsh, 2017). However, states should also endeavor to target professional development to
underperforming schools within districts; furthermore, this equity argument speaks to the
original intent of ESEA, and it places the onus of school improvement on states and districts
(Williams & Welsh, 2017). Williams and Welsh (2017) purported that the intent of the ESSA is
rooted in the desire to close achievement gaps and improve the educational experience of
students, particularly those from low-socioeconomic families. A focus on principal preparation
affords the education community the opportunity to devote sufficient attention, support, and
resources for these students (Williams & Welsh, 2017).
According to Anderson and Reynolds (2015) at the state and federal levels, the
government is demanding that states implement new teacher and principal accountability
systems that connect student achievement to leadership actions (for instance No Child Left
Behind [NCLB] waiver, Race to the Top, [RTTT]). Consequently, principals must be well
prepared to effectively guide instruction and spearhead school improvement initiatives

30
(Anderson & Reynolds, 2015). Thus, the interest of policymakers should extend beyond policies
directly impacting principals; they should also be interested in the policy levers accessible to
improve principal preparation programs and candidate licensure as a means to enhance school
leadership (Anderson & Reynolds, 2015). This can be accomplished when policymakers are able
to employ more robust, formative tools that are validated by research to aid the process
(Anderson & Reynolds, 2015).
The results of multiple studies have provided consistent evidence that there is an
academic achievement disparity between students of low-socioeconomic and their more
economically advantaged peers (Anderson & Reynolds, 2015; Fairman et al., 2017; Williams &
Welsh, 2017). Studies have shown that there are legislations in place to narrow the achievement
gap by holding schools, districts, and states accountable for student achievement. However,
despite these legislations, the achievement gap between economically advantaged and
economically disadvantaged students persists.
Leadership Practices That Impact Student Achievement
School principals’ practices have direct and indirect impact on student achievement. As a
result, federal and state policies have begun to hold principals responsible for the academic
outcomes of students. Kannapel, Clements, Taylor, and Hibpshman (2005) stated that even
though public schools are held accountable to ensure that all students are educated, they have
traditionally experienced greater success educating middle-to-upper income students as opposed
to poor students.

31
The Role of Principals in Closing the Academic Achievement Gap for Low-Socioeconomic
Status Students
Analysis of a study conducted by Kannapel et al. (2005) in eight high-poverty schools in
Kentucky has changed the narrative regarding the pattern of low-income being equivalent to
low-performance. The authors have uncovered evidence that the background of the student body
does not have to determine student achievement. The schools included in the study mostly
gained high ratings in the areas of school culture and student, family, and community support
(Kannapel et al., 2005). The study found that when the audit results were compared, those of
low-performing, high-poverty schools, the eight study schools scored considerably higher on
review and alignment of curriculum (Kannapel et al., 2005). The principals have communicated
high expectations in tangible ways and have held teachers and staff accountable, and the teachers
and staff in turn held high expectations for themselves and their students (Kannapel et al., 2005).
The principals fostered a strong culture of optimism grounded in the beliefs that students were
capable of achieving academic success, and staff had the capacity to make it a reality; hence, a
caring, nurturing respectful atmosphere was cultivated and maintained among adults, between
adults and among students (Kannapel et al., 2005). The authors maintained that all of the eight
schools in the study had strong emphasis on academics, instruction, and student achievement;
therefore, schools focused keen attention on their performance on state assessments, and used
results garnered as baseline (Kannapel et al., 2005). Each school had specific structures in place
to frequently assess student progress and created action steps for improvement (Kannapel et al.,
2005). Additionally, principals, faculty, and staff exhibited strong work ethics and morale, as
they tirelessly work to meet the needs of students by frequently analyzing data and creating
tailored lessons and interventions in response to data (Kannapel et al., 2005). They worked

32
together to assist families in obtaining necessities such as transportation, clothing, health care,
and other services. These hours extend throughout the weekends where students were provided
tutoring, portfolios, assessment preparations and other programs focus on empowering parents
(Kannapel et al., 2005). The authors noted that authoritarian and dictatorial leadership styles
were not present in any of the schools, and principals included staff in the decision-making
process (Kannapel et al., 2005). Moreover, school principals were very intentional about the
recruitment process for staff to ensure the selection suited the needs of the population (Kannapel
et al., 2005).
Day, Gu, and Sammons (2016) later found that the use of performance data and
monitoring are important strategies in the quest to increase standards in schools that show
improvement in increasing student achievement, particularly those in economically
disadvantaged schools. Successful principals quantify success from the perspective of the pupil
test and examination result based on the larger educational goals (Day et al., 2016). The authors
posited that effective school principals view school leadership as a process of mutual influence,
where they impact the quality of school results by shaping the school mission and alignment of
school culture. This in turn creates a shift to raising the bar for instruction and instructional
leadership (Day et al., 2016). Thus, the extent to which influence is perceived and “measured” as
it relates to student academic achievement can only be weighed over time; can partly be
observed in the conditions, structures, traditions, norms, and expectations that define the culture
of the schools (Day et al., 2016). The actions of effective principals, similar to those of the most
effective classroom teachers, are instinctual, knowledge informed, and strategic; thus, their
success is defined by their ability to be responsive to their setting and to identify, acknowledge,
comprehend and attend to the needs and drives of others (Day et al., 2016). Furthermore,

33
successful principals know how to create cultures that encourage staff and student engagement in
the learning and increase students’ achievement levels in terms of value-added measures of pupil
growth in national test and examination outcomes (Day et al., 2016).
Principals’ Leadership styles in Low Performing Schools
Effective school principals know that with recent pressures to increase academic
achievement for all students, they can no longer operate as the sole leaders responsible for
bringing about effective outcomes. Principal leadership is crucial in changing the trajectory for
low performing schools (Finnigan, 2012). Finnigan (2012) conducted research that examined
leadership and motivation in three of Chicago’s low-performing, low-socioeconomic majority
elementary schools involved in the Chicago School Probation Study. Two of the schools were
removed from the probation list in the first five years and one remained on probation for more
than five years. Finnigan (2012) found that instructional leadership involves numerous leadership
parts connecting to the principal’s role in providing guidance; which includes articulating a
vision, setting the tone for high expectation and monitoring performance. Instructional leadership
was one of the reasons the teachers in both schools cited for the schools moving off the probation
list (Finnigan, 2012). The author noted that teachers conversed on the instructional leadership of
their principals in relation to their abilities to share the vision, communicate expectations;
interpretation of policies and emphasis on collaborative practice; and the coherence and
consistency they experience in the midst of uncertainty. However, teachers at the school that
remained on the probation list reported an absence in these leadership practices (Finnigan, 2012).
Furthermore, the principals who lead the successful schools demonstrate the importance
of trust, instructional leadership, and support to teachers in low-performing schools, while the
unsuccessful school proves that when principals fail to demonstrate leadership practices, teachers

34
are likely to become unmotivated, frustrated, and even angry with their principals’ lack of
exemplary leadership (Finnigan, 2012). For school change to occur, the principals play a key role
in improving the performance of teachers via way of motivation (Finnigan, 2012). The research
submits that principals should focus on providing instructional leadership, improving teacher
practice–principal trust, and supporting change. Regrettably, principal capacity in habitually
underachieving schools is weak, and this was demonstrated in the school that remained on
probation (Finnigan, 2012).
Hallinger and Heck (2010) reported findings drawn from a series of empirical analyses
that assessed the effects of collaborative leadership on school improvement capacity and student
learning in a large sample of US primary schools over a four-year period. Over 50 years of
empirical research analyses provide confirmation that principal leadership contributes to the
quality of education, school improvement, and students learning (Hallinger & Heck,
2010). Using empirical research analyses the researchers examine how collaborative school
leadership impacts school improvement in a large sample of US schools within a four-year span.
The researchers employed the following four models to determine leadership impact: a direct
impact model which theorizes leadership as the vehicle for changing student learning; a mediated
effect model where the principal steers the growth in student outcomes by shaping and building
the school’ capacity for improvement, reversed mediated effects model in which changes in
student achievement determine changes in school capacity and leadership; a reciprocal effects
model in this case leadership and school improvement are seen as having mutual influence
process contributing to student achievement. The researchers found that the results support the
predominant view that collaborative school leadership can positively impact student learning in
reading and math by building the school's capacity for academic improvement (Hallinger &

35
Heck, 2010). The researchers expounded on the findings by providing first-hand support which
classifies leadership for student learning as a process of communal influence in which school
capacity both shapes and is shaped by the school's collective leadership (Hallinger & Heck,
2010). The researchers used two approaches to understanding the extent to which school
leadership contributes to student learning. They operated under the assumption that studies of
school improvement must assess change in academic processes and student achievement; and
that student learning is the target of leadership improvement efforts (Hallinger & Heck, 2010).
They found that leadership is conceptualized as the driving force that brings about change in
student learning.
Wahlstrom and Louis (2008) claimed that there were three types of instructional
behaviors that define effective principals and teachers’ standard contemporary practice, focused
instruction, and flexible grouping practices. The presence of shared leadership and professional
community diminish the need for teachers to be concerned about trusting the principal
(Wahlstrom & Louis, 2008). There has been increasing discussions surrounding the need for
principals to involve teachers in the leadership and decision-making tasks (Wahlstrom & Louis,
2008). Research supports this idea by purporting that increased teacher influence in school can
potentially have a marked effect in improving schools (Wahlstrom & Louis, 2008). One of the
greatest advantages of shared leadership is that it minimizes isolation amongst teachers and
increases the likelihood for stakeholders to work together for the good of the organization
(Wahlstrom & Louis, 2008). The authors predicated that informal influence and feedback using
professional discussions have the propensity to promote shared practices and goals, however,
research suggests that participation in formal decision making and leadership roles may
marginally impact student outcome.

36
Bellibas and Lie (2018) conducted a study that examined the degree to which school
principals’ leadership styles act as a predictor of school climate, in order to determine if there is a
correlation between principals’ perceived practices of instructional and distributed leadership and
their perceptions of school climate. Using leadership survey data, the study found that principals
perceived distributed and instructional leadership are very instrumental in predicting the
communality of respect displayed amongst staff. It was also found that when principals place
emphasis on instructional practices and shared leadership there is a heightened level of trust,
collegiality, and respect amongst staff (Bellibas & Liu, 2018).
Multiple studies share the common element that collaborative leadership practices have a
positive effect on student achievement and the overall school culture and climate (Bellibas &
Liu, 2018; Finnigan, 2012; Hallinger & Heck, 2010; Wahlstrom & Louis, 2008). While research
confirms that shared leadership has some positive contribution to school improvement outcomes,
Wahlstrom and Louis (2008), suggested the undertaking of further research to determine the
effect leadership roles have on student achievement. Hallinger and Heck (2010) later posited that
leadership is the driving force that brings about a change in student learning.
School Culture and Climate
The school culture and climate play a pivotal role in determining the types of outcomes
students produce. Therefore, it is imperative that principals ensure that teachers possess the
capacity to be responsive to the needs of students.

37
The Principals’ Role in Ensuring Effective Professional Development
According to Williams (2013) in Texas and across the nation, substantial achievement
gaps continued to persist between various student groups. Variations between subgroups were
evident in the spring 2010 Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) reading data
(Williams, 2013). The researcher used causal-comparative mixed research design to examine
how Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) were organized for 200 reading teachers across
the district to collaborate and plan. The research found that numerous statistically important
growth occurred in student-performance data during district-wide implementation of PLCs.
Students who met target comprised 81.2% of African Americans; 84.8% of Hispanics; 93.6% of
Whites; 83.1% of economically disadvantaged students; 49.9% of Special Education Students;
68.5% of Limited English Proficient (LEP) students; and 74.9% of At-Risk students (Williams,
2013). This research demonstrates the need for principals to be very intentional in their practices
to narrow the academic achievement gap for students from low-socioeconomic families.
Additionally, the research found that consistent collaboration among teachers gave rise to
increased reading achievement for students across the district (Williams, 2013). Teachers
collaborated around the knowledge making process by learning from their colleagues or other
means; and also articulated gratitude for opportunities to learn with their colleagues as opposed
to learning in isolation (Williams, 2013). The researcher noted that a culture of collaboration
was fostered, and multiple forms of data were used to inform instruction. Williams (2013)
concluded that PLCs can result in organizational growth in the areas of job-embedded learning
via teamwork and shared data-driven decisions; and within three years of the study, growth was
noted in student achievement. On the contrary, the researcher received feedback from teachers,

38
examined variables in student achievement across grade levels that could be as a result of other
variables such as school culture and teacher-to-teacher collaboration.
Milner, Murray, Farinde, and Delale-O’Connor (2015) maintained that every educator,
especially teachers, need to have sound knowledge of how to effectively manage classroom
environments so that learning can be maximized and to deescalate discipline problems when they
occur. Educators are experiencing characteristics that are more pronounced in urban intensive
schools; and it should not be assumed that educators are able to instantly create shifts in their
practices to better align with their students and families, but they must be supported (Milner et
al., 2015). The authors also posited that teachers fail in high-poverty environments because they
are not equipped with the skills and strategies needed to connect with students and build
relationships. Developing and maintaining connections with students is the most essential
component of teaching in an urban social setting (Milner et al., 2015). Moreover, outside of
school factors are related to what occurs inside the school, and affect student achievement
(Milner et al., 2015). Due to some of these issues, economically disadvantaged students may be
absent from school more days than other children, be transient or tardy, and have problems
focusing on learning and interacting with peers (Milner et al. (2015).
Principals must ensure that educators are prepared and supported to make the educational
shifts necessary to bring about desired outcomes. Teachers must have sound classroom
management skills to connect and engage with students. Therefore, principals must provide
opportunities for teachers to engage in relevant classroom and behavior management
professional development sessions that will assist teachers to connect with students and narrow
the academic achievement gap for economically disadvantaged students. The principal must
ensure that educators who interact with students are knowledgeable of students’ situation and are

39
responsive to the needs of students. Educators must also be aware of the outside factors that
impact students’ attitude inside the school and be prepared to address them.
The Principals’ role in Promoting Parental Involvement
There are many barriers to parental involvement, and it is the school principals’ role to
create an environment that fosters parental involvement. The literature has credited parental
involvement as an effective approach to increase student achievement; however, schools still
grapple with how to effectively involve low-income parents (Bower & Griffin, 2011). As stated
in Bower and Griffin (2011) with the new wave of accountability systems in place, the promise
to raise academic outcomes, with emphasis on closing the academic achievement gap for low-
socioeconomic students, puts the desire to increase parent involvement at the core of education
initiatives. The research found that Epstein’s model identifies six types of parental involvement
which are designed to assist principals in creating various partnership programs, and shifts some
of the burden from the parents to the school by recognizing communication as a bifacial effort
and urging school principals to create a place for parent proprietorship within the school through
shared decision making (Bower & Griffin, 2011).
Poverty provides exceptional impediments to traditional methods of parental involvement
(Bower & Griffin, 2011). Based on the evidence concerning the restrictions of current parental
involvement approaches, new methods that integrate culturally relevant approaches are needed.
Bower and Griffin (2011) avow that these culturally relevant strategies should be implemented in
high-minority, high-poverty schools. The results suggest that strategies that characterize effective
parental engagement (building relationships, advocacy and efficiency) for parents of low
socioeconomic status were absent (Bower & Griffin, 2011). Moreover, concentrating efforts to
build parent capacity to become educational partners at home enables the school to move away

40
from traditional approaches to parental involvement and towards practices that may result in
greater impact on student achievement, such as relevant homework, home-based learning
activities, and bidirectional communication (Bower & Griffin, 2011).
Research findings from Baker, Wise, Kelley, and Skiba (2016) revealed that both parents
and school staff share a common view regarding barriers to parent involvement but provide
differing resolution. Parents frequently provide solutions that focus on addressing barriers and
support parent engagement, while the school staff and teachers often focus on providing
detached solutions that emphasize parent involvement, which requires the parents to be
physically present in the building as opposed to parents being engaged (Baker et al., 2016).
Parent involvement and parent engagement have been categorized differently by some authors,
with each consisting of precise parent behaviors connected with the construct (Baker et al.,
2016). The authors noted that although there are distinct variances in how the two are
characterized, there are benefits to be gained from increasing both (Baker et al., 2016). Both
parents and staff articulated the crucial need for effective communication because it gives
information and aid both parents and staff in their capacity to support students (Baker et al.,
2016). The authors submitted that poor parent communication is a great barrier that causes
parents to develop the perception that the school is not family friendly. Parents reported that the
school does not provide ample notifications of events or the notices they receive is inconsistent
as it relates to events (Baker et al., 2016). Parents suggest that schools should shift from the
traditional perspective of parent involvement and explore a variety of ways that require parents
not only to be physically present in the school but consider the myriad ways parents can
contribute to their students’ success (Baker et al., 2016). The authors shared that parents require
support in being engaged, for instance, the school providing activities to complete at home and

41
instructions for parents to assist their child with more complex subjects. The researchers argued
that it is obvious that there are barriers that impede parent involvement, and addressing these
impediments are crucial to improving involvement which channels engagement (Baker et al.,
2016). The authors noted that based on the feedback from parents, they are seeking assistance
from the school about ways they can assist their children with the school being responsible for
providing the resources that teach parents how to help, or equipping parents with the tools they
need to assist their children (Baker et al., 2016). Many school events occur during work hours or
in the evenings, which prevent economically disadvantaged parents from participating as they
have to work in order to support their children. Addressing barriers and listening to parent-
suggested solutions is one way of creating the shift from parent involvement to engagement
(Baker et al., 2016). To transition from parent involvement to parent engagement, schools should
embrace a broader view of parent engagement which entails multiple constructs of how parents
are involved (Baker et al., 2016). The authors argued that parents with multiple opposing
obligations or duties are seeking different ways for staff to value their contribution outside of the
physical building.
Research proposes that the personal life context of low SES parents may present a surfeit
of hindrances to parent involvement (Murray et al., 2014). Murray et al. (2014) used the Hoover-
Dempsey and Sandler model of parent involvement processes as the framework to comprehend
how the barriers prevent and the facilitators encourage parents’ motivation for involvement. The
researchers found that there were more barriers than facilitators for parents’ motivation for
school-based parental involvement among primarily low income African American parents
whose children attend urban, public middle schools (Murray et al., 2014). Findings from the
study indicate that many parents held negative impressions of the school and reported that

42
general school invitations to school-based parental involvement regarding events and meetings
were poorly organized; information regarding school activities were inconsistent and did not
provide parents ample notification (Murray et al., 2014). The parents’ negative interaction with
the school both propelled and restricted school-based parental involvement (SBPI); for instance,
the idea of experiencing a hostile encounter with a teacher decreases parents’ interest from
attending SBPI; however, a child enduring a teacher’s disrespect and resentment was a
springboard for SBPI (Murray et al., 2014). Likewise, the negative school climate deterred
parents, while at the same time, the toxic school climate contributed to the pervasive nature of
classroom conduct problems and peer conflicts (Murray et al., 2014).
More recent research has sought to create a distinction between parent engagement and
parent involvement. All of the literature reviewed cited similar barriers to parental involvement.
Barriers to parental involvement were more pronounced among low-socioeconomic families.
However, all of the research suggested that school principals need to do much better in providing
alternatives to facilitating parental involvement among all subgroups, but especially among low-
socioeconomic families.
The Role of Principals in Using Data-Driven Decision Making
Principals play a crucial role in using data-driven decision making to improve student
achievement. Principals are required to collect, analyze, and use multiple forms of data to make
decisions regarding school improvement (Grissom et al., 2017). Grissom et al. (2017) conducted
a study to investigate the challenges principals encounter in utilizing available data to make
decisions regarding talent management within their schools and how principals are supported by
the school district. Using mixed-methods non-random sampling and surveys, Grissom et al.
(2017) conducted interviews with central office leaders and principals within eight urban school

43
districts. The sample was selected because in all eight cases, the systems selected were
implementing a new system of gathering multiple sources of teacher effectiveness for at least one
year of the time data collection commenced (Grissom et al., 2017). The research shows that the
eight school systems studied made significant gains regarding the gathering of data to determine
teacher effectiveness (Grissom et al., 2017). The research also revealed that in each of the eight
systems, there were centralized structures in place to ensure data were made available to
principals using an online portal (Grissom et al., 2017). Additionally, Grissom and colleagues
applied Marsh’s (2012) “conceptualization of data utilization as a multistage process” (p. 24) to
their interview data and were able to arrive at three additional steps, access, analysis, and action
(Grissom et al., 2017). Access provides principals with the data needed; principals must be able
to organize, cleanse, and interpret data in the context of their schools in order to generate
actionable knowledge (Grissom et al., 2017). The step requires principals to possess the capacity
and be empowered to employ actionable knowledge to make decisions (Grissom et al., 2017).
According to Grissom et al. (2017), principals reported various challenges to employing teacher
effectiveness data to make decisions regarding talent management within the systems. The
researchers noted that these barriers were common across all systems studied. The most
pronounced barriers identified were gaps in the principals’ knowledge or skills regarding data
access, data analysis, and how to effectively make data driven decisions; the unavailability of
data relating to specific decision timelines; and insufficient time to analyze and use data
(Grissom et al., 2017).
The research shows that although these large urban school districts had marked
investment in data systems, and in some cases, some districts had more than one system,
principals still encountered significant barriers to accessing data (Grissom et al., 2017). Several

44
principals reported that data were only available after the time had elapsed for important
decisions to be made regarding student growth and value-added measures that were needed to be
reported to the state (Grissom et al., 2017). Principals also reported that low capacity for data
analysis, and limited time to learn relevant skills relating to analysis further exasperated the
problem (Grissom et al., 2017). The research also found that principals were not savvy in
utilizing data and ongoing supports for principals to grapple with their own data were not present
in these schools (Grissom et al., 2017). Moreover, in cases where principals were able to analyze
the data, in many instances they were not able to utilize the data to make specific decisions
(Grissom et al., 2017). Professional development and training target closing skills and
knowledge gaps for principals (Grissom et al., 2017). The research revealed that central offices
invested heavily for principals to overcome the barriers to data-driven talent management by
connecting the principals to expertise, and changing practices within the district (Grissom et al.,
2017). The central offices sought to improving principals’ analytic skills by channeling them to
the types of data to be used and when, and assisting them to use multiple measures of data to
gain a comprehensive understanding of teacher performance, by equipping them with the
technical skills needed to utilize data and arrive at appropriate conclusions in order to avoid
misinterpretation (Grissom et al., 2017). Additionally, Grissom et al. (2017) suggest that districts
can improve principals’ effectiveness in using data by implementing tools and processes that
clarify how to utilize data and procedures to manage talents. It is also imperative that school
systems work to promote a culture where data utilization is commonplace (Grissom et al., 2017).
The study found alignment from previous research on actionable steps principals take to support
data utilization among teachers within their schools, which can incorporate creating structural
supports and instruments, building teacher capacity around data utilization, and creating a

45
conducive school climate by establishing expectations and ensuring that teachers are held
accountable for data utilization (Grissom et al., 2017).
Using data obtained from a previous case study, Levin and Datnow (2012), used
purposive sampling to select schools that demonstrated robust implementation of data-driven
decision making and had a history of improving student outcome. The schools had to represent
diversity with regards to ethnicity, gender and socioeconomic status, and had a reputation of
increasing student performance on state assessment tests (Levin & Datnow, 2012). The study
found that while principals are major stakeholders in providing site-based leadership, there are
other important stakeholders who contribute to the co-construction of data-driven decision-
making reform (Levin & Datnow, 2012). Principals work in collaboration with teachers to
impact student learning (Levin & Datnow, 2012). They are responsible for interceding districts’
policies and initiatives that determine instructional practices within the classroom and are tasked
with setting school-based policies working in collaboration with teachers and other leaders
within the school such as the assistant principal and teacher leaders (Levin & Datnow, 2012).
The study found that principals were responsible for conducting four major key actions:1)
creating goals that are specific and aligned to the needs of the school and the community; 2)
creating structures that support data-driven decision making; 3) building staff capacity; 4) and
fostering an environment of trust and collaboration and culture of data utilization (Levin &
Datnow, 2012). The study examined the practices of a particular school and found that the
principal’s priority was to sensitize teachers around the district’s global goal for students and
establish high expectations for every student (Levin & Datnow, 2012). Teachers also created
their own goals and in some cases these goals exceeded the district’s goal (Levin & Datnow,
2012). The school was found to be ahead of the district as it relates to goal setting. Before the

46
school district determined the goal to have all students finishing the course prerequisite for
college entry into the state universities, the school was already working toward this goal (Levin
& Datnow, 2012).
After establishing the targets for student learning, the principal guided teachers in
creating subject-based curriculum guides that encompassed the goal established for college
readiness for every student (Levin & Datnow, 2012). The principal provided opportunities for
teachers to collaborate within their department teams (Levin & Datnow, 2012). The principal
fostered an environment where teachers were able to create their own benchmark assessments for
the core subjects and strategically ensured that teachers established their own perception of
leadership in this venture (Levin & Datnow, 2012). Additionally, Levin and Datnow (2012)
noted that many teachers reported that the principal had a high level of trust in teachers, and also
exhibited a deep level of respect in the teachers’ judgement. Assessments were viewed as a
means of measuring students’ gains in relation to meeting the state standards (Levin & Datnow,
2012). The results were then utilized to determine if the standards have been achieved and to
adjust as needed (Levin & Datnow, 2012). Thus, the principal played a crucial role in providing
oversight to make sure that assessments were analyzed and utilized to create action plans (Levin
& Datnow, 2012). The study revealed that the principal invested time for teachers to collaborate
around data, provided structures for teachers to engage in re-teaching, and invested in relevant
curriculum material and resources that foster data-driven instruction (Levin & Datnow, 2012).
Moreover, Levin and Datnow (2012) posited that creation of designated time for teachers to
engage in collaborative discussions around was the most beneficial framework for incessant
progress (Levin & Datnow, 2012). Additionally, in an attempt for the meeting to be more
purposeful, the district designed protocols for teachers and even students to analyze data (Levin

47
& Datnow, 2012). The team used data analysis discussion outlines to engage teachers in
conversations regarding strengths and growth areas, trends across grade- level, and trends within
specific subgroups (Levin & Datnow, 2012). Subsequently, teachers engaged in brainstorming
sessions to determine instructional strategies and differentiated grouping and then devised an
action plan (Levin & Datnow, 2012). Teachers were able to articulate that the expectation after
each data discussion was for them to adjust their instructional practices (Levin & Datnow, 2012).
Principals must invest in the human and social capital of the school by developing the
knowledge and skills of teachers (Levin & Datnow, 2012). Although the school district provided
professional development for teachers, the principal’s efforts were crucial in increasing teachers’
ability to use data (Levin & Datnow, 2012). The researchers noted that the principal sought to
build teachers’ capacity to analyze and interpret data and teachers’ capacity to alter their
instructional practices in response to data (Levin & Datnow, 2012). In addition, the principal
created “leverage points” among teachers and the tasks and found ways to create staff buy-in for
teachers to adopt new strategies by employing a distributive leadership approach (Levin &
Datnow, 2012). It was noted that the principal formed a data team consisting of two teachers
who are responsible for supporting data-driven decision making at the school level (Levin &
Datnow, 2012). The teachers who led the data team were already invested in utilizing data
therefore, they volunteered to lead the data team, and received training from the district
regarding how to utilize the district’s management system to assist other teachers in making data-
driven decisions (Levin & Datnow, 2012). The principal fostered an atmosphere where teachers
collaborated and learned from each other (Levin & Datnow, 2012). The research also revealed
that teachers experienced varied comfort levels regarding the utilization of data; younger

48
teachers were more inclined to using data due to their familiarity with technology (Levin &
Datnow, 2012).
According to Levin and Datnow (2012), school principals have an important role in
establishing the expectations for what data-driven instruction should look like among teachers,
and ensuring that a climate of trust and collaboration is fostered, so that teachers are able to work
together in professional learning communities to increase their instructional craft. Furthermore,
Levin and Datnow (2012) noted that there was mutual respect between the principal and district-
level leadership and the principal, and mutual respect was also evident between the principal and
the teachers (Levin & Datnow, 2012). Teachers experienced ease sharing their student
achievement data with their colleagues, and operated on the view that data utilization allows
them to engage in reflective practices around their pedagogical practices regarding student
growth (Levin & Datnow, 2012).
Employing a sequential mixed-methods approach, Farley-Ripple and Buttram (2014)
gathered data on four elementary schools situated within two school districts to determine if, and
how schools facilitated the collaborative utilization of data. Purposive sampling was used to
select schools to include a school that placed strong emphasis on data utilization and another that
required improvement regarding the use of data (Farley-Ripple & Buttram, 2014). Interviews
were conducted to obtain information regarding districts’ and school principals’ expectations for
professional learning communities, expectations for school improvement, and how to access and
utilize local and state level data (Farley-Ripple & Buttram, 2014).The research revealed that due
to the state’s directive around the implementation of professional learning communities, school
principals were required to provide designated time for teachers to collaborate and utilize data
within each school (Farley-Ripple & Buttram, 2014). Additionally, Farley-Ripple and Buttram

49
(2014) found that there was substantial variation in the way school leaders approached time
allotted, instructional leadership provided by principals, and the dispersion of experts to fulfill
the professional learning community component (Farley-Ripple & Buttram, 2014).
Furthermore, Farley-Ripple and Buttram (2014) posited that it is important that district-
level leaders place strong emphasis on messaging a coherent vision and expectation around data
usage. This can be obtained by ensuring that continuous professional development is available
for teachers and teacher leaders to improve their comprehension of how to employ data and
determine how data influences instructional practices, and provide oversight in order to assess
principals’ effectiveness within their schools (Farley-Ripple & Buttram, 2014). The authors also
stated that school districts can supply resources such as data utilization centers in every school to
provide access to data and instructional experts. School principals will need to place strong
emphasis on creating a school culture that fosters cooperative accountability and provides access
to data and practice (Farley-Ripple & Buttram, 2014). In addition, Farley-Ripple and Buttram
(2014) postulated that for collaborative accountability to occur, a common understanding
regarding the performance of all students and teachers’ instructional practices must be
communicated. Thus, a wide range of data must be accessible and communicated both vertically
and horizontally (Farley-Ripple & Buttram, 2014). District leaders as well as school principals
require adequate knowledge of data and instructional shifts in order to effectively make decisions
and implement strategies that successfully assist the schools and teachers to increase student
achievement (Farley-Ripple & Buttram, 2014).
The research shows that school principals can utilize data to improve students’ outcomes,
but they must be prepared to build teacher capacity, and create structures that support the
effective collaborative use of data-driven decision, while intentionally fostering a culture where

50
data is accessible and utilized to improve student outcomes (Farley-Ripple & Buttram, 2014;
Grissom et al., 2017; Levin & Datnow, 2012). Multiple research reviewed indicated that
principals must adopt a practice of communicating high expectations for students, and clear
expectations for teachers regarding what data-driven decisions within their schools should
resemble (Farley-Ripple & Buttram, 2014; Grissom et al., 2017; Levin & Datnow, 2012). The
literature revealed that principals and school districts must create a culture where teachers and
even students feel safe to consistently engage in data analysis, and set goals based on information
gleaned from the data; however, it is important to foster an environment where a high degree of
trust is evident, so that teachers can view data discussions as a growth tool that is non-
judgmental (Farley-Ripple & Buttram, 2014; Grissom et al., 2017; Levin & Datnow, 2012).
The first portion of this chapter has reviewed literature related to the academic
achievement gap between low-income and high- income students. The review has also examined
the general literature relating to strategies to close the performance gap. Next, an understanding
of the specific knowledge, motivation, and organizational barriers that prevent K-12 schools
from meeting their performance goal will be explored using the Clark and Estes (2008)
Conceptual Gap Analysis Framework.
Clark and Estes’ Gap Analysis Framework
In order to close performance gaps and achieve intended outcomes, one must first be able
to identify the root causes of these gaps, and then determine the type of performance initiatives
that are needed (Clark & Estes, 2008). The key factors that must be examined when analyzing
performance gaps are; knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational barriers. It is
imperative that all three factors are present and aligned with each other in order for the
organization to successfully accomplish its goal (Clark & Estes, 2008). Hence, organizational

51
goals can be accomplished when leaders are aware of the types of knowledge required (Rueda,
2011). The four important types of knowledge that stakeholders must possess in order for the
organization to achieve its goal are; factual; conceptual; procedural, and metacognitive
knowledge (Krathwohl, 2002). Motivation impacts three important aspects of one’s personal and
professional life (Clark & Estes, 2008). These entail the choice one makes in deciding to work
toward a particular goal; the level of persistence displayed in order to achieve the goal; and the
efforts invested in ensuring that the task is accomplished (Clark & Estes, 2008). Finally,
organizational influences relating to workplace conditions such as the processes, resources, and
inadequate facilities that obstruct work are crucial to stakeholder performance (Clark & Estes,
2008), and must be examined.
The elements of Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis will be addressed in terms of the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational barriers the school principals need to address in order
to meet the performance goal of, by May 2021, all principals will implement at least six relevant
professional development sessions, create structures for open communication and ensure that
100% of teachers are trained in using data-driven decisions to close academic achievement gap
for students of low socioeconomic status as measured by weekly meetings notes, surveys, and
student achievement data. The first section will comprise a discussion based on the assumed
influences on the stakeholder performance goals in relation to knowledge and skills. This will be
followed by an exploration of the assumed influences on the stakeholders’ motivation in
attaining performance goals and concluded with a discussion regarding the assumed
organizational influences that inhibit performance. Each of these assumed stakeholder
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences will be analyzed in the methodology
discussed in Chapter 3.

52
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences
Knowledge and Skills
This review of literature examines the knowledge and motivation, and organizational
influences that are necessary for K-12 schools to achieve their stakeholder performance goal. For
school principals to effectively support teachers in implementing the strategies needed to close
the academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and economically
disadvantaged students, they must possess the knowledge and skills needed to foster the type of
learning and school environment needed to ensure all students meet and exceed standards and are
fully prepared for college and career. Thus, it is important that these influences be explored.
Knowledge influences. Tsoukas and Vladimirou (2001) defined knowledge as a person’s
ability to differentiate between domains of actions based on comprehension of context or theory
or a combination of both. Zagzebski (2017) later claimed that knowledge is an esteemed state in
which an individual is placed in cognitive contact with actuality, resulting in a relation. The
relation consists of a conscious subject in which the knower is directly or indirectly related
(Zagzebski, 2017). Thus, organizational knowledge is the capacity garnered by members of the
organization to draw variances in the course of executing their duties in specified framework; by
activating indicated generality whose utilization is contingent on historically evolved collective
understanding (Tsoukas & Vladimirou, 2001). Therefore, for an organization to achieve its goals,
it must be aware of the types of knowledge that is required (Rueda, 2011).
In order for principals to reach their goal, it is crucial to examine the types of knowledge
and how these types of knowledge influence student outcomes. Rueda (2011) described four
important types of knowledge that stakeholders must possess in order for the organization to
achieve its goal. The first type of knowledge is factual knowledge. This type of knowledge

53
focuses on the fundamental knowledge which includes terminology, details, or elements that are
connected to a specific discipline required by individuals to comprehend and effectively execute
their job functions (Rueda, 2011). In order for stakeholders to impart knowledge effectively, they
must possess knowledge of their content. The second type of knowledge is conceptual
knowledge. In this type of knowledge, the individual is able to exhibit and apply principles of
how to solve performance problems using models and theories related to a specific domain
(Rueda, 2011). Procedural knowledge is the third type of knowledge. This refers to an
individual’s ability to utilize various techniques or methodologies required to accomplish a
specific task (Rueda, 2011). It is important that principals understand that teachers need to have a
comprehensive understanding of procedural knowledge so that they are able to determine the
best strategies required for students to be successful on assigned activities. The final knowledge
that is relevant in assisting stakeholders in realizing their performance goal is metacognitive
knowledge. This type of knowledge requires individuals to be cognizant of one’s own cognitive
ability and cognitive processes (Rueda, 2011). This requires employees to engage in reflective
practices and determine next steps regarding the identified learning gaps. While it is imperative
that stakeholders have a strong knowledge base of all four types of knowledge in order to
achieve the performance goal, for the purpose of this research, current research will dictate the
types of knowledge that will be employed based on knowledge gaps identified at K-12 schools in
Maryland.
Principals need to know how to identify targeted professional development to close the
academic achievement gap. The instructional role of teachers continues to be viewed as the
primary force responsible for student achievement. Therefore, principals need knowledge of how
to effectively build teacher capacity to increase student outcomes. Effective principals ensure

54
that teachers engage in continuous professional learning and they utilize research-based
strategies to improve teaching and learning (Krasnoff, 2015). The Common Core State Standards
have placed enormous pressure on school district and school administrators to ensure that
students perform at the highest standards. This shift has highlighted the need for principals to
ensure that teachers possess strong content knowledge and pedagogical skills (Zhang, 2014). In
order for K-12 schools to achieve their performance goals, principals need knowledge of how to
effectively implement strategies that will close academic achievement gap for low-
socioeconomic students, as measured by formative and summative assessments and daily
activities; as a result of this, principals need to know how to identify targeted professional
development and provide it to their teachers. Hill (2009) further contends that it is seldom
investigated whether or not teachers who need specific content knowledge are actually the ones
registering and attending professional development sessions on that topic. Effective professional
development considers the needs, interests and concerns of individual teachers, the school, or the
school district (Hunzicker, 2011). Restructuring professional development to mirror the needs of
adult learners enables the shift from a ‘one shot,’ ‘sit and get’ to one where teacher learning is
embedded in the daily routine (Hunzicker, 2011). A number of teachers at K-12 schools display
a learning gap when implementing strategies such as differentiation and close reading. The
school principals need knowledge of how to effectively conduct needs assessment and assist
teachers in identifying the types of learning that best suits their needs and provide opportunities
for teachers to be able to partake in the learning. Research shows that “educators, who do not
experience effective professional development, do not improve their skills, and student learning
suffers” (Mizell, 2010, p.9). Hunzicker (2011) posited that effective professional development
seeks to engage teachers in learning activities that are “supportive, job-embedded, instructionally

55
focused, collaborative, and ongoing” (p.176). She further stated that professional development
sessions that embrace these characteristics propel teachers to be more inclined to view the
knowledge as relevant and authentic, which increases the likelihood of teacher learning and
resulting in improved teaching practice. If school principals hope to impact student achievement,
then teacher quality, and by extension, teacher development, plays a critical role (Odden, 2011).
As the instructional leader, the principals need procedural knowledge as to how to implement
best practices around professional development opportunities that will enable teachers to
increase student achievement.
Principals must understand their role as instructional leaders and employ instructional
leadership approaches in order to support teachers in acquiring the skills and strategies that
are necessary to close the achievement gap for students of low socioeconomic status. As
instructional leaders, principals must understand the importance of participating in professional
development that is designed for teachers within their schools (Hirsh, 2010). The principals’
presence during teachers’ professional development emits light on the importance of the problem
or topic being tackled, it portrays the attributes of a dedicated leader, provides great insights into
the challenges teachers will encounter in the classroom, acts as a channel to provide scope and
relevant follow-up support, and allows one to assess the relevance of the professional
development (Hirsh, 2010). Additionally, this provides the springboard for principals to fulfill
their responsibilities to monitor the implementation of the changes they wish to effect in
classrooms and during collaborative team meetings (Hirsh, 2010). Moreover, Hirsh (2010) noted
that when principals are provided opportunities to participate in collaborative teams that mirror
the traits of teacher collaborative teams, principals benefit from the experiences. By being
members of collaborative teams, principals can establish fellowship and shared duties for student

56
achievement (Hirsh, 2010). As part of a collaborative community, principals are provided
opportunities to provide perspectives on each other’s data, identify common learning priorities
for teachers and students, and evaluate and engage in reflection with a community of
practitioners who are best positioned to support their learning (Hirsh, 2010). Principals need
effective coaching that supports them in confronting current concerns including helping them to
achieve their long-term goals (Hirsh, 2010). As instructional leaders, principals can improve
learning through their participation in teacher development, engagement in principal
collaborative learning, and working with an expert (Hirsh, 2010).
Effective principals see dialogue with their teachers as the bedrock to instructional
leadership, and they place value on the types of dialogue that enable teachers to be cognizant of
and engage in reflection relating to their instructional practices and development (Blasé & Blasé,
1999). Furthermore, effective principals guide teachers by making suggestions. These
suggestions promote reflective practice among teachers, assist teachers in implementing
innovative ideas, enable teachers to employ various teaching strategies, help teachers to cater to
the diverse need of students, promote meaningful and strategic planning, encourage risk taking,
allow instruction to be more targeted, and encourage the utilization of teachers’ professional
judgement to implement change (Blasé & Blasé, 1999). Additionally, instructional leaders
provide ongoing feedback to teachers. Feedback has a positive impact on teachers; it reinforces
instructional best practices, promotes creativity, builds instructional repertoire, is responsive to
the varying needs of students, and allows teachers to engage in purposeful planning of lessons
(Blasé & Blasé, 1999). Instructional leaders lead by example; they explicitly model best
practices for teachers during learning walks and provide opportunities for teachers to take part in
conferences to discuss techniques (Blasé & Blasé, 1999). As noted by Blasé and Blasé (1999),

57
when principals create relationships on the foundation of trust and mutual respect, teachers
welcome modeling and discussions regarding instructional practices. Effective instructional
leaders use inquiry to garner advice and perspectives about classroom instructions from teachers
(Blasé & Blasé, 1999). This approach positively influences teachers’ motivation, builds
confidence, increases efficacy, and promotes a feeling of security (Blasé & Blasé, 1999).
Additionally, effective instructional leaders promote the instructional growth of teachers
by increasing their pedagogical skills and providing opportunities for teachers to interact with
their colleagues regarding their instructional practices and learning (Blasé & Blasé, 1999).
Instructional leadership requires principals to develop teachers as leaders who collaborate with
their colleagues to assess their teaching and learning (Blasé & Blasé, 1999). According to the
findings from Blasé and Blasé (1999), principals acknowledged that it was important to build
collaborative networks among teachers in order to promote teaching and learning through the
avenue of professional development. This was made possible through the basis of modeling a
belief of teamwork, allowing teachers to communicate regularly about the work, encouraging
and providing opportunities for teachers to engage in peer observation (Blasé & Blasé, 1999). All
organizational goals are accomplished by employing a system of networking processes that
necessitate specialized knowledge, skills, and motivation to operate successfully; hence, these
work processes specify how people, equipment, and materials must be connected and intermingle
over time to produce the desired outcomes (Clark & Estes, 2008). Instructional leaders promote
the restructuring of instructional programs by supporting a myriad of approaches to teaching and
learning, are flexible when it relates to student grouping, staffing, instructional strategies, and
how resources are allocated in order to build teacher capacity and promote reflective practice
(Blasé & Blasé, 1999). When principals facilitate and promote the redesign of programs, build

58
efficacy, promote reflection amongst teachers, and provide a greater menu of strategies to
improve classroom instructions (Blasé & Blasé, 1999) students achievement gap decreases for
students of low socioeconomic status.
Principals need to know how to support teachers in using data-driven decision making
to close the academic achievement gap. The pervasiveness of accountability systems has
resulted in an increase in demands for evidence of student performance, resulting in the use of
data becoming very rampant in various countries (Marsh & Farrell, 2014). In order for City
Public Schools to meet its stakeholder goal, it is imperative that principals are equipped to use
multiple forms of data to make decisions regarding instructional practices. They need to know
how to support teachers in using data-driven decisions to close the academic achievement gap for
students of low-socioeconomic status. Advocates credit data-driven decision making as a key
factor in improving instructional practices and student achievement (Marsh & Farrell, 2014).
Marsh et al. (2006), defined data-driven decision making as the systematic process employed by
principals, teachers, and school administrators to gather, and analyzing various forms of data to
inform a wide range of decisions with the intent to improve student achievement and develop
schools. However, research indicate that although there is a wide spectrum of data available,
such as student work, district interim assessments, state standardized assessments, and
observations of classroom practices, principals do not necessarily know how to use data to
effectively elicit a change in teachers’ instructional practices and improved student outcomes
(Heritage, Kim, Vendlinski, & Herman, 2009; Olah et al., 2010).
Principals need knowledge of how to effectively utilize data systems to improve student
achievement. The construction and enhancement of data systems are indispensable to an
organization’s capability to successfully gather, transmit, and utilize data (Gill, Borden, &

59
Hallgren, 2014). Therefore, principals need procedural knowledge of how to precisely gather
high-quality raw data, engage in the types of analysis that guarantee data derived are pertinent
and analytic, and employ apposite diagnostic information to make decisions concerning
instructional practices and management decisions (Gill et al., 2014). School principals are
responsible for analyzing the overall performance of schools, which entails assessing overall
student achievement and staff effectiveness and growth (Gill et al., 2014). Thus, school
principals must possess the capacity to efficiently create and monitor school practices, initiatives,
and policies in order to realize the school’s target and goals (Gill et al., 2014). In order for this to
be attainable, principals are required to have knowledge of how to successfully gather and utilize
data, not only specific to raw student achievement but also based on the impact of teachers on
student outcomes, as well as the principals’ own performance on student outcomes as evaluated
by their supervisors, teachers or even parents (Gill et al., 2014).
The knowledge and skills that principals possess can have a detrimental effect on the
effective implementation of data-driven decision-making processes. One of the challenges
highlighted by Marsh and Farrell (2014) was that principals and teachers may not possess the
knowledge and skills needed to formulate questions, select indicators, and identify solutions.
This lack of knowledge in the type of questions needed to be asked, prevents school leaders from
properly engaging in root cause analysis, in order to drill down to the areas that need to be
addressed to effectively improve student achievement. If principals are to ensure that teachers in
K-12 schools master the art of data-driven decision making and implement various strategies to
improve outcome for economically disadvantaged students, principals must be able to provide
them adequate time, opportunity, and tools to do so effectively. Cosner (2011b) posited that
principals demonstrated challenges in effectively supporting teachers in the use of data, as they

60
often fail to provide specific guidance or place emphasis on future instructional practices, while
failing to examine past practices. School leaders must ensure that teachers have concrete
knowledge that data needs to be “collected, organized and analyzed to become information and
then combined with stakeholder understanding and expertise to become actionable knowledge”
(Marsh & Farrell, 2014, p. 271). Therefore, it is paramount that principals have a clear
understanding that data literacy needs to be explicitly taught and become a part of the
professional learning cycles so that teachers are adept in the data-driven decision-making
process. Additionally, principals’ lack of instructional knowledge as it relates to data, impedes
teachers’ ability to effectively design and implement lessons in response to data; hence, they will
not be able to appropriately recommend students for tiered interventions. Table 2 provides an
overview of three knowledge influences, types of knowledge and assessment tools for
determining knowledge gaps among stakeholders within K-12 schools in Maryland.
Table 2
Knowledge influences, Types, Assessment for Knowledge Gap Analysis
Organizational Mission

The mission of K-12 schools is to support each student in reaching his or her potential,
through a strong system of accountability to increase academic success for all students and
promote a safe, healthy and orderly environment where students’ physical, mental, social and
emotional well-being are prioritized; while ensuring teachers’ and administrators’
effectiveness.
Organizational Global Goal

The goal of K-12 schools is to ensure that all students have access to high quality education
that prepares them to graduate ready for college, successful careers and success in society and
life.
Stakeholder Goal

By May 2021, 100% of principals will implement at least six relevant professional
development sessions with one focused on data driven decision making, and one that is
focused on creating structures to improve parental engagement in order to close the
achievement gap among students of low socioeconomic status.

61
Table 2, continued
Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type Knowledge Influence Assessment
Principals need to know how to
identify relevant professional
development sessions that are
geared towards teaching
teachers how to close
achievement gap.

Conceptual

Interview: Principals describe how
they provide targeted professional
development to improve teacher
practice.
Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type Knowledge Influence Assessment
Principals need to understand
their role as instructional
leaders in order to plan and
implement effective
professional development that
will assist teachers in closing
the academic achievement gap
for students of low-
socioeconomic status.
Conceptual Interview: Principals describe their
role as instructional leaders. How
would you describe your role as the
leader of the school?
Are there opportunities for teachers
to participate in leadership roles? If
so, will you please describe the
process?
Does the school have an instructional
leadership team? If so, who are its
members and what are the functions
of the instructional leadership team?
How do you support teachers in the
acquisition of necessary skills and
strategies to support student learning?

Principals need to know how to
support teachers by providing
relevant professional
development that will assist
teachers in making accurate
data-driven decisions in order
to improve academic
achievement among students of
low-socioeconomic status.

Procedural

Interview: Principals engage teachers
in data cycles. Explain how you use
data-driven decision making
processes to assist teachers to close
the academic achievement gap.
How do you evaluate if you are
effectively using your data-driven
decision to close the academic
achievement gap for students of low-
socioeconomic status?

Motivation
Motivation is the internal drive one possesses that compels one to move forward and
sustains the momentum until the task is accomplished (Clark & Estes, 2008). Academic
motivation is evident in the efforts employed by the learner to make meaning of material needed

62
to participate in the apposite cognitive processes such as selecting, organizing, and integrating.
Hence, motivation is defined as the internal state responsible for instigating and maintaining
goal-directed behaviors (Mayer, 2011). Motivation impacts three important aspects of one’s
personal and professional life. These entail the choice one makes in deciding to work toward a
particular goal; the level of persistence displayed in order to achieve the goal; and the efforts
invested in ensuring that the task is accomplished (Clark & Estes, 2008). Clark and Estes (2008)
also proposed that in order to increase performance levels within K-12 schools, it is imperative to
eradicate unnecessary “demotivators” by providing positive motivational support that is geared
toward closing performance gaps. In order for principals at K-12 schools in Maryland to
effectively implement strategies to increase student performance, they need to feel empowered
and be able to see the value in the types of professional development sessions they engage in.
They also need to build their capacity by engaging in metacognitive strategies such as reflective
practices so that they are able to operate at peak performance (Mayer, 2011). Thus, self-efficacy
and expectancy value theories will provide the premise on which motivational influences relating
to stakeholders achieving their performance goal will be examined.
Self-efficacy theory. Principals need to believe that they possess the capacity to
implement effective strategies that will improve student achievement. Human beings are both the
products and producers of their environments; this is due to their abilities to alter their
environmental conditions, thus enabling them to influence the course of events and to contribute
to molding their lives (Bandura, 2000). Pajares (2006) postulated that people’s actions are
propelled by their perceived beliefs in their own efficacy. Self-efficacy is defined as individuals’
conviction about their abilities to perform or succeed at a task (Pajares, 2006). Additionally,
Pajares (2006) theorized that people who are confident in their abilities work harder, assess their

63
progress more frequently, and participate in self- monitoring strategies to increase success.
Bandura (2000) purported that efficacy plays an integral role in human functioning both directly
and indirectly, as it is responsible for channeling people’s goals, aspiration, expectations,
emotional tendencies, and perception of hindrances and opportunities in the social environment.
Efficacy influences one's thought process, thus impacting the choices they make, efforts they
exert, and the extent to which they exhibit persistence. Pajares, (2006) postulated that “unless
people believe that their actions can produce the outcomes they desire; they have little incentive
to act or to persevere in the face of difficulties” (p.1).
The principal plays a crucial role in creating a school culture that promotes high-
achieving schools (Hesbol, 2019). In a study, Hesbol (2019) examined various subcategories of
learning institutions in order to ascertain if principals contemplate different organizational
behaviors as a representation for measures of what constitutes learning organizations and how it
relates to the principals’ self-efficacy. The study revealed that in order for principals to convince
employees to perform at optimal, they must be extremely effectual, and must possess a firm
belief in teachers and the organization en bloc to undertake the kinds of school development
initiatives and evidence-based ‘organizational learning’ devices capable of increasing student
achievement (Hesbol, 2019).
Bandura (2000) posited that perceived self-efficacy increases the choices that leaders,
such as principals, contemplate when they are required to arrive at a decision. On the other hand,
if principals’ sense that they are inadequate regarding specific initiatives, they are likely to
exhibit the tendency to dismiss that perceived self-efficacy as a possibility during the decision-
making process (Hesbol, 2019). Additionally, when leaders operate on the premise that the
environment is susceptible to be controlled or altered, strong leader self-efficacy is the result

64
(Abuzid & Abbas, 2016; Machida & Schaubroeck, 2011). Thus, when leaders operate on the
notion that their environment can be altered, their self-efficacy intensifies to manage their
environment; however, when they view it as unalterable, it destabilizes their efficacy (Hesbol,
2019). Simultaneously, “principals’ self-efficacy may play a mediating role influencing the
principals’ interpretation of the organizational context and their problem-solving processes and
affect the nature and effectiveness of principals’ practices” (Hesbol, 2019, p. 34).
Principals are able to assess the school in its current state, and then develop a perception
or vision of what it should be; therefore, it is imperative that the principals view the institution as
adjustable; they must operate on the idea that through the implementation of specific structures,
human resources, policies, procedures, and cultural norms and expectations, the school can foster
high performance for teachers and students (Hesbol, 2019). Additionally, Hesbol (2019) further
argues that principals must believe that school improvement and student outcomes are a portion
of their responsibility, and must operate with the conviction that although schools experience
various internal and external demands, principals must function on the common understanding
that the characteristics of stakeholders such as teachers, parents, and students greatly impact
school and student achievement. Principals must, therefore, possess the capacity to capitalize on
the knowledge and expertise of stakeholders, and persuade them to perform, while at the same
time knowing when control needs to be relinquished (Bandura & Wessels, 1997; Hesbol, 2019).
When principals’ self-efficacy is high, they are able to lead and facilitate organizational learning
by supporting teachers to execute their duties and creating structures to foster communication of
ideas between several systems inside the school (Hesbol, 2019).
Expectancy-value theory. Principals need to see the value in providing professional
development for teachers. Wigfield and Eccles (2000) asserted that achievement choices are

65
directly impacted by expectancies and values. The researchers claimed that expectancies and
values also influence performance, effort, and persistence. Hence, expectancies and values are
also presumed to be swayed by an individual’s beliefs in his or her ability to complete a specified
task, the perceived complexity of the tasks, individual’s prior knowledge, and affective
memories (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000). The researchers further stated that cognitive variables are
then shaped by one’s perception of their own prior experiences and a myriad of social influences.
The way employees perceive the effectiveness of the group to which they belong, are critical to
determine whether they will be satisfied with and committed to the group and the organization as
a whole (Borgogni, Dello Russo, & Latham, 2011). Eccles (2009) provided four value
guidelines for goal attainment. These were classified as attainment value, intrinsic value, utility
value, and cost value. All of these values are important for K-12 schools to achieve their
stakeholder goal; however, utility value is most important in allowing K-12 schools to reach their
performance goal as the principal has to strategically align programs, structures, and procedures
to the goals of the school. Utility value focuses on the extent to which a task aligns to an
individual’s goal (Eccles, 2009). It is imperative that whenever learning opportunities are
provided, they are designed with the needs of the stakeholders and the goals of the organization
so that the utility value can be at its pinnacle. Principals need to operate on the belief that when
stakeholders have a vested interest in the tasks, it results in an increased level of engagement
which leads to improved performance (Schraw, 2009).
Table 3 shows the assumed motivational influences and the goals that are necessary to
close the academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and economically
disadvantaged students.

66
Table 3
Assumed Motivational Influences and Assessment for Motivational Gap Analysis
Organizational Mission

The mission of K-12 schools is to support each student in reaching his or her potential, through a strong
system of accountability to increase academic success for all students and promote a safe, healthy and
orderly environment where students’ physical, mental, social and emotional well-being are prioritized;
while ensuring teachers’ and administrators’ effectiveness.

Organizational Global Goal

The goal of K-12 schools is to ensure that all students have access to high quality education that prepares
them to graduate ready for college, successful careers and success in society and life.

Stakeholder Goal

K-12 principals will implement at least six relevant professional development sessions with one focused
on data driven decision making and one that is focused on creating structures to improve parental
engagement in order to close the achievement gap among students of low socioeconomic status.

Motivational Indicator(s)

Assumed Motivation Influences

Motivational Influence Assessment

Self-Efficacy- Principals need to believe that they
possess the capacity to implement effective
professional development by employing instruction
leadership to support teachers to learn and implement
strategies that will close the academic achievement
gap for students of low-socioeconomic status.

Interview: Do you feel confident in your ability
to implement effective strategies to close the
academic achievement gap for students of low-
socioeconomic status? Why or why not?

Expectancy Value-Principals need to see the value in
providing teachers the types of professional
development sessions that will close the academic
achievement gap for students of low-socioeconomic
status.

Interview: How difficult is it for you to provide
teachers access to the kinds of professional
development sessions that are relevant to the
needs of your school? Will you please provide an
explanation?
Will you please describe a time when you
noticed deficits within a teacher's skill set and
the needs of students? How were you able to
provide teachers with the skills or experience
they need? Or What were some of the barriers
that prevented you from effectively providing
support to teachers?

67
Organization
Effective change management occurs when solutions to performance gap are congruent
to the culture of the organization (Clark & Estes, 2008). Organization and institutions can be a
primary influence on the performance goal (Rueda, 2011). Inadequate processes and lack of
materials can hinder the achievement performance goals even for people who possess top
motivation and exceptional knowledge and skills (Clark & Estes). For K-12 principals to achieve
their goal and implement strategies such as engaging teachers in effective professional
development, promoting an atmosphere of data-driven decision making, and creating buy-in to
effectively close achievement gaps between advantaged and disadvantaged students, issues
relating to organizational influences must be addressed in conjunction with the previously
outlined knowledge and motivation influences. Commencement with the general theory about
organizational culture, this section reviews literature that focuses on the organizational cultural
models and settings specifically affecting K-12 principals in achieving their goal.
General organization theory. Organizational culture can be defined as the sum of a
group’s learning in its efforts to survive, grow, and cope with its external environment, and
organize itself (Schein, 2017). Thus, it is abstract, and exists in a group’s unconscious, and has a
powerful influence on a group’s behavior (Schein, 2017). The notion of culture infers structural
stability, depth, breadth, and patterning or integration, arising from the fact that groups view
culture as a learned phenomenon, similarly to how personality and character are associated with
an individual’s learned phenomena (Schein, 2017). Therefore, culture is both stable and
dynamic, and subsists, in spite of the fact that some members leave the organization. Culture is,
therefore, inescapable and impacts every facet of how an organization handles its primary
function, its various environments, and its internal operations (Schein, 2017). Culture suggests

68
that rituals, values, and behaviors are knotted together into a reasoned whole, and this pattern or
integration is the ethos of what defines culture (Schein, 2017). Additionally, as organizations
progress and formulate subgroups, those subgroups formulate their own subcultures, which may
operate contrary to each other or the larger “corporate culture” (Schein, 2017).
Organizational culture can be examined from three well-defined vantages: artifacts,
espoused beliefs and values, and basic underlying assumptions (Schein, 2017). Artifacts focus on
the visible and tangible products of the group such as the physical environment, language,
resources, emotional displays, organizational charts, published values, and noticeable rituals of
the organization. They are easy to observe but challenging to decipher. The organizational
climate is also considered an artifact of the organizational culture. Espoused beliefs and values
are the explicitly articulated shared norms, beliefs, values, and aspirations that provide a compass
for members of the group to solve problems and shape behaviors. Lastly, underlying assumptions
focus on the implicitly, unconsciously entrenched beliefs and values that govern the organization
(Schein, 2017). It is important for change leaders to examine how identified beliefs, values, and
assumptions might promote or inhibit the proposed change program (Schein, 2017). If leaders
are not cognizant of the culture in which they are implanted, those cultures will manage them;
therefore, an understanding of culture is desirable for everyone, but it is imperative for leaders if
they ought to lead (Schein, 2004). The succeeding sections will examine the literature relevant to
the principals’ achievement of their performance goal as it relates to culture at K-12 schools in
Maryland as learning organizations, specifically, the cultural models and settings related to these
schools being able to achieve their goal.
Cultural models. Cultural models are the common mental schema or normative
interpretation of how the world functions, or should function (Schneider, Brief, & Guzzo, 1996).

69
It can be viewed as the historically shared perception, thoughts, and solutions to adaptive
challenges and changing conditions (Schneider et al., 1996). They represent the invisible
organizational influences such as values, beliefs, and attitudes (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001).
Cultural models can enhance or hinder the organizational performance goal. In the context of a
school or organizational setting, cultural models assist in molding the structure of an
organization through its values, practices, policies, and reward structures (Rueda, 2011). This
section reviews literature related to specific cultural models at K-12 Schools that may be barriers
or assets to stakeholder achieving their goal, including communication of organizational values
and expectations and trust.
Communication. The organization needs to implement a system of effective
communication. To establish a culture of high expectations for all students, the mission, vision,
goals, and expectations must be clearly communicated to all stakeholders, and the need for
change verified in order to create buy-in (Rainey & Fernandez, 2012). Organizational policies,
practices, and structures are important to communicate when examining performance gaps as
they help to determine whether or not an individual, group, or school meets its performance goal
(Berger, 2014; Rueda, 2011). Clear goals and strategies allow teams to navigate stressful
circumstances, while at the same time enabling principals to determine whether or not
performance goals have been realized (Northouse, 2015). Additionally, communication
comprises an informational and corrective feedback mechanism which helps employees in
adjusting the knowledge and skills they are employing to achieve their goal (Clark & Estes,
2008). Clear and open communication stimulates trust and assists people in altering their
performance to accommodate unexpected events (Clark & Estes, 2008). When leaders,
supervisors, and organizational culture reinforce strategic employee communications, the

70
likelihood increases that both individual and organizational performances improve and
strengthen (Berger, 2014).
Trust. The organization needs to assist principals in fostering a culture of trust in the
school between principals and teachers in order for the organization to achieve its goal. Trust is
an essential element for the growth and development of organizations. Trust can inhibit or
enhance workplace motivation; thus, when supervisors or managers are perceived as biased,
duplicitous, or dishonest, trust is lost (Clark & Estes, 2008). For an organization to earn trust
from stakeholders, principals must demonstrate that they genuinely care for teachers, students,
and parents alike (Tschannen-Moran, & Gareis, 2015). Teachers' trust in principals is contingent
on the principals’ ability to operate in their role as leaders (Handford & Leithwood, 2013).
Principals are accountable for promoting a persuasive vision for the school, by mirroring desired
professionalism for educators, training teachers to match their skills with the vision, managing
organizational resources effectively and fairly, and arbitrating the unavoidable conflicts that arise
as teachers participate in the intricate tasks of teaching (Tschannen-Moran, 2014a). Teachers rely
on principals to navigate these difficult tasks effectively in order to accomplish the
correspondingly intricate roles they share in educating students (Tschannen-Moran & Gareis,
2015). Therefore, the organization must prepare principals with the knowledge of how to balance
the task aspect of their role with the relationship aspect of leadership (Tschannen-Moran, 2014a).
When principals are able to validate the aptitude to accomplish the task, irrespective of the task,
teachers are more apt to trust in principals (Tschannen-Moran, & Gareis, 2015). Principals who
consistently operate in ways that promote trust in various situations are more susceptible to earn
and maintain the trust of their staff than those who do not (Handford & Leithwood, 2013;

71
Tschannen-Moran, 2014a). Teachers need to be able to trust that their leaders are reliable and are
impartial in allocating resources and assigning rewards (Berger, 2014).
Buy-in. The organization needs to create a culture of teacher buy-in between school
principals and teachers so that the school is able to effectively implement change to improve
student achievement. Change is inevitable in any organization; it is sometimes sought, oftentimes
it is opposed, and at times it is imposed upon others (Lewis, 2011). Thus, it is imperative that
principals are able to create buy-in and garner support from teachers when thinking about
changes regarding learning and instructional practices. School districts must ensure that
principals possess the capacity to allow teachers to understand why changes need to take place,
include teachers in the change process, and equip employees with the resources and support
needed to effectively implement the required changes or practices. School principals build
capacity by the way they involve and include teachers in the change process, and by the amount
of autonomy and support they are provided to effectively execute their duties (Bolman & Deal,
2013). Change is seen as the alternative to alleviating previous failures and the channel by
which learning and progress can be obtained (Lewis, 2011). However, these changes can only be
possible if school principals are able to effectively communicate the change, guide others to
understand the relevance of the change and how to appropriately implement the desired change.
Leaders who are unsuccessful in their efforts to enact change, and who lack the capacity to
implement creative ideas methodically and successfully, are most likely not able to achieve the
rewards of the most successful ideas (Lewis, 2011). Therefore, organizations must have
dedicated employees who are driven and are operating as change agents (Atkinson, 2016), so as
to minimize resistance to change. Principals must therefore be supported in how to use division
of labor through the creation of various roles in order to work cohesively as a team. They must

72
then utilize both vertical and horizontal approaches to merge the numerous components (Bolman
& Deal, 2013). According to Atkinson (2016), the key to success for any change initiative within
any organization is the level of interaction between the major players and the change process.
The players are described as the sponsors, the catalysts, and the targets of the change initiatives.
The sponsors are those who are responsible for leading the change process; the consultants are
accountable for implementing the change and developing the capacity of those with whom they
share a close working relationship, while the targets of the change are those who must host the
change, apply the learning and work to ensure that the change is implemented (Atkinson, 2016).
Successful implementation of change initiatives requires major investment coordination among
the three players in order to amalgamate their interest and collaborate as a unit with the goal of
increasing overall performance as their top priority (Atkinson, 2016). The principals play
multiple roles within the change process and are responsible for ensuring that the change is
successfully implemented and is sustainable within their schools. Thus, the school system needs
to articulate a vision for principals as instructional leaders and provide professional development
to support them in accomplishing their goals in this role (Hirsh, 2010). Principals must be
supported in building a coalition to create buy-in to support professional development and
instructional shifts that are necessary to bring about desired change in order to improve student
achievement.
Cultural settings. Cultural settings are the location where organizational policies and
practices are enacted (Rueda, 2011). It focuses on the more visible aspect of the organization.
Cultural settings affect behaviors and are molded by individuals and groups who operate in the
same cultural models that molded their behavior (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001; Rueda, 2011).
The reciprocal relationships between cultural models and cultural settings are not considered to

73
be mechanistic or static in nature, but as dynamic and interactional processes (Rueda, 2011). The
inclusion of cultural models and cultural settings is not confined to improving student
achievement for only ethnic minority students, but for students in all ethnic groups (Schneider et
al., 1996). This section reviews literature related to specific cultural settings at K-12 schools that
may be barriers or assets to stakeholder achieving their goal, including principal training and
resources.
Resources. Organizations must equip principals with the resources necessary to
implement effective strategies to close the academic achievement gap between advantaged and
disadvantaged students. The scope of resources includes access to high-quality teachers who can
serve as mentors to early career teachers, increase professional learning opportunities, connect
school and home community, and implement data-driven decision processes. Deficiency in
efficient organizational work processes and material resources result in performance gaps (Clark
& Estes, 2008). Organizations must be equipped with tangible materials and equipment in order
to achieve their goal (Clark & Estes, 2008). Moreover, when organizations fail to provide
employees with the necessary resources that were promised to achieve high priority work goals
or when policy is not reinforced by effective work processes or procedures, this results in
conflict between certain parts of the organizational culture and performance goals (Clark &
Estes, 2008). For instance, novice teachers serve more struggling students from low-income
families than experienced teachers, therefore, organizations must focus on retention and support
for novice teachers; since it has significant implications for school operations, and student
learning and achievement (Bruno, Rabovsky, & Strunk, 2019). Additionally, organizations must
manage constant change, however, principals in dissimilar types of organizations require
different support to manage both dramatic change and routine challenges (Clark & Estes, 2008).

74
Table 4 illustrates a summary of organizational influences and related assessments necessary for
principals to achieve their goal of implementing strategies to close the academic achievement
gap between economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students. This goal was
developed in response to low assessment scores particularly for students who fall within the
economically disadvantaged subgroup. Forty percent or more of the population falls within the
economically disadvantaged subgroup within these school districts and often perform poorly
based on state assessment reports.
Table 4
Organizational Influences
Organizational Mission

The mission of K-12 schools is to support each student in reaching his or her potential,
through a strong system of accountability to increase academic success for all students and
promote a safe, healthy and orderly environment where students’ physical, mental, social and
emotional well-being are prioritized; while ensuring teachers’ and administrators’
effectiveness.
Organizational Global Goal

The goal of K-12 schools is to ensure that all students have access to high-quality education
that prepares them to graduate ready for college, successful careers, and success in society
and life.
Stakeholder Goal

By May 2021, 100% of principals will implement at least six relevant professional
development sessions with one focused on data-driven decision making and one that is
focused on creating structures to improve parental engagement in order to close the
achievement gap among low students of low socioeconomic status.
Assumed Organizational Influences Organization Influence Assessment
Cultural Model Influence 1: The
organization needs to implement a
system of open communication, trust,
and buy-in.
Interview to determine stakeholders’ effectiveness
of communication systems to articulate the
mission, vision, goals, and initiatives.
Cultural Model Influence 2: The
organization needs to foster a culture of
trust in the school among principals,
teachers, and parents in order for the
organization to achieve its goal.
Interview to ascertain the level of trust among
stakeholders such as principals, teachers, and
parents.

75
Table 4, continued
Assumed Organizational Influences Organization Influence Assessment
Cultural Model Influence:3
K-12 schools need to foster a culture of
teacher buy-in between principals and
teachers in order for the organization to
achieve its goal.
Interview to determine how the schools create buy-
in amongst stakeholders as it relates to
implementing change initiatives.
Cultural Setting Influence 4:
K-12 schools need to provide adequate
resources that will assist principals in
implementing effective strategies to
close the academic achievement gap for
students of low-socioeconomic status.
Interview to determine if schools have adequate
resources and programs needed to close the
academic gap for economically disadvantaged
students.

Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and Motivation and
the Organizational Context
The conceptual framework is the core of the study, and it provides a depiction of the
researcher’s understanding of how the variables in the study intertwine or connect to each other
(Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Hence, the conceptual framework is a system of
concepts, assumptions, expectations, beliefs and theories that substantiates and informs research
(Maxwell, 2013). It presents a theory which articulates the ideas and beliefs one holds to be true
about a specific problem of study (Maxwell, 2013). The function of the conceptual framework is
to amalgamate the literature and inform the research design in order to enhance goals, create
appropriate and pertinent research questions, determine methodological approaches, and detect
validity threats to the conclusion (Maxwell, 2013). The conceptual framework presented has
considered review of relevant research on the academic achievement gap between economically
advantaged and economically disadvantaged students. While the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences have been presented separately, in order to examine the gap, it is
crucial to analyze how these performance influencers overlap. Furthermore, as these
organizational structures and policies become fixtures in numerous cultural settings, the

76
performance goal can be hindered even when people possess the knowledge and motivation to
achieve those goals (Rueda, 2011). Clark and Estes’ (2008) Gap Analysis Framework will be
used to guide the study.
Figure 1 illustrates the interconnectedness among knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences relating to the stakeholder performance goal. The orange box reflects
the stakeholder goal that by May 2021, 100% of principals will implement at least six relevant
professional development sessions with one focused on data-driven decision making and one that
is focused on creating structures to improve parental engagement in order to close the
achievement gap among low students of low socioeconomic status. The outer blue circle
represents the organization’s global goal. Within the global goal, are the knowledge and
motivation influences that affect school principals’ ability to effectively implement strategies to
increase student achievement and close the academic achievement gap for low-socioeconomic
students. The knowledge influence consists of conceptual, factual, and procedural knowledge
that is necessary for principals to effectively communicate the school’s vision, mission, goals,
and expectations to all stakeholders. The conceptual knowledge relates to the principals’ ability
to identify relevant professional development to support teachers in closing the academic
achievement gap for students of low-socioeconomic status and to examine the principals’ ability
to employ various leadership practices in order to achieve desired results. The factual knowledge
addresses how the principals identify and address barriers to parental engagement for families of
economically disadvantaged students, while the procedural knowledge examines the principals’
knowledge in supporting teachers to make accurate data-driven decisions to improve academic
performance for students of low-socioeconomic status. Motivation influences include self-
efficacy and expectancy-value. Principals need to feel confident in their ability to achieve their

77
goal. They also need to see value in the learning in which they engage, thus, they are able to
reciprocate this for teachers as they leverage resources to provide high-quality professional
development to build teacher capacity in order to increase student achievement.
The arrow connecting the black circles represents simultaneous interaction between the
knowledge and motivation influences. The arrow pointing to the stakeholder goal demonstrates
the interdependent relationship between motivation and knowledge influences, and that goal
attainment is reliant on those influencers. Sitting in the outer green circle are the organizational
influences such as cultural models and cultural settings-which also encompass the knowledge
and motivation influencers. Within the cultural models are the trust and communication factors.
The cultural settings consist of the resources that are necessary for the stakeholder goal to be
realized. However, if any of these influencers are not addressed, the organization risks not
meeting its goal. Missing or inadequate processes and materials can impede the performance
achievement goal, even among people with top motivation and superior knowledge and skills
(Clark & Estes, 2008).

78

Figure 1. Conceptual framework: Interaction of stakeholder knowledge and motivation within
organizational cultural models and settings.

79
Conclusion
This improvement study aims to identify the resources necessary for K-12 schools to
meet their goal of all principals effectively implementing strategies to close the academic
achievement gap between economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students,
thus achieving its global goal of closing the academic achievement gap for all students by
ensuring that all K-12 students have access to high-quality education that prepares them to
graduate ready for college, successful careers and success in society and life. To inform this
study this chapter has reviewed literature that relates to the academic achievement gap between
economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students. This literature review has
also identified assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences specifically related
to the stakeholder goal. The knowledge influences that have been identified are conceptual,
factual, and procedural knowledge about the principals’ ability to identify and implement
relevant professional development, engage in data-driven decision processes, and reflect practice
within K-12 schools in Maryland. The motivation influences include self-efficacy about
principals’ ability to implement strategies, and expectancy value focuses on the relevance of the
professional development. Finally, organization influences examine the structures for open
communication, trust, and resources. Chapter three will examine the validation processes for
these influences.

80
CHAPTER THREE: METHODS
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this qualitative study was to examine the knowledge and skills,
motivation, and organizational resources that are necessary to assist K-12 schools in Maryland in
reaching the organizational performance goal that, by May 2021, 100% of principals will
implement at least six relevant professional development sessions with one focused on data-
driven decision making in order to close the academic achievement gap among students of low
socioeconomic status. This goal mirrors the Maryland State Department of Education’s mission
to support each student in reaching his or her potential, through a strong system of accountability
to increase academic success for all students and promote a safe healthy, orderly environment
where students’ physical, mental, social and emotional well-being are prioritized; while ensuring
teachers’ and administrators’ effectiveness.
The Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework was used to guide this purposeful
inquiry and assist in identifying the root causes of performance gaps through the analysis of the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences. The analysis began by generating a list of
needs and then moved to examining these systematically to focus on actual or validated needs.
As such, the following questions guided the study:
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs necessary for K-12
principals to implement effective strategies to close the academic achievement gap
between economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students?
2. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and k-12 principals’
knowledge and motivation?

81
Methodological Approach and Rationale
Conducting research involves selecting a study design that aligns with the research
questions, the extent to which the research design mirrors the researcher’s worldview,
personality, and expertise (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Creswell and Creswell (2018) posited that
qualitative research allows the researcher to explore and comprehend the meaning individuals or
groups attribute to social or human problems, such as the reason students of low socioeconomic
status perform much lower than their more economically advantaged peers. It is important to use
qualitative approach for this study as it would support a depth of analysis using various methods
of data sets and it would also allow the researcher to have a more in-depth understanding of the
results while unearthing new viewpoints and developing new measuring tools (Tashakkori &
Teddlie, 1998).
While quantitative research would allow the researcher to measure objective theories by
analyzing the relationship among variables, a qualitative approach to the study would allow the
researcher to use tools such as interviews and document analysis to arrive at perceptual
information that would not otherwise be obtained from surveys and closed-ended questionnaires
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Principals were able to respond and provide detailed responses to
open-ended interview questions, which allowed the researcher to gain in-depth insights into the
principals’ self-efficacy about their ability and practices in which they engage, in order to close
the academic achievement gap between students of high socio-economic status and students from
low socio-economic status. By employing a qualitative approach to the study, the researcher
believed it would provide a more comprehensive and thorough understanding of the phenomenon
being studied and/or explain certain incongruities in the data (Dunning, 2008) as the researcher
was able to ask clarifying questions.

82
Furthermore, the qualitative approach was the most conducive approach as it directly
aligned with the researcher’s constructivist worldview, as the researcher sought to examine the
processes of interaction among individuals (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Constructivists are
interested in researching the exact contexts in which people reside and work in order to
comprehend the historical as well as the cultural context of participants (Creswell & Plano Clark,
2011). Thus, they aspire to understand participants’ context or setting by going to the actual site
and personally collecting information, as they work to ensure that the best understanding of a
research problem is ascertained (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Similarly, qualitative inquiry
concentrates on making sense in context and necessitates a data collection tool that is responsive
to subjacent meaning when assembling and analyzing data (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). This design aspires to achieve the internal validity connected with qualitative
methods, that is, detailed accounts of the phenomenon of interest (Leithwood & Azah, 2014).
Participating Stakeholders
The stakeholder group of focus consisted of K-12 principals within the state of Maryland.
The population comprised approximately 1,400 principals in 24 public school systems in the
state of Maryland. Over 50% of the school districts serve 40% or more FARMs or Title I
students. Principals’ employment within these schools ranged from seven months to over thirty
years. This study sought to identify a sample of principals who would provide an accurate
representation of principals within K-12 schools. In order to gather insights into the problem, a
qualitative method was utilized in the form of interviews and document analysis in order to
compare results from the databases (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The succeeding sections will
address each of the methods that was utilized in the sampling and recruitment for the various
types of data collected such as interviews and document analysis.

83
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Interviews provide more insights into the problem of practice and inform the research
questions, as the interviewer is able to use probes to obtain responses and clarification or
additional information (Johnson & Christensen, 2015). Employing interviews as a sampling
strategy would provide the researcher the opportunity to build rapport and utilize techniques to
promote trust (Johnson & Christensen, 2015). The researcher used a semi-structured interview,
which allowed the researcher to be flexible and responsive by being able to alter the course of
the interview as new information unfolded (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). Additionally, the researcher was able to gain entrance into the inner world of the
interviewees thus, obtaining a deeper understanding of the interviewees’ perspective, (Patton,
2002).
Criterion 1. Maryland K-12 principals who work in school districts that serve 40% or
more FARMs students as well as Title I students. Principals who currently work in the Title I
setting are most equipped to provide relevant and detailed information to inform the research as
to why the problem exists.
Criterion 2. Maryland K-12 principals with one or more years of experience as principal
in school districts that serve 40% or more FARMs students. These principals are best positioned
to provide insights into the research topic as they possess the knowledge and experiences
necessary to reflect upon past practices and discuss root cause analysis of the topic being studied
and provide perceived solutions.
Criterion 3. At least three principals with three or more years of experience as principal
in K-12 schools districts that serve 40% or more FARMs students in elementary school. These
principals possess the experience to inform the research by allowing the researcher to gain

84
insights from the perspective of the elementary school principals to best provide generalization
during analysis of the data.
Criterion 4. At least two principals with three or more years of experience as principal in
school districts serving 40% or more FARMs students in middle school. These principals possess
the experience to inform the research by allowing the researcher to gain insights from the
perspective of the middle school principals to best provide generalization during analysis of the
data.
Criterion 5. Two principals with one or more years of experience as principal in
Maryland public school districts serving 40% or more FARMs students. These principals have
the experience to inform the research by allowing the researcher to gain insights from the
perspective of the high school principals to best provide generalization during analysis of the
data. Having representation from various types of schools will also further validate the findings.
The researcher will also be able to conduct comparative analysis of how the topic being studied
is experienced in high schools, as opposed to how it is experienced in other traditional schools.
Criterion 6. At least two principals representing male or female gender who have
worked for three or more years as principal in school districts that serve 40% or more FARMs
and Title I students. These principals possess the experience to reflect upon their practices and
inform the topic being studied. Ensuring that both the female and male genders are represented,
decreases the likelihood of gender-bias relating to the target population. Additionally, it provides
the basis for the researcher to analyze data to determine if some practices or experiences relating
to the topic being studied are more prevalent among male or female principals.

85
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
Since no analysis can compensate for improperly collected data, it was imperative that
the selection of the manner in which data are acquired is executed with sound judgement (Etikan,
Musa, & Alkassim, 2016). Hence, this qualitative study took the form of nonrandom purposive
sampling and snowball sampling. Thus, it was important to identify selected participants who
possessed the willingness, knowledge, or experiences necessary to provide relevant information
in order to inform the study (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011; Etikan et al., 2016). Moreover, since
the researcher sought to discover, understand, and garner insights into the problem of practice, it
was crucial that a sample be selected from which the most could be garnered (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). While it is important to gather data using large samples, for the purpose of this
study, the researcher aimed to interview a total of 12 K-12 principals due to time constraints.
Thus, it was imperative that the sampling remained consistent with the goals and assumptions
inherent to qualitative methods (Palinkas et al., 2015).
Data Collection and Instrumentation
Using the qualitative method, the researcher was interested in comprehending how
individuals interpret their experiences, how they conceptualize the world in which they live, and
what meaning they ascribe to their experiences (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Hence, qualitative
inquiry, which emphases on meaning in context, involves a data collection instrument that is
responsive to underlying meaning when gathering and interpreting data (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). Therefore, humans are best suited for this task, particularly because interviewing,
observing, and analyzing data are central to qualitative research (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In
this section, the researcher used interviews as the main source of collecting data from principals.
This method allowed the researcher to gain insights into how the knowledge, motivation, and

86
organizational influences at K-12 schools within the state of Maryland work together to assist
school principals in implementing strategies that are geared toward closing the academic
achievement gaps for all students, thus allowing each student to achieve at high levels.
Additionally, the data garnered from individual participants would provide a more in-depth
explanation of how and why the organization operates the way it does from the perspective of the
principal (Yin, 2009).
Interviews
Interview is often considered as the main strategy for collecting data in qualitative
research (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Therefore, the researcher utilized a semi-structured
interview. Thus, allowing the researcher to be flexible and responsive by being able to alter the
course of the interview as new information unfolded (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). Additionally, the researcher would be able to gain access into the inner world of
the participant thus, obtaining a greater insight relating to the participant’s perspective, (Patton,
2002).
Interview Protocol
Prior to the start of the interview, the researcher conducted an introduction and reminded
participants of the purpose and the researchers’ role in the research process. The questions that
were being investigated were directly aligned to the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
needs pinpointed in the literature review and conceptual framework. The interview questions
sought to unveil the principals’ knowledge and motivation related to K-12 organizational goal
that by May, 2021, all principals will implement at least six relevant professional development
sessions, create structures for open communication, and ensure that 100% of teachers are trained
in using data-driven decisions to close academic achievement gap for students of low

87
socioeconomic status as measured by weekly meetings notes, surveys, and student achievement
data. Given the low academic achievement for students in some K-12 schools, coupled with the
academic gap that exists between students from high- and low-income families, some of the
research questions were designed to ascertain information relating to the principals’ self-efficacy,
challenges, and supports received to address this phenomenon. The interview questions were
prepared in advance and were used consistently across all interviews (Creswell & Creswell,
2018). The researcher memorized the interview questions so that it did not appear that the
researcher was reading verbatim from the paper (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Interview Procedures
The interviews were conducted from May 2, 2020, through June 9, 2020. Using the
participants’ work email addresses, emails were sent to principals requesting and reminding them
of their participation in the interview. One day prior to the actual interview, the researcher sent
an email to remind participants of the upcoming interview. The researcher extended the
interviews over a five-week period, in order to provide flexibility in the event of unforeseeable
circumstances, or in the event the interviewer needed to schedule any follow-up interviews. The
researcher aimed to interview a total of twelve principals. The duration of each interview was
expected to last one hour per sitting. The total anticipated number of hours for the interview
process to be completed across all participants was estimated to be 720 minutes in addition to
follow-up interviews as needed. The interviews consisted of open-ended questions. The
principals were the primary source of obtaining data. Principals were asked to rank three dates
indicating the order in which the dates were most suitable to them. The researcher and the
participants agreed on a date and time that was most convenient to the participants. Due to
COVID-19, all interviews took place using Zoom platform or telephone, instead of the original

88
plan to conduct interviews using the face-to-face format. Principals in K-12 schools were fluent
in English; therefore, the interviews were conducted in English. In order to capture as much data
as possible, with participants’ consent, the interviewer audiotaped the interviews, as well as
made handwritten notes. Creswell and Creswell (2018) cautioned that even though an interview
is taped, researchers should take notes in the event the recording equipment malfunctions.
Documents and Artifacts
During the process of this qualitative research, the researcher collected qualitative
documents. Document analysis was conducted in order to triangulate data (Creswell & Creswell
(2018). The types of documents and artifacts that were collected were based on findings from the
review of literature and the conceptual framework. The documents that were analyzed consisted
of Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE) strategic plans in order to examine how
these plans address concerns regarding closing the academic achievement gap for low-
socioeconomic students and promoting equity within the schools. Statewide required documents
posted on MSDE’s website were analyzed to examine the alignment between individual school
districts’ performance and MSDE’s strategic plan. Other important documents that were
examined were documents showing attendance, and student achievement data by districts. This
was done to assess how the documents correlated with the review of literature and responses
from the interviews. Meeting agendas and minutes were also examined in order to arrive at a
deeper understanding of how the school districts’ leadership and expectations mirrored the global
goal for the state. The documents allowed the researcher to make additional inferences which
provided depth into the leadership practices of K-12 school districts and what is being prioritized
in schools. Documentation is vital in a qualitative study as it authenticates and amplifies
evidence from other sources of data collection (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Yin, 2009).

89
Data Analysis
Merriam and Tisdell (2016), define data analysis as the process the researcher employs to
deduce meaning from the data. For this improvement study, interviews were conducted, and
documents analysis was completed and then used in order to triangulate the data. Immediately
after each interview, the researcher generated interview transcripts from Otter, and then reviewed
the recordings to ensure the transcripts accurately reflected the participants’ perspective. On a
few occasions the researcher conducted member checking to ensure accuracy of the data
collected. The researcher checked to ensure all identifiable features were removed from the
transcripts to protect the participants’ privacy and secure the anonymity of the organizations.
Codebook was generated and interview transcripts coded for analysis. Each of the interview
questions was categorized and analyzed according to knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences. From this, the researcher arrived at common themes that aligned to the conceptual
framework and research questions.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
The researcher was the primary instrument in this qualitative research. Therefore, the
researcher was cognizant that her role in the study and her experience as a principal within K-12
schools in Maryland, had the potential for shaping the researcher’s interpretation, in terms of the
themes being prioritized and the meaning attributed to the data (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Thus, the qualitative phase consisted of inherent bias (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Consequently,
this section outlines the measures the researcher took in order to minimize these biases and
increase credibility and trustworthiness throughout the research process.
Within the research design, the researcher sought to ensure that credibility was preserved
by strategically ensuring that the methodology selected aligned with the conceptual framework

90
and the review of literature. It was important to ensure that the interview questions were
designed to garner the types of data that would allow the researcher to make the intended
inferences. It was also important to ensure that the appropriate number of responses was present
in order to make correct inferences. Although no exact number of items can be provided, the
total number of items should range between five and ten (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The
number of questions for each of the three causes ranged from seven to 10 items. The open-ended
questions allowed the participants to share their ideas freely, and that they would not feel
restrained by predetermined items (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The researcher also triangulated
the interview data with document analysis. Employing the strategy of triangulation provided
protection against the researcher’s own biases; thus, increasing the credibility of the study
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Triangulation also assisted the researcher in constructing a coherent
rationale for themes (Creswell& Creswell, 2018).
It was also important to ensure that the data entered would represent the participants’
perspective and not the researcher’s interpreted perspective that was not supported by data.
Therefore, it was important to use member checking to determine the accuracy of the findings
(Creswell& Creswell, 2018). The researcher was cognizant that the participants’ perception of
the researcher could also impact the research findings; thus, the researcher had no supervisory
role over the participants. However, due to the fact that the researcher is a colleague of the
participants, it was possible that the respondents could have been hesitant to answer questions
they believed the researcher should already have the answers to. Hence, it was imperative that
the researcher established her role in the research and the purpose for the research in such a way
that trustworthiness was preserved, and the participants remained responsive.
Validity and Reliability

91
In qualitative research, the same connotation does not apply to validity as it applies to
validity in quantitative studies (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). In this case, the researcher must
ensure that the findings are accurate by using specific strategies, while qualitative reliability
signifies that the approach the researcher employed is consistent (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
The researcher accomplished this by ensuring that transcripts were checked against audio
recordings in order to eliminate obvious mistakes. Here, the researcher would also return with
parts of the polished or semi-polished report to allow participants to verify or clarify and
determine the accuracy of specific descriptions or themes (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The
researcher is aware that good qualitative research consists of comments or disclosure by the
researchers regarding how their analysis of findings is skewed by their background or
experiences (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Thus, these biases were disclosed.
Ethics
Ethical responsibility continues to be one of the fundamental principles of conducting
research, irrespective of the type of research (Casey Fletcher, Schaefer, & Gleddie, 2017). This
qualitative research allowed the researcher to utilize tools such as interviews and document
analysis to gather rich information to arrive at perceptual information that would not otherwise
be obtained from a quantitative study which utilizes surveys and closed-ended questionnaires
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). In order to garner this rich information, the researcher was
cognizant of the ethical principles such as informed consent, which must be employed in order to
ensure that participants understand the nature of the research, are cognizant of potential risk
factors, and are not openly or surreptitiously coerced to participate (Glesne, 2011; Rubin &
Rubin, 2012). In order to safeguard the safety of participants and ensure that participants’ rights
were protected, the researcher submitted the study to the University of Southern California

92
Institutional Review Board (IRB) to ensure adherence to the stipulated guidelines. Informed
consent forms were sent to all participants. The researcher sought to eliminate all potential risks
to participants and reminded them that their privacy was paramount, and that they reserved the
right to withdraw at any point without any pressure of being penalized (Glesne, 2011).
Immediately before the interviews were conducted, the researcher obtained consent to audio-tape
participants. Additionally, due to the unobtrusive nature of recorders, the researcher reminded
participants that they were being recorded, and periodically paused the recorder whenever
someone entered the room (Glesne, 2011).
The Role of the Researcher
The researcher operated on the premise that conversational partnerships were established
on the foundation of trust and mutual respect (Glesne, 2011). This was exhibited by the
researcher keenly listening to the participants and tailoring questions in response to what was
shared by participants, instead of imposing the researcher’s initial ideas without being sensitive
to the responses provided in previous questions (Glesne, 2011). Due to the fact that the
researcher is an employee within the state of Maryland Public Schools, shares a collegial
relationship with participants, and have experience dealing with the research topic, it was
imperative that the answers provided by the participants were free from the researcher’s personal
biases, and that every effort was made to uphold objectivity. Furthermore, in order to stay clear
of coercion, no incentives were provided to participants. However, the researcher informed
participants that broad themes without any identifying information from the results from the
study, would be shared with the school districts and principals in order to increase academic
achievement and create a culture and climate where educational equity is experienced by all

93
students. At the end of the study, a handwritten thank you card was mailed to participants, as a
mark of the researcher’s appreciation for the time and efforts they have invested in the study.
Limitations and Delimitations
There were many limitations and delimitations which the researcher needed to be
cognizant of prior to conducting the study. Limitations can be classified as factors outside the
researcher’s realm of control (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Some of the factors that limited this
study included:
● Limited sample size;
● The study relied on the responsiveness, transparency and truthfulness of participants;
● The time of year in which the study was scheduled to be conducted could have
implication on the number of participants if the study occurs during testing or graduation
season, or during end of year close out;
● There may be difficulty getting enough participants across school districts;
Delimitations are prescribed boundaries outlined by the researcher, which have implications on
the study. These delimitations included:
● The study focused on a specific group of stakeholders so the researcher could not garner
data from teachers in order to gain various perspectives into the knowledge, motivation,
and organizational influences that are necessary to close the academic achievement gap;
● Participants were asked to report on their own actions relating to their knowledge,
motivation, and organizational barriers, employing observations as a data collection
instrument would allow the researcher to gather more in depth information regarding the
principals’ practices as they interact with teachers during professional development and
engage with their colleagues during monthly principals’ development sessions.

94

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
This section utilized the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework to assess the
causes delineated in Chapter 3, to gain an in-depth understanding of how the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences promoted or inhibited K-12 principals’ ability to
implement effective strategies to close the academic achievement gap between economically
advantaged and economically disadvantaged students. The results were arranged by the
categories of assumed causes of knowledge, motivation, and organization. Qualitative data was
collected in order to validate the assumed causes. Specifically, semi-structured interviews and
documents from the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE) were collected and
analyzed to gain insight on the knowledge, motivation, and organizational challenges that
impacted K-12 principals’ ability to close the academic achievement gap between economically
advantaged and economically disadvantaged students.
Based on the researcher's knowledge and personal and professional connections, a Call to
Action letter was emailed to participants who met the criteria of the study to solicit participation
for an interview. After, snowball sampling was employed to increase the participation rate.
Interviews were conducted, and then statewide documents were analyzed. Due to Covid-19, all
interviews were conducted via Zoom. The interview process lasted approximately four weeks.
Documents on the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE) were analyzed after
interview completion.
Participating Stakeholders
Table 5 shows the stakeholder group from whom data was collected to validate the study.
The sample was drawn from K-12 principals in Maryland who work in school districts with 40%
or more FARMs students and serve Title I students. A total of 12 principals voluntarily

95
participated in the study. These participants represented approximately 46% of the school
districts serving 40% or more FARMs students, and participants reflected both male and female
gender. The participants’ experiences ranged from three to 24 years as principals. Three out of
12 participants earned a doctoral degree, while 9 out of 12 participants held a master's
degree. All participants met the criteria outlined in the study.
Table 5
Matrix Reflecting Principal Criteria
Participants Criterion 1: Serve
40% or more
FARMs students
as well as Title 1
students
Criteria 2: 1
or more years’
experience as
Principal
Criteria 3:
Represent
Male (M)
or Female
(F) Gender
Criteria 4: Serve in
Maryland K-12
Schools
Participant
#1
Met 7 years F Met
Participant
#2
Met 24 years F Met
Participant
#3
met 17 years M Met
Participant
#4
Met 8 years F Met
Participant
#5
Met 15 years M Met
Participant
#6
Met 3 years M Met
Participant
#7
Met 12 years F Met
Participant
#8
Met 6 years F Met
Participant
#9
Met 4 years F Met
Participant
#10
Met 9 years F Met
Participant
#11
Met 8 years M Met
Participant
#12
Met 16 years F Met

96
Determination of Assets and Needs
Two sources of data were utilized in the study. The knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences were assessed using interviews as the main source of data collection. A
total of 12 interviews were conducted, with duration ranging from a minimum of 50 minutes to a
maximum of two hours for each interview. These interviews were transcribed and coded.
Document analysis was utilized to triangulate and validate findings from the interview. In order
to determine the validity of the assumed influences, the following criteria were employed:
Assumed influences were determined as an asset if 75% or more of the principals interviewed or
document analyzed provided responses indicating the identified assumed influences; or if ten out
of twelve principals purported to have that influence as an asset. An assumed influence was
considered to be a need if fewer than 75% of participants did not answer the questions
adequately or insufficiently answer the questions based on research. Due to the qualitative nature
of the study, which allowed participants to report on their own practices, findings are based on
the participants’ perception and may not necessarily represent all K-12 principals within the state
of Maryland. Nevertheless, in cases where most principals have the determined influence as an
asset, it provides in-depth knowledge into the principals’ ability to implement strategies to close
the academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and economically
disadvantaged students.
Results and Findings for Knowledge Causes
The assessment of the principals’ knowledge causes was conducted through semi-
structured interviews and document analysis. The findings are presented in the following section
according to Krathwohl’s (2002) categorization of the types of knowledge. The findings are
categorized into two knowledge types; conceptual knowledge and procedural knowledge.

97
Conceptual Knowledge
Interviews were conducted to assess the principals’ conceptual knowledge. Participants
were interviewed on the conceptual knowledge necessary to identify relevant professional
development sessions that are needed for teachers to be able to close the academic achievement
gap between economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students.
Knowledge influence 1. Principals need to know how to identify relevant professional
development sessions that are geared towards teaching teachers how to close the academic
achievement gap.
Interview findings. To assess the first conceptual knowledge influence, principals were
asked to answer three questions. When the questions were averaged, 64% of participants were
able to sufficiently articulate how they identify relevant professional development sessions that
were specifically designed to support teachers with strategies to close the academic achievement
gap. In order for this influence to be determined as an asset, 75% or more of the participants
needed to provide adequate responses to demonstrate how they identify and provide professional
development sessions that are geared toward supporting teachers to close the academic
achievement gap. The first question was a three-part question which asked participants to:
“Name some professional development workshops that are targeted to closing the achievement
gap?” Of the training you have attended, which one do you find most effective?” and “Why do
you find that to be the most effective?” Sixty-seven percent of principals were able to identify
and discuss the types of professional development that were geared toward closing the academic
achievement gap. These principals were also able to articulate why they found a particular
professional development to be most beneficial. Many principals discussed that professional
development on data was very useful in closing the academic achievement gap. Participant 12

98
reported that “professional development around data allows principals to really tease down on
the data, and have the teachers experience that from the students’ perspective so that they are
able to identify those misconceptions from students’ perspective.” Participant 5, shared similar
sentiment, “I actually believe that when administrators are savvy in teaching teachers how to use
data, they help to provide individualized learning opportunities for kids, and therefore help them
to close the achievement gap.”
Social emotional learning and the focus on equity and trauma were also responses
discussed by some participants. Participant 6 stated, “over the past two years we started focusing
on social emotional learning and trauma and how it affects learning”. Participants 7 and 8
agreed that professional development sessions that focus on equity, poverty, and trauma were
most beneficial in closing the academic achievement gap. Although 67% of principals were able
to identify professional development that are geared toward closing the academic achievement
gap, 33% of principals were not able to identify or determine the type of professional
development they found most effective in closing the academic achievement gap. For example,
Participant 9 stated,
I cannot recall specific strategies or one main conversation around closing the gap. There
needs to be more conversations around being strategic about closing the gap beyond
giving me a list of interventions, beyond telling me to look at the data.
Some principals reported training that focused on the technical aspects of operating the school
but were not able to speak to workshops that were specifically designed to close the academic
achievement gap. For example, Participant 2 added that the county provides general workshops
and principals have to create structures to connect students to counselors and provide school
supplies such as uniforms to students whose families are facing financial hardships.

99
The second question that was asked regarding this assumed conceptual influence was for
participants to: Describe how you identify professional development workshops that target
closing the academic achievement gap. The responses for this question indicated a need in
principals' knowledge as only 58% of participants adequately responded to the question. For
example, Participant 4 stated that
At the beginning of the school year, the leadership team along with teachers conduct
needs assessments and have regular discussions around instructional practices and student
performance. School leadership use the results from formal and informal observations,
learning walks, and teacher recommendations or suggestions to identify professional
development to close the academic achievement gap. A lot of times it's based on looking
at the student performance data and looking at commonalities of weaknesses that we see
in observing instruction.
Participant 5 reported using a combination of student achievement data and root cause analysis to
determine the focus of the professional development for teachers:
We collect and analyze schoolwide data, then disaggregate the data by subgroups to
identify gaps in student achievement. The leadership team then dedicates a considerable
amount of time conducting root cause analysis to drill down to why they believe that gaps
exist within particular areas. Once the root causes are ascertained, targeted professional
development sessions are identified and implemented.
Participant 12 asserted that “during collaborative planning, teams discuss high-level strategies
that would be beneficial, but if the strategies are not being observed during learning walks, then
we are forced to go back and identify why the strategies are not being implemented.” Participant
12 questioned, “Is it that the teacher is struggling with classroom management and maybe we

100
need to focus on that aspect in order for the teacher to be able to move to a better understanding
or better implementation?” While some principals were able to satisfactorily address this
question, 42% of principals insufficiently articulated how targeted professional development was
selected. Participant 9 stated, “we don’t really focus on professional development that closes the
gap. The more I think about it, that’s a leadership move that we need to make to ensure we are
putting structures of intervention in place to close the gap.” Participant 10 mentioned that they
used school data to determine the areas of focus but did not sufficiently articulate how the data
was used to determine professional development. When probed to provide an explanation,
Participant 10 stated, “there is definitely a gap. It doesn’t matter what school you are in, low
income and African Americans are performing at lower rates, so the overarching question is why
and what can we do about it?”
The final question that was asked to assess principals’ conceptual knowledge on this
influence was: “How do you evaluate if you have selected the appropriate professional
development session for teachers?” The findings from the interviews revealed that 67% of
participants sufficiently responded to the question. For example, Participants 4 and 5 stated that
resource staff and administrators observe instruction and give non-evaluative feedback to
monitor implementation of the instructional strategy or the learning module that the professional
development seeks to target. Student work that is based on the professional development that is
being assessed, and at the end, assessment data specific to the growth goal is analyzed to
determine growth and next steps. Participant 5 and 6 explained that there is a qualitative type of
success affixed to professional development, but it is only successful when student achievement
improves, and that such success is evaluated through administration of students’ pretest and
posttest aligned to the targeted growth area. At the end of each professional development session,

101
teachers' learning and satisfaction of the professional development is assessed through the use of
a feedback tool. Similarly, Participant 10 stated that they use teacher reflection tools and then
utilize the data to assess the implementation of the professional development in the classroom, to
determine the gains made by students. Participant 6 shared that they progress monitor every two
weeks with each grade level. In the fall and in the spring, they engage in full-day data review by
grade levels to conduct quarterly data review and develop a list of students that demonstrate
particular gaps in skills. Participant 7 responded that they “ask teachers to bring back evidence of
how they've incorporated, a strategy that they have learned. Example, what takeaway do you
plan on trying in your classroom, and then I actually asked them to provide evidence that they've
tried it.” While some participants were clearly able to adequately articulate how they evaluate if
they have selected the appropriate professional development for teachers, 33% of participants
demonstrated a need with this influence as they provided insufficient or vague responses. For
instance, Participant 3 stated, “we can go to really good professional development, but if they're
not going to use it, then it is not helping me, so I visit the classroom to see implementation.”
Additionally, Participant 2, cited a number of examples regarding professional development but
did not fully articulate an evaluation plan.
Document analysis. A review of Maryland State Department of Education Every Student
Succeed Act (ESSA) documents revealed that the state has what appears to be a systematic plan
to improve the skills of principals, and other stakeholders by assisting Local Education Agencies
(LEAs) in training principals and staff to identify students with specific learning needs by
creating tools, continuum or framework that principals and other school leaders can employ to
discreetly conduct self-assessment of their abilities to identify the types of professional
development that they need to help them meet the needs of students. The continuum is designed

102
to improve professional practices through a variety of ways, such as validating participants for
their knowledge, providing support for LEAs to provide transparency in regard to their practices.
Information on the website further revealed that Maryland Department of Education (MSDE)
collaborates with the LEAs to provide relevant professional learning that aligns to the needs of
schools. The feedback garnered from the state’s ESSA Listening Tours and ESSA surveys is
used to customize professional learning. The ESSA document also revealed that a committee of
LEAs stakeholders, school-based and district level personnel requested that the state collects data
on national research around professional best practices to increase student achievement through a
series of national meetings and multistate collaboration. An analysis of the ESSA plan also
showed that MSDE creates opportunities and structures to collaborate and establish partnerships
with Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) with regard to professional learning needs such as
Cultural Competency and Universal Design of Learning (UDL). Local Education Agencies
feedback suggests a need for the state to facilitate collaboration when selecting curriculum
materials aligned to rigorous state standards in order to provide equity to the diverse needs of
students.
Summary. The assumed influence that principals need to know how to identify relevant
professional development sessions that are geared towards teaching teachers how to close the
academic achievement gap was determined to be a need. While some principals shared that the
professional development, they receive from their district is aiding the process of closing the
academic achievement gap, some principals stated that they receive training that focuses on the
technical and legal aspects regarding the State of Maryland and the Federal Government
mandates. However, some participants reported that some districts do not provide the types of
professional development that allow them to implement practices to close the academic

103
achievement gap, especially if their schools do not meet the baseline to operate as schoolwide
Title 1 sites. Over 50% of principals shared that the types of professional development that they
found most beneficial, were those that were not directly linked to academics, but rather
professional development sessions that focus on trauma-informed practices, social-emotional
learning, poverty, and equity issues in schools. Some shared that they would like to receive
training in these areas so that they can better serve students. A review of the documents on the
MSDE website showed that the state offers equity-based training. Data has been cited as a
common professional development that principals receive across school districts. However, some
principals were not able to describe how they are using the appropriate professional development
to close the academic achievement gap. Overall, 64% of principals adequately responded to the
questions relating to this knowledge influence, which fell below the threshold of 75%, thus
rendering this conceptual knowledge influence to be a need.
Table 6 shows the types of professional development principals found to be most
impactful to closing the academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and
economically disadvantaged students.
Table 6

Types of Professional Development Principals Believe Are Important to Closing Achievement
Gap

Most Important Professional Development for Principals
Professional development around data allows principals to really tease down on the data, and
have the teachers experience that from the students
Professional development that focus on Social Emotional Learning
Equity-based Professional Development
Trauma Informed Practices
Poverty
Culturally Responsive Professional Development

104
Knowledge influence 2. Principals need to understand their role as instructional leaders
in order to plan and implement effective professional development that will assist teachers in
closing the academic achievement gap for students of low-socioeconomic status.
Interview findings. To assess the second conceptual knowledge influence, principals
were asked to answer five questions. When the responses for the five interview questions were
averaged, 63% of participants provided sufficient responses to the questions. In order for this
influence to be determined as an asset, 75% or more of the participants needed to provide the
sufficient responses. Since the participants’ responses did not meet the 75% threshold for this
influence to be considered an asset, this influence has been determined to be a need. The first
question asked: “How would you describe your role as the leader of the school?” Findings from
the interview on this particular question demonstrated that 75% of principals met the 75%
requirement for this question to be determined as an asset. Some common themes emerged such
as, the leaders engage in collaborative leadership, the leaders set the vision and create buy-in. For
example, Participant 8 explained that the role of principals includes setting the vision and
expectations for what the school needs to accomplish by making sure everyone is informed
around the clients- who are the students and parents. It is important to make sure the best access
and opportunities are provided to students. The participant continued by stating that it is the
principal’s responsibility to give teachers and parents the tools, and ensure students have what
they need to make this educational experience a success. Participant 8 also expressed that her
role is to empower; and substantiated this by explaining “I have to continue to build the capacity
of everyone because it really does take a village to do this and not just teachers and parents, but
also community members, the community is well versed on school initiatives.” Participant 11
also agreed that collaboration is important and emphasized that principals must lead with the

105
mentality that all of the answers are not housed within them, but the answers can be found within
the collective body of the school, especially within the teachers; therefore, the principals’ role is
to rally the troops-they must be able to motivate teachers enough to want them to be on board
and for everybody to bring their knowledge to the table. Participants 6, 9, and 10 explained in
agreement that it is important to tap into teachers’ knowledge because they need to feel like they
have a voice and their opinion and expertise matter. Participant 10 also emphasized the
importance of garnering buy-in and discussed that principals having the big picture in mind and
being able to fill in the details for staff members is paramount. She stated that the principal’s
role is about “orchestrating the whole learning cycle; getting staff to buy-in and become active
participants, letting them see where the school is, the trajectory that’s needed for success, and
the strategies and tools that will contribute to the actual success is key.” Participant 5 viewed the
role of principal through the lens of building the capacity of leaders within the building so that
they too can lead effectively:
I provide my assistant principals with targeted professional development around how
they're going to provide their instructional leaders, their teacher coordinators, their
department chairs with professional development. I'm intimately connected with the work
that's being done in the classroom. I understand that my first level of learners is my
assistant principals. So, I train my assistant principals on how to engage with data
effectively, and how to provide professional development, so that those they lead will do
the same for their departments. My role is to engage in distributive leadership and model
for my team.
Similarly, Participant 1, expressed agreement with Participant 5 by stating that, “transformational
leaders provide opportunities for staff to step into leadership roles to prevent dominance.

106
Teachers take minutes and they present during professional development. We must empower
staff through training and development while modeling and providing feedback.” While these
principals were able to sufficiently discuss their perception of their role as principal, 33% of
principals struggled to adequately articulate their role as the instructional leader. Participant 3
defined his role as basically realizing the vision. When probed to explain how the vision is
realized, the participant responded, “That's my role period. I have to get it done. However, I have
to get it done, when I say get it done, that means all my children need to be educated…”
The second question asked participants: “Are there opportunities for teachers to
participate in leadership roles? If so, will you please describe the process?” Overall, the findings
for this question showed that 92% of principals answered in the affirmative. For example,
Participant 5 explained that there is an Instructional Management Team, where teachers are
playing an intimate part in the work of stewarding the vision of analyzing data, looking at how
resources are allocated and how the school is leading initiatives. This participant expressed that
there is a firm belief in developing leaders from the ground up, who understand how to operate
within all of those modules. Additionally, Participant 5 shared how teachers are selected for
leadership roles in the school:
We identify talent. We want people who are motivated. So, a lot of times your best
aspiring leader is the person who shows themselves through their work. This occurs when
there is excellence in the classroom, teachers are volunteering to lead different initiatives,
clubs, and activities, and they demonstrate an acuity for a certain part of the work that the
school needs to engage. So, we reach out to them, to find out if this is something, they are
willing to participate in, and they often volunteer. Sometimes we have people who we
just recognize would be excellent in leading certain parts of the work, and we initiate the

107
conversation with them around requirements. We take a real collaborative approach, as it
relates to the work.
Participant 6 likewise, shared a strategy for identifying talents by stating, “we use Gallup
Strengthsfinder and I also look to that to sometimes identify individuals who have command,
adaptability or they have an ideation and they come up with great ideas and you can see those
things.” Participant 9 expressed that teachers are assigned leadership roles based on their skill set
and what the need is at the time. If teachers are skilled at scheduling, they are needed at the table
during that time. Teacher leadership is not fixed in the school, so teachers are leaders in their
spaces. Similar to Participant 4, Participant 12 explained that there are multiple opportunities for
formal and informal leadership. However, there are some set teacher leaders in the building that
helped to design the collaborative planning, lead the collaborative planning, develop the
professional development, identify the topics, being able to coach teacher and to be able to help
with some of the things that are not as instructionally based. Participants 4 and 12 shared that
there are several teachers who are in some type of graduate program, whether it is a master's
level program or a doctoral program, and are really interested in stretching their thinking.
Whereas there are some teachers who want to be teacher leaders in a formal capacity those who
want to be an administrator, and those who generally just want to see great teaching and be a part
of it; there is a leadership role for each person within the school to provide that level of input,
and that can be done through either leading and facilitating through the planning aspect, or
providing input. Most participants are strategic in involving teachers in leadership roles and were
able to sufficiently articulate the process. However, only one participant insufficiently responded
to the question. Participant 7 shared that one teacher is a member of the instructional leadership

108
team but was not able to speak to the process or a plan to include other teachers in other
leadership roles.
The third question in this conceptual knowledge influence asked participants: “Does the
school have an instructional leadership team? If so, who are its members and what are the
functions of the instructional leadership team?” The interview findings for this question revealed
that 58% of principals provided adequate responses. For instance, Participant 12 explained that
there is a School Planning and Management Team, which functions more like a steering
committee but essentially, those are leaders in the building. The team consists of the principal
and assistant principals, special education coordinator, formalized teacher leaders in the building,
such as the instructional lead teacher, Title 1 math teacher and Title I reading teacher, the
chairperson of English as a Second Language Department, and a representative from the Special
Education Department. At the teacher level, there is a representative from each grade level, to
include primary and intermediate grades. At the kindergarten level, the representative is
responsible to facilitate support among the grade level chairs from pre-K to grade two, and the
intermediate teacher’s responsibility is to facilitate leadership among grades three through five.
In addition, there is a crisis intervention resource teacher, who is a part of a team who provides
social emotional learning and support. There is also the community school coordinator, due to
the school’s status as a community school in the district. This person helps to facilitate the
leadership team alongside the principal. The principal helps to provide parental input. Participant
8 added that some committee members are members by default, they are on the team based on
the position they hold. Therefore, administrators, counselors, psychologists, team leaders of a
grade level or content and anyone else in the school can apply to sit as an at large member of the
team and there is an application and interview process for them to be a part of it. Most of the

109
participants described a similar composition for their leadership team. Although some
participants were able to describe the composition of their Instructional Leadership Team, 33%
of participants were not able to sufficiently describe the function of the leadership team. For
example, Participant 11 stated that “our leadership team consists of myself, the assistant
principal, and it consists of what we call our staff development teacher.” When asked to describe
the function of the Instructional Leadership Team, Participant 11 responded, “we are rebuilding
our instructional leadership team. “Participant 4 provided a description for the administrative
team as opposed to the Instructional Leadership Team. Participant 4 stated, “we have an
administrative team consisting of the principal, my assistant principal, ESOL teacher, and the
guidance counselor.”
The fourth question for this conceptual knowledge influence asked participants: “How do
you support teachers in the acquisition of necessary skills and strategies to support student
learning? “The findings from the interview revealed that 75% of participants were able to
sufficiently articulate how they support teachers in the acquisition of the skills and strategies to
support student learning. Common responses among participants were the use of survey
responses from teachers and collaborative planning. For example, Participant 5 discussed that at
the end of each school year, time is spent completing a survey to determine the effectiveness of
the professional learning provided during the current school year. Ideas are collected from
teachers around the types of professional learning that they would like to engage in for the next
school year. That information along with the data collected from the school year is used to
develop a yearlong professional development plan that is rolled out in the summer. Teachers are
brought in during the summer to assist in developing the professional development plan. The
team looks at resources that are available inside and outside of the school district to support the

110
execution of the plan. Participant 5 explained that one of the first steps is to bring the teachers
back, as the purpose of the summer professional learning week is to actually facilitate
conversations with them about what that professional development plan will look like for the
upcoming school year. Additionally, there is the global learning plan, and then it becomes
specific to departments, and then there is the individual learning plan which is aligned to the
teacher evaluation framework; it might have to do with one specific component, based the
teachers’ informal and formal observation from the previous year, that the teacher needs to
improve on such as questioning or developing the culture of the classroom, that is based on
having students take ownership for learning. It is important to ensure that professional learning is
both specific and holistic at the same time. Participant 6 expressed that “if a teacher wants to
attend a conference that the school can afford, they can go. They just have to come back and
share what they learned at the conference, that could be at progressive planning or during staff
meetings.” Participant 10 also shared that teachers are supported by indicating their interests in a
professional learning, and through what is observed during formal and informal observations.
Participant 10 stated, “if there's something that I think they would benefit from, I provide the
information to them, ask them to look up classes they can take themselves regarding classroom
management, reading strategies or math content strategies.”
Participants 5 and 12 described a tiered process of support for teachers which includes
support through communicating with grade-level chair, instructional lead teachers, and selected
administrator. According to Participant 5, this process commences at the beginning of the
academic year where the teachers examine the curriculum as well as the evaluation instrument
and participate in a goal-setting activity to identify two professional goals and one personal goal
that they would like to get accomplished that year. As a part of that goal setting, teachers write

111
an action plan on what they feel they need in order to reach that goal. In the action plan, they are
able to identify which members of the school community or the district community, or the type
of experience they feel need to be a part of the action plan and then the leadership team conducts
check in to see progress towards the goals. Participants 12 explained that teachers are responsible
for providing artifacts, so that the team can see if they are meeting that goal. These artifacts
could be part of a reflection, student performance data, or artifacts from professional
development or experiences that teachers participated in. While some participants were able to
clearly articulate how they support teachers with the acquisition of the necessary skills and
strategies to support student learning, 25% of participants provided insufficient response as to
how they support their teachers. For example, Participant 3 shared, “I give them a couple of
suggestions. They can take it, they don't have to, but I need to see growth. I may refer them to
my reading specialist. I don't have all the answers.”
The fifth question for this conceptual knowledge influence asked participants: “Are there
particular strategies that specifically support students of low socioeconomic status? If so, will
you please describe these strategies?” Interview findings for this question revealed that 42% of
principals were able to sufficiently identify and describe specific strategies that particularly
support students of low socioeconomic status. A common theme that emerged from these
responses was focused on strategies supporting the social-emotional, and economic needs of
students as opposed to supporting students academically. For example, Participant 12 stated that
as a result of being a community school, they conduct a fair amount of research and outreach to
family members to ensure that the families are equipped with the right resources that they need
to function within the school. They have in place a wellness committee that is responsible for
making sure students are not only physically healthy but also emotionally and mentally healthy

112
as well. Participant 8 echoed similar sentiment as Participant 12, and emphasized the need for
strategies that focus on the social and emotional needs of economically disadvantaged students
by stating that, “ counselors, mental health therapists, crisis resource intervention teacher, and
community school partners work collectively to identify students who might sit in that
vulnerable space, and think about what levels of additional support might be needed from
community partners.”
Participant 10 also had a similar thought process by explaining that they make sure
students are available for learning and that they have enough food and are given breakfast on a
daily basis. The participant explained that to support students academically, they use hands-on
strategies, manipulatives, visuals, computer web-based interventions, as well as the small group
components and the one-on-one pull out components. Participant 4 expressed that there are
volunteers who come into the school and work with students during pull out for the younger
children who are working on emergent reading skills. Some volunteers will assist students with
basic sight words. At the end of the year, the data is analyzed to look specifically at students'
maximum scores. Students are then identified for an extended year program where they have
additional time to work on the grade-level standards from the previous year, as well as
previewing or working towards some of the standards for the upcoming year in their next grade
level. Interview findings also revealed that 58% of the principals shared that their school
provides no specific strategies to support students of low socioeconomic status. For example,
Participant 7 stated, “my school is economically challenged. That’s about 70% of my work. We
look at that category, but we don't have specific programs just for those children.” Participant 9
lamented:

113
We don't do a good job of identifying low-income students because I guess in a way, that
information has been confidential, and I don't seek out a report for it because we are not a
schoolwide Title 1 school. You saying that out loud is helping me to reflect and see that's
something that we need to take a look at because we don't provide strategies specific to
them. I mean, we look at English Speakers of Other Language, we look at Talented and
Gifted, we look at students who have one race or two races, we look at things like that,
but we don't look at specific FARMs. Yeah. We don't. We do extended learning
programs, but I can't say that program is specifically for our Title 1 students. I couldn't
even tell you what percentage of those students are on Free and Reduced Meal.
Participant 11 shared a common thought: “I would honestly have to say no. We do have some
FARMs students, but I can't say that's been our particular focus in terms of specifically providing
strategies for them because that was not where our largest gap was.”
Table 7 shows how principals’ responded regarding how they view their roles as
instructional leaders and the number of principals who engage in that particular practice.
Table 7
Number of Principals and Responses Relating to Instructional Leadership Practices
Articulated Leadership Practices Number of Participants Engaging in Particular
Practice
Collaborative Leadership 4 of 12
Setting the Vision and Expectations 4 of 6
Equipping teachers with the tools they need to
succeed
9 of 12
Equipping teachers and parents with the tools
they need to succeed
5 of 12
Build leadership capacity amongst staff 8 of 12
Build the capacity of leaders within the school 2 of 12
Tap into the expertise of teachers 4 of 12
Garner buy-in from various stakeholders 6 of 12
Employ Distributive Leadership Approach 5 of 12
Survey stakeholders to garner input 4 of 12

114
Table 7, continued
Articulated Leadership Practices Number of Participants Engaging in Particular
Practice
Provide specialized professional development
for teachers
5 of 12
Implement strategies to support social
emotional learning
5 of 12
Promote positive school culture and climate 6 of 12

Document analysis. Based on a review of the ESSA document on the MSDE website,
Title II, Part A, the state is committed to providing personalized learning for principals, teachers
and supervisors of principals, in alignment with student achievement data. The professional
learning will be designed to assist Local Education Agencies in identifying individual’s learning
needs relating to student achievement, promote inventive, evidence-based strategies, and support
LEAs in developing the professional capacity of all educators. MSDE plans to develop an
educator growth-mindset by personalizing professional learning that reflects student needs in
every LEAs. An analysis of the ESSA document revealed that the state plans to provide
opportunities for educators to collaborate across LEAs, and provide particular guidance relating
to instructional practices, guidance and prototypes. Based on the ESSA guidance document,
professional learning for principals and other educators must entail a needs assessment, student
achievement data, evidence-based strategies that are determined based on data and identified
needs. Professional learning must also include an implementation plan, educator development
plans, resources that are needed to support the plan, and strategies relating to reflection and
evaluation.
According to the ESSA Consolidated State Plan (2018), effective schools consist of
effective leaders. The document outlined the need expressed by stakeholders for professional
learning that is designed for supervisors of principals, principals, assistant principals, aspiring
principals, and teacher leaders. This need was corroborated by feedback garnered from statewide

115
ESSA plan survey and ESSA regionally held Listening Tours. To address this need, MSDE will
reserve three percent of Title II funds to build leadership capacity on a school-base level.
According to the ESSA (2018) document, the state will work in partnership with LEAs to devise
a strategy for professional learning for principals, principal supervisors, and other leaders, in
alignment with the Professional Standards for Educational Leaders (PSEL); this could include
principal residency programs, focused academies, professional learning communities, webinars
and online workshops.
Summary. The assumption for this influence is that principals need to understand their
role as instructional leaders in order to plan and implement effective professional development
that will assist teachers in closing the academic achievement gap for students of low-
socioeconomic status. Many participants expressed the importance of ensuring that the social
emotional needs of students are met. This includes making sure students attend school and that
they have a meal when they come to school. Participants emphasized the importance of
providing wraparound services for these students. For example, Participant 12 shared that
Rethink is a curriculum that gives very short video lessons for parents and instruction so that
they can utilize the same strategies that the teachers are using within the classroom so that those
expectations are not only happening within the school building but within structures across
homes, and family members and everyone can really be able to speak in one voice that provides
wraparound support for the students. Although a review of the document analysis revealed that
Local Educational Agencies (LEAs) are expected to include professional learning communities
as one of the strategies to improve principals’ efficacy, no principal discussed a formal structure
for professional learning communities. One participant mentioned that a group of principals meet
informally to discuss strategies and provide support. The overall findings from the interview

116
revealed that 63% of participants were able to sufficiently articulate an understanding of their
role as instructional leaders and the significance it has on the planning and implementation of
effective professional development opportunities to support teachers in closing the academic
achievement gap for students of low socioeconomic status. In order for this influence to be
determined as an asset, 75% or more of the participants needed to sufficiently articulate their role
as instructional leaders and describe the importance of diagnosing, designing, and implementing
effective professional development to assist teachers in closing the academic achievement gap.
Since the participants’ responses did not meet the 75% threshold for this influence to be
considered an asset, this influence has been determined to be a need.
Procedural Knowledge
Interviews were conducted to assess K-12 principals’ procedural knowledge. Participants
were interviewed on the procedural knowledge necessary to know how to support teachers
through the provision of professional development that will assist teachers in making accurate
data-driven decisions in order to improve academic achievement among students of low-
socioeconomic status.
Knowledge influence 3. Principals need to know how to support teachers by providing
relevant professional development that will assist teachers in making accurate data-driven
decisions in order to improve academic achievement among students of low-socioeconomic
status
Interview findings. To assess participants’ procedural knowledge, participants were
asked two questions. When the two questions were averaged, 50% of participants provided
adequate responses to the questions. In order for this influence to be determined as an asset, 75%
or more of the participants needed to sufficiently articulate how they provide teachers with

117
effective professional development sessions that assist teachers to effectively utilize data-driven
decision making to increase academic achievement for economically disadvantaged students.
Since the threshold of 75% was not met, this influence has been deemed a need. The first
question asked participants to: “Explain how you support teachers in using data-driven decision
making processes to close the academic achievement gap.” Participant 4 declared “my job is to
develop professionals as well as to develop teacher capacity to analyze data and to make data-
based decisions to enhance their reflective practices in terms of how they're performing. That is
done a lot through questioning.” Participant 6 stated,
We use the Plan Do Study Act (PDSA) to analyze data using a four-week cycle. The first
and the third week, we present data. In the second and the fourth week, teachers tell us
what they want to do and then they tell us how it worked. The data review meetings are
provided with support from testing coordinator, reading specialist, instructional lead
teacher, and administration; the four-week progress monitoring in between those, really
gets teachers talking about data and data not as a number only, but data as a child as
well. We drill down into the data because it's easy to look at the numbers and see how
many people are doing well, or not doing well, but it's more important for us to say who
isn't doing well, and why they are not doing well.
Additionally, similar to Participant 6, Participant 8, described a systematic process of support for
teachers in using data to improve student achievement:
Through our data utilization program, we look at our intervention data and we look at our
classroom data, we look to see if there are common errors among data sets, which could
imply that there's a teaching concern versus a student learning concern. So then we kind
of go back and we work with a teacher right now on how something was introduced, and

118
we do corrective action plans and corrective action plans either address a standard
multiple ways; it either means if the majority of the students do not understand the
concept, the teacher goes back and reteach it, or if it's just a few students that means
there was a misunderstanding or there was a lack of readiness for that and then the third
piece is given assumes additional experiences. So, when we do our misconceptions, we
go back and look to see which one of those three boxes we need to begin to address. So,
we do that every six weeks at the school level, but my teachers do that every three or four
weeks at the classroom level.
Furthermore, Participant 12 stated,
We do utilize protocols within our building to help facilitate conversations and kind of
takes it away from the individual and focuses on a neutral standpoint, which is the data.
We also have guided questions that help teachers to really think through and process what
they're looking at. Data inquiry sessions typically occur at least three times a year.
Teachers are able to present their data, other colleagues are able to ask those questions,
and they are really questioning to help the teacher really think through what they're
looking at and think through strategies to be able to support the students.
Participant 11 used a similar questioning technique to guide the data utilization process for
teachers. He presents disaggregated data, starting with the story, explaining subgroups score on
the problem and addressing misconceptions and how to solve the problem. While half of the
participants interviewed were able to adequately answer the questions, the other 50% of
participants provided insufficient answers or did not demonstrate how the strategies they
described supported the teachers’ development in the use of data-driven decision making. For
example, Participant 2 stated “the teachers talk about underperforming students in their grade

119
level. I ask them about the progress of each of those students because I want to know how they
are progressing. I don’t want them to be stagnant.” Additionally, Participant 7 stated, “we look at
groups of students. So, we'll look at their gender, we look at whether they're FARMs, their
ethnicity or their race code if they are special education, 504 or students and their overall
performance.”
The second procedural knowledge question asked participants: “How do you evaluate if
you are effectively supporting teachers in using data-driven decisions to close the achievement
gap for students of low-socioeconomic status?” Less than half (42%) of participants were able to
sufficiently articulate how they determine if they were effectively supporting teachers in using
data-driven decision making to close the academic achievement gap for economically
disadvantaged students. For example, Participant 4, stated that
We have data analysis meetings, where we would review the student work,
collaboratively plan the lesson assessment. So, we do a lot of group scoring, comparing
that to the standard, even when designing the assessment, making sure that the
assessments are standard aligned so that when you come back and look at the student
work, you're measuring it against the standard. It is important to gauge how far the
students’ response is compared to the standard, but a lot of times, people tend to just be
comparing the kids against themselves, and that's deadly because even though you can
say well, this group of children did well, you always have to compare that to the standard.
That's why group scoring and looking at the standards forms are very helpful.
A common theme that emerged from participants’ responses, was the use of formal and informal
observation. For example, Participant 5 explained that through the process of formal and
informal observation, as well as through the analysis of data, specifically drilling down to the

120
students from low socioeconomic status or FARMs students, is another subgroup of students that
they actually look specifically at their performance. Participant 5 declared, “So I think we're
closing the achievement gap for the FARMs students. Our data shows that there is still a gap
between FARMs and non-FARMS students, but over the last several years, the gap has been
closing.” Participant 6 emphasized the importance of using data as a gauge if teachers are
properly supported by explaining:
It always goes back to the data and how students are doing in between those assessments.
It would be those interventions in between to make sure that we're addressing what
particular students need. So, if we see that the standard for multiplication is a gap as a
whole, we put kids on the intervention for DreamBox and they practice that standard,
then we can see if students are making gains.
Additionally, Participant 8 also used formal and informal observation to evaluate the
effectiveness of support for teachers:
During observations, the data sets that are used are the immediate data sets I am looking
for. My expectation is to see that there was some net success by the end of that lesson. It
doesn't have to be a long drawn out test. It could just be a quick exit ticket, just a quick
way of showing the students master whatever your goal was for that lesson. Those are the
standards that we progress monitor throughout the year so that we make sure that the
post-assessment data has shown student growth. So, when we have our data tracking,
those are the standards that the teachers will be measured against on their final
evaluation.
Further, Participant 10 added: “Formal and informal observations and the running records,
making sure that they are done. So that we're constantly moving and seeing progress in

121
scholars.” Participant 12 discussed measuring the effectiveness of the support teachers receive on
data-driven decision making through an equity lens:
We examine our school equity report. It helps to frame the conversation of where we are.
While we're grouping our students, our electronic student information sheet that we've
created causes us to be able to look at our African Americans versus our Hispanic
students, versus, male versus female, and we're able to utilize that structure to sort
through it. To see, one is how we’re approaching grouping for the students and how we
are being fair in the process.
The interview findings also revealed that 58% of principals did not sufficiently articulate
their plan or they did not have a plan to evaluate how they are supporting teachers in using data-
driven decision making to close the academic achievement gap between economically
advantaged and economically disadvantaged students. For example, Participant 11 stated that
“the only way to evaluate is to look at your data, the data tells the story.” While it is factual that
the data tells the story, participants did not fully articulate how it was known that the support
provided to teachers is effective for them to use data-driven decision making to close the
academic achievement gap. Additionally, Participant 3, examined the data from a teacher action
point of view, but did not show how school principal supports teachers:
We look at data once per quarter. After the first quarter, I'm looking at those i-Ready
reports to see if students have made any movement. If they haven't, then I go to the
teacher. So, what are we going to do to get them there? She's not making any progress. I
didn't say they had to be acting on grade level, but I do need to see progress.
Table 8 shows how principals support teachers in making data-driven decisions to close
the academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and economically

122
disadvantaged students. The table also shows the number of principals who reported that they
engage in those practices.
Table 8
Number of Principals Engaging in Particular Strategies for Data-Driven Decision Making
Practices to Build Teacher Capacity Number of Participants Engaging in the Process
Data cycles 5 of 12
Implementing corrective action plan 2 of 12
Establishing schoolwide data Protocols 5 of 12
Frequent data analysis meetings 7 of 12
Formal and informal observations 8 of 12
Equity Report 3 of 12

Document analysis. Each Local Educational Agency is required to provide the Maryland
Department of Education a comprehensive professional learning program which consists of
needs assessment; student data, and strategies that they will use for improvement informed by
identified needs and dictated by data. The state of Maryland Department of Education collects
data from LEAs in the form of yearly reports, surveys, monitoring and support visits, assessment
analysis of state achievement data, and needs assessment. Data is also collected during quarterly
meetings, focus groups and webinars.
Summary. The assumption with this influence is that principals need to know how to
support teachers by providing relevant professional development that will assist teachers in
making accurate data-driven decisions in order to improve academic achievement among
students of low-socioeconomic status. While participants expressed the importance of data and
could describe how data is disaggregated, 42% of participants provided insufficient responses
relating to how teachers are supported in using data-driven decision-making processes to close
the academic achievement gap. Some participants demonstrated a narrow definition of data by
referring to data from a quantitative lens only; specifically focusing on standardized assessment
measures, but did not adequately discuss the role of qualitative data such as formal and informal

123
observation and the value it adds to their role as instructional leaders. This suggests a need for
principals to be supported in this area as only 58% of principals reflected this influence as an
asset.
According to documents analyzed on MSDE website, each Local Educational Agency is
required to submit a comprehensive professional learning plan which includes multiple forms of
data. However, the document did not specifically outline how teachers ought to be supported in
using data driven decisions to improve student outcomes nor did it include best practices
principals needed to operate as instructional leaders. For this influence to be determined an asset,
75% or more of participants needed to sufficiently articulate how they provide teachers with
effective professional development to effectively utilize data-driven decision making to increase
the academic achievement for economically disadvantaged students. Only 58% of participants’
responses met this criteria. Since the 75% threshold for this influence to be determined as an
asset, was not met, this influence is determined to be a need.
Results and Findings for Motivation Causes
The principals’ motivation was assessed through interview findings. The results are
provided in the following section for each of the two assumed motivation influences in the areas
of self-efficacy and expectancy-value. Both influences have been determined to be a need.
Self-Efficacy
Principals’ self-efficacy was assessed through the use of semi-structured interviews.
Principals were interviewed on the self-efficacy necessary to determine if they believed they
possessed the capacity to implement effective strategies that would close the achievement gap
between economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students.

124
Motivation Influence 1. Principals need to believe that they possess the capacity to
implement effective strategies that will close the achievement gap for students of low-
socioeconomic status.
Interview findings. To assess participants’ self-efficacy, a total of four interview
questions were asked. When all four questions were averaged, 63% of participants demonstrated
self-efficacy regarding this influence. For this influence to be determined as an asset, 75% or
more of the respondents needed to provide affirmative responses regarding their beliefs in their
capacity to implement effective strategies to close the academic achievement gap for students of
low socioeconomic status. Since 75% or more of participants did not meet or exceed the 75%
threshold, this influence has been determined to be a need. The first question asked: “Do you feel
confident in your ability to implement effective strategies to close the academic achievement gap
for students of low-socioeconomic status? Why do you feel confident or why do you not feel
confident?” Five out of 12 participants affirmed their confidence in their ability to close the
academic achievement gap for economically disadvantaged students. Some common responses
were based on the principals’ ability to draw on their pedagogical knowledge when they served
as classroom teachers, or they felt confident because they did not have a large population of Title
1 students with a large achievement gap, like their colleagues who serve a schoolwide Title I
population. For example, Participant 7 stated, “Yes. I feel confident due to longevity in the
profession. I have always worked with an at-risk group of students as a community, and I have
seen positive changes over the history of my career.” Participant 5, shared a similar sentiment:
Approximately 15 years ago, I was a math and science teacher. After that, I was an
assistant principal at a high FARMs environment. I grew up as an inner-city kid. I have a
connection to the work that I'm engaged in. I feel passionate about it, and the results in

125
the middle school and high school that I've led over the last 15 years speak to
outperforming our peers, especially as it relates to low-income students.
Participant 4 explained that her expertise as a teacher has positioned her to approach her
leadership with confidence:
I'm a teacher first. I have always been committed to learning and doing new things. You
can kind of help to grow teachers in a way that their students will continue to grow as
well. I'll go in a small group and model it for them. I establish positive relationships with
students. Research shows that relationships are the key when working with students from
disadvantaged homes.
Participant 2 was the only participant who did not indicate a gap between economically
advantaged and economically disadvantaged students; and therefore, attributed the level of
confidence experienced to the marginal or nonexistence gap in academic achievement between
economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students at the participant’s school:
I don't have such a large population where they stand out to where they are any different
from any student. The resources that I need for the lower socio-economic group are very
small things, maybe some school supplies or payment for a field trip but academically,
they're on board and on point.
Another seven out of 12 participants did not provide affirmative responses in their ability to
implement effective strategies to close the academic achievement gap for students of low
socioeconomic status. Some participants cited societal factors outside of their control that do not
directly align to their ability but certainly affect their confidence. For example, Participant 6
declared:

126
I'm not always confident. Sometimes I think we're fighting societal issues and we have no
control over those. Even if we have the manpower and the money, there are some things
that we cannot address. We are dealing with trauma. We are dealing with poverty. Some
students are hungry. I don't know what to do about that. I don't know how to deal with
that. We provided breakfast and lunch to almost all of our students every day. So, I don't
know what they're doing now, during the pandemic.
Additionally, Participant 8, attributed the lack of confidence experienced to teacher preparation
and availability of staff:
There are varying factors that are beyond my ability. So, it really depends on if I'm
staffed right. What you can do with a teacher versus a vacancy can hinder my progress,
my ability to start classes with fully certified teachers. It also determines my level of
success because a teacher who's ready to teach on day one who is fully certified versus a
teacher who is new to the career field are two different levels of support that are needed.
Therefore, when you begin to talk about the life cycle of a career teacher, it takes five or
six years, for a non-teacher to become like a first-year teacher. Therefore, factors vary my
leadership. My leadership can still continue to build capacity and give feedback, but it
may not show up in students’ success, because that depends on where that teacher is. I
may be growing and developing that teacher, but the rate in which I can do that, may not
translate into student achievement. It will translate into teacher achievement, but it may
not get that far enough to show in student achievement. So, I do say that there are a lot of
variables that sometimes impact my ability to demonstrate success, because most of the
time success is demonstrated through student achievement.

127
Participant 9 echoed a similar response as participant 8 by stating that there are certainly
challenges that impede the level of confidence, such as staffing and hiring. These participants
shared that the district sometimes does placements within the school buildings which means that
the principal or the school does not have a role in identifying which teachers are in the building.
According to Participants 8 and 9, this does not happen all the time, but when it does happen, no
matter how much professional development is being provided, if the person is not the right
person to deliver that instruction for students, then you are constantly at a crossroads. Participant
9 decisively stated, “until we begin to make sure that we are being very thoughtful about
placements, closing achievement gap will continue to be a challenge for leaders in our district
and for leaders across school districts.”
Additionally, Participant 1 described the level of confidence by stating, “it's a work in
progress. I'm three years with no real intervention schedule in place. I relied on the teachers’
expertise and the teachers' conversation to sort of guide what happened, what our next steps
were.” Participant 10 stated, “We would love to have more resources to effectively close the
achievement gap. We can do more with more resources, but we are doing what we can with what
we have.” Participant 3 lamented, “I can't do it overnight. First of all, in order for me to even do
any of that, I have to build trust and rapport with my parents and my staff. If I don't have that I
cannot do it.”
The second question that was asked to assess participants’ self-efficacy was: “On a scale
of one to 10, with 10 being the highest, how confident do you feel in your ability to implement
effective strategies to improve student achievement.” Seventy-five percent of participants
affirmed their confidence regarding this question. For example, Participant 2, stated, “just for the
fact that our Maryland Report Card, we have four stars out of five, which I think is awesome but

128
we're not where we want to be.” Participant 8, expressed a high level of confidence, but stated
that
I need to sometimes understand when I need to take the foot off the pedal. Sometimes I
can be so driven in the work that I forget that we're dealing with people who sometimes
need time to process. I'm so involved in ensuring that all kids are learning, and I move
with a sense of urgency, but I understand that sometimes the sense of urgency can move
people towards disengagement and that disengagement can actually be counterproductive
to what you're trying to accomplish.
However, not all participants expressed that they felt confident in their ability to implement
effective strategies to improve student achievement; for example, Participant 7 expressed that the
lack of confidence exuded was owing to the fact that “more resources are needed. If we had the
one-to-one technology capabilities, then we wouldn't have to scrape and try to figure out how
we're going to do the distance learning. “Participant 9 attributed the low confidence rating to the
anticipated lack of buy-in from staff, but not necessarily as a result of participants implementing
the strategies to close the academic achievement gap.
The third question that was asked to determine participants’ self-efficacy was for them to:
“Tell me about a time when you were confident in your ability to achieve a school performance
goal?” Eight out of 12 participants were able to sufficiently respond to the question. Participant
12 shared achievement for closing the achievement gap for English language learners:
Our school has a growing number of ESOL students, but not a high number. Ensuring
that those students have the right levels of support and that we are using the right
instructional moves for the students, such as strategically grouping and thinking about
ways to support those students, became one of our targeted goals in identifying and

129
making sure that more and more students that are coming in to receive ESOL services as
a beginner are advancing to intermediate or either testing out completely of receiving
services. We were recognized last year as being able to do that to help close that
academic gap for English language learners.
Participant 7 discussed that their achievement goal for math was to see a 20% overall gain in
average growth from kindergarteners all the way to fifth grade. The school used the pre math
tests from the beginning of the year, and then staff examined the average scores, then
administered a posttest back in February. So, from September to February, the goal was
measured, and the school was able to meet that goal. Participant 5 shared a similar mechanism
for achieving their school performance goal by stating:
We focused on creating data walls where we analyzed the data for each student in every
class, we would have conversations that were specifically, not just to the subject itself,
for the student themselves and where is this kid qualitatively and quantitatively? Where
were we not meeting his needs? We started looking at numbers of students based on our
data that we needed to show immediate improvement on, in order to show the growth that
was needed to make Annual Yearly Progress. Two years in a row, we were the only
school in 10 years to exit the School Improvement process.
On the other hand, some participants were not able to confidently articulate how they were able
to accomplish a specific school performance goal. For instance, Participant 10 missed the mark
with this response regarding specificity by stating: “every day. Our purpose is to go in and make
sure that our scholars are getting the best teaching. I tell everyone that it's not that we want them
to perform well on tests, but we actually want them to learn so that they are ready for their
future. Participant 2 explained that confidence level is higher with the primary because it is easy

130
to see and track what they are doing. The participant did not provide any specific instance when
or how a school performance goal was realized.
The final question that was asked to assess participants’ self-efficacy was: “Describe the
steps you take in creating and sustaining a culture and climate that fosters academic excellence
for all students.” Eight out of 12 participants were able to adequately describe the steps they take
to create and sustain a culture and climate that foster academic excellence. One common theme
that emerged from the interview findings was shared vision. For instance, Participant 4
communicated the importance of starting with a shared vision and expectations and making sure
that everybody understands what the vision is and hopefully everyone who works at your school
has either the same or at least a similar vision in terms of providing quality education for
students. Further, Participant 5 added: “We are intentional in communicating our vision of
ensuring that all students are graduating ready for college and careers, therefore, our work is
focused around what it looks like to be in an environment of excellence and executing that
vision.”
Another common theme that emerged from the interview findings was having a
collaborative mindset. Participant 6:
It is important to promote a growth mindset or a collaborative mindset. Teachers are
constantly reminded that student performance is compared to other students in the
county, therefore, incremental growth must be measured as opposed to waiting for the
end result from assessments because students start at different points. If our students grew
10 points, then we're being successful in moving children because our kids may not get it
this year, they may get it next year.

131
Participant 10 echoed similar sentiment by also expressing a shared belief in the growth mindset
by stating that they recognize both students and staff for their efforts and make sure that they are
confident in the strategies that they have been taught. The participant shared, “we always
recognize them for the effort that they have done; irrespective if they have made the goal that
they have set for themselves.” Participant 12 emphasized the importance of creating inclusive
structures that account for the success of all subgroups by stating that it is important to make sure
all students are being discussed during progress monitoring conversations because teachers
sometimes have a tendency to focus on the below grade level learners and not looking at all
students. Thus, it is important that the school begins to think about every student that is in the
building and what is their next step and how teachers can continue to push students by engaging
in structured conversations around goal setting for each student. Participant 8 expressed a belief
that a culture of excellence begins with the recruitment and selection process and the structures
that are present to drive the work by explaining that creating a culture that fosters academic
excellence actually starts at the interview process, during recruitment. Participant 8 explained
that a significant amount of time is spent on really actively going to recruitment fairs really
making sure candidates are the best fit for the school, making sure candidates really understand
the environment that they are walking into, and what it is going to take to move student
achievement. Thus, helping them to understand the culture of the school during the interview.
Every attempt is made to immerse them in the culture as much as possible because everyone
needs to understand the hard work that is expected, so following the interview process any
candidate who can be brought on early is immediately added to the email address. The
participant continued, as a Gallup Strengthsfinder school, the administration is certified
Strengthsfinder coaches, so everyone on staff takes a Strengthsfinder assessment, and the

132
spotlight goes on the top five strengths, so everyone is publicly displayed. Additionally, it is
important to have a real opportunity to just get to know who individuals are at the core, so that
when teams are working, conflict does not arise, because individual’s differences, beliefs, and
values are recognized. The school’s mission, vision, and core values, are frequently revisited and
the practices are examined in alignment to them. Every staff meeting provides an opportunity to
engage in professional dialogue. Team building is an important part of developing a culture of
excellence. A lot of the work is grounded in Patrick Lencioni’s work, The Five Dysfunctions of a
Team. Proactive measures are taken to think about things that can really get in the way of the
work and how issues can quickly be resolved before they really surface and become problematic.
Participants 8 concluded, “We nurture and support a culture of collaboration, but also a culture
of problem-solving and inclusion. We have multiple team structures where everyone owns the
governance of our school and they are working to make it a better place.”
Participant 9 examined a culture of excellence through the lens of transparency and celebration
of successes:
Being open and honest is what we do. When I say we celebrate learning, we celebrate
learning. We do regular things like Dr. Seuss, but we do math day where our students
make math shirts for math day and they were very creative. We also host Pi day. We
always aspire to link learning to what we do daily. We take an integrated approach to
learning where we incorporate math or social studies in our reading lesson for example.
We just try to provide every opportunity as an opportunity to learn something.
Table 9 shows the reasons principals attribute their confidence in their ability to closing
the academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and economically
disadvantaged students.

133
Table 9
Principals Reasons for their Confidence or Lack of Confidence.
Factors that Contribute to Principals’
Confidence
Factors that Hinder Principals’ Confidence
Being able to draw on their expertise as a
classroom teacher, prior to their role as
principal.
Poor teacher preparation program
Shared vision Lack of adequately trained teachers to provide
high quality instruction
Low quality professional development
Having a growth mindset Districts making executive decisions to place
teachers and staff who are not a right fit for
the school, without garnering input from
principals or school personnel.
Create inclusive structures that focus on
improving outcomes for all students.
Insufficient intervention programs for
economically disadvantaged students.
Will and skill of teachers
Intentionally building relationships to get to
know who individuals are at the core
Lack of resources
Insufficient funding
Cultivate s culture of transparency and
celebration of successes
Cultural competency
Being a product of an economically
disadvantaged household
Trauma and other societal factors that affect
students

Summary. The assumption is that principals need to believe that they possess the
capacity to implement effective strategies that will close the achievement gap for students of
low-socioeconomic status. Sixty-three percent of principals believe that they possess the capacity
to implement effective strategies to close the academic achievement gap for economically
disadvantaged students. Many principals cited external factors such as trauma, an influx of
teachers to the profession who are not adequately trained to meet the needs of students because
they have not gone through a formalized teacher preparation program. Principals also discussed
that staff needs training and support in the area of cultural competency to adequately meet the
needs of the diverse student population. The lack of resources was also cited as an impediment to

134
principals’ level of confidence. Principals also expressed concern for students who depended on
the schools to provide basic needs such as food, and were not able to obtain food due to the
COVID-19 pandemic. Since less than 75% of principals expressed a belief that they possessed
the capacity to implement effective strategies to close the academic achievement gap between
economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged student, this influence was
determined to be a need.
Expectancy-Value
Interviews were conducted to assess the principals’ expectancy-value. Participants were
interviewed on the value they placed on providing teachers with the types of professional
development sessions that are needed for teachers to be able to close the academic achievement
gap between economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students.
Motivation Influence 2. Principals need to see the value in providing teachers the types
of professional development sessions that will close the achievement gap for students of low-
socioeconomic status.
Interview findings. Participants were asked three questions. The first question asked:
“How important is it for you to provide teachers the types of professional development that are
focused on closing the achievement gap for students of low-socioeconomic status?” To be
considered an asset, 75% or more of the principals needed to see the value in investing time in
identifying the types of professional development sessions to close the academic achievement
gap and be able to discuss how professional development impacts student achievement. One
hundred percent of participants believed that it was very important to provide teachers with the
types of professional development opportunities to close the academic achievement gap.
Participant 4 summarized all participants’ views by stating that relevant professional

135
development is very important in terms of educating adult learners, everything has to be a win-
win. People have to see the benefit in what you are doing in order to fully engage and participate
in and work to transfer the strategies back to their classroom. It is important to have
conversations about what is observed during an informal observation and getting input from
faculty also on what areas they think they need growth and development in. All of that goes into
determining professional development and then, curtailing the professional development session
so that they can see how it is usable. Four out of 12 participants explained that they often
differentiate professional development, so it is not always given at a faculty meeting where
everybody is present, but rather, it is sometimes delivered in grade level, or in small groups.
Participant 6 stated that sometimes the “teachers choose from three options which they think best
fits where they are in their professional world, but it's definitely having them to at least
understand the rationale behind why the professional development is needed seems to help.”
Next, participants were asked: “How valuable is it for you to invest time in identifying
the most effective professional development for teachers? a. What impact do you see
professional development having on student achievement?” Eight out of 12 participants stated
that it was extremely valuable to invest time in identifying the most effective professional
development for teachers and were able to speak on the impact that professional development
has on student achievement. For example, Participant 4 explained that
Before we submit our budgets, as a school, we have discussions around what we need,
what professional experiences we need, and how much time it is going to take. We do try
to align our budgets based on initiatives that we have at the school level and then
initiatives that teachers have shared that they are interested in participating in.
Participant 2 shared similar views:

136
It is a priority for us because a lot of times the teachers want to go to professional
development and I just want to make sure that they themselves see a need for it, of course
it's important to me. I empower them as well. I want them to spend time looking at their
data and then say, I need some more help in this, or I need some more help in that. So, it's
very important to me. But it's more important for them to want to be a part of that and
say, okay, this is what I need to get my students just over the hump, to get them where I
need them to be.
Participant 11 shared that the only way you can change behavior and change instruction is to
expand the capacity of your teachers. Participant 10 explained that it is important to invest time
in selecting the right professional development because everything needs to be meaningful, that
is the goal. If teachers are asked to provide meaningful instruction, then that means that they
need to be provided meaningful professional development to improve student achievement. It is
a part of the cycle. Everyone has to be a continuous learner because what worked even five years
ago may not work with the scholars that are in schools today. So, it is important to identify
various learning strategies, different techniques, different platforms of engagement, and
participation for scholars to be engaged and actually learning, and that requires a great deal of
research. On the contrary, Participant 12 expressed a belief that professional development is not
always the answer. Sometimes it can be very low quality and does not support what teachers
need. So, the burden stays with the principal and teacher leaders to provide that learning, even
though teachers attend professional development.
Finally, to assess this expectancy-value influence, principals were asked: “Is there a time
when you noticed deficits with teachers’ skills set and the needs of students? If so, will you
please describe a time when you noticed deficits within teachers’ skill set and the needs of

137
students? How were you able to provide teachers with the skills or experience they need? What
were some of the greatest barriers that prevented you from effectively providing support to
teachers?” Five out of 12 principals provided responses that adequately addressed the questions.
Participant 8 stated that cultural competency has been a deficit exhibited by teachers and
explained that throughout the country there has been an influx of students whose English is a
Second Language and the public schools overall, have not been prepared in teacher college
training on how to educate students whose first language is not English. Therefore, to minimize
this issue, Participant 8 explained that the school has tapped into resources such as having
college professors to Skype into some international classrooms, just to see how they were set up
to see the expectations, and to see what the teachers’ role was. Additionally, Participant 8
reported that they have conducted live case studies and engaged in a lot of research but securing
a second language teacher had been difficult because some of them have not entered into
education as yet.
Participant 5 discussed that pedagogical practices are deficits experienced among some
high school teachers and that sometimes there are teachers who may have the content
knowledge, but they do not have the pedagogy, therefore, you have to start all over with
teaching, especially in high school, teaching teachers pedagogy. Participant 5 continued by
stating that high school teachers, often times do not believe that they have to be teachers of
pedagogy, but the purveyors of information, and that has been a barrier to teach teachers that
they are not just teachers of information, but teachers of children and children are different.
Participant 5 concluded by stating that “how you are engaging students is going to make the
difference on how they are going to perform; so that is definitely a barrier.”

138
Participant 11 discussed the importance of using county-based resources to provide
support for teachers because sometimes teachers are not necessarily new to the district, but they
experience certain gaps in instructional practices and need that additional support. Participant 11
went on to explain that sometimes when principals draw on external support systems, it can be
more beneficial to the teachers due to its non-evaluative nature, teachers do not feel threatened,
because oftentimes when the principal is offering the support, it can be very intimidating.
Additionally, Participant 12 clarified that providing teachers with the skills they need is about
understanding what the deficits are and thinking of various options to address them. This
participant explained that in some cases:
It could be the teachers and their willingness, and sometimes it just requires feedback and
someone saying this is what I see, here is what I would like for you to try out, it is not
necessarily a requirement, but in some cases that could be professional development, you
are giving feedback in the moment as opposed to going through a formalized setting.
Seven out of 12 participants provided insufficient responses to the questions. Several principals
were able to identify deficits teachers experienced but believed that external factors outside of
the skills and strategies they could readily provide to the teachers exacerbated the deficits. For
example, Participant 9:
I hired a teacher this year that had a conditional certificate and when I say I don't know
what he was thinking or what I was thinking when I hired him. He talked a good game.
Oh my gosh. When it came down to him, meeting the needs of his students, it just did not
happen. I started with having my ILT support him, but because the skill was not there, it
was a project that I took on myself. I literally had to change my schedule to support him.
He participated in the collaborative planning and understood the conversations around it,

139
but when it came down to delivering that instruction, I needed someone seasoned to do it.
He didn't have the vocabulary to do it. He got his support, but a big part of it was his
will.
Additionally, Participant 10, cited a similar example and explained that there was a teacher who
was coming from a different career and was trying to be a teacher, but there was a definite gap in
the teacher’s content knowledge, so she was provided, mentors, professional development, New
Teacher Academy, and support from the grade level chairperson. The participant shared that the
teacher even received extra support in the classroom and extra planning time with the
instructional lead teacher and the assistant principal where they focused on bite size successes,
because if success was reflected on one thing, then the teacher could move to something else. A
lot of resources were poured into the teacher’s professional growth, but the teacher was just not a
right fit.
Table 10 shows how principals discussed that they demonstrate value in providing
teachers with professional development sessions that are geared toward closing the academic
achievement gap for economically disadvantaged students.
Table 10

Number of Principals and the Strategies They Employ to Provide Professional Development for
Teachers

Principals’ Action Number of Participants Engaging in the
Action
Ensure people see the benefit in the
professional development
5 of 12
Differentiate professional development 4 of 12
Provide coverage for teachers to engage in
professional development

Provide teachers with options to select their
own professional development
7 of 12

140
Table 10, continued
Principals’ Action Number of Participants Engaging in the
Action
Operate with the mindset that the only way to
change behavior and change instruction is to
expand the capacity of teachers
6 of 12
Establish a culture where everyone is a
continuous learner.
9 of 12
Create a shift in instructional practices among
high school teachers from being purveyors of
information
1 of 12

Document analysis. A review of ESSA (2018) documents posted on the MSDE website
revealed that disportionality exists regarding teacher placement within the school district across
the state. More unqualified and a high possibility of ineffective teachers serve in the most
difficult classroom across the state. As indicated in the ESSA (2018) document, this is believed
to be as a result of structural processes, seniority, and difficulty recruiting teachers who are
willing to serve in schools which are designated to be Title I Part A schools. As such, the state is
working with the Local Educational Agencies human resources department to institute structures
that focus on equitable placement of teachers, with a plan that state-directed professional
development initiatives will give precedence to low-performing schools and ensure Title I Part A
schools are prioritized.
Summary. The assumed influence that principals need to see the value in providing
teachers the types of professional development sessions that will close the academic achievement
gap for students of low-socioeconomic status, was determined to be a need. Sixty-two percent of
the principals interviewed were able to adequately describe deficits displayed by teachers and
were able to provide strategies to improve the teacher’s skills or content knowledge. Principals
were able to sufficiently identify deficits in teacher performance and student needs but were not
able to satisfactorily address the discrepancy to improve teacher practice. Some principals

141
reported that it is very difficult to support teachers who have not attended a formal teacher
preparation program. A review of MSDE’s ESSA documents revealed that more unqualified
teachers who are more likely to be rated ineffective have been placed in some of the most
challenging schools. Principals also shared that they have received little to no training on
trauma-informed practices, social emotional learning, and how to effectively address cultural
competency within the schools. They believe that these have impacted the level of confidence
they experience when attempting to close the academic achievement gap. The lack of adequate
resources was also cited as a hindrance to principals having high self-efficacy. Since the
percentage of responses fell below the 75% threshold that was needed to render this influence an
asset, this influence has been determined to be a need.
Results and Findings for Organization Causes
The principals’ organizational causes were assessed through interview findings. The
following section presents findings for each assumed influence in the areas of cultural models
and cultural settings. Findings from the interviews are used to determine if assumed gaps exist.
Cultural Models
Principals were asked to respond to interview questions which assess their perception of
the cultural models that exist within the K-12 school districts in which they work. Interviews
were used to determine whether or not participants believe that their district fostered a system of
open communication, trust, and buy-in to close the academic achievement gap between
economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students.
Organizational model Influence 1. K-12 schools need to foster a culture of open
communication amongst all stakeholders including principals, teachers, and parents in order to
close the achievement gap for students of low socioeconomic status.

142
Interview findings. The principals were asked the following questions: “To what extent
do you believe that your school district fosters an open system of communication within the
organization among stakeholders such as principals, teachers and parents? Describe how
communication occurs among various stakeholders such as parents, teachers, community
partners, and central office personnel.” In order for this influence to be rendered an asset, 75% of
participants need to agree that their specific school districts foster a system of open
communication among various stakeholders. Of the 12 participants, 4 felt that their school
system fostered a system of open communication amongst stakeholders. Some common
responses were that their organizations operate an open-door policy. Participant 2 asserted,
“organizationally, it's 100%. There is a monthly staff meeting with principals, sometimes within
clusters or among grade bands or cohorts of schools that have similar dynamics, so I think
organizationally, we are very informed and really open.” Participant 5 continued “the CEO
models hosting open forums with stakeholders and hosting town halls and councils of different
stakeholders that you communicate back and forth on a constant basis. The CEO does an
excellent job of modeling that for us.” Participant 12 agreed by explaining that there is a high
level of openness in terms of gathering feedback and that whenever they are submitting the
budget or making any decision on behalf of the school, they are required to indicate how
feedback is being garnered. This she believes sends the message and sets the expectation that
input from all stakeholders is valued and is important. However, this was not the sentiment
echoed by the remaining eight participants. For example, Participant 11 declared, “they do offer
different opportunities for surveying different stakeholders’ input, but honestly, I don't think that
it’s used. So, they make it seems like, oh yeah, we're getting input, but the decisions, oftentimes,
are already made.” Participant 7 described a broken communication chain:

143
I'm going to be very honest. I've been in the system over 20 years and communication has
not always been their strike, sometimes in trickles down, sometimes parties are forgotten,
or stakeholders have forgotten specific stakeholders, information that is shared by one
department is sometimes retracted by another.
Participants 4 and 9 articulated a lack of consistency in messaging and openness within school
districts. They shared that the districts are open about certain things and not about everything and
that there is often a disconnect with messages that principals receive, and messages that parents
receive, which often causes friction between parents and the school community. The participants
argued that the districts make effort to communicate, but it needs to be clear and it needs to be
the same message, no matter which group of stakeholders, is being addressed. Since only 33% of
participants provided responses that demonstrated that their school system fostered a system of
open communication, this influence did not meet the 75% threshold that would render it to be an
asset, thus, this influence was determined to be a need.
Document analysis. A review of the MSDE communication documents revealed that the
local school districts conduct annual surveys from stakeholders such as parents, students, and
staff. Additionally, ESSA documents reflected that Local Educational Agencies collaborate and
present data during quarterly meetings. A review of the documents also revealed that the state
conducts Listening Tours with LEAs.
Summary. The assumption was that K-12 schools need to foster a culture of open
communication amongst all stakeholders including principals, teachers, and parents in order to
close the achievement gap for students of low socioeconomic status. Only 33% of principals
believed that their school district fosters a system of open communication amongst all
stakeholders. All participants discussed that their school systems have structures in place to

144
communicate with all stakeholders, but some principals discussed that communication is often
not clear, inaccurate, and sometimes their districts appear to want feedback, but whenever
feedback is provided by stakeholders, the feedback is not used or valued and it appears that the
district is only going through the process, but is not valuing the process. Some participants stated
that their districts have started to host town hall meetings, but overall, the quality of
communication needs to be improved. All participants reported that their individual schools have
various structures to communicate with parents. A review of documents on the MSDE website
suggests that the state holds monthly open forums and conducts stakeholder surveys, however,
67% of the participants did not feel that the school system fosters a system of open
communication. Since less than 75% of the participants provided the affirmative response to the
cultural model influence, this influence has been determined to be a need.
Organizational model Influence 2. K-12 schools needs to foster a culture of trust in the
school among all stakeholders including principals, teachers, and parents in order for the
organization to achieve its goal.
Interview findings. For this influence to be determined as an asset, 75% or more of the
participants must articulate how their school fosters a culture of trust among all stakeholders and
be able to describe a time when a high degree of trust was experienced. The principals were
asked the following questions: “Does the school foster a culture of trust between principal,
teachers and students? b. Will you please explain how the school fosters an atmosphere of trust
and collaboration between teachers and principal? c. is there a high degree of trust and
collaboration among teachers, principals and parents? If yes; describe a time you felt an
especially high degree of trust and collaboration amongst principals and teachers.” Fifty-eight
percent of principals sufficiently articulated how they foster a culture of trust in the school

145
among all stakeholders. For example, Participant 10 builds trust by collaborating, empowering
staff, and maintaining an open-door policy as she explained, “I'm very transparent. I don't hide
things from them. We have stand up meetings, staff meetings, collaborative planning. I'm open.
My door is always open. They know that they can come to me, and I do go to them.” Similarly,
Participant 12 asserted that they actively work on garnering trust by employing an open-door
policy. She declared that sometimes it is even too open. There is a tiered structure, but it is still
the culture that staff, parents and students can reach out to anyone if they have a question.
However, she thinks that there are still silos that exist within the school building, and she has not
yet figured out if it is because of friendships that are just likely developed, or if those are things
that need to be watched more closely so that everyone is working together more holistically
across the board. Participant 12 added that there is a high degree of trust established between
staff and students; they know they can reach out to their teacher and there is always an adult they
can connect with; if they are not happy with the response they can go directly to administration.
Participant 4 emphasized the importance of building relationships in order to develop trust by
explaining that when educating children of poverty, the importance of relationships, not only
with the student, but with the family does not always have a high level of trust with school
systems. Therefore, if the child may be struggling behaviorally or academically, it is hard for
parents to accept that, they want to find other reasons for why the child may not be performing
academically. She explained that one must be able to relate to the student and to the parent, so
that understanding can take place. She stressed that parents have to feel that staff really loves
their child, if they do not feel that the staff really cares about their child, then little to no progress
will be made with that child or that family, because they will not trust the staff. Participant 8,
clarified that there is definitely a high level of trust between students and administration, teachers

146
and administration, parents and administration, however, based on survey data, there seems to
still be a space where students do not feel that they can share something with their teachers, and
it is going to be solved. She believes that based on discussions with students, a cultural
competency issue exists, and cultural competency is key to making everyone feel trusted, feel
heard, and feel like their teachers have their best interests at heart. Thus, really doing the work
with her teachers around helping them to understand how trust is formed so differently in the
urban community is paramount. Participant 8 emphasized that in urban schools, trust is around
safety, empathy—feeling like you understand, while in some communities, they might not even
care if there is trust at school because they are going to take care of the child’s education
anyway, but in urban communities, parents might not send their children to school if they do not
trust that the school is going to take care of them.
Forty-two percent of participants do not feel that a high level of trust is fostered within
their school. Participant 9 expressed that there is a lack of trust, that was present before she was
appointed principal of the school and that lack of trust persists. She stated that there has always
been a lack of trust between the school and the Parent Teachers Association (PTA) and she was
unaware until she started to make observations. The participant claimed that the teachers and the
PTA do not share a positive relationship which causes a disconnect between the school and the
PTA. She lamented, “there are some underlying trust issues. I don't know where it originally
stemmed from; there’s just a group in our PTA, they have a vision. It's not our vision. It is their
vision that's different from the school’s.”
Summary. The assumption was that school districts need to foster a culture of trust in the
schools among all stakeholders including principals, teachers and parents in order for the
organization to close the academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and

147
economically disadvantaged students. Fifty-eight percent of principals articulated that their
school fosters a culture of trust and was able to sufficiently describe a time when a high degree
of trust was experienced. Since the percentage of positive responses fell below the threshold of
75%, this influence has been determined to be a need.
Organizational model Influence 3. K-12 schools need to foster a culture of teacher
buy-in between principals and teachers in order for the organization to achieve its goal.
Interview findings. To determine this cultural model influence, participants were asked
four questions. The first question was: “How would you describe the change process that occurs
at your school?” In order to be an asset, 75% of participants needed to sufficiently describe the
change process at their school. Eight out of 12 participants (67%) sufficiently described the
change process. A common response was for participants to ground the change in data.
Participant 11 shared that as a new principal to the school, it was important to effectively
communicate why the change was necessary because oftentimes when someone new comes in
and wants to implement change, people are usually resistant to the change so she had to rely on
the data because the data tells a very imperial version of the story. Therefore, it is not principal
X saying this, it is the data that that is being shared. Participants 4 and 11 agreed that every
decision for change is derived from some sort of data set, and that is usually the way that people
understand why the change needs to happen. They stated that after researching the data points
related to that problem area, initiative is developed; then participants and facilitators develop the
progress monitoring, data points are identified or selected, the calendaring of when the
benchmark assessments or benchmark will be met and analyzed is established and typically, that
happens initially with a school improvement team or instructional leadership team with perhaps
some other people brought in and then that information is shared with the staff. Participant 4

148
concluded by stating that if teachers can really see the rationale and how it is going to be
beneficial to students and staff in terms of the work with students, then one gets a bigger buy-in.
Participant 11 cautioned that
Ten percent of the time I have to implement change with no notice and no input, and I
just have to tell my teachers that this is a deciding announcement, I don't really have
time. This came down from the district. So, what I am rolling out, I am rolling out the
best avenue that I have thought to do. Because I am a facilitative leader and I have
included my teachers. I am very transparent, so when I have to tell them, look, we have to
get this done no whining. I don't have time to come with a plan. You guys, I just have to
do this; they trust me enough because I've included them in so many other things and
they understand my decision-making process.
Participant 5 concurred that a sense of urgency is the ingredient that drives the change and added
that it cannot be something that you just throw at people; it cannot be something that works well
somewhere else, it has to be something that is discussed and something that is taken apart. One
has to ensure that the change to be implemented is directly pointing towards your own culture,
and your own faculty, and it has to be monitored. Participant 5 explained that once the
implementation strategy has been determined, consistent monitoring of the implementation must
occur, and is important that communication is not only initiated at the beginning of the change
process, but it should be consistent throughout the entire implementation and after the
implementation. He concluded the discussion by emphasizing that there are several different
benchmarks that must be used to measure the effectiveness of the change and the extent to which
the change is being implemented with fidelity. Participant 12 added that the change process
includes communication with all stakeholders. She pointed out that it is also imperative to allow

149
people to respond to whatever that change is through not only verbal feedback but also through
writing and communicating, and that there is a fair amount of reflection surveys that seek to find
out what was stakeholders’ reaction, how did they feel about the change, what suggestions do
they have, and they always end with some type of action item. Participant 12 added, “It is
important that people are able to express how they feel, but then also think about it in terms of an
action item.”
While some participants provided adequate responses regarding the change process, 42%
of principals struggled to sufficiently articulate their change process. Participant 9, claimed:
it just happens naturally. I have a very compliant staff, they'll say…. Just tell me what
you want me to do and I'll do it. But then there are times where I'm like hey guys, I need
your input. I want some feedback. I want this to be our plan. It is slow. So, I have to
move with caution.
The second question asked participants: “What structures if any, do you currently have in
place to promote a culture of teacher buy-in?” Sixty-seven percent of participants were able to
adequately discuss the structures that promote teacher buy-in. Some common responses were to
engage in frank discussions and celebrate successes. Participant 4 stated that they talk very
frankly about what the goal is, and why the goal is important. It is important to try to find ways
for the teachers to see how it is going to benefit them and their students to use whatever strategy
and then to support them as they go along. The celebrations help to continue to encourage them
and then have them share their successes or quick wins with the rest of the staff. Participant 8
also garners buy-in by recognizing teachers, “we showcase those teachers and the success that
they are having amongst themselves, so it wasn't just coming from administration. That's been
very helpful in getting the buy-in.” Participant 5 agreed that celebration of success drives further

150
growth, further investment, and further trust and further buy-in. Participants 11 and 12 further
argued that the process of creating buy-in is initiated with the leadership team, and then it is
trickled down to the staff. Participant 11 reiterated that the process of creating buy-in, “really
starts with the instructional leadership team. We try to at least get buy-in from that lead person at
every grade level and then they help to turnkey it to everyone else.” Participant 12 agreed by
explaining that oftentimes, it is she who is communicating with the leadership team, and they
become the champions or the additional communicators of whatever that change factor is or
those core content leaders, teacher leaders within the building help to push the message forward.
Additionally, Participant 12 discussed that the reason for that is, in some cases, the teachers have
a better or stronger relationship with those individuals and it is a fact that in order to have buy in,
there has to be trust; therefore, it is important to try to look to see where there are levels of trust
between individuals, and how they become a part of the communication team and to help
facilitate that understanding. So the structure includes delivering some of those in team meetings
and smaller meetings, as opposed to a single time, so by the time it reaches a whole staff
meeting, bits and chunks of that information would have already been shared on a small scale so
that when the staff collectively come together, people would have had an opportunity to rest on
the idea that there were some new practices, and really starting to think through some solutions
as opposed to the complaints around it. Although some participants were able to clearly
articulate how buy in was promoted, 33% of participants struggled to articulate a clear plan. For
example, Participant 9, described the process as being painful:
I literally had to tell them I may not make every decision, the way your previous principal
did, but know that when I make a decision, it's done with the students’ needs in mind. I'm
never going to make a blind decision and it may not be a decision that you favor.

151
The third question asked participants to “Describe the decision-making process that occurs at
your school.” Sixty-seven percent of participants sufficiently described the decision-making
process that occurs at their school. A common theme that emerged from the interview findings
was decision through collaborative leadership. For example, Participant 10 declared:
I'm a collaborative leader so we discuss things. I may throw out some options or I may
give them a situation and then allow them to come up with options. Then we go through
them. I'm also very deliberate, so I try not to make decisions hastily. I like to have all the
details and all the information so that we're making an informed decision, then I'll go
from there.
Participant 4 also took a similar collaborative leadership approach by explaining that she tries to
make the decision process participatory through team leaders having conversations with their
grade level and then bringing that back to the leadership team, whether surveying and then,
sharing the rationale behind what the decision is. Participant 4 also discussed that it is important
to try to get input from staff and families and teachers and sometimes students, depending on
what decision needs to be made. The participant shared that the district has a stakeholder survey
that they do every winter, where they ask students to respond to a set of questions that relate to
climate, educational rigor and opportunities, and things of that nature, and then there is a parent
component of that as well. They survey the parents, they survey staff and they survey students,
then they share that information with schools. Schools can use some of that data in terms of
looking at your school improvement plan when developing goals and initiatives for improvement
for the upcoming school year. Participant 11 also spoke on the importance of taking a team
approach to the decision-making process:

152
It's important as a leader to not think that you have all the answers because you don’t.
Typically, leaders are strong in one area more than another. I lean on the expertise of my
staff, because it creates a twofold process; it communicates to my team, I appreciate you
and I value and I need your expertise, but it also helps me to make well-rounded
decisions. It’s just a best practice to have multiple viewpoints on every decision that you
make, in my opinion, unless you absolutely know that you are just the expert and you’ve
got it all, which you probably don't.
While 67% of principals articulated clear strategies relating to the decision-making process, 33%
of participants were able to satisfactorily discuss the decision-making process. Some common
responses among Participants 1, 3, and 9 were that they have to make decisions that best suit the
needs of students, even if staff were not in agreement. All three participants did not discuss a
process that solicited input from various stakeholders.
The fourth question asked: “On a scale of one to ten with ten being the highest, how
receptive are teachers to changes regarding instructional shifts? What are some factors that
contribute to the rating you have provided?” Three out of 12 participants rated teachers’ level of
receptiveness at an eight and noted this rating was after the teachers’ initial resistance. For
example, Participant 10 explained that getting teachers to see the value in the new process or a
different strategy sometimes, requires work. For example, there is a new curriculum this school
year and some teachers have not really bought into that and they are still trying to do things from
last year, or they are continuing to use the strategy that they were most comfortable with. So, it
was important to go back and show them the value and how what they were doing was fine. But
then there was another layer that the students were missing. They had to be provided with the
entire strategy and not just piecemeal it. Once they got used to the new way, they were better

153
able to apply it and became less resistant. Participant 2 agreed that teachers are receptive to
changes regarding instructional shifts if they know they will be supported and coached
throughout the process. Participant 5 added that some teachers are very open, they have growth
mindsets, they understand that it is their job to get better; and then you have some that have fixed
mindsets. So the teacher with a fixed mindset just like a kid with a fixed mindset just like the
administrator with the fixed mindset believes that their inability to accomplish something is an
innate shortcoming; and it is not something they can work on because they believe that what they
have brought to the table is what they have and that is it. He added that, on the contrary, there is
that growth mindset individual who believes that like everything else is, substantial growth can
occur with investment of time and investment in it. So, it matters the type of teacher you are
dealing with. Participant 5 concluded by stating, “we spend a lot of time with Carol Dweck's
work around mindset. So, we can help to identify when we're operating within a fixed mindset
and using strategies to kind of shift that to a to a growth mindset.” Participant 8, also discussed
several reasons why a teacher may or may not be resistant to changes regarding instructional
shifts by explaining that some teachers who are very new to the profession and very eager
because they want to move into administration, may be very eager to learn new things. Some of
it comes with the generation that they represent where they are just learners and they are very
quick to pick up things and try, and they are excited about it. She added that data for most
teachers means a win. It is like a reward system for them and that really intrinsically motivates
them to continue on the path when they begin to see their students succeed. In contrast,
Participant 7 expressed that some teachers have been around a long time and they are aware that
change happens frequently in education and they feel like it is temporary, so they are not really
going to buy-in. Participant 12 also expressed that there is often a lot of change that happens

154
within the district, and so that causes frustration, on behalf of the teachers and that causes people
to not necessarily want to change and move forward to something new. She cited that there is
also a level of fear, which is a part of the change process. People are afraid of the unknown. If it
is a new curriculum, a new strategy, new expectation. They are fearful of how they will respond
to it, and how well they will do with whatever the expectation is.
Summary. The assumption was that K-12 schools need to foster a culture of teacher buy-
in between principals and teachers in order for the organization to achieve its goal. Participants
were asked four questions in order to determine the extent to which schools foster a culture of
teacher buy-in. Fifty-seven percent of principals were able to sufficiently articulate how the
school fosters a system of teacher buy-in. In order for this influence to be deemed an asset, 75%
or more of the principals needed to provide adequate responses which demonstrate that the
school is intentional about fostering a culture of teacher buy-in. Since the 58% of positive
responses fell below the threshold of 75%, this influence has been determined to be a need.
Cultural Settings
Principals responded to interview questions which were designed to assess their
perception of K-12 cultural settings. Four interview questions were used to discuss the extent to
which principals felt that their school districts were providing adequate resources to close the
academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and educationally disadvantaged
students.
Cultural Setting Influence 1. K-12 schools need to provide adequate resources that will
assist principals in implementing effective strategies to close the achievement gap for students of
low-socioeconomic status.

155
Interview findings. The first question asked: “What are some of the resources that are
needed to implement strategies or programs that will close the achievement gap between
economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students?” Findings from the
interview revealed that only 17% or 2 out of 12 principals indicated that they had the types of
resources or programs needed to close the academic achievement gap for economically
disadvantaged students. Participant 2 explained that at the beginning of the year they wanted to
purchase an i-Ready reading program because it is really good at improving students’ math and
reading skills. With the help of the Parent Teachers’ Association, they were able to purchase the
program for the school, so they have no real need at this time. However, 83% of the principals
expressed that they would like to have more resources to assist in closing the academic
achievement gap for economically disadvantaged students. Participant 4 highlighted the need for
school districts to provide a database of resources that are readily available to principals so that
they have access to some proven strategies to close the academic achievement gap for specific
populations of students. The participant explained that the database could include goals of
specific initiative, how a particular program worked, testimonials, and the expected time
allotment for achieving a particular goal. She also pointed out that it would also be important to
include any financial obligation that was involved, and that the district could provide trained
experts in the area of dealing with economically disadvantaged students to conduct walkthroughs
at the school and provide strategies and feedback based on implementation. Participant 4
continued “I'm a big proponent of small groups, we definitely use small group instruction with
our grouping practices. We have a range of homogeneous groups inside of a classroom to make a
heterogeneous classroom grouping, but that doesn't always pay off.” Participant 5 expressed
similar needs by stating that the district needs to provide a Learning Management System (LMS)

156
where data and other resources are readily available so that more time is focused on instructional
practices as opposed to teachers spending sometimes all of their collaborative planning time
trying to find the right information. Participants 6 and 7 expressed the need for school districts to
provide wraparound services that can be in the form of family community schools model, for all
schools to address community issues and family issues in providing those wraparound services,
so that schools can instruct students knowing that those things are being taken care of.
Participants 8 agreed that schools should be able to prescribe a classroom structure based on
what students need and suggested all of the following: some students may need to be in a smaller
setting, but still without any type of disability code, but just may need to be in a class of 10;
some students need to be able to go to a middle school for advanced level classes because they
are ready for that; some students would benefit from possible distance learning opportunities and
not just being confined at the school level; some students need a year-round program because
learning regression is very detrimental to their progress, therefore, being able to offer different
instructional models and programming that really work for students is important because one
cannot always assume that economically disadvantaged students are all low learners because
they are not. Participant 8 emphasized that students all need different opportunities and so right
now, education is pretty much a one-shot deal. Therefore, it is prescribed for the middle child
and is not necessarily prescribed for children who need something different. Participant 10
voiced the need for more funding to be provided to schools that are not fully Title I, so that they
can properly serve students who are economically disadvantaged. She stated, “we do have
economically disadvantaged children in my building, but we don't have enough to be considered
a Title 1 school, so I do not have funds for special programs.” Participant 12 concurred:

157
We recognize that the one size fits all approach is null and void and in order for students
to make progress we have to meet them where they are. Finding the right interventions to
be able to support students and provide that regular instruction that ensures learning is a
priority. Right now, a high number of students with socioeconomic challenges are
without the technological devices or internet services they need to engage in distance
learning.
Participant 11 expressed that more attention needs to be paid to students’ readiness, especially
pre-k students who will eventually fall into the economically disadvantaged group. He added
that, “some schools do not have a pre-kindergarten program, and if we are talking about closing
the academic achievement gap, we must begin to support economically disadvantaged students
as early as possible.”
The second question asked participants: “Do you believe the resources you are receiving
are adequate to close the academic achievement gap for students of low-socioeconomic status?
Please explain why or why not?” One out of 12 participants stated that she believes the resources
she is receiving is adequate to close the academic achievement for students of low
socioeconomic status. Participant 6 stated, “this year we receive an additional $100,000 grant,
but it is only for this year, so I don’t know what will happen next year.” Ninety-two percent of
participants expressed that they do not believe the resources they are receiving are adequate to
closing the academic achievement gap for economically disadvantaged students. Participant 7
declared:
I feel that we're strapped with human resources as well as materials. We have textbooks
but our population may be bigger than what they allotted for, and it will take us the better
half of the year to get the additional textbook for the school population. I have children

158
who are sitting and sharing textbooks because the textbook office is just not getting us the
materials in a timely manner when requested. Although those texts are available through
the internet, not all students have access at home, and having a hard copy book is
sometimes the best practice for children with various needs.
Participant 12 also expressed the need for schools to be supplied with the resources that will
assist staff in meeting the needs of every student:
I'm still looking for continued resources around that social emotional learning aspect for
all of our students. There are some students who are still not yet available for learning
and trying to think about ways that we can support those students with getting ready for
learning. We know they have the propensity to learn, we know that they have the
leadership qualities inside of them, but it's something that's causing a barrier. So, I need
to find the right program, the right resources to really see to it that all students continue to
flourish.
The third question asked: “How do you use these resources to close the achievement gap
between economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students within your
school?” Sixty-seven percent of participants were able to provide detailed descriptions of how
they are using various resources to close the academic achievement gap. According to Participant
8, most of the funding is spent on classroom teachers to be able to have smaller class sizes to
meet the individualized needs of students, and a great deal of funding goes toward implementing
intervention structures. Part-time teachers offer intervention throughout the day for students
struggling in reading and mathematics. There are also the distance learning platforms that can
assist students during free time, as well as time at home, whether it is supporting students with
learning English or whether it is supporting students with reinforcement in reading or

159
mathematics. Participants 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, and 12 all reported having some form of extended
day learning or after school enrichment clubs for students who are identified as need supports or
for students who do not necessarily want to go home, but want to participate. Participant 8 and
12 expressed their belief in developing well-rounded children, because often times in low
economic communities there is nothing for children to do when they get home from school, so
they have created an after school programming model where students can stay after school and
participate in things like engineering, entrepreneurship, writing, cheerleading basketball, arts,
and theater. Participant 12 emphasized that “it is also important for us that we're not just focusing
on those academic areas and it's important for those students to really have a well-rounded
focus.” Participant 8 agreed that these extracurricular activities allow students to unleash the
other side of them, and when teachers get to see who else students are like, they are that more
encouraged to really cheer them on and support them during the day in the classroom because
they then get to see the kid that parents see, and so their heart is even more connected to that
student because they get to see all of that student in one setting. In addition to extended day
learning opportunities, Participant 6 also provides Parent University to teach parents various
concepts and ways to provide support for students at home. Although 67% of principals
sufficiently described how they are using resources to close the gap for economically
disadvantaged students, 33% of principals shared that they did not implement any specific
strategy. Participant 9 stated, “I do not particularly focus on students from that subgroup.”
The fourth question asked participants: “How do you propose the lack of resources
experienced, can be addressed to close the achievement gap between economically advantaged
and economically disadvantaged students?” One out of 12 (8%) participants stated that, “we do
not have any specific resources that we need to close the academic achievement gap. Our socio-

160
economically disadvantaged students do not reflect a gap in achievement.” Whereas 92% of
participants were able to discuss in depth, the deficits they encounter regarding the lack of
resources. Many of the resources that participants discussed that would help to close the
academic achievement gap were in the area of human resources and technology. Participants 4
and 12 stated that closing the gap begins with high-quality teachers and making sure that the
right teachers are in front of students. She added that the Human Resource Department needs to
make sure effective and highly effective teachers are in schools that have economically
disadvantaged students. They have got to find a way to keep them there longer and use them to
mentor and grow other teachers. Participant 12 concluded by stating, “ensuring that the teachers
want to be there, that they believe in student success, and they're going to do whatever it takes to
support students, fundamentally, that is the beginning aspect of ensuring that we are closing the
gap.” Additionally, Participant 11 shared:
Oftentimes you don't have the funding for the additional staffing, because that's one of
the first things that gets cut. When you're talking about small groups, when you're talking
about smaller student to teacher ratio, things of that nature, that all boils down to funding
that boils down to staff, and oftentimes we don't have it.
Participant 10 echoed a similar sentiment as Participant 11 by stating:
I'm asking for the same treatment, not just by class size but also by location. There are
affluent areas of the county and then there are the others. There are schools within those
affluent communities that are actually disadvantaged schools, but because they fall within
that umbrella, they are given that umbrella treatment when in fact they need different
things. As a result, we do not get sufficient funds to give our economically disadvantaged
students the programs that they need.

161
Additionally, participant 6, proposed that closing the gap might mean closing school early once
per month or every other month to provide more time for schools to facilitate collaborative
planning. Participant 7 suggested that the school district needs to provide more human resources
so that training can be provided to families so that they too can help to extend the learning
outside of the regular school day. Participant 5 arrived at the same agreement by stating that
closing the academic achievement gap means closing the digital divide by making sure that all
students have access to devices and the internet, which will allow them to engage in the learning
inside and outside of school.
Summary. The assumption was that K-12 schools need to provide adequate resources
that will assist principals in implementing effective strategies to close the achievement gap for
students of low-socioeconomic status. Four questions were asked to assess the cultural setting of
the school districts in which participants operate. In order for this influence to be deemed an
asset, 75% or more of participants needed to express through discussions and or examples that
the resources they are receiving are adequate to assist them in implementing strategies to close
the academic achievement gap for students of low-socioeconomic status. When the four
questions were averaged, the interview findings revealed that of the 12 participants, 25%
expressed that the resources they are currently receiving are adequate to closing the academic
achievement gap. 75% of principals felt that the resources they are receiving are inadequate.
Since the number of participants who expressed satisfaction with the resources fell below the
75% threshold, this influence has been rendered to be a need.
Summary of Validated Influences
The findings from this study corroborated the literature discussed in Chapter Two.
However, this study revealed additional barriers to closing the academic achievement gap for

162
economically disadvantaged students; these barriers were not discussed in Chapter Two.
Additionally, principals expressed that trauma-informed practices, relationship building,
inadequate teacher training, and the need for culturally responsive environments, were
impediments to closing the academic achievement gap for economically disadvantaged students.
Tables 11, 12, and 13 show the knowledge, motivation, and organization influences for
this study and their determination as an asset or a need.
Knowledge
Table 11
Assumed Knowledge Influences Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data
Assumed Knowledge Influence Asset
or
Need
Conceptual
Principals need to know how to identify relevant professional development sessions
that are geared towards teaching teachers how to close the academic achievement
gap.
Need
Principals need to understand their role as instructional leaders in order to plan and
implement effective professional development that will assist teachers in closing the
academic achievement gap for students of low-socioeconomic status.
Need
Procedural
Principals need to know how to support teachers by providing relevant professional
development that will assist teachers in making accurate data driven decisions in
order to improve academic achievement among students of low-socioeconomic
status.
Need

163
Motivation
Table 12
Assumed Motivation Influences Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data
Assumed Motivation Influence Asset or
Need
Self-Efficacy
Principals need to believe that they possess the capacity to implement effective
strategies that will close the achievement gap for students of low-socioeconomic
status.
Need
Expectancy-Value
Principals need to see the value in providing teachers the types of professional
development sessions that will close the achievement gap for students of low-
socioeconomic status.
Need

Organization
Table 13
Assumed Organizational Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data
Assumed Organizational Influence Asset
or Need
Cultural Model
K-12 schools need to foster a culture of open communication amongst all
stakeholders including principals, teachers, and parents in order to close the
achievement gap for students of low socioeconomic status.
Need
K-12 schools need to foster a culture of trust in the school among all stakeholders
including principals, teachers and parents in order for the organization to achieve its
goal.

Need
K-12 schools need to foster a culture of teacher buy-in between principals and
teachers in order for the organization to achieve its goal.
Need
Cultural Setting
K-12 schools needs to provide adequate resources that will assist principals in
implementing effective strategies to close achievement gap for students of low-
socioeconomic status
Need

Discussion
Findings from this study magnifies the crucial role principals play in the systems and
structures they implement within their schools to increase student achievement. However, the

164
findings also highlight the fact that principals need conceptual and procedural knowledge in
order to implement various strategies and programs to close the academic achievement gap
between economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students. This research
reveals that principals are making efforts to foster a system of collaboration amongst staff within
their buildings, but many principals reported the need for collaboration amongst principals. Only
one principal expressed that they have formed an informal principal support group to support
each other. The findings from this study align with previous research from Farley-Ripple and
Buttram (2014), revealing marked differences in the way principals conceptualized, prioritized,
allotted time for data utilization, and utilized data. The findings also showed that principals are
providing opportunities for teachers and staff to collaborate around data. However, most
principals displayed a limited definition of data; as in most cases when they were referring to
data, they largely defined data by speaking about standardized test scores only, as opposed to
including other forms of quantitative and qualitative data.
Interview findings also revealed that principals’ self-efficacy and expectancy-value were
areas of needs identified. However, the researcher believes that principals’ views regarding their
self-efficacy might have been impacted by the current climate as the research occurred at a time
where everyone witnessed a sudden obliteration of what was known as normalcy, replaced by the
incessant questioning of one’s own existence and the ability to cope on a physical and emotional
level, as a result of COVID-19 pandemic. This uncertainty was swiftly exacerbated by the racial
injustice highlighted by the killing of George Floyd. Phenomenon like COVID-19 causes people
to question what they have known to be true. During the interviews, principals were concerned
about the digital divide that is being experienced among schools that serve economically
disadvantaged students, as many of these students were unable to participate in the virtual option

165
of schooling due to lack of access to the internet and unavailability of technological devices
required for these students to connect to the virtual classroom. Additionally, COVID-19 is
converting the status of digital spaces from a convenience to a necessity, as they represent not
only the primary gateway to access information and services, but also one of the only remaining
trajectories for economic, educational, and leisure activities as well as for social interactions to
occur (Beaunoyer, Dupéré, & Guitton, 2020).
Additionally, principals also expressed frustration and concern about how students’ basic
needs such as food would be satisfied during the pandemic, as many economically disadvantaged
students depend on the schools to provide them with food. Moreover, COVID-19 has magnified
the disparity between economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged households in
that economically disadvantaged people are at a higher health risks and seek healthcare services
at a more advanced stage of illness, which leads to dismal health outcomes (Patel et al., 2020).
This means that school must now be proactive in the measures they take to assist economically
disadvantaged students in dealing with these issues in their households, while still trying to cope
with the social distortion or social crippling that occurs as a result of the well-needed social-
distancing being implemented as a strategy to contain COVID-19. This means that principals are
now being faced with unprecedent challenges, and the training and professional development
sessions can no longer be confined to reactive practices, therefore, school districts must provide
principals with high-quality professional development experiences that transcend the status-quo.
Chapter Five includes proposed solutions and recommendations for each assumed cause.
The proposed solutions and recommendations will be shared with school districts.

166
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS AND SOLUTIONS
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this study is to conduct a gap analysis to examine the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences that are necessary to assist K-12 principals in reaching
the organizational performance goal of implementing effective strategies to close the academic
achievement gap between economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students.
If all students are expected to attain the organizational performance goal, then this must also
include students of low-socioeconomic status. This goal mirrors the Maryland State Department
of Education’s mission to support each student in reaching his or her potential, through a strong
system of accountability to increase academic success for all students and promote a safe
healthy, orderly environment where students’ physical, mental, social and emotional well-being
are prioritized; while ensuring teachers’ and administrators’ effectiveness. The Clark and Estes
(2008) gap analysis framework was used to guide this purpose and assist in identifying the root
causes of performance gaps through the analysis of the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences. The analysis began by generating a list of needs and then moved to
examining these systematically to focus on actual or validated needs.
As such, the following questions guided the study which addressed the knowledge and
skills, motivation, and organization resources and solutions for the stakeholder group. The
stakeholder group of focus for this study was K-12 principals.
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs necessary for all
principals to implement at least six relevant professional development sessions with one
focused on data-driven decision making in order to close the achievement gap among
students of low socioeconomic status?

167
2. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and K-12 school
principals’ knowledge and motivation?
3. What are the recommended knowledge, motivation and organizational solutions to assist
K-12 principals in implementing strategies to close the academic achievement gap
between economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students?
Introduction and Overview
The Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework was employed to assess the
stakeholders’ role in implementing strategies to close the academic achievement gap between
economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students. The analysis of the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences provided insights into the strategies that
are necessary to close the academic achievement gap for these subgroups of students. Through
the analysis, assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences were identified and
later validated by principals within the state of Maryland to attain their respective organizational
goals. At the initial stage, the assumed influences were identified as a result of a review of
literature relating to effective strategies principals employ to close the academic achievement gap
between economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students. Using a qualitative
research design in the form of semi-structured interviews and document analysis, the assumed
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences were evaluated as gaps, benefits, or not
validated.
Chapter 5 focuses on answering the research question, what are the recommended
knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions to assist K-12 principals in implementing
strategies to close the academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and
economically disadvantaged students. The chapter unveils solutions to addressing the validated

168
gaps within the construct of the organization. The first section of the chapter provides a review
of the organizational context, mission, organizational performance goals, the targeted
stakeholder group, the purpose of the study, and the questions that the research sought to answer.
Section two focuses on the recommendations identified for the validated knowledge, motivation,
and organizational influences. The third section addresses the implementation and evaluation
plans which are grounded in the New World Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) Four Levels of
Evaluation Model. The final section focuses on the four levels of evaluation beginning at Level
4-Results, Level 3-Critical Behaviors, Level 2-Learning, and Level 1-Reaction.
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
Knowledge Recommendations
Introduction. Table 14 shows all knowledge influences were determined to be a need
during data collection. According to Clark and Estes (2008), conceptual knowledge relating to a
topic is paramount to applying the concept procedurally. Similarly, to creating a culture of
reflective practice and implementing learning communities to build principal capacity to close
the academic achievement gap for economically disadvantaged students. Also included in Table
9 are the recommendations for these validated influences based on theoretical principles.

169
Table 14
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Knowledge Influence

Validated
as a Gap?
Yes, High
Probability
or No
(V, HP, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Principals need to know
how to identify relevant
professional development
sessions that are geared
towards teaching teachers
how to close academic
achievement gap. (C)
Y Y Modeling to-be-
learned strategies
or behaviors
improves self-
efficacy,
learning, and
performance
(Denler, Wolters,
& Benzon,
2006).

To develop
mastery,
individuals must
acquire
component
skills, practice
integrating them,
and know when
to apply what
they have
learned (Schraw
& McCrudden,
2006).
Staying current
(teachers and
administrators)
with the field’s
research and
practice is
correlated with
increased student
learning
outcomes
(Waters,
Marzano &
McNulty, 2003)
Provide
opportunities for
principals to connect
experts who can
model effective
strategy use
including when and
how to use them,
consistently guide
principals to
effectively diagnose,
design, and
implement effective
professional
development that
will build teacher
capacity to close the
academic
achievement gap for
economically
disadvantaged
students.

Provide
opportunities for
principals to
practice skills and
transfer learning.
Provide a culture of
reflective practice so
that teachers are
equipped to provide
input regarding their
growth.

170
Table 14, continued
Assumed Knowledge Influence

Validated
as a Gap?
Yes, High
Probability
or No
(V, HP, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation

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

Experts observe and
provide, timely,
specific and
individualized
feedback to
principals regarding
their practices.
Principals need to
understand their role as
instructional leaders in
order to plan and
implement effective
professional development
that will assist teachers in
closing academic
achievement gap for
students of low-
socioeconomic status. (C)
Y Y Very frequently
experts who
serve as training
creators and
facilitators do
not understand
the basis of their
own knowledge
and skills, the
manner in which
learning takes
place, or what
sort of
preparation
encourages job
performance
(Clark & Estes,
2008).
Develop and
implement
professional
learning
communities where
principals are able
to collaborate with
their colleagues to
support teachers in
closing the
achievement gap.

Provide job aid that
details the
characteristics of
instructional
leadership.

171
Table 14, continued
Assumed Knowledge Influence

Validated
as a Gap?
Yes, High
Probability
or No
(V, HP, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Principals need to know
how to support teachers by
providing relevant
professional development
that will assist teachers in
making accurate data
driven decisions in order to
improve academic
achievement among
students of low-
socioeconomic status. (P)
Y Y To develop
mastery,
individuals must
acquire
component
skills, practice
integrating them,
and know when
to apply what
they have
learned (Schraw
& McCrudden,
2006).
Learning is
highly dependent
on “goal-directed
practice” and
“targeted
feedback”
(Ambrose,
2010).
Utilizing data for
decision-making
improves
accountability
and
organizational
performance
(Clark & Estes,
2008).

Provide principals
with resources to
build their capacity
to employ various
methodologies in
order to adequately
support teachers in
making data driven
decisions.

Provide training,
modeling, practice,
feedback and job aid
for principals to
build their capacity
to support teachers
to utilize data to
improve student
achievement.

*Indicate knowledge type for each influence listed using these abbreviations: (D)eclarative;
(P)rocedural; (M)etacognitive

Conceptual knowledge solutions. Conceptual knowledge is the knowledge that an
individual is cognizant of and it often acts as the foundation on which expertise is built (Clark &
Estes, 2008). One solution to solving the assumed conceptual knowledge gap among principals is

172
through the provision of education. Clark and Estes (2008) define education as any circumstance
which allows individuals to obtain conceptual, theoretical, and strategic knowledge and skills in
order to assist them in navigating unforeseen challenges. Education focuses on existing research-
based knowledge regarding the reason situations occur and what accounts for the event’s
occurrence (Clark & Estes, 2008). Thus, the recommendation is to provide principals with
education through effective professional development sessions that will explicitly educate them
and connect them to experts who can consistently guide them to effectively diagnose, design, and
implement relevant professional development that will build teacher capacity to close the
academic achievement gap for economically disadvantaged students. To develop mastery,
individuals must acquire component skills, practice integrating them, and know when to apply
what they have learned (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). Additionally, staying current (teachers
and administrators) with the field’s research and practice is correlated with increased student
learning outcomes (Waters, Marzano & McNulty, 2003). Moreover, modeling to-be-learned
strategies or behaviors improves self-efficacy, learning, and performance (Denler, Wolters, &
Benzon, 2006). Therefore, through education, the school district will be able to build principals’
capacity to produce new conceptual knowledge that will equip them to cope with challenges
when they arise (Clark & Estes, 2008). Feedback that is private, specific, and timely enhances
performance (Shute, 2008). Thus, it is important that experts observe and provide, timely,
specific, and individualized feedback to principals regarding their practices. Follow up activities
on the education provided must occur along with the provision of information and job aid. This
could take the form of professional journals, professional readings that outline the steps that
principals need to consider when determining the types of professional development that are

173
relevant to meeting the needs of their teachers. This could be completed during professional
learning communities with principals and their colleagues.
Very frequently experts who serve as training creators and facilitators do not understand
the basis of their own knowledge and skills, the manner in which learning takes place, or what
sort of preparation encourages job performance (Clark & Estes, 2008). Therefore, another
solution to closing the conceptual knowledge gap relating to principals’ role as the instructional
leaders within their schools is to provide education to principals on the characteristics of
instructional leadership by developing and implementing professional learning communities
where principals are able to collaborate with their colleagues to support teachers in closing the
academic achievement gap. In order to increase student achievement, the principal as the
instructional leader acts as the resource provider, provides instructional resources, ensures
effective communication occurs, and maintains a visible presence throughout the school (Smith
& Andrews, 1989, as cited in Whitaker,1997). Hence, the principal must be able to engage in
strategic planning and implementation of these tasks to increase student achievement. In
addition, the conceptual knowledge gap could also be closed by providing principals with job
aids and training that demonstrate the actions principals take when they engage in instructional
leadership. For principals to make sound decisions regarding teachers’ instructional practice,
introduce new techniques, and create buy-in, they must possess a comprehensive understanding
of teachers’ current instructional practices (Baeder, 2017). The central office or individual
Community Learning Networks could also provide differentiated information sessions for
principals to attend sessions based on the specific knowledge gap identified as it relates to their
role as instructional leaders. As instructional leaders, principals can enhance learning by

174
participating in teacher training, partaking in principal collaborative learning, and work in
partnership with an expert (Hirsh, 2010).
Procedural knowledge solutions. Procedural knowledge is the type of knowledge that
assists individuals in understanding “how” to accomplish a task. It also encompasses techniques
of inquiry, which outlines very targeted or absolute skills that are needed to complete specific
tasks (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). In addition to the conceptual knowledge addressed above,
principals must possess the capacity to employ various methodologies in order to adequately
support teachers in making data driven decisions. Findings from the study indicate that there is a
procedural knowledge gap in principals being accurately able to support teachers in making data-
driven decisions that are geared toward closing the achievement gap between economically
disadvantaged and economically advantaged students.
As discussed in Clark and Estes (2008), “training is defined as any situation where people
must acquire “how to” knowledge and skills and need practice and corrective feedback to help
them achieve specific work goals” (p.58). Since data-driven decision making is cited as one of
the most important contributors to increasing student performance (Marsh & Farrell, 2014), a
recommended solution is to provide principals with training in how to effectively support
teachers in using data-driven decision making (DDDM) to increase student outcome. Utilizing
data for decision-making improves accountability and organizational performance (Clark &
Estes, 2008). To develop mastery, individuals must acquire component skills, practice
integrating them, and know when to apply what they have learned (Schraw & McCrudden,
2006). Learning is highly dependent on “goal-directed practice” and “targeted feedback”
(Ambrose, 2010). Therefore, the organization needs to connect principals to experts who can
direct them to the types of data and how they can utilize multiple data points to support teachers

175
in addressing the academic achievement gap and promote a culture of data-driven decision
making. The findings from this study revealed that principals displayed a narrow definition of
data. When most principals made reference to data, they usually talked about standardized test
scores, and not a wide range of qualitative and quantitative measures. Principals must also be
provided training on how to create a culture of data-driven decision making. This can only be
possible if principals know how to effectively build teacher capacity around data literacy by
implementing professional learning cycles focused on data-driven decision-making. For this to
materialize, the principals need to know how to analyze the overall school effectiveness through
the monitoring of initiatives and policies in order to attain the intended outcome (Gill et al.,
2014). According to Grissom et al. (2017), the central office can focus on increasing principal
effectiveness in data-driven decision making by implementing tools and structures that explain
how to use data and processes to manage data utilization.
Additionally, the recommendation is to provide principals with job aids to support them
in becoming more independent as it relates to building their capacity to support teachers to
effectively use data-driven decision making as a strategy to improve student achievement. The
most important advantage to be derived from providing information, job aids, and training is to
support the learning of the knowledge that explains how employees can accomplish recurring,
established job tasks (Clark & Estes, 2008). Through the provision of a job aid, principals would
also be able to assess their own level of effectiveness regarding the quality of support they are
providing teachers and if necessary, seek alternative support as needed.
Motivation Recommendations
Introduction. The motivation influences in Table 15 represent the complete list of
assumed motivation influences and their probability of being validated based on the most

176
frequently mentioned motivation influences to achieving the stakeholders’ goal during semi-
structured interviews and document analysis and supported by the literature review and the
review of motivation theory. Clark and Estes (2008) outline three aspects of motivational
processes that can be problematic within the workplace; active choice, persistence, and mental
efforts. According to Clark and Estes (2008) active choice focuses on an individual’s stance to
actively accomplish a goal. Persistence concentrates on one’s ability to actively pursue a goal
even when faced with multiple distractions. Whereas mental efforts focus on an individual’s
choice to invest mental efforts to pursue a goal even when faced with distractions. The study
assumes that active choice and persistence might be lacking for principals to effectively
implement strategies to close the achievement gap between economically advantaged and
economically disadvantaged students. Therefore, as indicated in Table 10, the two motivational
influences have been validated as a need and have a high priority for achieving the stakeholders’
goal. Table 10 also shows the recommendations for these influences based on theoretical
principles.

177
Table 15
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Motivation Influence

Validated as
a Gap
Yes, High
Probability,
No
(V, HP, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Principals need to believe that they
possess the capacity to implement
effective strategies that will close
achievement gap for students of
low-socioeconomic status. (SE)
Y Y High self-efficacy
can positively
influence
motivation
(Pajares, 2006).

Self-efficacy is
increased through
modeling and
feedback
(Pajares, 2006).
Provide coaching
on instructional
leadership and the
implementation of
effective
strategies, and
provide
opportunities for
principals to
observe and
engage with
experts who have
a track record of
implementing
various strategies
to increase student
achievement.
Principals need to see the value in
providing teachers the types of
professional development sessions
that will close the achievement gap
for students of low-socioeconomic
status. (EV)
Y Y “Rationales that
include a
discussion of the
importance and
utility value of
the work or
learning can help
learners develop
positive values
(Eccles, 2006;
Pintrich, 2003).
Provide rationales
outlining the
importance and
utility value to be
derived from the
types of
professional
development
offered and how it
connects to
improving student
outcomes.

Self-efficacy influence written as example above. Approximately 63% of principals
interviewed expressed that they are confident in their ability to implement effective strategies to
close the academic achievement gap for students of low-socioeconomic status. A
recommendation ingrained in self-efficacy theory has been selected to increase the level of self-
efficacy for principals. High self-efficacy can positively influence motivation (Pajares, 2006).
This would suggest that providing principals with training on the types of strategies to close the

178
academic achievement gap would increase their self-efficacy. The recommendation is for the
organization to provide training for principals to observe and engage with experts who have a
track record of implementing various strategies to increase student achievement. When principals
are provided multiple opportunities to learn from experts in similar environments, their level of
confidence increases, and they become more likely to lean into their discomfort and take risks
and implement a myriad of strategies they would be hesitant to implement prior to the training.
People’s actions are propelled by their perceived beliefs in their own efficacy (Pajares, 2006).
Bandura (2000) posited that efficacy plays an integral role in human functioning both
directly and indirectly, as it is accountable for focusing people’s goals, aspiration, expectations,
emotional tendencies, and perception of hindrances and opportunities in the social environment.
Therefore, when people do not operate on the conviction that they can achieve a specific goal,
they will refuse to tackle it (Clark & Estes, 2008). Additionally, Bandura (2000) posited that
perceived self-efficacy increases the choices that leaders, such as principals, contemplate when
they are required to make decisions. Training boosts confidence and builds self-efficacy.
Consequently, there is a positive correlation between confidence and the attainment of the
performance goal. “As confidence increases, commitment to performance goals also increases”
(Clark & Estes, 2008, p.90). People’s perception regarding the specific skill set they possess to
be successful at a task can be classified as one of the most important factors in determining the
level of commitment they invest in the task and the mental effort they exert in accomplishing the
work (Clark & Estes, 2008). Thus, providing principals with the types of training needed to build
their capacity to increase student achievement will ultimately close the academic achievement
gap for economically disadvantaged students, as principals will feel empowered to select and
implement the most effective strategies.

179
Expectancy value influence written as example above. Approximately 62 % of
principals interviewed see the value in providing teachers the types of professional development
sessions that will close the academic achievement gap for students of low-socioeconomic status.
A recommendation grounded in expectancy-value theory has been chosen to increase the
expectancy value for principals. Rationales that include a discussion of the importance and utility
value of the work or learning can help learners develop positive values (Eccles, 2006; Pintrich,
2003). This would suggest that providing principals with rationales that explain the importance
of the types of high-yield professional development that increase student achievement will allow
the learners to see the value in the types of learning in which they engage. The recommendation
is for the organization to provide rationales outlining the importance and utility value to be
derived from the types of professional development offered and how these professional
development sessions connect to improving student outcomes. Moreover, when principals are
able to see how the professional development sessions align to the needs of the school, they are
more likely to provide opportunities for teachers to engage in professional learning directed to
improving student outcomes. Individuals are more inclined to participate in activities that
provide value to them (Eccles, 2009).
Wigfield and Eccles (2000) asserted that achievement choices are directly impacted by
expectancies and values and that expectancies and values also influence performance, effort, and
persistence. Hence, expectancies and values are also assumed to be influenced by an individual’s
beliefs in his or her ability to carry out a particular task, the perceived difficulty of the tasks,
one’s prior knowledge, and affective memories (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000). Providing principals
with rationales regarding the benefits to be derived from the types of professional development
sessions that are required to close the academic achievement gap for economically disadvantaged

180
students, will act as support systems to aid in the creation of structures needed to ensure proper
implementation, monitoring, and adjustment are made to maximize learners’ engagement in
professional development sessions and create buy-in. The more value an individual places on a
task, the more likely he or she chooses, persists, and engages in that task (Rueda, 2011). When
stakeholders have a vested interest in the tasks and are able to see how the task assists them in
accomplishing the goal, it results in an increased level of engagement which leads to improved
performance (Schraw, 2009).
Organization Recommendations
Table 16 represents the complete list of assumed organization influences and whether
they were validated as a need or an asses and if the influence was identified as a priority to
address in supporting the stakeholders in reaching their goals. Interviews and document analysis
supported by the literature review and the review of organization and culture theory were utilized
to assess these influences. Clark and Estes (2008) postulated that organization and stakeholder
goals are often not attained as a result of inadequate resources, most frequently time and money,
and the nonalignment of stakeholder goals with the mission and goals of the organization.
Organizational culture can be examined from three well-defined viewpoints: artifacts espoused
beliefs and values, and basic underlying assumptions (Schein, 2017). Artifacts or settings focus
on the visible and tangible products of the group such as the physical environment, language,
resources, emotional displays, organizational charts, published values, and noticeable rituals of
the organization (Schein, 2017). While the espoused beliefs and values or cultural models are
the explicitly articulated shared norms, beliefs, values, and aspirations that provide a compass for
members of the group to solve problems and shape behaviors (Schein, 2017). Additionally, the
underlying assumptions focus on the implicitly, unconsciously entrenched beliefs and values that

181
govern the organization (Schein, 2017). It is good for all stakeholders to understand the impact
of culture on an organization; however, this understanding becomes a necessity for leaders if
they must lead (Schein, 2004).
As such, as indicated in Table 16, all organizational influences have been validated as a need and
have a high priority for achieving the stakeholders’ goal. Table 11 also shows the
recommendations for these influences based on theoretical principles.
Table 16
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Organization
Influence

Validated
as a Gap
Yes, High
Probability,
No
(V, HP, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and
Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation
K-12 schools need to foster a
culture of open communication
amongst all stakeholders
including principals, teachers,
and parents in order to close the
achievement gap for students of
low socioeconomic status. (CM)
Y Y Organizational
performance
increases when
effective change
endeavors are
communicated
consistently and
systematically
(Clark & Estes,
2008).
Develop a
communication
plan using DICE

Develop a culture
of open
communication
through formal and
informal
communication
structures using
DICE.

K-12 schools needs to foster a
culture of trust in the school
among all stakeholders including
principals, teachers and parents in
order for the organization to
achieve its goal. (CM)
Y Y Organizational
performance
increases when
stakeholders
communicate
frequently and
candidly to those
involved
regarding
organizational
plans and
progress (Clark
& Estes, 2008).

Use formal and
informal mode of
communication to
create a culture of
trust through
feedback and
ensure all
stakeholders are
informed about
organizational
initiatives.

182
Table 16, continued
Assumed Organization
Influence

Validated
as a Gap
Yes, High
Probability,
No
(V, HP, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and
Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation

Trust increases
the spread of
communication
to change goals
on all levels
(Clark & Estes,
2008)

The
informational
and corrective
feedback
components of
communication
help people to
adjust the
knowledge and
skills they are
using to
accomplish
goals (Clark &
Estes, 2008)

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

Develop a culture
of trust by
promoting formal
and informal
feedback from all
stakeholders in
order to achieve
the goals of the
organization.
Participate in
monthly meetings
to discuss these
initiatives, provide
updates and solicit
feedback from all
stakeholders.

183
Table 16, continued
Assumed Organization
Influence

Validated
as a Gap
Yes, High
Probability,
No
(V, HP, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and
Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation
K-12 schools need to foster a
culture of teacher buy-in between
principals and teachers in order
for the organization to achieve its
goal. (CM)
Y Y
Organizational
culture is
established
through shared
experience,
shared learning
and stability of
membership. It
is something that
has been
learned, it
cannot be
imposed
(Schein, 2004).
When
organizations
create processes
collaboratively,
performance
increases (Clark
& Estes, 2008).

“The two
greatest
yearnings in the
human
experience are to
be included and
to have a sense
of agency,
(Kegan’s 1994
research as cited
by Mezirow &
Associates,
2000, p. 11).

Capitalize on the
value of “cognitive
diversity” by
broadening the
membership of the
planning
committee to
include divergent
thinkers and
individuals who
have access to
various networks.

Cultivate a culture
of buy-in through
collaborative
leadership.

Provide individuals
opportunities to
play key roles in
the change process.

184
Table 16, continued
Assumed Organization
Influence

Validated
as a Gap
Yes, High
Probability,
No
(V, HP, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and
Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation
K-12 schools needs to provide
adequate resources that will assist
principals in implementing
effective strategies to close
achievement gap for students of
low-socioeconomic status. (CS)
Y Y Organizational
performance
increases when
effective change
efforts ensure
that everyone
has the resources
(equipment,
personnel, time,
etc.) needed to
do their job, and
that if there are
resource
shortages, then
resources are
aligned with
organizational
priorities (Clark
& Estes, 2008).
Create and work
collaboratively
with a team to
establish, from the
onset, what the
fixed priorities are,
and provide the
resources
necessary to
implement the
priorities in order
to guide the
decision-making
process.

Cultural models influence written as example above. Cultural Models: Approximately
75% of principals expressed that the organization needs to foster a culture of open
communication amongst all stakeholders including principals, teachers, and parents in order to
close the academic achievement gap for students of low socioeconomic status. Cultural models
are defined as the collective psychosomatic schema or broadly accepted ideals of how the world
operates or is expected to operate (Schneider et al., 1996). These models are often recognized as
the historically shared views, thoughts, and solutions to adaptive challenges and changing
environments (Schneider et al., 1996). They personify the invisible organizational influences
such as values, beliefs, and attitudes (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Thus, organizational
performance increases when effective change endeavors are communicated consistently and

185
systematically (Clark & Estes, 2008). Cultural models act as promoters or hindrances to the
change process. Moreover, managing change can be a difficult task if stakeholders cannot agree
on the factors that have the greatest impact on transformation initiatives (Sirkin, Keenan, &
Jackson, 2005). Therefore, a recommendation is for the organization to develop a culture of open
communication through formal and informal communication structures using duration, integrity,
commitment to change, and effort (DICE) in order to close the achievement gap for students of
low socioeconomic status.
DICE is a framework that was derived from a study conducted by Sirkin et al. (2005), to
examine the commonalities regarding how various countries and approximately 200 companies
manage transformation. The study found that there was a consistent correlation relating to the
successes and failures of change initiatives and the hard elements which represented the duration,
of the change program, which focused on the elapsed time between project review; integrity or
aptitude of the team’s; commitment of both senior executives and the staff whom are most likely
to be impacted by the change; and the extra efforts employee will need to invest to cope with the
change. Sirkin et al. (2005) termed these variables as the DICE factors as they were able to load
them to the advantage of the program’s success. It is important that districts’ executives
thoroughly examine the four elements of DICE, duration, integrity, commitment, and efforts, and
determine whether or not the change initiatives will succeed or fail (Sirkin et al., 2005). When
the organization fosters a culture of open communication through formal and informal
communication structures, a channel is created for individuals to communicate regarding the
change efforts, which will assist the organization in reaching its successful implementation of
strategies that are needed to increase student achievement. Studies reveal that a project with a
lengthy duration that is frequently reviewed is more likely to be successful than a short project

186
that is not reviewed on a regular basis (Sirkin et al., 2005). Too often organizations
underestimate the role managers and staff play in transformation initiates (Sirkin et al., 2005).
Inconsistent communication or communication which arrives too late will alienate the
stakeholders who are most impacted by the changes; it frequently occurs where senior executives
perceive a change as a good thing, but the staff view the change as negative or a message
believed to be extremely clear by senior managers is in fact misunderstood by employees (Sirkin
et al., 2005). A simple act of reaching out to employees, facilitating series of one-on-one
conversations focused on the change initiative, and encouraging straight talk amongst
employees, allows a project team to achieve a series of quick wins, which provide initiatives
with the vivacity needed to succeed (Sirkin et al., 2005). According to Clark and Estes (2008)
work culture is present in the conscious and unconscious understanding of people’s perception of
themselves, what they value, and how they function as an organization. In many ways,
organizational culture is the most important “work process” in all organizations because it
dictates how people work together to get the job done (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Approximately 92% of principals discussed that the organization needs to foster a
culture of trust in the school among all stakeholders including principals, teachers, and parents in
order for the organization to achieve its goal. Organizations with high levels of cultural trust
have a tendency to produce high-quality goods and services that are more cost-effective due to
their ability to recruit and retain highly motivated employees (Colquitt, Scott & LePine, 2007, as
cited in Starnes, Truhon & McCarthy, 2010). These employees are more likely to experience job
satisfaction, invest the time to execute their job properly; make their own decisions; take risks;
innovate; support the organization’s vision, mission, and values, and exhibit organizational
citizenship actions such as assisting a colleague in need (Colquitt, Scott & LePine, 2007, as cited

187
in Starnes, Truhon & McCarthy, 2010). The recommendation is for the organization to develop a
culture of trust by promoting formal and informal feedback from all stakeholders in order to
achieve the goals of the organization. Organizational performance increases when stakeholders
communicate constantly and candidly to those involved regarding plans and progress (Clark &
Estes, 2008). Effective change efforts employ feedback to assess if and how improvement is
occurring (Clark & Estes, 2008). Therefore, the organization can provide opportunities for
stakeholders to participate in monthly meetings to discuss these initiatives, provide updates, and
solicit feedback from stakeholders.
Organizations that promote clear and candid communication, stimulate trust, and
assist people to adjust their performance to make provision for unforeseen events (Clark & Estes,
2008). Trust increases the dispersion of commitment to change goals on every level within the
organization (Clark & Estes, 2008). Thus, the informational and corrective feedback elements of
communication assist people in adjusting the knowledge and skills they are utilizing to achieve
goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). Additionally, team-based organizations require motivation,
feedback, and access to expert skills (Clark & Estes, 2008). Moreover, it is imperative for
organizations to foster a culture of trust through a system of feedback because trust develops in
an environment where there is a willingness to make oneself susceptible to others without
underlying agendas (Seto & Sarros, 2016). When leaders demonstrate that they are sincerely
interested in their followers’ needs and welfare, followers are more apt to trust them and
recognize impartial treatment (Seto & Sarros, 2016). Thus, “organizational citizenship behaviors
and job satisfaction are natural results of such trust” (Seto & Sarros, 2016, p. 26). When
considering organizational trust, one must examine two types of trust: cognitive-based trust
focuses on logic, which is contingent on the proof substantiating a person’s credibility and

188
capability to act under particular circumstances; while affect-based is important as employees
invest in building trusting relationships, voice concerns, and demonstrate care for the welfare of
others, which becomes mutual (Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005, as cited in Seto & Sarros, 2016 ).
Therefore, the organization must prepare principals to balance the task aspect of their role with
the relationship aspect of leadership (Tschannen-Moran, 2014a), so that principals are able to
validate the ability to realize the task, regardless of the task, stakeholders, in particular teachers
are more apt to trust in principals (Tschannen-Moran, & Gareis, 2015).
Approximately 67 % of principals interviewed believed that the organization fosters a
culture of teacher buy-in between principals and teachers in order for the organization to achieve
its goal. When organizations create processes collaboratively, performance increases (Clark &
Estes, 2008). Organizational culture is established through collective experience, shared learning
and stability of membership; it needs to be learned, it cannot be imposed (Schein, 2004). A large
portion of the potency and influence of modern organizations are derived from tension between
stability and change (Clark & Estes, 2008). Thus, the success of any change initiative is highly
dependent on the quality and feasibility of the relationships that is established between the
change agent and the main drivers of the change within the organization (Lunenburg, 2010).
Hence, in order to minimize the extent to which employees resist change, it is imperative that
principals develop positive relationships with stakeholders and seek to provide opportunities to
engage staff members who are committed to implementing the change. Principals must therefore
be supported in how to use division of labor through the creation of various roles in order to
work collectively with teachers to effectively implement initiatives designed to achieve the
organization’s goals. The recommendation is for organizations to cultivate a culture of teacher
buy-in through the use of collaborative leadership. It is important that organizations capitalize on

189
the expertise of teachers and include them in the decision-making process by allowing them to
play key roles on the instructional leadership teams and decide and lead monthly professional
learning communities with teacher teams. Organizational culture improves when effective
change efforts are designed to ensure that all stakeholders’ viewpoints inform the design and
decision-making process guiding the change (Clark & Estes, 2008). Organizational change is
cemented when beliefs and values within the organization are shared with its stakeholders
(Schneider et al., 1996).
Findings from a series of over 50 years of empirical analyses that assessed the effects of
collaborative leadership on school improvement capacity and student learning in a large sample
of US schools over a four-year period reveal that the principals’ leadership styles have a great
impact on student achievement and school improvement efforts (Hallinger & Heck, 2010).
Leadership for student learning was viewed as a process of communal influence in which school
capacity both shapes and is shaped by the school's collective leadership (Hallinger & Heck,
2010). School improvement initiatives must examine change in academic processes and student
achievement; thus, student achievement must be the core of the leadership improvement
initiatives (Hallinger & Heck, 2010). They found that leadership is conceptualized as the driving
force that brings about change in student learning. Additionally, it is believed that a strong
organizational culture regulates organizational behavior and can prevent an organization from
making required changes for adjusting to a changing environment (Schein, 2004). According to
Wahlstrom and Louis (2008) when organizations promote shared leadership and professional
community, it decreases the need for teachers to distrust their principals. One of the most
impactful influences of collaborative leadership is that it minimizes isolation amongst teachers
and increases the likelihood for stakeholders to work together to achieve the common goals of

190
the organization (Wahlstrom & Louis, 2008). Bellibas and Liu (2018) posited that when
principals place emphasis on instructional practices and collaborative leadership, there is an
increased level of trust, collegiality, and respect amongst staff; which promotes buy-in from
teachers. The organization must ensure that principals are aided in building alliances needed to
create buy-in to support professional development efforts and instructional alterations that must
be implemented to close the achievement gap for economically disadvantaged students.
Cultural setting is the physical site where organizational policies and practices are
performed (Rueda, 2011). It concentrates on the more noticeable characteristics of the
organization. Cultural settings influence behaviors and are fashioned by individuals and groups
who operate in similar cultural models that fashioned their behavior (Gallimore & Goldenberg,
2001; Rueda, 2011). Approximately 92% of principals interviewed stated that the organization
needs to provide adequate resources that will assist principals in implementing effective
strategies to close the gap for students of low-socioeconomic status. Organizational performance
increases when successful change efforts make sure all stakeholders have the resources
(equipment, personnel, time, etc.) needed to execute their job, and if resource scarcities are
experienced, then resources are aligned with organizational priorities (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Inadequacy relating to ineffective organizational work processes and material resources result in
performance gaps (Clark & Estes, 2008). Organizations must be equipped with tangible materials
and equipment in order to achieve their goal (Clark & Estes, 2008). Schools within the various
school districts receive funding based on per pupil allotment, however, students are able to
transfer to schools within the same school district after the funding season has closed. This
increases the enrollment number for schools that receive students after the funding deadline and
no additional funding is provided to the receiving school, therefore, the organizations must

191
support principals in managing constant change, nevertheless, operating on the understanding
that principals in different types of organizations require different support to manage both
dramatic change and routine challenges (Clark & Estes, 2008). The recommendation is for the
organization to cultivate a culture where school principals create and work collaboratively with a
team to establish, from the onset, what the fixed priorities are, and provide the resources
necessary to implement the priorities in order to guide the decision-making process. Create
structures for the group to meet monthly to ensure resources and procedures are aligned to school
priorities.
Even for people who possess superior motivation and extraordinary knowledge and
skills, lacking or insufficient processes and materials can thwart the organization from attaining
its performance goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). Performance problems become the natural
expectation when a conflict exists between the organizational policies, goals, and procedures
(Clark & Estes, 2008). Organizations also require tangible supplies and equipment to achieve
goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). Thus, when people are not provided the essential resources that
were promised to achieve high priority work goal or when work policy does not align to work
processes or procedures, one of the probable causes is a conflict regarding some elements of
organizational culture and existing performance goal (Clark & Estes, 2008). Organization
comprise of people whose knowledge, skills, and motivation steer the organization; therefore, it
is important that organizations focus on the people, and what is required to make them successful
(Clark & Estes, 2008). Cultivating a culture where school principals create and work
collaboratively with a team to establish, from the onset, what the fixed priorities are, and
providing the resources necessary to implement the priorities in order to guide the decision-
making process, will assist the organization in reaching its performance goal. Organizations must

192
also consider the types of support people require to perform at their optimal according to the
organizational structures, cultures and processes (Clark & Estes, 2008). It is imperative that the
organization creates culture where principals can be attuned to the “organizational
undercurrents” in order to correspond with student learning targets in schools (Waters et al.,
2003). This will assist principals to develop situational awareness, which allows them to utilize
information to anticipate and plan proactively for possible challenges.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
The implementation and evaluation plan for this study employs the New World
Kirkpatrick model, which is derived from the original Kirkpatrick Four Level model of
Evaluation (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). This model focuses on four key levels of training,
presented in the opposite order of the original model. This model operates on the premise that the
evaluation plan begins with the identification of the organizational goal. It is imperative that each
level occurs in the suggested sequential order as each level will have adverse impact on the
subsequent level (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Level Four focuses on the results, which
examines the extent to which participants achieve the intended outcome of the training. Whereas,
Level Three (Behavior) examines the key drivers and the critical behaviors that participants must
exhibit in order to achieve the results specified in Level Four. Level Two (Learning) then
determines the degree to which participants develop the targeted knowledge, skills, attitude,
confidence, and commitment, as a result of their involvement in the training. Finally, Level One
(Reaction) evaluates the extent to which the participants are satisfied with the training and
whether or not they find it engaging and pertinent to their job (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Based on the strategic design of the implementation and evaluation plan, there is a high

193
probability that the organization will be successful in closing the academic achievement gap for
economically disadvantaged students.
Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations
The mission of K-12 schools is to support each student in reaching his or her potential,
through a strong system of accountability to increase academic success for all students and
promote a safe healthy, orderly environment where students’ physical, mental, social, and
emotional well-being are prioritized; while ensuring teachers’ and administrators’ effectiveness.
In order to accomplish this mission, the Maryland School Department of Education has
established guidelines for all school districts to increase academic achievement for all students.
K-12 principals will implement at least six relevant professional development sessions with one
focused on data-driven decision making and one that is focused on creating structures to improve
parental engagement in order to close the achievement gap among students of low
socioeconomic status. Data from Maryland State Department of Education (2019) the
proficiency rate for FARMs students across the state was 25.5% when compared to students who
were not identified as FARMs students, whose proficiency rate for the PARCC assessment was
60.3%. This shows that Title I and FARMs students are performing more than 50% below their
non-FARMs peers in both Reading and Mathematics. Similar trends were noted for the primary
and the middle grades in both Reading and Mathematics; for example, in 4
th
grade, the
achievement gap between FARMs and Non-FARMs students, Title I and non-Title I students
remained consistently wide over the five year period, with these economically disadvantaged
students trailing a minimum of 16.8% to a maximum of 18.4% in 2019 on the Maryland
Comprehensive Assessment Program (MCAP). Additionally, cohort graduation trend data for
2015-2019 revealed that FARMs students experienced 77.65%, which showed a 9.21%

194
difference in graduation rate when compared to non-FARMs students' graduation rate of 86.86%
for school year 2018-2019.
In order for K-12 schools to achieve their global goal of closing the academic
achievement for economically disadvantaged students, it is important that principals implement
professional development sessions with one focused on data-driven decision making in order to
close the achievement gap among students of low socioeconomic status. Principals have been
selected as the main stakeholders since they have the power to shape the organizational culture
and determine the types of professional development and instructional practices that are
necessary to increase student achievement. In addition to principals, teachers act as important
drivers as they play a crucial role in directly impacting student achievement, therefore, the goal
is that teachers will engage in targeted professional development and use of data to inform
instructional practices that will close the academic achievement gap as measured by formative
and summative assessments and daily activities. Educating principals on the characteristics of
instructional leadership and providing opportunities for principals to connect to experts who can
consistently guide them to effectively diagnose, design, and implement effective professional
development that will build teacher capacity to close the academic achievement gap for
economically disadvantaged students, will assist school districts in effectively meeting their
goals for principals and ultimately achieving the global goal for students.
Table 17 reflects the organizational goal and the stakeholder goals that are necessary for
the organization to meet its goal. According to the findings derived from this study, as the
stakeholders’ goals are achieved, these achievements result in the realization of the
organizational performance goal. The principals as the main stakeholder possess the authority to
support teachers in reaching the organization’s goal. The recommendations create a roadmap for

195
principals and the organization to consider when aspiring to achieve comparable goals, of closing
the academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and economically
disadvantaged students.
Table 17
Organizational Mission, Global Goal and Stakeholder Performance Goals (repeated)
Organizational Mission
The mission of K-12 schools is to support each student in reaching his or her potential, through a
strong system of accountability to increase academic success for all students and promote a safe,
healthy and orderly environment where students’ physical, mental, social, and emotional well-being
are prioritized; while ensuring teachers’ and administrators’ effectiveness.
Organizational Performance Goal
K-12 principals will implement at least six relevant professional development sessions with one
focused on data-driven decision making and one that is focused on creating structures to improve
parental engagement in order to close the achievement gap among students of low socioeconomic
status.
Stakeholder 1 Goal Stakeholder 2 Goal Stakeholder 3
Goal

By May 2021, 100% of
principals will implement at
least six relevant professional
development sessions with at
least one focused on data-
driven decision making, in
order to close the
achievement gap among
students of low
socioeconomic status.
By May 2021, 100% of
teachers will engage in
targeted professional
development and use data to
inform instructional practices
that will close the academic
achievement gap as
measured by formative and
summative assessments and
daily activities.
By September
2021, 75% of
students will
perform at or above
grade level in
reading and
mathematics as
measured by
formative and
summative
assessment.

Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Table 18 demonstrates the proposed Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators depicted by
outcomes, metrics, and methods for the internal and external outcomes for K-12 principals. The
internal outcomes are achieved as a result of the education, training, and job-aids for principals,

196
it can then be expected that the external outcomes for school districts will also be realized. The
external outcome is that the strategies will be effectively implemented so that students'
achievement increases to ultimately close the achievement gap between economically
advantaged and economically disadvantaged students. Table 13 below shows the internal and
external outcomes and the corresponding metrics and methods for measuring these outcomes.
Table 18
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
Increase in mentorship
programs between
principals and experts
inside and outside the
district.
Number of mentorships
established with principals.
Count the number of
mentorships obtained by the
Executive Directors and
Principal Support and
Development office.
An increase in the
percentage of principals
operating as instructional
leaders.
Number of principals operating
as instructional leaders.
Count the number of
instructional leaders as
determined by the Schools’
Effectiveness Review.
Increase in academic
achievement for
economically
disadvantaged students as
measured by state
assessment.
Percentage increase in academic
achievement for students of low-
socioeconomic status.
Examine data from the state
report card.
Increase in the percentage
of principals actively
engaged in structured
Professional Learning
Communities.

Number of principals who
participate in Professional
Learning Communities.
Solicit data from interviews,
and the Office of Principal
Development.

197
Table 18, continued
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
Internal Outcomes
Increase in collaborative
leadership between
teachers and principals.

Number of opportunities for
principal and teachers to engage
in collaborative leadership.
structures that are in place to
support collaborative leadership
Examine data from site based
collaborative planning meetings
and meeting agenda. Interview
data
Increase in professional
development satisfaction
rate.

Number of principals reporting
that they are satisfied with their
ability to provide targeted and
relevant PD to close the
achievement gap.

Number of teachers reporting
that they are satisfied with the
types of learning opportunities
they are receiving to close the
academic achievement gap.

Data from surveys.

Data from school surveys.
Principals and teachers are
provided with the type of
learning and resources
required to close the
academic achievement
gap for economically
disadvantaged students.
Number of culturally relevant
and equity professional
development.
Alignment of resources to meet
the needs of students.
Data from professional
development meetings.
Data reflecting how resources
and programs are aligned to
meet the needs of students.
Literacy Night, opportunities
for extended learning.
Increase in the level of
communication and trust
among teachers, parents,
and principals.
Number of parents who report a
positive level of communication
and trust between them and the
school.
Number of teachers who report
a positive level of
communication and between
them and the principals.

Data from school climate
survey from parents.
Data from school climate
survey from teachers.
100% of principals
provide relevant
professional development
to close the academic
achievement gap.
Number of principals who
provide professional
development opportunities that
target closing the achievement
gap.
Number of principals providing
professional development
sessions that focus on access
and equity.
Data from professional
development agenda and
minutes.

198
Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. This is classified as the most crucial level, since training in itself will
not produce adequate organizational outcomes to be seen as successful (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). The critical behaviors are those quantifiable and observable behaviors that
the main stakeholder must exhibit in order to achieve the desired outcomes. This is classified as
the most crucial level, since training in itself will not produce adequate organizational outcomes
to be seen as successful (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The critical behaviors are those
quantifiable and observable behaviors that the main stakeholder must exhibit in order to achieve
the desired outcomes. The undergirding critical behavior is that all principals will implement at
least six relevant professional development sessions with one focused on data-driven decision
making in order to close the achievement gap among students of low socioeconomic status. For
this to be accomplished, the following critical behaviors must be evident: Principals provide
relevant professional development sessions that are focused on strategies to close the academic
achievement gap for economically disadvantaged students. The second critical behavior is for
principals to utilize instructional leadership strategies to support teachers in closing the academic
achievement gap. The third critical behavior is that principals employ collaborative leadership
approaches to engage teachers in activities that are designed to close the academic achievement
gap between economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students. The fourth
critical behavior is that principals use the DICE framework to develop a culture of open
communication and trust among stakeholders such as teachers and parents. Finally, principals
must participate in professional learning communities where they collaborate with their
colleagues and experts in the field of education to engage in new learning, analyze various data

199
sets, reflect on their practice, and determine various strategies to increase student achievement.
Table 19 reflects the specific metrics, methods, and timing for each of the critical behaviors.
Table 19
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
1. Principals provide
relevant professional
development sessions
that are focused on
strategies to close the
academic
achievement gap for
economically
disadvantaged
students.
2. Principals use
instructional
leadership strategies
to support teachers in
closing the academic
achievement gap.

The frequency in which
principals identify and
provide professional
development
opportunities to
teachers that focused
on closing the
academic achievement
gap.

The number of
strategies used that
directly align to closing
the academic
achievement gap for
economically
disadvantaged students.
The frequency in which
principals act as
instructional leaders or
implement strategies
based on the
characteristics of
instructional
leadership.

Support staff and
curriculum development
department will provide
training related to equity
issues.

Data from professional
development.

Data from School
Performance Plan

Data from Professional
Development agendas
and minutes.

Weekly at the
school level.
Monthly at the
district level.

Ongoing
throughout the
school year.

The First month
of school.

Monthly

200
Table 19, continued
Critical Behavior Metric(s) Method(s) Timing
3. Principals employ
collaborative
leadership
approaches to engage
teachers in activities
that are designed to
close the academic
achievement gap
between
economically
advantaged and
economically
disadvantaged
students.

The number of times
principals engage
teachers in
collaborative
leadership.

Instructional Leadership
Team (ILT) minutes and
agendas.
Collaborative planning
meeting agendas and
minutes.

Monthly

Weekly
4. Principals use the
DICE framework to
develop a culture of
open communication
and trust among
stakeholders such as
teachers and parents.

The completion of a
communication plan.

The frequency in which
communication occurs
among stakeholders.

Data from
communication plan.

Data from newsletter,
websites, school climate
surveys.

The first three
months of
school.

Monthly

5. Principals will
participate in
professional learning
communities where
they can collaborate
with their colleagues
and experts to engage
in new learning,
examine various data
sets, reflect on their
practice and examine
various strategies to
increase student
achievement.

The number of times
principals participate in
professional learning
communities.

Attendance document
from the Office of
Principal Development.

Monthly

201
Required drivers. The rate of success for critical behaviors is highly dependent on the
required drivers. The organization must therefore create the conditions needed to ensure success
by utilizing four key elements known as required drivers. The first step is to ensure support is in
place to reinforce critical behaviors. Reinforcing drivers provide additional training, job aids,
guidelines or reminders as needed after the training occurs (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
These include knowledge-based solutions such as providing job aid that outlines the
characteristics of instructional leadership so that principals can operate as effective instructional
leaders. Another required driver that is essential to achieving the critical behavior is the
encouraging driver. It is important to design ways to encourage or support the critical behavior
both formally and frequently (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). This could take the form of
principals receiving targeted feedback from experts or during professional learning meetings.
Rewarding drivers are utilized to acknowledge employees for good performance, this reward
usually occurs in public settings such as meetings (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). This driver
includes publicly recognizing principals who are effectively closing the academic gap for
economically disadvantaged students as mirrored by quarterly benchmark assessments. Finally,
if systems of accountability are lacking after the training has been provided, even stakeholders
with good intention, will revert to their previous ways of operating prior to the training
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Monitoring could consist of experts conducting observations
to provide feedback on principals’ practices. Table 20 represents the methods, timing, and
critical behaviors supported by these required drivers.

202
Table 20
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical Behaviors Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Reinforcing
Job Aid that details how
principals can build capacity
by providing targeted
professional development that
focus on closing the
achievement gap.
Ongoing 1,2,3
Professional learning
communities’ meetings where
principals are able to
collaborate with their
colleagues to support teachers
in closing the achievement
gap.
Monthly 1, 2, 3, 4,5,
Job Aid that provides
resources for principals to
build their capacity to employ
various methodologies in
order to adequately support
teachers in making data
driven-decisions.
Ongoing 1,2,3
Job Aid that outlines the
characteristics of instructional
leadership so that principals
can operate as effective
instructional leaders.
Ongoing 2,4,5,
Job Aid that provides detailed
information on how to foster
collaborative leadership
within the workplace.
Ongoing 1,2,3,4,5
Job Aid which visually
represents how to implement
data cycles.
Ongoing 1,2

203
Table 20, continued
Method(s) Timing
Critical Behaviors Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Encouraging
Rationale for effective
professional development.
1,2,3,5
Principals receive targeted
feedback from their experts or
during professional learning
meetings.
Ongoing 1,2,3,4,5
Principals modeling best
practices for their peers
during professional learning
communities.
Meetings 1,2,3.4,5
Cultivate a culture of
collaborative leadership by
providing opportunities for
teachers to become members
of the ILT and lead
Professional Learning
Communities with their peers.
Ongoing 2,3,4,5
Create a culture of
collaboration amongst all
stakeholders to achieve the
goals of the organization by
soliciting feedback and
encouraging communication
from stakeholders.
Ongoing 2,3,4,5
Rewarding
Recognize principals publicly
using the district website,
district newsletter, and
principals’ meetings to
highlight principal of the
month for exhibiting
tremendous growth in
instructional leadership.
Monthly 1,2,3,4,5
Publicly recognize principals
who are effectively closing
the academic gap for
economically disadvantaged
students.
Monthly or based on data
from Quarterly Benchmark
Assessments.
1,2,3,4,5

204
Table 20, continued
Monitoring
Experts conduct observations
to provide feedback on
principals’ practices.
Ongoing 1,2,3,4.5
Accountability trackers to
help principals hold
themselves accountable for
implementing strategies to
support teachers in increasing
student achievement.
Ongoing 1,2,3,4,5
Principals share success
stories during monthly
Community Learning
Network Meetings (CLN)
Monthly 1,2,3,4,5

Organizational support. The organization plays a crucial role in supporting the success
of these critical behaviors identified. Therefore, the organization must agree to provide
opportunities for principals to engage in Professional Learning Communities (PLC), where
principals can engage in discourse and deepen their learning around best practices to increase
teacher practice and student outcomes. During monthly Community Learning Networks (CLN),
Executive Directors can acknowledge principals who are successfully increasing student
achievement or effectively building teacher capacity, and publicly recognize these principals as
the CLN principal of the month. Specific aspects of this principal’s school can be highlighted
and published in the district’s Global Communication letter throughout that month. Additionally,
the organization in conjunction with the Office of Principal Support and Development can offer
targeted differentiated professional development to build principal capacity in instructional
leadership and to widen their repertoire in identifying and providing relevant professional
development sessions that are focused on closing the academic achievement gap between
economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students.

205
Level 2: Learning
Learning goals. Following the completion of the recommended solutions, principals
will be able to:
1. Accurately identify and provide relevant professional development required to improve
student achievement (Conceptual Knowledge).
2. Understand and apply the characteristics of Instructional Leadership to support teachers
in closing the academic achievement gap for students of low-socioeconomic status
(Conceptual Knowledge).
3. Adjust professional development sessions to focus on Data-Driven Decision Making in
order to close the academic achievement gap for economically disadvantaged students
(Procedural Knowledge).
4. Value the importance of providing effective professional development sessions to close
the academic achievement gap (Value).
5. Exude confidence in their ability to implement the strategies needed to close the
academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and economically
disadvantaged students (Self-Efficacy).
6. Use DICE Framework to create structures that promote open communication, trust and
buy-in amongst stakeholders (Cultural Model).
Program. This Leadership Development Program (LDP) is a comprehensive plan that is
specifically designed to ensure that stakeholders are empowered to implement strategies that will
close the academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and economically
disadvantaged students. The program strategically supports principals in meeting the learning
goals mentioned in the previous section by providing training and support in identifying and

206
implementing relevant professional development needed to support teachers in closing the
academic achievement gap. Additionally, the program also seeks to provide principals with a
thorough understanding of their role as instructional leaders by delivering asynchronous training
on the characteristics of instructional leadership and the provision of job aids in the form of
videos as exemplars depicting best practices to support principals as they execute their duties as
instructional leaders. Furthermore, the program will support principals in developing and
promoting a culture of open communication and trust through formal and informal
communication structures using the DICE framework in the form of training and job aids.
During the synchronous in-person monthly professional learning community sessions,
principals will engage in activities that allow them to discuss and share with their colleagues how
they are applying instructional leadership practices from job aids and asynchronous resources.
Principals will also create action plans that exemplify the characteristics of instructional
leadership approaches in order to effectively support teachers in increasing student achievement.
Moreover, the program will provide training and job aids to engage principals in understanding
the value that can be derived from providing teachers the types of professional development
opportunities that are aligned to closing the academic achievement gap for economically
disadvantaged students. Principals will also be trained in supporting teachers to employ data-
driven decision making to improve student outcomes. Additionally, through this program, the
organization will be able to match principals to experts who will support them as they create and
implement structures such as collaborative leadership to promote buy-in among teachers.
Experts, principal mentors, and the Executive Directors for principals will create oversight and
provide actionable feedback to principals as they engage with the various aspects of the program.

207
Evaluation of the components of learning. Demonstrating conceptual knowledge is
often necessary as a precursor to applying the knowledge to solve problems. Therefore, it is
important to evaluate learning for both conceptual and procedural knowledge being taught. It is
also important that principals value the training as a prerequisite to employing their newly
learned knowledge and skills on the job. However, they must also be confident that they can
succeed in applying their knowledge and skills and be committed to using them to execute their
job. As such, Table 21 lists the evaluation methods and timing for these components of learning.
Table 21
Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”

Knowledge checks utilizing checklist validation
based on discussions and needs assessment tools
to determine professional development.
Periodically during professional
development workshops

Knowledge checks through discussions, think-
pair-share activities demonstrating understanding
of the characteristics of instructional leadership.
Periodically during in-person workshops
and documented observation notes.
Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”

Demonstration of individual use of job aids to
effectively support teachers in implementing
data-driven decision making to increase student
achievement.
During workshops and through
observation notes.
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”

Pre and post surveys assessing participants’ level
of proficiency before and after the training.
Before and after the training.
Discussion of the value of what they are required
to do on the job.
During workshops and during sessions
with experts or colleagues.

Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”

Scaled survey After the training/workshop
Discussions following practice and feedback. During the training or workshop
Retrospective pre- and post-test assessment item. After the training

208
Table 21, continued
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”

Design individual action plan After the training and during collaborative
meetings with peers and teacher teams.
Retrospective pre- and post-test assessment item. After the training

Level 1: Reaction
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) recommend three reactions for Level One:
engagement, relevance, and satisfaction. Although the reactions provide surface-level evaluation,
they are essential to the type of outcomes the program yields. For programs to succeed, they
must withstand natural skepticism and inertia (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Table 22 below
demonstrates the components to measure reactions to the program stated above.
Table 22
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Attendance. During the training and team meetings.
Observation checklist by facilitator. During the training.
Relevance
Brief pulse-check with participants via
survey (online) and discussion (ongoing).
Immediately following the training or
workshop.
Customer Satisfaction
Brief pulse-check with participants via
survey (online) and discussion (ongoing).
Immediately following the training or
workshop.
Training or workshop evaluation. Two weeks after the training.

Evaluation Tools
Enabling feedback at various junctures throughout the learning process allows the
participants to communicate issues, misunderstanding, ideas, and successes immediately
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). It also helps to identify initial warning problems so that they
can be rectified (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). A variety of approaches such as multiple-
choice questions and observation tools will be employed to guide the evaluation of the program

209
in order for the facilitator to ascertain information regarding participants’ assessment of the
program and to gauge the overall effectiveness of the program as well as to determine the scope
for program improvement. The following section summarizes the evaluation methods utilized
during and immediately following the implementation of the program using the timeframe
outlined in Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016).
Immediately following the program implementation. During the in-person
professional learning communities and workshops, principals will engage in “temperature
checks” and exit surveys to assess their knowledge and the effectiveness of the program. The
instant availability of results will be used to guide the learning in an effort to ensure that the
desired competencies are ascertained (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Level 1 feedback will
be garnered from participants in the form of satisfaction surveys consisting of questions that
explicitly seek to determine whether or not participants gleaned any new knowledge and to
assess the extent to which the program meets the needs of the learners and their level of
satisfaction with the resources from the program. Participants will also be provided with exit
tickets to indicate how the training or resources are meeting their needs by responding to these
frames; “What I Learned,” “I Still Need to Know” and “I Still Wonder.” Additionally, during the
leadership development training, Level 2 evaluation will consist of checks for understanding as
participants engage in collaborative discourse with their colleagues as they participate in small
group and whole group activities. Level 3 evaluation will be employed as participants engage in
leadership development activities which allow them to demonstrate characteristics of targeted
behaviors based on learning obtained through the program. The facilitator will use the blended
evaluation observation tool to provide feedback based on Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3

210
evaluation. Appendix E provides an observation tool to assess the level of effectiveness of the
leadership development program.
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. In order to fully assess the
effectiveness of the leadership development program, follow-up evaluation will take place
approximately 3 weeks, 8 weeks, and 12 weeks after the training has been provided. The
assessment tool will consist of a survey that utilizes the blended approach. The tool will include
assessment of participants’ views regarding the level of satisfaction, engagement, and relevance
of the program (Level 1), participants’ confidence and value in identifying and providing
effective professional development (Level 2), the degree to which the principals apply the
characteristics of instructional leadership (Level 3), and the extent to which the training supports
participants’ in closing academic achievement gap for economically disadvantaged students
(Level 4). Appendix F provides a sample of the blended evaluation instrument.
Data Analysis and Reporting
The Level 4 goal for closing the academic achievement gap between economically
advantaged and economically disadvantaged students will be measured by principals’
satisfaction with the program, the degree to which principals are engaged in the program,
principals’ satisfaction with the program, the type of learning and how principals’ behavior
changed as a result of the implementation of the training. As formative and summative data are
collected during the implementation of a program, it is important to ascertain answers to three
main questions: “Does the program meet expectations? If not, why not? If so, why so?”
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016, p. 122). During and immediately following the program, the
facilitator will administer surveys relating to level 2 and 3 behaviors through the use of an
observation tool. After each training, the facilitator will capture principals’ responses and report

211
the findings using the dashboard. The dashboard will be used for the purposes of monitoring the
results and to ensure accountability for the program. Principals will have access to the dashboard.
Similar dashboard will be created and displayed for Levels 2 and 3 evaluation.
Summary
This implementation and evaluation plan were structured using the New World
Kirkpatrick (2016) model. This model starts with the end result in mind. It then focuses on the
critical behaviors stakeholders need to exhibit in order to attain the desired results. Evaluating
the training outcomes will assist stakeholders in devising ways to ensure that learning is
transmitted to the desired behaviors, and ultimately achieving the organizational results; while
outlining the value of the training to the organization (Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick, 2016). This
model assist organizations to provide solutions to remedy the gaps in knowledge, motivation and
organizational influences validated in the research and create the types of learning environment
that is needed to leverage resources necessary to close the academic achievement gap between
economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students.
Limitations and Delimitations
This study was impacted by some key limitations. Given the climate in which the study
was conducted as a result of COVID-19 pandemic, the researcher had to resort to the minimum
range of sample size as some principals were unable to participate in the study because they were
occupied adjusting or redesigning their schools to facilitate virtual classes. Hence, the small
sample size does not accurately reflect all the school districts that serve 40% or more FARMs or
Title I students. Additionally, the interview findings were reliant on participants’ own account of
how they view their own effectiveness in the execution of their duties, which could allow
unconscious bias to dictate their responses or perspectives. Another limitation experienced was

212
that due to time constraints relating to limited data collection and analysis time frame, the
research design restricted other data collection methods such as observation, which could
provide more insights into participants’ knowledge, motivation, and organizational barriers as
they interact with other stakeholders such as teachers in executing their job.
Delimitations are the perimeters that the researcher has established for the study that
impacts the study’s flexibility. The following were some delimitations of this study: The
researcher did not include observation which could provide rich data as participants interact with
their colleagues and conduct professional development with teachers. Observation would also
assist in corroborating data received during the interviews. The researcher did not collect data on
other stakeholder groups such as teachers, who would provide another perspective into the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that prevent stakeholders from closing the
academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged
students. Additionally, the researcher did not focus on influences such as social emotional
learning, trauma informed practices, and building cultural competency. Based on the findings,
additional influences focusing on the impact of social emotional learning, cultural competence,
and trauma could be included in the study as several principals indicated that these are areas
where they need to be supported as economically disadvantaged students need to be supported
using the whole child approach, which participants need to be trained in.
Future Research
There are myriad factors that need to be taken into consideration when thinking about
implementing high yield strategies, practices, programs, and resources that are necessary to close
the academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and economically
disadvantaged students. As such, future research needs to be done in the areas of social

213
emotional learning, building cultural competency and trauma-informed practices. Findings from
this study revealed that approximately 40% of participants indicated that they need to be
supported in these areas because many of the issues they face relating to educating students from
economically disadvantaged households not only focus the academic aspect of schooling, but
students who are economically disadvantaged experience various types of trauma and sometimes
have difficulties coping, and these behaviors are sometimes manifested in schools. Participants
also pointed out that they too need assistance in supporting teachers and building teachers’
cultural competency because teachers and staff must be able to relate to students’ situations and
approach them with empathy before they can begin to truly teach these students effectively.
Future research needs to be conducted to determine if there is a correlation between trauma and
economically disadvantaged students and the impact this has on student academic achievement.
Future studies can also build on this research to broaden the stakeholder group from which data
was collected and intentionally drill down to those key factors that must be addressed to close the
academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged
students.
Conclusion
This improvement study sought to identify the practices and resources that are necessary
to close the academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and economically
disadvantaged students. All nine influences relating to the principals’ knowledge, motivation,
and organizational influences were determined to be needs validated through semi-structured
interviews and triangulation using document analysis. The findings revealed that principals are
engaging in practices relating to each of these influences, but school districts need to provide

214
opportunities for more principals to engage in these practices so that these become common
practices or assets held across school districts.
The findings from this study demonstrate that school districts across the state of
Maryland are implementing professional development. However, these practices are not
consistent across school districts and they are being implemented within concentrated pockets
within districts. Hence, the researcher’s proposed Leadership Development Plan will deviate
from the status quo to give precedence to consistency, normed practices, and data-driven
professional development solutions that are relevant and responsive to the needs of participants;
so that participants can experience high self-efficacy in times of radical changes which require
them to act swiftly with precision as they collaborate to close the academic achievement gap for
economically disadvantaged students. It is important to understand that COVID-19 has morphed
the social, economic, and educational fabric of society, resulting in a new landscape. Therefore,
this paradigm shift that results from COVID-19, requires a shift in school principals’ practices.
Principals will now have to restructure their views on the way they establish and maintain a
positive culture and climate, engage in instructional leadership, implement accountability
measures, promote parental engagement, and engage teachers in relevant professional
development sessions that are designed to increase student achievement. School districts must
acknowledge that not all principals are equal as it relates to the skills required to navigate
computerized spaces optimally (Beaunoyer et al., 2020). Therefore, principals must at times
display a willingness to take initiatives to retool themselves to stay current; and still be ready to
let go of their role as the expert, and be prepared to take the role as a novice learner, considering
the answers are not always housed within any specific individual or system. Moreover,
collaborative leadership and professional learning communities will act as the central tendencies

215
for schools to effectively navigate this level of newness. Digital inequalities were already in
existence, and the COVID-19 crisis is exacerbating them dramatically (Beaunoyer et al., 2020).
School districts must be intentional in the way they provide resources and professional learning
experiences for principals to act as instructional leaders, ensuring that each student receives the
high-quality education they deserve, regardless if they economically advantaged or economically
disadvantaged; or if they are being educated in the brick and mortar building or within the virtual
setting.

216
REFERENCES
Abuzid, H. F. T., & Abbas, M. (2016). Role of self-efficacy beliefs and its relationship with
emotional intelligence to developing leadership capabilities. International Journal of
Applied Business and Economic Research, 14(3), 1975-1989.
Aguinis, H., & Kraiger, K. (2009). Benefits of training and development for individuals and
teams, organizations, and society. Annual review of psychology, 60, 451-474.
Ambrose, S. A. (2010). How learning works: 7 research-based principles for smart teaching.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Anderson, L., & Krathwohl, D. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing (1st
ed.). New York, NY: Longman.
Anderson, E., & Reynolds, A. (2015). The state of state policies for principal preparation
program approval and candidate licensure. Journal of Research on Leadership Education,
10(3), 193-221.
Anderson, S., Medrich, E., & Fowler, D. (2007). Which achievement gap?. Phi Delta
Kappan, 88(7), 547-550.
Atkinson, P. (2016), Effective change implementation: Managing relationships in the change
team. Management Services, Autumn, 31-36.
Baeder, J. (2017). Now We're Talking. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
Bailey, M. J., & Dynarski, S. M. (2011). Gains and gaps: Changing inequality in US college
entry and completion (No. w17633). Washington, DC: National Bureau of Economic
Research.
Baker, T. L., Wise, J., Kelley, G., & Skiba, R. J. (2016). Identifying barriers: Creating solutions
to improve family engagement. School Community Journal, 26(2), 161-184.

217
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current directions in
psychological science, 9(3), 75-78.
Bandura, A., & Wessels, S. (1997). Self-efficacy. New York, NY: W. H. Freeman & Company.
Bass, L. (2017). Improving student outcomes through reflective practice and mindfulness in
educational leadership. In B. S. Cooper, C. R. McCray, & S. V. Coffin (Eds.), Why
School Leaders Need Vision: Managing Scarcity, Mandates, and Conflicting Goals for
Educational Quality (pp. 51–64). Lanham, MD: Rowmn & Littlefield.
Beard, K. S. (2018). Standing in the gap: Theory and practice impacting educational opportunity
and achievement gaps. Urban Education, 53(5), 668-696.
Beaunoyer, E., Dupéré, S., & Guitton, M. (2020). COVID-19 and digital inequalities: Reciprocal
impacts and mitigation strategies. Computers in Human Behavior, 111, 106424.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106424
Becker, B. E., & Luthar, S. S. (2002). Social-emotional factors affecting achievement outcomes
among disadvantaged students: Closing the achievement gap. Educational
psychologist, 37(4), 197-214.
Bellibas, M., & Liu, Y. (2018). The effects of principals’ perceived instructional and distributed
leadership practices on their perceptions of school climate. International Journal of
Leadership in Education, 21(2), 226-244.
Berger, B. (2014). Read my lips: Leaders, supervisors, and culture are the foundations of
strategic employee communications. Research Journal of the Institute for Public
Relations, 1(1). Retrieved from http://www.instituteforpr.org/wp-
content/uploads/BergerFinalWES.pdf

218
Blasé, J. & Blasé, J. (1999). Principals' instructional leadership and teacher development:
Teacher's perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35(3), 349-378.
Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (2013). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice and leadership (5th
ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Borgogni, L., Dello Russo, S., & Latham, G. P. (2011). The relationship of employee perceptions
of the immediate supervisor and top management with collective efficacy. Journal of
Leadership & Organizational Studies, 18(1), 5-13.
Bower, H. A., & Griffin, D. (2011). Can the Epstein model of parental involvement work in a
high-minority, high-poverty elementary school? A case study. Professional School
Counseling, 15(2), 2156759X1101500201.
Bruno, P., Rabovsky, S., & Strunk, K. (2019). Taking their first steps: The distribution of new
teachers into school and classroom contexts and implications for teacher effectiveness
and growth. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.
Carter, P., & Welner, K. (2013). Closing the opportunity gap: What America must do to give
every child an even chance. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199982981.001.0001.
Casey, A., Fletcher, T., Schaefer, L., & Gleddie, D. (2017). Conducting Practitioner Research in
Physical Education and Youth Sport. New York, NY: Routledge.
Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., & Rockoff, J. E. (2011). The long-term impacts of teachers: Teacher
value-added and student outcomes in adulthood (No. w17699). Washington, DC:
National Bureau of Economic Research.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

219
Corak, M. (2006). Do poor children become poor adults? Lessons from a cross-country
comparison of generational earnings mobility. Research on economic inequality, 13(1),
143-188.
Cosner, S. (2011b) Supporting the initiation and early development of evidence-based grade-
level collaboration in urban elementary schools: Key roles and strategies of principals
and literacy coordinators. Urban Education 46(4), 786–827.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed method research
(2nd ed.)Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Darling-Hammond, L., Bae, S., Cook-Harvey, C. M., Lam, L., Mercer, C., Podolsky, A., &
Stosich, E. L. (2016). Pathways to new accountability through the Every Student
Succeeds Act. Palo Alto: Learning Policy Institute. Retrieved from
https://learningpolicyinstitute. org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Pathways_New-
Accountability_Through_Every_Student_Succeeds_Act_04202016.pdf.
Darling-Hammond, L., Noguera, P., Cobb, V. L., & Meier, D. (2007). Evaluating" no child left
behind". Nation-New York, 284(20), 11.
Day, C., Gu, Q., & Sammons, P. (2016). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: How
successful school leaders use transformational and instructional strategies to make a
difference. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(2), 221-258.
Delpit, L. (2012). Multiplication is for White people: Raising expectations for other people’s
children. New York, NY: New Press.

220
Denler, H., Wolters, C., & Benzon, M. (2006). Social cognitive theory. Retrieved from
http://www. education.com/reference/article/social-cognitive-theory/.
Dunning, T. (2008). Natural and field experiments: The role of qualitative methods. Qualitative
and Multi-Method Research, 6(2), 17-23.
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value and motivation theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/
Eccles, J. (2009). Who am I and what am I going to do with my life? Personal and collective
identities as motivators of action. Educational psychologist, 44(2), 78-89.
Erikson, R., Goldthorpe, J. H., Jackson, M., Yaish, M., & Cox, D. R. (2005). On class
differentials in educational attainment. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences, 102(27), 9730-9733.
Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and
purposive sampling. American journal of theoretical and applied statistics, 5(1), 1-4.
Fairman, J., Johnson, A., & Eberle, F. (2017). The Every Student Succeeds Act: A summary of
federal policy and implications for Maine. Augusta: Maine Department of Education.
Farley-Ripple, E. N., & Buttram, J. L. (2014). Developing collaborative data use through
professional learning communities: Early lessons from Delaware. Studies in Educational
Evaluation, 42, 41-53.
Finnigan, K. S. (2012). Principal leadership in low-performing schools: A closer look through
the eyes of teachers. Education and Urban Society, 44(2), 183-202.
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational
Psychologist, 36(1), 45-56.

221
GarcĆa, E., & Weiss, E. (2017). Education inequalities at the school starting gate: Gaps,
Trends, and strategies to address them. Washigngton, DC: Economic Policy Institute.
Gill, B., Borden, B. C., & Hallgren, K. (2014). A conceptual framework for data-driven decision
making. Seattle, WA: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation,.
Glesne, C. (2011). Chapter 6: But is it ethical? Considering what is “right.” In Becoming
qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.) (pp. 162-183). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Grissom, J., Rubin, M., Neumerski, C., Cannata, M., Drake, T., Goldring, E., & Schuermann, P.
(2017). Central office supports for data-driven talent management decisions: Evidence
from the implementation of new systems for measuring teacher effectiveness.
Educational Researcher, 46(1), 21–32. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X17694164
Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (2010). Collaborative leadership and school improvement:
Understanding the impact on school capacity and student learning. School leadership and
management, 30(2), 95-110.
Handford, V., & Leithwood, K. (2013). Why teachers trust school leaders. Journal of
Educational Administration, 51(2), 194-212.
Hanushek, E. A., Peterson, P. E., Talpey, L. M., & Woessmann, L. (2019). The Unwavering SES
Achievement Gap: Trends in US Student Performance (No. w25648). Washington, DC:
National Bureau of Economic Research.
Hardie, R. (2015). Succession planning for sustainable leadership for the school principalship.
Antistasis, 5(1), 7.
Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (2003). The early catastrophe: The 30 million word gap by age 3.
American educator, 27(1), 4-9.

222
Herbers, J. E., Cutuli, J. J., Supkoff, L. M., Heistad, D., Chan, C. K., Hinz, E., & Masten, A. S.
(2012). Early reading skills and academic achievement trajectories of students facing
poverty, homelessness, and high residential mobility. Educational Researcher, 41(9),
366-374.
Heritage, M., Kim, J., Vendlinski, T., & Herman, J. (2009). From evidence to action: A seamless
process in formative assessment? Educational Measurement, Issues and Practice, 28(3),
24–31. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2009.00151.x
Hesbol, K. A. (2019). Principal self-efficacy and learning organizations: Influencing school
improvement. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 33.
Hill, H. C. (2009). Fixing teacher professional development. Phi Delta Kappan, 90(7), 470–476.
Hirsh, S. (2010). We need every school system to establish its vision for the principal as
instructional leader. Journal of Staff Development, 31(2), 64,59. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/870747148/
Hunzicker, J. (2011). Effective professional development for teachers: A checklist. Professional
development in education, 37(2), 177-179.
Isaacs, J., Sawhill, I., & Haskins, R. (2008). Economic mobility of families across generations. In
getting ahead or losing ground: Economic mobility in America. Washington, DC:
Brookings Institute.
Jennings, J., & Renter, D. S. (2006). Ten big effects of the No Child Left Behind Act on public
schools. Washington, DC: Center for Education Policy.
Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2015). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative,
and mixed approaches. (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

223
Kannapel, P. J., Clements, S. K., Taylor, D., & Hibpshman, T. (2005). Inside the black box of
high-performing high-poverty schools. Lexington, KY: Prichard Committee for
Academic Excellence.
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation.
Alexandria, VA: ATD Press.
Koball, H., & Jiang, Y. (2018). Basic facts about low-income children: Children under 9 years,
2016.
Krasnoff, B. (2015). Leadership qualities of effective principals. Portland, OR: The Northwest
Comprehensive Center.
Krathwohl, D. M. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice,
41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). From the achievement gap to the education debt: Understanding
achievement in US schools. Educational researcher, 35(7), 3-12.
Leithwood, K., & Azah, V. (2014). Elementary principals’ and vice-principals’ workload study:
Final report. Unpublished manuscript). Toronto, ON: Ontario Ministry of Education.
Retrieved from www. edu. gov. on. ca.
Levin, J., & Datnow, A. (2012). The principal role in data-driven decision making: Using case-
study data to develop multi-mediator models of educational reform. School Effectiveness
and School Improvement, 23(2), 179–201.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2011.599394
Lewis, L. K. (2011). Organizational change: Creating change through strategic 3 communication
(Vol. 4). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

224
Machida, M., & Schaubroeck, J. (2011). The role of self-efficacy beliefs in leader development.
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 18(4), 459-468.
Marsh, J. A. (2012). Interventions promoting educators’ use of data: Research insights and gaps.
Teachers College Record, 114(11), 1–48.
Marsh, J. A., & Farrell, C. C. (2014). How leaders can support teachers with data-driven decision
making. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 43(2), 269-289.
doi:10.1177/1741143214537229.
Marsh, J. A., Pane, J. F., & Hamilton, L. S. (2006). Making sense of data-driven decision making
in education (RAND Education occasional paper). Santa Monica, CA: RAND
Corporation. Retrieved from http://www.rand.org/pubs/occasional_papers/OP170.html
Maryland Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) State Plan (2018). Retrieved from
http://www.marylandpublicschools.org/about/Documents/ESSA/ESSAMDSubmissionCo
nsolidatedStatePlan091718.pdf
Maryland School Report Card (2019). Retrieved from https://reportcard.msde.maryland.gov/
Masumoto, M., & Brown-Welty, S. (2009). Case study of leadership practices and school-
community interrelationships in high-performing, high-poverty, rural California high
schools. Journal of Research in Rural Education (Online), 24(1), 1.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson Education
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

225
Mezirow, J. & Associates. (2000). Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory
in progress. San Francisco, CA: Josssey-Bass.
Michelmore, K., & Dynarski, S. (2016). The gap within the gap: Using longitudinal data to
understand income differences in student achievement (No. w22474). Washington, DC:
National Bureau of Economic Research.
Milner, H. R., IV. (2012). Beyond a test score: Explaining opportunity gaps in educational
practice. Journal of Black Studies, 43(6), 693-718.
Milner, H. R., IV. (2013). Analyzing poverty, learning, and teaching through a critical race
theory lens. Review of Research in Education, 37(1), 1-53.
Milner, H. R., IV., Murray, I. E., Farinde, A. A., & Delale-O’Connor, L. (2015). Outside of
school matters: What we need to know in urban environments. Equity & Excellence in
Education, 48(4), 529-548.
Mizell, H. (2010). Why professional development matters. Oxford, OH: Learning Forward.
Murray, K., Finigan-Carr, N., Jones, V., Copeland-Linder, N., Haynie, D., & Cheng, T. (2014).
Barriers and Facilitators to School-Based Parent Involvement for Parents of Urban Public
Middle School Students. SAGE Open, 4(4), 215824401455803–.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014558030
National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2018). Achievement gaps. Retrieved from
https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/studies/gaps/
Northouse, P. (2015). Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
OECD. (2016). Low-performing students: Why they fall behind and how to help them succeed,
PISA, Paris, France: OECD Publishing.

226
Odden, A. (2011). Strategic management of human capital in education: Improving instruction
and student learning in schools. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Oláh, L., Lawrence, N., & Riggan, M. (2010). Learning to learn from benchmark assessment
data: How teachers analyze results. Peabody Journal of Education, 85(2), 226–245.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01619561003688688.
Owens, A. (2018). Income segregation between school districts and inequality in students’
achievement. Sociology of Education, 91(1), 1–27.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040717741180
Owens, A., Reardon, S. F., & Jencks, C. (2016). Income segregation between schools and
districts, 1990 to 2010. Center for Education Policy Analysis Working Paper, (16-04).
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/self-efficacy-theory/
Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015).
Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method
implementation research. Administration and policy in mental health and mental health
services research, 42(5), 533-544.
Patel, J. A., Nielsen, F. B. H., Badiani, A. A., Assi, S., Unadkat, V. A., Patel, B., ... & Wardle, H.
(2020). Poverty, inequality and COVID-19: the forgotten vulnerable. Public health, 183,
110.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 667–
686.doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667

227
Rainey, H. G., & Fernandez, S. (2012). Managing successful organizational change in the public
sector. In R. F. Durant & J. R. S. Durant (Eds.), Debating Public Administration (pp. 7-
26). New York, NY: Routledge.
RAND Corporation. (2019). Disadvantaged students. Retrieved from
https://www.rand.org/topics/disadvantaged-students.html
Reardon, S. F. (2011). The widening academic achievement gap between the rich and the poor:
New evidence and possible explanations. In Whither Opportunity? (p. 91–). Russell Sage
Foundation. https://doi.org/10.7758/9781610447515.10
Reardon, S. F. (2013). The widening income achievement gap. Educational leadership, 70(8),
10-16.
Reardon, S. F. (2016a). School district socioeconomic status, race, and academic
achievement. Stanford Center for Educational Policy Analysis. Retrieved from.
https://cepa.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/reardon%20district%20ses%20and%20achiev
ement%20discussion%20draft%20april2016.pdf
Reardon, S. F., Baker, R., & Klasik, D. (2012). Race, income, and enrollment patterns in highly
selective colleges, 1982-2004. Stanford, CA: Center for Education Policy Analysis.
Reardon, S. F., & Owens, A. (2014). 60 years after Brown: Trends and consequences of school
segregation. Annual Review of Sociology, 40, 199-218.
Rodgers, C. (2002). Defining reflection: Another look at John Dewey and reflective thinking.
Teachers College Record, 104(4), 842–866.
Romeo, R. R., Leonard, J. A., Robinson, S. T., West, M. R., Mackey, A. P., Rowe, M. L., &
Gabrielirodgers, J. D. (2018). Beyond the 30-million-word gap: children’s conversational

228
exposure is associated with language-related brain function. Psychological science, 29(5),
700-710.
Rowe, M. L. (2008). Child-directed speech: Relation to socioeconomic status, knowledge of
child development and child vocabulary skill. Journal of Child Language, 35, 185–205.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.)
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 Dimensions of Improving Student Performance: Finding the Right
Solutions to the Right Problems. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Sampson, R. J., Sharkey, P., & Raudenbush, S. W. (2008). Durable effects of concentrated
disadvantage on verbal ability among African-American children. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, 105(3), 845-852.
Schein, E. H. (2004). In E. H. Schein, (Ed.), Organizational culture and leadership (3rd ed.).
San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
Schein, E. H. (2017). Organizational culture and leadership (Vol. 2l). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Schneider, B., Brief, A. P., & Guzzo, R. A. (1996). Creating a climate and culture for sustainable
organizational change. Organizational Dynamics, 24(4), 7-19.
Schraw, G. (2009). A conceptual analysis of five measures of metacognitive
monitoring. Metacognition and learning, 4(1), 33-45.
Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory/.
Seto, S., & Sarros, J. C. (2016). Servant Leadership Influence on Trust and Quality Relationship
in Organizational Settings. International Leadership Journal, 8(3).

229
Sheppard, B., & Dibbon, D. (2011). Improving the capacity of school system leaders and
teachers to design productive learning environments. Leadership and Policy in Schools,
10, 125–144. doi:10.1080/15700763.2010.502610.
Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of educational research, 78(1), 153-
189.
Sirkin, H. L., Keenan, P., & Jackson, A. (2005). The hard side of change management. HBR’s 10
Must Reads on Change, 99.
Starnes, B., Truhon, S., & McCarthy, V. (2010). Organizational trust: Employee-employer
relationships, A primer on organizational trust. Milwaukee, WI: ASQ Human
Development & Leadership Division.
Tashakkori, A., Teddlie, C., & Teddlie, C. B. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative
and quantitative approaches (Vol. 46). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Tschannen-Moran, M. (2014a). Trust matters: Leadership for successful schools (2nd ed.) San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Gareis, C. R. (2015). Faculty trust in the principal: An essential
ingredient in high-performing schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 53(1), 66-
92.
Tsoukas, H., & Vladimirou, E. (2001). What is organizational knowledge? Journal of
management studies, 38(7), 973-993.
Turney, K., & Kao, G. (2009). Barriers to school involvement: Are immigrant parents
disadvantaged? The Journal of Educational Research, 102(4), 257-271.

230
Wahlstrom, K. L., & Louis, K. S. (2008). How teachers experience principal leadership: The
roles of professional community, trust, efficacy, and shared responsibility. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 44(4), 458-495. doi:10.1177/0013161x08321502
Waters, T., Marzano, R. J., & McNulty, B. (2003). Balanced leadership: What 30 years of
research tells us about the effect of leadership on student achievement (A working
paper). Aurora, CO: Mid-Continent Regional Educational Lab.
Whitaker, B. (1997). Instructional leadership and principal visibility. The clearing house: A
journal of educational strategies, issues and ideas, 70(3), 155-156.
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy–value theory of achievement
motivation. Contemporary educational psychology, 25(1), 68-81.
Williams, A. (2011). A call for change: Narrowing the achievement gap between white and
minority students. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and
Ideas, 84(2), 65-71.
Williams, D. J. (2013). Urban education and professional learning communities. Delta Kappa
Gamma Bulletin, 79(2), 31.
Williams, S., & Welsh, R. (2017). ESSA and school improvement: Principal preparation and
professional development in a new era of education policy. (Every Student Succeeds
Act). Journal of School Leadership, 27(5). https://doi.org/10.1177/105268461702700505
Wilson, J. P. (2008). Reflecting-on-the-future: A chronological consideration of reflective
practice. Reflective Practice: International and Multidisciplinary Perspectives, 9(2),
177–184. doi: 10.1080/14623940802005525
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

231
Zagzebski, L. (2017). What is knowledge? In J. Greco & E. Sosa (Eds.), The Blackwell guide to
epistemology, 92-116.
Zhang, S. (2014). New teachers’ implementation of the common core standards. Action in
Teacher Education, 36(5), 465-479.

232
APPENDIX A
Interview and Document Analysis
Knowledge Influence

KMO
Construct
Knowledge Influence Assessment
Principals need to
know how to identify
relevant professional
development sessions
that are geared towards
teaching teachers how
to close the academic
achievement gap for
students of low-
socioeconomic status.

Conceptual

Interview: Name some professional development
workshops that are targeted to closing the academic
achievement gap?
Probe: Of all the training you have attended, which
one do you find most effective? Why do you think
it was most effective?
Interview: Why do you find that to be the most
effective?

Artifact: Review schools’ professional
development plan.

Describe how you identify professional
development workshops that target closing the
academic achievement gap.
Artifact: Review schools’ needs assessment, survey
or protocol document.
How do you evaluate if you have selected the
appropriate professional development session for
teachers?
Artifact: Review schools’ professional
development evaluation survey responses.
Principals need to
understand their role
as instructional
leaders in order to
plan and implement
effective professional
development that will
assist teachers in
closing the academic
achievement gap for
students of low-
socioeconomic status.
Conceptual

Interview: How would you describe your role as
the leader of the school?

Interview: Are there opportunities for teachers to
participate in leadership roles? If so, will you
please describe the process?
Interview: Does the school have an instructional
leadership team? If so, who are its members and
what are the functions of the instructional
leadership team?
Artifact: Review meeting agendas or minutes.
Artifact: Review report from School Effectiveness
Review.

233
How do you support teachers in the acquisition of
necessary skills and strategies to support student
learning?
Are there particular strategies that specifically
support students of low socioeconomic status? If
so, will you please describe these strategies?
Artifact: Review professional development
agendas, meeting notes.
Artifact: Review lesson plans and program
documents.
Principals need to
know how to support
teachers in making
accurate data driven
decisions in order to
improve academic
achievement among
students of low-
socioeconomic status.
Procedural

Interview: Explain how you support teachers in
making data driven decisions in order to close the
academic achievement gap.

Artifact: Review schools’ agendas and minutes
from collaborative planning.

Interview: How do you evaluate if you are
effectively supporting teachers in using data driven
decisions to close the academic achievement gap
for students of low-socioeconomic status?

Artifact: Review agendas, and powerpoints used in
professional development.
Motivation
Influence

Motivation Influence Assessment
Principals need to
believe that they
possess the capacity
to implement
effective strategies
that will close the
academic
achievement gap for
students of low-
socioeconomic status.
Self-efficacy Interview: Do you feel confident in your ability to
implement effective strategies to close the academic
achievement gap for students of low-socioeconomic
status? Why do you feel confident or why do you
not feel confident?
On a scale of one to 10, with 10 being the highest,
how confident do you feel in your ability to
implement effective strategies to improve student
achievement.

Interview: Tell me about a time when you were
confident in your ability to achieve a school
performance goal?
Probe: What impacts your confidence?
Describe the steps you take in creating and
sustaining a culture and climate that fosters
academic excellence for all students.

234
Principals need to see
the value in providing
teachers the types of
professional
development sessions
that will close the
academic achievement
gap for students of
low-socioeconomic
status.
Expectancy
Value
Interview: How important is it for you to provide
teachers the types of professional development that
are focused on closing the academic achievement
gap for students of low-socioeconomic status?
Please provide an explanation.
Artifact: Review schools’ professional
development plan.
Interview: How valuable is it for you to invest time
in identifying the most effective professional
development for teachers?
Artifact: Review surveys or documents that reflect
how professional development sessions are
prioritized and assessed.
Interview: Probe:
What impact do you see professional development
having on student achievement? (How does
professional development impact student
achievement?)
Will you please describe a time when this occurs in
your school?

Artifact: Review meeting notes, agendas, and
powerpoint for collaborative planning and
professional development sessions.

Interview: Is there a time when you noticed deficits
with teachers’ skills set and the needs of students?
If so,
Will you please describe a time when you noticed
deficits within teachers’ skill set and the needs of
students? How were you able to provide teachers
with the skills or experience they need? Or What
were some of the greatest barriers that prevented
you from effectively providing support to teachers?

Artifact: Review training or support schedules and
documents that reflect differentiated supports.

Organizational
Influence

Organizational Influence Assessment

235
The organization needs
to foster a culture of
open communication
amongst all
stakeholders including
principals, teachers,
and parents in order to
close the academic
achievement gap for
students of low
socioeconomic status.
Cultural Model Interview: To what extent do you believe that the
organization fosters an open system of
communication within the organization among
stakeholders such as principals, teachers and
parents?

Artifact: Review culture and climate surveys from
students, teachers and parents.

Artifact: Review schools’ Effectiveness Review
Report.

Interview: Probe: Can you provide an example as
to why you believe they do or do not foster a
system of open communication within the
organization?
How does this impact closing the achievement gap
among students of low-socioeconomic status?
Probe: Describe how communication occurs among
various stakeholders such as parents, teachers,
community partners, and central office personnel.

Artifacts: Review schools’ flyers, newsletters,
bulletins, websites, and other documents that
reflect the school communication with
stakeholders.

The organization needs
to foster a culture of
trust in the school
among all stakeholders
including principals,
teachers and parents in
order for the
organization to achieve
its goal.
Cultural Model Interview: Does the school foster a culture of trust
between principal, teachers and students?
Probe: Will you please explain how the school
fosters an atmosphere of trust and collaboration
between teachers and principal?
Interview: Is there a high degree of trust and
collaboration among teachers, principals and
parents? If yes, describe a time you felt an
especially high degree of trust and collaboration
amongst principals and teachers.
Artifact: Review survey responses from teachers.

236
The organization needs
to foster a culture of
teacher buy-in between
principals and teachers
in order for the
organization to achieve
its goal.
Cultural Model Interview: How would you describe the change
process that occurs at your school?
Interview: What structures if any, do you currently
have in place to promote a culture of teacher buy-
in?
Interview: Describe the decision-making process
that occurs at your school.
Artifact: Review organization chart depicting roles.
Artifact: Review notes from collaborative
meetings.
Interview: On a scale of one to ten with ten being
the highest, how receptive are teachers to changes
regarding instructional shifts? What are some
factors that contribute to the rating you have
provided?
Artifact: Review report from School Effectiveness
Review.

The organization needs
to provide adequate
resources that will
assist principals in
implementing effective
strategies to close the
academic achievement
gap for students of
low-socioeconomic
status.
Cultural
Setting
Interview: What are some of the resources that are
needed to implement strategies or programs that
will close the academic achievement gap between
economically advantaged and economically
disadvantaged students?

Artifact: Review schools’ poverty allocation
document (if available).

Artifact: Review schools’ budget prioritization
documents.
Interview: Do you believe the resources you are
receiving are adequate to close the academic
achievement gap for students of low-
socioeconomic status? Please explain why or why
not?

Interview: How do you use these resources to close
the academic achievement gap between
economically advantaged and economically
disadvantaged students within your school?

237
Or
How do you propose the lack of resources
experienced, can be addressed to close the
academic achievement gap between economically
advantaged and economically disadvantaged
students?

Artifact: Review extracurricular activities.

238
APPENDIX B
Interview Protocol
Thank you for the time and efforts you have so willingly invested in participating in this
study. The duration of this interview should be approximately one hour. Before we begin, I
would like to take a few minutes to provide you with some background information. I am a
doctoral student at the University of Southern California, where I study Organizational Change
and Leadership. As part of the requirement for completing my doctoral degree, I am conducting
an improvement study to examine the academic achievement gap between students of low socio-
economic status, and students from higher income families. The study also examines the role
school principals play in closing achievement gaps among these subgroups of students.
Additionally, the purpose of this qualitative study is to examine the knowledge and skills,
motivation, and organizational resources that are necessary to K-12 principals in implementing
effective strategies to close the academic achievement gap between economically advantaged
and economically disadvantaged students. Throughout the process of this study, no school
districts, individual schools or principals will be named. This will be done to protect the
confidentiality of the organization and the data garnered from this interview will be confidential.
Please note that this interview is non-evaluative, and my role is strictly to collect information as
objectively as possible. Moreover, your participation in this interview process is completely
voluntary, and at all times, you reserve the right to withdraw from this process, and you may opt
to refuse to answer any questions you do not wish to answer. Please be assured that everything is
being done to ensure your rights are protected. In our previous communication you agreed to be
recorded, does that agreement still stand? Should someone enter the room during the interview
process, the recorder will be stopped or paused until the person exits the room. The information

239
will be kept in a safe, and no additional person will be able to access the recordings. As shared
previously, the questions are designed to examine the knowledge and skills, motivation and
organizational barriers that prevent the organization from attaining its goal.
I will begin with questions relating to knowledge influences.
(Knowledge Influence Questions)
1. Name some professional development workshops that are targeted to closing the
academic achievement gap?
a. Of the training you have attended, which one do you find most effective?
b. Why do you find that to be the most effective?
2. Describe how you identify professional development workshops that target closing the
academic achievement gap.
3. How do you evaluate if you have selected the appropriate professional development
session for teachers?
4. How would you describe your role as the leader of the school?
5. Are there opportunities for teachers to participate in leadership roles? If so, will you
please describe the process?
6. Does the school have an instructional leadership team? If so, who are its members and
what are the functions of the instructional leadership team?
7. How do you support teachers in the acquisition of necessary skills and strategies to
support student learning?
8. Are there particular strategies that specifically support students of low socioeconomic
status? If so, will you please describe these strategies?
9. Explain how you support teachers in using data driven decision making processes to
close the academic achievement gap.
10. How do you evaluate if you are effectively supporting teachers in using data driven
decisions to close the achievement gap for students of low-socioeconomic status?
I will now transition to questions relating to motivational influences.
(Motivational Influences Questions)
1. Do you feel confident in your ability to implement effective strategies to close the
academic achievement gap for students of low-socioeconomic status? Why do you feel
confident or why do you not feel confident?

240
2. On a scale of one to 10, with 10 being the highest, how confident do you feel in your
ability to implement effective strategies to improve student achievement.
3. Tell me about a time when you were confident in your ability to achieve a school
performance goal?
a. What impacts your confidence?
4. Describe the steps you take in creating and sustaining a culture and climate that fosters
academic excellence for all students.
5. How important is it for you to provide teachers the types of professional development
that are focused on closing the academic achievement gap for students of low-
socioeconomic status? Please provide an explanation.
6. How valuable is it for you to invest time in identifying the most effective professional
development for teachers?
a. What impact do you see professional development having on student achievement?
(How does professional development impact student achievement?)
b. Will you please describe a time when this occurs in your school?
7. Is there a time when you noticed deficits with teachers’ skills set and the needs of
students? If so, will you please describe a time when you noticed deficits within teachers’
skill set and the needs of students?
a. How were you able to provide teachers with the skills or experience they need?
b. What were some of the greatest barriers that prevented you from effectively providing
support to teachers?
I will now transition to the last set of questions that focus on organizational influences.
(Organizational Influences Questions)
1. To what extent do you believe that your organization fosters an open system of
communication within the organization among stakeholders such as principals, teachers
and parents?
a. Can you provide an example as to why you believe they do or do not foster a system of
open communication within the organization?
b. How does this impact closing the achievement gap among students of low-socioeconomic
status?
c. Describe how communication occurs among various stakeholders such as parents,
teachers, community partners, and central office personnel.
2. Does the school foster a culture of trust between principal, teachers and students?
a. Will you please explain how the school fosters an atmosphere of trust and collaboration
between teachers and principal?

241
b. Is there a high degree of trust and collaboration among teachers, principals and parents?
If yes; describe a time you felt an especially high degree of trust and collaboration
amongst principals and teachers.
3. How would you describe the change process that occurs at your school?
4. What structures if any, do you currently have in place to promote a culture of teacher
buy-in?
5. Describe the decision-making process that occurs at your school.
6. On a scale of one to ten with ten being the highest, how receptive are teachers to changes
regarding instructional shifts? What are some factors that contribute to the rating you
have provided?
7. What are some of the resources that are needed to implement strategies or programs that
will close the academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and
economically disadvantaged students?
8. Do you believe the resources you are receiving are adequate to close the academic
achievement gap for students of low-socioeconomic status? Please explain why or why
not?
9. How do you use these resources to close the academic achievement gap between
economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students within your school?
10. How do you propose the lack of resources experienced, can be addressed to close the
academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and economically
disadvantaged students?

Thank you very much for participating in this interview process. Should you have any further
questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me at 404-207-9517 or email me at
whilby@usc.edu. Do I have your permission to follow-up with you, should I have any lingering
or clarifying questions? Once again, I appreciate the time and efforts you have provided to this
research process.

242
APPENDIX C
Information Sheet for Exempt Research
STUDY TITLE: ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT GAP BETWEEN ECONOMICALLY
ADVANTAGED AND ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS

PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Charlene Whilby

FACULTY ADVISOR: Alison Muraszewski, Ed.D.

You are invited to participate in a research study. Your participation is voluntary. This document
explains information about this study. You should ask questions about anything that is unclear to
you.

PURPOSE
The purpose of this study is to conduct a gap analysis to examine the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences that interfere with principals’ ability to reach their performance goal. If
all students are expected to attain the organizational global goal, then this must also include
students of low-socioeconomic status.
We hope to learn how we can close academic achievement gap between economically
advantaged and economically disadvantaged students. You are invited as a possible participant
because you are a principal within the state of Maryland.

PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
I am a doctoral candidate at the University of Southern California, where I study Organizational
Change and Leadership. As part of the requirement for completing my doctoral degree, I am
conducting an improvement study to examine the academic achievement gap between students of
low socio-economic status, and students from higher income families. The study also examines
the role school principals play in closing the academic achievement gaps among these subgroups
of students. You will be asked to answer questions on your knowledge, motivation and
organizational influences that are necessary to close the academic achievement gap and support
the organization in reaching its performance goal. The duration of the interview will be
approximately one hour. If a follow-up session is needed to clarify any lingering questions, your
permission will be requested. During the interview handwritten notes will be taken. However, in
order to capture the most information with your permission, audio-recording will also be used.
You have the right to decline from being audio-reordered and still continue with your
participation.

If you decide to take part, you will be asked to participate in a semi-structured interview.
Throughout the process of this study, a pseudonym will be used to protect the confidentiality of
the organization and the data garnered from this interview will be confidential. Please note that
this interview is non-evaluative, and my role is strictly to collect information as objectively as
possible. Moreover, your participation in this interview process is completely voluntary, and at
all times, you reserve the right to withdraw from this process, and you may opt to refuse to

243
answer any questions you do not wish to answer. Please be assured that everything is being done
to ensure your rights are protected.

PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION

You will not be compensated for your participation; however, a thank you card will be sent to
you for your participation in the study.

CONFIDENTIALITY
The members of the research team, and the University of Southern California Institutional
Review Board (IRB) may access the data. The IRB reviews and monitors research studies to
protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.

When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used. A pseudonym will be used throughout the research process.
The interviews will be conducted in a private setting. The interview and audio-recordings will be
periodically paused, should someone enter the room. Data collected will not be labeled with any
identifiable information nor codes that can connect you to the study. Data collected will be stored
in locked cabinets and drawers and no additional person will be able to access the recordings.
Electronic data will be stored on a computer with secured password protection.

You reserve the right to review or edit the audio-recordings or transcripts. To preserve your
privacy, audio-recordings will not be labeled with any personal identities and information and
audiotape will be transcribed and then audio-recordings will be destroyed within three years. All
data collected will be analyzed in a private setting.

Broad themes without any identifying information from the results from the study, will be
published and shared with school districts in order to close the academic achievement gap
between economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students, increase academic
achievement and create a culture and climate where educational equity is experienced by all
students.

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about this study, please contact Charlene Whilby at (404) 207-9517 or
email whilby@usc.edu. You may also contact Allison Muraszewski at (213) 740-0224 or email
alkeller@usc.edu.

IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the
University of Southern California Institutional Review Board at (323) 442-0114 or email
irb@usc.edu.

244
APPENDIX D
Call to Action Letter
Dear Principal:

I am Charlene Whilby, a doctoral student at the University of Southern California, where I study
Organizational Change and Leadership. As part of the requirement for completing my doctoral
degree, I am conducting an improvement study to examine the academic achievement gap
between economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students. The study also
examines the role school principals play in closing the achievement gap among these subgroups
of students.
Additionally, the purpose of this qualitative study is to examine the knowledge and skills,
motivation, and organizational resources that are necessary to assist K-12 principals throughout
the state of Maryland to achieve their goal.
I know your time is valuable, but I would really appreciate your support in participating in an
interview that will assist us in closing the academic achievement gap for all students. If the
increasing inequality in education outcomes between the economically advantaged and the
economically disadvantaged is not addressed, schools will no longer be viewed as the symbol of
equalizer they are prescribed to be.
Recommendations from the study will assist school districts and principals with strategies to
close the achievement gap for students of low-socioeconomic status; which will lead to higher
graduation rates for economically disadvantaged students. Closing the academic achievement
gap will eventually eliminate or reduce the generational cycle of poverty, increase earning power
and standard of living for students of low-socioeconomic status, and provide equitable education
for all students.
If you are willing to participate, please email me three dates and time that are convenient to you,
so that I can schedule the interview.
I am attaching the Informed Consent for your review.
I appreciate your willingness to collaborate so that all students can achieve academic excellence.

Thank you,
Charlene Whilby

245
APPENDIX E
Observation Protocol
Observation checklist for Experts to be completed during and after training
Critical Behaviors
Indicators
Evident Partially
Evident
Not
Evident
Rationale
Principals provide
relevant professional
development sessions
that are focused on
strategies to close the
academic achievement
gap for economically
disadvantaged students.

Principals use
instructional leadership
strategies to support
teachers in closing the
academic achievement
gap.

Principals employ
collaborative leadership
approaches to engage
teachers in activities that
are designed to close the
academic achievement
gap between
economically advantaged
and economically
disadvantaged students.

246
Principals use the DICE
framework to develop a
culture of open
communication and trust
among stakeholders such
as teachers and parents.

Principals will participate
in professional learning
communities where they
can collaborate with their
colleagues and experts to
engage in new learning,
examine various data
sets, reflect on their
practice and examine
various strategies to
increase student
achievement.

247
APPENDIX F
Blended Evaluation
Thank you for the time and efforts you have invested in attending the recent Leadership
Development Trainings. Please provide your answers to the brief survey so that we can assess
the extent to which the program was beneficial to your development. Your responses will
provide valuable feedback as we work to close the academic achievement gap between
economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students.
The survey will employ the four-point Likert scale from strongly agree to strongly disagree.
Level One: Reaction
Engagement
1. The program increases my understanding of effective strategies to close the academic
achievement gap for economically disadvantaged students.
2. The workshop was engaging.
Relevance
3. The workshop was relevant to my practice.
Satisfaction
4. I believe that the workshop was a great use of my time.
5. I was satisfied with the contents of the workshop.
Level Two: Learning
6. The training increased my knowledge of effective strategies to support teachers to close
the academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and economically
disadvantaged students.
7. The workshop increased my knowledge relating to the characteristics of instructional
leadership.
8. The workshop helped me to identify and see the value in providing teachers with
effective professional development to close the academic achievement gap.
9. After participating in the program, I feel more confident in my ability to support teachers
in effectively closing the academic achievement gap for economically disadvantaged
students.
Level Three: Behavior
10. I have used the job aid to support my practices around instructional leadership.
11. I have used job aid to support my practices relating to teacher buy-in.

248
12. Since I attended the training, the frequency in which I provide teachers with professional
development that is based on data driven decision making has increased.
13. I have employed at least one of the strategies to execute my job.
Level Four: Results
1. Since the training I have noticed improvement in students' achievement.
2. Since the training I have noticed progress in meeting my goals.
3. Teachers have been successfully implementing some of the strategies to close the
academic achievement gap.
4. Since the training I feel I have the capacity to close the academic achievement gap for
economically disadvantaged students.
Open Ended Responses:
I believe the next training could be improved by:
I still have questions about:

249
APPENDIX G
Dashboard Snapshot Sample

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
My knowledge increased as a result of the training.
I have used job aids to support my practice.
The frequency at which I provide teachers PD has improved.
I have employed at least one of the strategies to execute my
job.
The program improves my understanding of creative
strategies.
The workshop was engaging.
The workshop was relevant to my practice.
The workshop was a great use of my time.
I was satisfied with the contents of the workshop.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree or Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

250

Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree or Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

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

PDF

Embedded academic support for high school student success: an innovation study

PDF

Utilizing school counselors to increase the number of rural high achieving low-income students at selective colleges: an evaluation study

PDF

Teacher role in reducing the achievement gap: an evaluation study

PDF

Labor displacement: a gap analysis an evaluation study addressing professional development in a small business environment

PDF

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

PDF

The academic implications of providing social emotional learning in K-12: an evaluation study

PDF

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

PDF

Narrowing the English learner achievement gap through teacher professional learning and cultural proficiency: an evaluation study

PDF

The implementation of strategies to minimize the achievement gap for African-American, Latino, English learners, and socio-economically disadvantaged students

PDF

Bridging the gap: a formative evaluation of the productivity-based funding model’s support for academically underserved students

PDF

Increasing college matriculation rate for minorities and socioeconomically disadvantaged students by utilizing a gap analysis model

PDF

Social emotional learning curriculum implementation: an evaluation study of fidelity

PDF

An evaluation study: quality contextual professional development

PDF

Understanding barriers in consumer health advocacy: an improvement study

PDF

Narrowing the achievement gap: Factors that support English learner and Hispanic student academic achievement in an urban intermediate school

PDF

First-year retention: Community college students -- a gap analysis

PDF

An evaluation study of the training, orientation, and implementation of a community college new student counseling intervention program: a gap analysis

PDF

Improving Hispanic student performance in English language arts and math: a small California school case study

PDF

Teaching literacy to Latino English learners in kindergarten, ready or not: an evaluation study

Asset Metadata

Creator Whilby, Charlene Joh-Shawn (author)

Core Title Closing academic achievement gap between economically advantaged and economically disadvantaged students: an improvement study

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 09/18/2020

Defense Date 08/20/2020

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

Tag achievement gap,advantaged students,disadvantaged students,income gap,low-income,OAI-PMH Harvest,socio-economic status

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Muraszewski, Alison (committee chair), Crawford, Jenifer (committee member), Mora-Flores, Eugenia (committee member)

Creator Email charlenewhilby@yahoo.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-372397

Unique identifier UC11666505

Identifier etd-WhilbyChar-8973.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-372397 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-WhilbyChar-8973.pdf

Dmrecord 372397

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Whilby, Charlene Joh-Shawn

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