Journal of K-12 Educational Research Volume 2 | Issue 1 a publication of the CENTER forK-12 EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP
• Three weekends per semester • Summer trips to Austin and Washington, D.C. • Degree completion in four years while working full time • Integration of faith and learning at a Christian university • Direct application to current K-12 issues • Lifelong relationships through the cohort model • Improvement in your K-12 educational setting through Ed.D. treatise • Tuition competitively priced • Superintendent certification Earn Your Doctorate at DBU emphasizes a practical approach to leadership development utilizing the Christian servant leadership model while preparing individuals to have a transformational impact on their K-12 setting. The Ed.D. in Educational Leadership K-12 program Program Features For more information, please contact us: 214.333.5728 · www.dbu.edu/doctoral/edd · neil@dbu.edu
Journal of K-12 Educational Research 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUPERINTENDENTS AND HISPANIC STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT: LEADERSHIP PRACTICES UTILIZED BY K-12 URBAN SUPERINTENDENTS TO INFLUENCE AND INCREASE THE ACHIEVEMENT OF HISPANIC STUDENTS......................................................5 Mark A. Ramirez 1. A STUDY OF THE IMPACT OF REFLECTIVE CONVERSATIONS ON TEACHER PRAXIS AND CLASSROOM INSTRUCTION..................................................................................14 DeAnna Jenkins 2. GREETINGS FROM THE DEAN...........................................................................................................3 A WORD FROM THE EDITOR.................................................................................................................4 A STUDY OF THE EFFECTS OF PRE-K EDUCATION ON A LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICT...............................................................................................................................................21 James Alton Howard 3. THE EFFECTS OF PRE-KINDERGARTEN PARTICIPATION ON LATER ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT IN A NORTH TEXAS SCHOOL DISTRICT.......................................................26 Shea Stanfield-McGarrah 4. FIDELITY OF IMPLEMENTATION OF AN INSTRUCTIONAL COACHING PROGRAM: AN INTERVIEW STUDY...............................................................................................31 Pamela Bell Reece 5. FIRST YEAR TEACHER PERCEPTIONS OF INSTRUCTIONAL COACHING AS A PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT MODEL...................................................................................37 June Ritchlin 6. THE EFFECTS OF ACADEMIC GROUPING ON STUDENT PERFORMANCE IN SCIENCE .........................................................................................................44 Sally Smykla Scoggins 7. JOURNAL OF K-12 EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
2 THE IMPACT OF PARTICIPATION IN STEM PROGRAMS ON COLLEGE ADMISSION REQUIREMENTS OF HISPANIC STUDENTS.................................................................................50 Ladye Welpman 8. JOURNAL OF K-12 EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH PUBLISHING INFORMATION EDITOR Sharon Lee, Ph.D. ASSISTANT EDITOR Aubra Bulin THE EFFECT OF STANDARDS-BASED GRADING ON STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT: A CORRELATIONAL INVESTIGATION..............................................................................................55 Lacey S. Rainey THE EFFECTS OF CERTIFICATION PATHWAY ON BEGINNING TEACHER PREPAREDNESS ..................................................................................................................................67 Pamela Kelly Linton 9. 11. EDUCATOR PREPARATION PROGRAM EFFECTIVENESS: ADMINISTRATORS’ PERCEPTIONS OF TRADITIONAL AND NONTRADITIONAL PROGRAMS .......................62 Joey Grizzle 10. TABLE OF CONTENTS ART DIRECTOR Layna Evans LAYOUT Abbey Watson, Bailey Barr
Journal of K-12 Educational Research 3 Neil Dugger, Ed.D. GREETINGS FROM THE DEAN Journal of K-12 Educational Research 2018, VOL. 2, ISSUE 1 www.dbu.edu/doctoral/edd Greetings from Dallas Baptist University! We are pleased to provide you with the second edition of our doctoral research journal, composed of eleven articles on timely K-12 educational issues in North Texas! The articles are summaries of doctoral dissertations defended at DBU in the past couple of years, and it is our hope the research will provide local schools with answers and perspectives to issues in their own settings. These are challenging times in our schools, and it requires outstanding leaders using solid research. Earning a doctorate is difficult, but the mark of a great leader is one who does not shy away from hard work and challenges. To move forward with all students achieving at a high level, we need research to show what does and does not work. The vision of DBU is to produce “servant leaders who are transforming the world,” and that is happening in a significant way with graduates of DBU’s Ed.D. in Educational Leadership K-12 program. The 85 educators who have graduated since 2015 are in key positions in nearly every major school system in North Texas, and the authors of the enclosed articles are wonderful representatives of DBU’s graduates. I feel confident in the future of education, knowing it will be led by this outstanding group of “next generation” leaders. Our doctoral program currently has over 125 students enrolled, including traditional public school educators, charter school educators, and private school educators. It is designed to be a practitioner’s degree, helping students to be well prepared for the challenging roles in our schools. Most students finish in less than four years, and their dissertation (treatise) topic is selected with the goal to have an impact on their school or district. Feel free to reach out to the authors for the full dissertation or with any questions. Thank you for the critical role you play in the education of the children in our state and nation—there is no greater calling. For more information about the degree, please contact me at neil@dbu.edu. Sincerely, Neil Dugger, Ed.D. Dean, College of Education Director, Ed.D. in Educational Leadership K-12
4 Sharon Lee, Ph.D. AWORD FROM THE EDITOR Journal of K-12 Educational Research 2018, VOL. 2, ISSUE 1 www.dbu.edu/doctoral/edd Dallas Baptist University is proud to present the second annual issue of the Journal of K-12 Educational Research. In this issue, you will read articles written by a selection of recent graduates of the Doctorate of Education in Educational Leadership K-12. The Ed.D. K-12 program is a practitioner’s degree which highlights skills needed to lead districts in North Texas and beyond. The final project of the degree is a treatise that provides data and poten - tial answers to a question of local interest. While the data for the treatise may come from a single district, we believe the answers may be applicable to many districts in this area. Student researchers are encouraged to look for immediate and site-based solutions that could be easily transferrable to issues that concern schools in the North Texas region. In this issue, you will find articles that have statewide impact such as the study by Dr. Mark Ramirez who interviewed Texas superintendents about issues related to Hispanic student achievement and how the district’s highest-ranking educator can influence that achieve - ment. Dr. DeAnna Jenkins developed and deployed a survey about teacher evaluation systems in Texas (PDAS and T-TESS) and the importance of using reflective conversations as part of those evaluations. Some of the research was conducted in the authors’ home districts on topics of local interest, yet can be applied in all districts in Texas. Dr. James Howard and Dr. Shea Stanfield-McGarrah studied the impact of an effective pre-kindergarten program on student achievement both in Kindergarten and in later elementary grades. Their findings will be interesting for any district with a pre-K program. Many districts in the North Texas region have been using instructional coaching for both job-embedded professional development and teacher growth. Dr. Pamela Reece and Dr. June Ritchlin have rich qualitative data to add to the discussion of coaching as a viable professional learning model. Dr. Sally Scoggins and Dr. Ladye Welpman explored STEM education and student performance. Both studies provide information about science education—grouping for advanced academics and preparation for college readiness. Dr. Lacey Rainey provides information about a standards-based grading system with interesting insights for districts who may want to explore this system. The second issue ends with an exploration of teacher preparation and pathways to certification. Dr. Joey Grizzle inter - viewed school leaders about their perceptions of alternate pathways to certification, and Dr. Pamela Linton explored the retention rates of alternatively and traditionally certified teachers. Both studies have strong impact for hiring and retention of highly qualified teachers. DBU’s Ed.D. K-12 program is based on the Biblical servant leader model of putting the needs of others first. Students ex - plore problems that have immediate concern in their districts and are encouraged to bring answers to their districts. The articles included in this issue and the final treatises upon which they were based have the potential to empower educational leaders and classroom educators, while making a difference for students in the classroom throughout the North Texas re - gion and beyond. Sharon Lee, Ph.D. Director of Research in K-12 Education Editor, Journal of K-12 Educational Research
Journal of K-12 Educational Research 5 Journal of K-12 Educational Research 2018, VOL. 2, ISSUE 1 www.dbu.edu/doctoral/edd SUPERINTENDENTS AND HISPANIC STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT: LEADERSHIP PRACTICES UTILIZED BY K-12 URBAN SUPERINTENDENTS TO INFLUENCE AND INCREASE THE ACHIEVEMENT OF HISPANIC STUDENTS Mark A. Ramirez, Ed.D. Introduction The role of the superintendent has evolved into a formidable and powerful position allowing the superintendent to become the definitive instructional leader of the school district (Lauen & Gaddis, 2012; Byrd, Drews, & Johnson, 2007). Improving the quality of instruction and increasing student achievement for all students is the wave of the future for superintendent evaluation and accountability (Houston, 2001; Lashway, 2002; Sherman 2008). The number one priority for 21st century urban school superintendents is student achievement (Byrd et al., 2007; Lewis, Rice, & Rice, 2011; Rammer, 2007). The most recent data from the Texas Education Agency (2015b) indicates that in addition to economically disadvantaged students, the performance gap among Hispanic students must be addressed by districts across the state. According to the Texas Education Agency (TEA) 2014-2015 Texas Public School Pocket Edition Statistics, Hispanic students represented 52.0%, White students represented 28.9%, African American students repre - sented 12.6%, and Asian students represented 3.9% of the student population in Texas (Texas Education Agency, 2015c). In 2015, there were 2,722,272 Hispanic students enrolled in Texas public schools (Texas Education Agency, 2015c). The 2015 State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readi - ness (STAAR) for all subjects reveal 72% of Hispanic students met the Level II passing standard as compared to 87% of White students in the state of Texas (Texas Education Agency, 2015b). This issue is of critical importance to Texas, where Hispanic students scored 16 percentage points lower than their White counterparts in reading and 12 percentage points lower in math on the 2015 STAAR exam (Texas Education Agency, 2015b). The underachievement of Hispanic students can no longer be over - looked and superintendents must rise to the challenge to imple - ment leadership practices aimed at influencing and increasing the academic performance of Hispanic students. Literature Review Overview Impact of Effective Superintendent Leadership The impact of effective superintendent instructional leadership may be difficult to determine, but it is clear that leadership does matter (Fullan, 2001, 2005, 2006; Marzano, 2003; Waters & Marzano, 2006) and may be key to closing the performance gap. A meta-analysis completed by Waters and Marzano (2006) found the academic achievement of students in a district is directly correlated to superintendent leadership. In addition, a study con - ducted by Leithwood and Jantzi (2008) found five superintendent leadership practices that lead to increases in student achievement. The two studies reported four common leadership behaviors that lead to increases in student achievement. The four specific lead - ership behaviors were: (a) collaborative goal-setting to develop a compelling vision, (b) setting clear, non-negotiable goals for stu - dent achievement, (c) establishing progress monitoring systems for identified goals, and (d) using district resources for structured and sustained professional development aligned to district goals (Leithwood & Jantzi, 2008; Waters & Marzano, 2006).
6 Mark A. Ramirez, Ed.D. Performance Gap With the signing of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act on January 8, 2002, school districts were charged with closing the performance gap among all subgroups by requiring districts to disaggregate the data and provide interventions for underachieving subgroups (Linn, 2005). The current study defines the perfor - mance gap as the disparities in STAAR scores between Hispanic students in comparison to the all student group category (Texas Education Agency, 2015a). There is lack of consensus among educational leaders and policymakers on what strategies are the most effective in reducing the performance gap (Jeynes, 2015). A meta-analysis conducted by Jeynes (2015) suggests superinten - dents need a broad and multidisciplinary approach to eliminate the performance gap. Hispanic Students Hispanic students are the largest minority group attending schools in the United States (Camera, 2016), and they account for 52.0% of all students enrolled in Texas public schools (Texas Education Agency, 2014). The Pew Hispanic Center (2009) reports that Hispanic Americans make up the largest percentage of the coun - try’s youngest citizens and are the largest and fastest growing minority group. There continues to be growing concern regarding the academic achievement of Hispanic students (Valencia, 2011). Educators must begin by acknowledging the underachievement of Hispanic students and then set high expectations for the potential of the same students to be academically successful (Murillo et al., 2010). Purpose of Study The purpose of the current sequential explanatory mixed methods research study was to examine the leadership practices and instructional beliefs that effective urban school district superin - tendents have used to influence and increase the achievement of Hispanic students. The study aimed to investigate the possibility that superintendents in K-12 Texas urban school districts, whose Hispanic student population showed academic growth as mea - sured by STAAR results, shared a common set of leadership beliefs and district best practices that impacted the performance gap for Hispanic students. The study utilized the Superintendents’ Leadership Practic - es Survey (SLPS) developed by Dr. Jacqueline Mora (2010) to identify specific leadership practices to increase the academic achievement of Hispanic students. A purposeful sample of 44 superintendents working in Texas urban cities of at least 100,000 residents were invited to participate in this study. Out of the 44 superintendents, 30 of the surveys were returned for a return rate of 68.1%. The performance gap over the past three years for Hispanic students of the participating districts ranged from 12.8% to 13.4%. A Pearson- r correlation coefficient was used to measure the linear relationship between the performance gap comparing Hispanic and White students and the superintendent leadership practices reported in the SLPS. A quantitative approach was used to determine the relationship between superintendent leadership practices and the performance gap for Hispanic students defined in research question 1 (RQ1). A qualitative approach was used for both research question 2 (RQ2) and research question 3 (RQ3). Five superintendents were interviewed to obtain their perspective on the leadership practices used in their school districts to impact Hispanic student achievement. A qualitative analysis was completed using NVivo Pro 11 to identify emerging themes and patterns to connect the qualitative data to the STAAR index 3 performance gap data for Hispanic students. Summary of Findings and Interpretation of Results Research Question 1 (RQ1) Is there a relationship between urban superintendent leadership practices and the performance gap for Hispanic students as mea - sured by the State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR)? Quantitative Data The results of the Pearson- r correlation coefficient compar - ing the SLPS average score to the 2015 index 3 score for each corresponding district showed there is not a linear relationship between the two variables. The conclusion was that there was not a linear relationship between the SLPS average and the district index 3 score from the state accountability system. The research - er failed to reject the null hypothesis indicating there was no relationship between urban superintendents’ leadership practices and the performance gap of Hispanic students as measured by STAAR. Based on Cohen’s guidelines, the correlation of -.124 corresponds to a small effect size, suggesting a small negative correlation between the SLPS and the district 3 index score
Journal of K-12 Educational Research 7 (Cohen,1992). The coefficient of determination ( R ²) indicates the leadership practices on the SLPS account for 1.54% of the variability in index 3 scores. Only 1.54% of the variance in the two variables is common variance and there is no statistical significance. A second Pearson- r correlation coefficient comparing the SLPS sum and the three-year performance gap for Hispanic students based on the Texas accountability system was also performed. The conclusion was that there is not a linear relation - ship between the SLPS sum and the three-year gap change. Once again, the researcher failed to reject the null hypothesis indicating there was no relationship between urban superintendents’ leadership practices and the performance gap of Hispanic students as measured by STAAR. Based on Cohen’s guidelines, the correla - tion of .145 corresponds to a small effect size, suggesting a small correlation between the SLPS sum and the three-year perfor - mance gap change for each participating district (Cohen,1992). The coefficient of determination ( R ²) indicates the leadership practices on the SLPS sum account for 2.10% of the variability in the three-year performance gap for each district. Only 2.10% of the variance in the two variables is common variance so there is no statistical significance. Descriptive Statistics There was a total of six core leadership practices identified by Waters and Marzano (2006) and Leithwood and Jantzi (2008) that directly corresponded with all the questions on the SLPS devel - oped by Mora (2010). The six core leadership practices identified were: (a) collaborative goal-setting to develop a compelling vision, (b) setting clear non-negotiable goals, (c) establish prog - ress monitoring systems, (d) use of district resources for struc - tured professional development, (e) board alignment of district goals, and (f) defining autonomy to campus principals. Pearson- r correlation coefficients for each leadership practice were per - formed by using the sum of the SLPS questions associated with each leadership practice and the three-year gap change for each district. All corresponding p -values for all six leadership practices revealed there was no statistical significance. The SLPS was designed with a Likert-type rating scale rang - ing from 0 to 4. A rating of 4 was the highest possible score and indicated the leadership practice was a very important strategy all schools were implementing throughout the district. The lowest possible score on the SLPS was a zero and this rating indicated the leadership practice was not used by the school district. There were six superintendent leadership practices that were rated 3.8 or higher by participating superintendents and were directly correlated to the five superintendent interviews. The top six lead - ership practices used by superintendents to increase the achievement of Hispanic students are listed in Table 1. There were four leadership practices identified by superin - tendents as being between somewhat important and important to impact Hispanic student achievement and eliminate the perfor - Table 1. Top Six SLPS Leadership Practices
8 Mark A. Ramirez, Ed.D. mance gap. The four lowest rated leadership practices had an average score of 2.87 or lower on the SLPS. The bottom four leadership practices according to the 30 participating superintendents are listed in Table 2. Qualitative SLPS Findings The final question on the Superintendents’ Leadership Practices Survey (SLPS) asked superintendents to discuss the top three leadership practices they believe were the most important in improving the instruction and achievement of Hispanic students in their district that may or may not have been included in the SLPS. The major themes that emerged from the open-ended question were: (a) developing a clear vision and goals with high expec - tations for Hispanic students, (b) using data to progress monitor Hispanic student achievement throughout the school year, (c) providing targeted professional development to address the needs of Hispanic students in their district, and (d) hiring talented teach - ers who will use data to guide instruction for Hispanic students. Research Question 2 (RQ2) What specific leadership practices related to planning, prioritiz - ing, and visioning are utilized by school superintendents to influ - ence the closing of the performance gap for Hispanic students? Qualitative Data RQ2 focused on superintendent leadership practices related spe - cifically to the planning, prioritizing, and visioning for the school district. The five major themes along with the minor themes that emerged are referenced in Figure 1. (See Figure 1 on page 9) Governance The major theme relating to governance reflects the personal be - liefs of each superintendent. Superintendents feel strongly about their leadership style in making a positive impact on student achievement. Superintendents learn from their experiences and continue to utilize the successful leadership strategies that have a positive impact on student achievement. Resources The superintendents referenced resources as it relates to professional development and the hiring of personnel. Superintendents must ensure they are hiring the “right” people to lead campuses, teach students, and influence the Hispanic performance gap. Effective principals are able to lead the work at each campus and effective teachers work directly with students on a daily basis to increase student achievement. Progress Monitoring Superintendents should consistently analyze campus data, have data conversations with their campus principals, and hold every campus accountable for student learning. A key recommendation for a superintendent to make a significant impact on the perfor - mance gap is to be visible. The most successful superintendent in closing the performance gap made frequent visits to schools and asked specific questions related to the performance gap. Strategic Planning Strategic planning included setting high expectations, establish - ing a common vision, and setting specific goals and targets. A superintendent cannot leave learning to chance and everyone in Table 2. Bottom Four SLPS Leadership Practices
Journal of K-12 Educational Research 9 the organization needs to know exactly what they are aiming for regarding the closing of the performance gaps. A superintendent can develop a high quality strategic plan, but the closing of the performance gap is dependent on the execution of the strategic plan. Autonomy Superintendents stressed that autonomy has its limits and must be done within the confines of the system of the school district. Autonomy does not give principals the right to do whatever they want to do in their building. Clear parameters need to be established by the school district and superintendent to distinguish which campuses have earned autonomy for their campus. Campuses with earned autonomy must continue to have some accountability to ensure increases in student achievement and continued success in the closing of the performance gap. Research Question 3 (RQ3) What specific instructional practices are supported by the super - intendent and implemented district-wide to increase the academic achievement of Hispanic students? Qualitative Data RQ3 focused on superintendent leadership practices related specifically to instructional practices that were implemented dis - trict-wide. The themes of progress monitoring and resources were duplicate themes that emerged for both RQ2 and RQ3. There was much more variation in interview responses related to instructional leadership practices. Figure 2 shows the major themes and the minor themes that emerged for RQ3. (See Figure 2 on page 10) Language Acquisition The general findings around language acquisition included: a literacy focus, the use of dual language models, and addressing the readiness gap at an early age. In an effort to determine the readiness gap, school districts must assess students at an early age and develop interventions to ensure students are able to read on grade level as quickly as possible. The focus on language acquisition does not necessarily mean that every Hispanic student is deficient in the English language. The emphasis on language acquisition must be targeted to those Hispanic students that enter schools with an English language barrier. Progress Monitoring Progress monitoring as an instructional practice refers to data analysis by individual students. In order to close the performance Figure 1. Research Question 2: Major and Minor Themes. The figure represents the major and minor themes for research question 2 using NVivo Pro 11.
10 Mark A. Ramirez, Ed.D. gap, a system to monitor individual students has to be implemented. The superintendent of a large urban district may not be able to know every single student, but systems for campuses to closely monitor individual students can be established. The monitoring of struggling students by each campus is one way superintendents can supervise if the performance gap is closing for Hispanic students. Instructional Framework The superintendent is responsible for the instruction taking place in schools throughout the school district and the differentiation of instruction based on individual student needs. The instructional framework defines exactly what students are required to know and be able to do at each grade level. Individualized progress monitoring leads to personalized instruction as part of a dis - trict's instructional framework. A personalized approach for each student is a major leadership practice for superintendents to close the performance gap for Hispanic students. Extended Opportunities The major theme of extended opportunities had the most varying viewpoints as to which would be the most beneficial. A strong mentoring program and ensuring the basic needs of each student is met on a daily basis were two specific strategies mentioned. Superintendents focused on interventions, but a need to look at enrichment opportunities embedded with the curriculum became evident with the current study. Magnet schools and specialized opportunities previously only reserved for the top performing students must be made available to all students. Superinten - dents acknowledged the need to increase parental involvement throughout the school district and how enrolling a student means enrolling an entire family. Resources The final major theme that emerged was the use of resources related to professional development. Once a superintendent hires the “right” people, district resources must be used to provide quality professional development for both principals and teachers. On a larger scale, structured and aligned professional devel - opment ensures the major district initiatives are being implement - ed effectively throughout the district. Implications The current study revealed there was no statistically significant Figure 2. Research Question 3: Major and Minor Themes. The figure represents the major and minor themes for research ques - tion 3 using NVivo Pro 11.
Journal of K-12 Educational Research 11 relationship between urban superintendents’ leadership practices and the performance gap of Hispanic students as measured by STAAR index 3 data. This initial finding supports research by Chingos, Whitehurst, & Gallaher (2014) who believe there are so many causes of the student achievement gap and the factors leading to the achievement gap cannot be separated using quantitative and methodological tools of modern science. These findings support the belief by some educators that the superintendent has a minimal impact on student achievement because the superintendent does not engage directly with teachers or students in the classroom (Kowalski, 2006). The 30 superintendents who returned the SLPS identified six instructional practices they believed were very important in influencing and increasing the academic achievement of Hispanic students. This finding supports the belief by some scholars who believe superintendents who are able to use the managerial levels at their disposal; such as, staff recruitment and selection, principal supervision and evaluation, articulation of clear goals, and distribution of financial resources can directly improve instruction for students (Björk, 1993; Bridges, 1982; Cuban, 1984; Fullan, 1991; Kowalski, 2006). The major findings of the open-ended responses revealed superintendents believed developing a clear vision and goals with high expectations, using data to progress monitor, providing targeted professional development, and hiring talented personnel who will use data to guide instruction were critical to Hispanic student success. This finding directly aligned with the Waters and Marzano (2006) research suggesting working collaborative - ly with the community to set goals, identifying non-negotiable goals, providing the necessary support, and resources impacts student achievement. One discrepancy of the findings from the current study in - volved the mention and work between the superintendent and the school board. Research by Waters and Marzano (2006) identified board alignment and support of district goals as a leadership practice that positively impacted student achievement. In both the interviews and the SLPS, there was minimal support for involv - ing the board and ensuring alignment of district goals. Two of the lowest scoring questions on the SLPS were questions related to analyzing factors with the school board and working directly with the school board to consider options and strategies. A school board that is aware of the data and the need to close the performance gap for Hispanic students could lead to more emphasis and district-wide support of high leverage leadership practices identified in this research. The most successful superintendent in closing the performance gap was directly involved in instructional decisions, professional development, and analyzing data. In addition, a primary role of an urban superintendent is to influence curriculum policy, diagnose educational needs, and recommend strategies to increase student achievement (Andero, 2000). The results of this study indicate superintendents must have a hands-on approach in curriculum decisions, analyzing the data, and have specific strategies implemented in the most struggling schools. Collaborating with all stakeholders to develop strategic plans, monitoring data, holding educators accountable, and hiring effective educators are a few common leadership practices used by superintendents. The expectation of today’s urban superinten - dents is to be able to provide direction, craft a vision (Carter & Cunningham, 1997), manage a variety of expectations (Jackson, 1995), while being able to meet state accountability standards of closing the performance gaps. There was no clear evidence to suggest specific leadership practices led to increases in Hispanic student achievement; how - ever, there were common leadership practices used by the most successful superintendents to impact the Hispanic performance gap. A meta-analysis conducted by Jeynes (2015) claims there is still a lack of consensus about what strategies and at what levels they must be implemented to reduce the performance gap. Based on the findings from the qualitative data, superintendents can implement specific instructional leadership practices throughout their district to positively impact Hispanic student achievement. Conclusions There has been specific leadership practices identified that urban superintendents can implement to close the performance gap for Hispanic students. A compilation of both the quantitative and qualitative findings indicate urban superintendents should do the following: • be directly involved in instructional decisions, professional development, and analyzing data; • implement an early childhood literacy program with the goal that all students will be reading on grade level by the end of 3rd grade;
12 Mark A. Ramirez, Ed.D. • be highly visible by making frequent campus visits and asking questions related to the campus performance gap; • require campus principals of the lowest performing campuses to present quarterly data directly to the superintendent; • have a direct involvement in the hiring of principals, especially those assigned to the lowest performing campuses; and • incorporate an individualized progress monitoring sys - tem leading to a personalized approach for each student as part of the district’s instructional framework. A paradigm shift must take place in order to view Hispanic students as “at-potential” instead of being labeled as being “atrisk” (Murillo et al., 2010, p. 280). The reform challenge facing Hispanic students begins with overcoming a deficit mindset that blames poor, Hispanic, and minority students for school failures (Valencia, 2011). The performance gap for Hispanic students is a complex, multidimensional concern that requires a wide lens to be able to capture all viable solutions to improve student achievement (Valencia, 2011). The current study identified a potential blueprint of leader - ship practices that can be used by superintendents to significantly close the performance gap for Hispanic students. The leadership practices identified in the current study bring a future of hope and unlimited potential for urban school districts to have a signifi - cant impact on the closing of the performance gap for Hispanic students. References Andero, A. (2000). The changing role of school superintendent with regard to curriculum policy and decision making. Education, 121 (2), 276. Björk, L. (1993). Effective schools effective superintendents: The emerging instructional leadership role. Journal of School Leadership , 3 (3), 246-259. Bridges, E. (1982). Research on the school administrator: The state of the art 1967-1980. Educational Administrator Quarterly, 18 (3), 12-33. Byrd, J., Drews, C., & Johnson, J. (2007). Factors impacting superintendent turnover: Lessons from the field. National Council of Professors of Educational Administration, 7 (2), 1-11. Camera, L. (2016, March). Gains in reading for Hispanic students overshadowed by achievement gap. U.S. News and World Report. Retrieved from http://www.usnews.com/ news/blogs/data-mine/2016/03/28/hispanic-students-gainsovershadowed-by-achievement-gaps Carter, G., & Cunningham, W. (1997). The American school superintendent: Leading in an age of pressure. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass. Chingos, M., Whitehurst, G., & Lindquist, K. (2014). School superintendents: Vital or irrelevant? Washington, DC: Brown Center on Education Policy at Brookings. Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112 (1). 155-159. Cuban, L. (1984). Transforming the frog into a prince: Effective schools research and practice at the district level. Harvard Educational Review , 54 (2), 129-151. Fullan, M. (1991). The meaning of educational change; NewYork, NY: Teachers College Press. Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Fullan, M. (2005). Leadership and sustainability: System thinkers in action. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Fullan, M. (2006). Turnaround leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Houston, P. (2001). Superintendents for the 21st century: It’s not just a job it’s a calling. Phi Delta Kappan , 82 (6), 428-433. Jackson, B. (1995). Balancing act: The political role of the urban school superintendent . Washington, DC: Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies. Jeynes, W. H. (2015). A meta-analysis on the factors that best reduce the achievement gap. Education and Urban Society, 47 (5), 523-554. Kowalski, T. J. (2006). The school superintendent: Theory, practice, and cases (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Lashway, L. (2002). Trends in school leadership. ERIC Digest, 162. Eugene, OR. Lauen, D. L., & Gaddis, S. M. (2012). Shining a light or fumbling in the dark? The effects of NCLB’s subgroupspecific accountability on student achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 34 (2), 185-208. Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2008). Linking leadership to student learning: The contributions of leader efficacy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44 (4), 496-528.
Journal of K-12 Educational Research 13 Lewis, T., Rice, M., &Rice, R. (2011). Superintendents’beliefs and behaviors regarding instructional leadership standards reform. The International Journal of Educational Preparation, 6 (1), 1-13. Linn, R. L. (2005). Fixing the NCLB accountability system. Los Angeles: University of California, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards and Student Testing. Marzano, R. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into action. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Mora, J. (2010). Superintendents and Latino student achievement: Promising practices that superintendents use to influence the instruction and increase the achievement of Latino students in urban school districts (Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California). Retrieved from http:// search.proquest.com.library.dbu.edu:2048/pqdtglobal/ docview/375517526/4ED038B986794DA4PQ/1?accountid= 7024 Murillo, E., Villenas, S., Galvan, R., Munoz, J., Martinez, C., & Machado-Casas, M. (2010). Handbook of Latinos and education: Theory, research, and practice. NY: Routledge. No Child Left Behind – Public Law 107-100. (2002, January 8). Washington, DC: 107th United States Congress. Retrieved September 1, 2015, from http://www.ed.gov/legislation/ ESEA02/107-110.pdf Pew Hispanic Center (2009). Between two worlds: How young Latinos come of age in America (Report No. 117). Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://pewhispanic.org/files/ reports/117.pdf. Rammer, R. (2007). Call to action for superintendents: Change the way you hire superintendents. The Journal of Educational Research , 101 (2), 67-76. Sherman, W. H. (2008). No child left behind: A legislative catalyst for superintendent action to eliminate test-score gaps. Education Policy, 22 (5), 675-704. Texas Education Agency (2014). Enrollment in Texas public schools, 2013-2014. Division of Research and Analysis. Retrieved from tea.texas.gov/acctres/Enroll_2013-14.pdf Texas Education Agency (2015a). 2015 Texas accountability manual for Texas public school districts and campuses. Retrieved from https://rptsvr1.tea.texas.gov/perfreport/ account/2015/manual/manual.pdf Texas Education Agency (2015b). 2015 accountability reports. Retrieved from https://rptsvr1.tea.texas.gov/perfreport// account/2015/srch.html?srch=D. Texas Education Agency (2015c). 2014-2015 Texas public school pocket edition statistics. Retrieved from http://tea.texas.gov/ communications/pocket-edition/ Valencia, R. (2011). Chicano school failure and success: Past, present, and future (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. Waters, J. T., & Marzano, R. (2006). School district leadership that works: The effect of superintendent leadership on student achievement. Retrieved from http://www.ctc.ca.gov/educatorprep/asc/4005rr_superintendent_leadership.pdf About the Author Dr. Mark Ramirez serves as an Executive Director in the Dallas Independent School District and as an adjunct professor in the Dorothy M. Bush College of Education at Dallas Baptist University. Previous positions held include Principal of Moisés E. Molina High School in Dallas, Texas and District Science Coordinator in Harlingen, Texas. He holds a Bachelor of Science from Texas Tech University, a Master of Education from the University of Texas at Arlington, and a Doctor of Education Degree in Educational Leadership K-12 from Dallas Baptist University. He can be reached at mramz22.mr@gmail.com for research inquiries.
14 A STUDY OF THE IMPACT OF REFLECTIVE CONVERSATIONS ON TEACHER PRAXIS AND CLASSROOM INSTRUCTION DeAnna Jenkins, Ed.D. Journal of K-12 Educational Research 2018, VOL. 2, ISSUE 1 www.dbu.edu/doctoral/edd Introduction It has long been perceived by some that the American public education system is failing today’s students. Ravitch (2014) as - serted, “the leading members of our political class and our media elite seemed to agree: Public education is broken. Our students are not learning enough. Public schools are bad and getting worse” (p. 3). Reports and reform movements, such asA Nation at Risk (1983), the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), No Child Left Behind (NCLB), and Race to the Top (RTT), are categorized as some of the levers for the decline of opinion regarding public education and the effectiveness of teach - er praxis (Marzano, Frontier, & Livingston, 2011; Popham, 2013; Ravitch, 2014; Toch & Rothman, 2008; Zhao, 2009). The implementation of teacher evaluation systems has been one of the recommended answers to fix the perceived crisis in education. In the 1983 reportA Nation at Risk, the National Com - mission on Excellence (NCEE) at that time recommended that teacher’s salary, promotion, and retention be tied to “an effective evaluation system” (p. 38). The major purpose of supervision and evaluation is to improve teacher praxis and classroom instruction (Darling-Hammond, 2013; Glickman, 1980; Marzano, et al., 2011; NCEE, 1983; Popham, 2013; Sullivan and Glanz, 2000). However, history and research has shown that states across the nation have been and continue to struggle with teacher evaluation systems and their lack of improvement on teach - er performance. Blumberg (1985) reviewed annual reports of superintendents in the common schools of the 59 counties in the state of New York in 1845. Superintendents discussed concerns about limited and outdated methods of teaching, inadequate staff development, and opportunities to elevate the quality of teaching in the classroom over a century ago. Darling-Hammond (2013) discussed teacher evaluation systems as failing and in need of drastic improvements, as the process rarely “distinguished those who were succeeding from those who are struggling” (p. 1). Popham (2013) argued that “If we evaluate American teachers inappropriately…we will not only see many American teachers being unfairly judged, but we’ll also witness a definite dip in the quality of our public schools” (pp. ix-x). With the increase in high-stakes evaluations, teachers are often evaluated without the opportunity to receive recurrent critical, constructive feedback that allows self-reflection on instructional practices. Successful teacher evaluation systems can be designed if they are individualized and allow for self-direction. Many researchers have identified effective teacher evaluation systems encompass the formative practice of providing facilitated, timely, relevant, and reflective feedback during recurrent instructional conversations that encourage self-reflection on praxis and instruc - tional growth (Brookhart and Moss, 2015; Danielson and McG - real, 2000; Darling-Hammond, 2013; Downey and Frase, 2001; Fullan, 2009; Lezotte and Snyder, 2011; Marzano, et al., 2011; Popham, 2013; Sullivan and Glanz, 2000). According to Killion (2015) feedback is a powerful process that provides “criteria-ref - erenced” evidence to assist in the identification of strengths and weaknesses, process of setting goals, and creation of an authentic plan for achieving those goals (p. 8). Hall and Simeral (2015) stated, “to be good at anything, you need to be thoughtful, intentional, and reflective about your practice…Self-reflection can bridge the doing-thinking gap, knowing-doing gap, and another gap that might otherwise impede your progress” (p. 21).
Journal of K-12 Educational Research 15 Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was multifaceted and examined the perceptions of campus administrators and classroom teachers for the following areas of concentration: 1) The benefits of participating in the formative practice of reflective conversations to improve classroom instruction and student learning; 2) The most effec - tive leader on the campus to conduct reflective conversations; 3) How often reflective conversations should take place; and 4) If reflective conversations provide opportunities to discuss areas of strength and need, establish attainable professional goals, develop action steps to meet those goals, and identify professional development options that lead to improved classroom instruction and student achievement. Setting, Target Population and Sample The study focused on the perceptions of administrators and teachers in a north central region of Texas encompassing ten counties including 77 school districts, 52 charter campuses, approximately 66,000 educators and more than 551,000 students. School dis - tricts in this area included urban, suburban, and rural districts and campuses ranging in size from a large urban school district with 142 campuses and over 80,000 students to small rural districts with one campus serving a total of 80 students in Pre-Kindergar - ten through grade eight. The campuses represented early child - hood, elementary, intermediate, middle school, and high school campuses that provide and support programs characteristic of educational systems across the state of Texas. The researcher’s sample database contained a total population of unique district and charter e-mail addresses for 24,404 teachers and 4,413 administrators. As the target population of teachers was very large, the researcher used the procedure of systematic sampling to select every 5th teacher to create a sampling frame of 4,880 participants. The researcher received 458 usable responses: 246 classroom teachers and 212 campus administra - tors. Instrumentation and Measures The researcher created and used a web-based survey questionnaire which included demographic, attitudinal, and “semi-closedended” questions (Creswell, 2015, p. 390). The survey instrument contained two sets of attitudinal questions designed for: 1) respondents participating in reflective conversations as a campus practice; and 2) respondents not participating in reflective conver - sations. As the survey was designed by the researcher, the instru - ment was pilot tested for both content validity and reliability. The researcher used a combination of descriptive and comparative statistics to analyze and report the data. Descriptive sta - tistics were used to communicate the occurrence in percentages and averages. Independent-samples t -tests were used to explore the difference in perception on reflective conversations of the teachers and administrators for Research Questions 1-8. A series of two-way between-groups analysis of variances (ANOVA) were conducted to explore the impact of the demographic influence of years of experience, gender, campus type, campus size, district size, campus location, and role on campus on the perception of whether reflective conversations are beneficial to improving classroom praxis. Research Questions Findings and Mean Differences Table 1 shows a summary of the research questions and the associated statistical findings. (See Table 1 on page 16) Summary of Findings There were 458 completed surveys returned for the study. Of the 458 participants sampled, there were two comparison groups: campus administrators and classroom teachers. The survey par - ticipants were divided into two response groups, those practicing reflective conversations and those who were not. Of the total participants sampled, 74% responded they were participating in reflective conversations, while 26% responded they were not. Of the 74% of participants who responded they were currently par - ticipating in reflective conversations, 164 were campus adminis - trators and 173 were classroom teachers. The 26% of participants who responded they were not currently participating in reflective conversations were made up of 48 campus administrators and 73 classroom teachers. The study showed that 88% of all participants believed par - ticipating in reflective conversations can lead to improved class - room instructional practice. There was a difference in agreement within the 88%; 97% of campus administrators responded they agree to strongly agree, while only 80% of teachers responded similarly. However, of the 26% of the respondents not currently participating in reflective conversations, 93% agreed this practice should be taking place on the campus, with 98% of administrators
16 and 89% of teachers responded similarly in agreement. Although there was significant agreement that reflective conversations can lead to improved instructional practice and who should lead the conversation, there were differences in agreement between the campus administrator and classroom teacher in the areas of the frequency of reflective conversations; opportunities to recognize areas of strength; opportunities to ascertain areas of weakness; opportunities to set professional goals; opportunities to create action steps; opportunities to identify professional development; and inclusion in the teacher evaluation system. Table 2 reflects the degree of difference in agreement in regards to the correlated questions asked of the total population. (See Table 2 on page 17) The 74% of respondents who indicated they were partici - pating in reflective conversations were asked a set of supporting questions to study the actual practice taking place during the reflective conversations. Although within this subset of respon - dents, there was agreement that reflective conversations can lead to improved instructional practice, there were significant differ - ences in the actual practice in regards to the opportunities to set professional goals; creation of action steps; identifying professional development; and the inclusion in the teacher evaluation system. Table 3 reflects the degree of difference for the set of supporting questions asked of only the participants participating in reflective conversations. (See Table 3 on page 18) DeAnna Jenkins, Ed.D. Table 1. Research Questions and Degree of Difference between Administrator and Teachers
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy ODc4ODgx