8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/dr-michelle-cloud-phd-dissertation-defense-dissertation-chair-dr-william 1/62 PRAIRIE VIEW A&M UNIVERSITY THE COLLEGE OF EDUCATION FACTORS IMPACTING STUDENT SUCCESS IN GRADES 6-8 DURING SCHOOL OF CHOICE TRANSITION AT TWO MIDDLE SCHOOLS MICHELLE ANNETTE CLOUD Chair of Advisory Committee: Dr. William Allan Kritsonis Dr. David Herrington Dr. Wanda Johnson Dr. Lucian Yates, III Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY March 2009
62
Embed
Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
One component of the No Child Left Behind Act(NCLB) is adequate yearly progress, or AYP.
Any Title I school designated in need of improvement (based on the AYP rating) must offerall students attending that school the opportunityto attend a school in the district that has
successfully met its AYP goals (Texas EducationAgency, 2008).
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
Quantitative research questions answered were as follows:
1. Are there differences in the 2006/2007 Mathematics Texas Assessmentof Knowledge and Skills scores between transfer and non-transferstudents in grade 6?
2. Are there differences in the 2005/2006 Mathematics Texas Assessmentof Knowledge and Skills scores and 2006/2007 Mathematics TexasAssessment of Knowledge and Skills scores between transfer and non-transfer students in grade 7?
3. Are there differences in the 2005/2006 Mathematics Texas Assessmentof Knowledge and Skills scores and 2006/2007 Mathematics TexasAssessment of Knowledge and Skills scores between transfer and non-transfer students in grade 8?
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
4. Are there differences in the 2006/2007 Reading Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scores between transfer and non-transferstudents in grade 6?
5. Are there differences in the 2005/2006 Reading Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scores and 2006/2007 Reading TexasAssessment of Knowledge and Skills scores between transfer and non-transfer students in grade 7?
6. Are there differences in the 2005/2006 Reading Texas Assessment of
Knowledge and Skills scores and 2006/2007 Reading TexasAssessment of Knowledge and Skills scores between transfer and non-transfer students in grade 8?
Quantitative Research Questions(continued)
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
7. Are there differences in the 2005/2006 Mathematics grade point averagesand 2006/2007 Mathematics grade point averages between transfer andnon-transfer students in grade 7?
8. Are there differences in the 2005/2006 Reading grade point averages and2006/2007 Reading grade point averages between transfer and non-transfer
students in grade 7?
9. Are there differences in the 2005/2006 Mathematics grade point averagesand 2006/2007 Mathematics grade point averages between transfer andnon-transfer students in grade 8?
10. Are there differences in the 2005/2006 Reading grade point averages and2006/2007 Reading grade point averages between transfer and non-transferstudents in grade 8?
Quantitative Research Questions(continued)
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
H01: There are no statistically significant difference in the scores on the
2006/2007 Mathematics Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scoresbetween transfer and non-transfer students in grade 6.
H02: There are no statistically significant difference in the scores on the2005/2006 Mathematics Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scoresand 2006/2007 Mathematics Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skillsscores between transfer and non-transfer students in grade 7.
H03: There are no statistically significant difference in the scores on the
2005/2006 Mathematics Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scoresand 2006/2007 Mathematics Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skillsscores between transfer and non-transfer students in grade 8.
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
H04: There are no statistically significant difference in the scores on the
2006/2007 Reading Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scoresbetween transfer and non-transfer students in grade 6.
H05: There are no statistically significant difference in the scores on the
2005/2006 Reading Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scores and2006/2007 Reading Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scoresbetween transfer and non-transfer students in grade 7.
H06: There are no statistically significant difference in the scores on the
2005/2006 Reading Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scores and2006/2007 Reading Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scoresbetween transfer and non-transfer students in grade 8.
Null Hypotheses (continued)
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
Extant data from the 2005/2006 and 2006/2007Mathematics and Reading TAKS Test were used todetermine if differences existed between the2005/2006 Mathematics and Reading TAKS scoresand the 2006/2007 Mathematics and Reading TAKSscores of transfer students and non-transfer studentsin grades 6-8.
Instrumentation
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
Quantitative Findings(continued) RQ 2 - Are there differences in the 2005/2006 Mathematics Texas Assessment of
Knowledge and Skills scores and 2006/2007 Mathematics Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scores between transfer and non-transfer students in grade7?
7th grade Mathematics TAKS 2005/2006 Mean Difference = 213.60 P = 0.00 P < 0.05 Reject the null hypothesis There was a statistically significant difference in the scores on the 2005/2006
Mathematics Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scores betweentransfer and non-transfer students in grade 7.
7th grade Mathematics TAKS 2006/2007 Mean Difference = 59.69 P = 0.31
P < 0.05 Accept the null hypothesis There was no statistically significant difference in the scores on the 2006/2007
Mathematics Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scores betweentransfer and non-transfer students in grade 7.
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
Quantitative Findings(continued) RQ 3 - Are there differences in the 2005/2006 Mathematics Texas Assessment of
Knowledge and Skills scores and 2006/2007 Mathematics Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scores between transfer and non-transfer students in grade8?
8th grade Mathematics TAKS 2005/2006 Mean Difference = -45.77 P = 0.39 P < 0.05 Accept the null hypothesis There was no statistically significant difference in the scores on the 2005/2006
Mathematics Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scores betweentransfer and non-transfer students in grade 7.
8th grade Mathematics TAKS 2006/2007 Mean Difference = -26.04 P = 0.60 P < 0.05 Accept the null hypothesis There was no statistically significant difference in the scores on the 2006/2007
Mathematics Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scores betweentransfer and non-transfer students in grade 7.
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
RQ4 - Are there differences in the 2006/2007 ReadingTexas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scores betweentransfer and non-transfer students in grade 6?
6th grade Mathematics TAKS 2006/2007
Mean Difference = 67.95
P = 0.03
P < 0.05
Reject the null hypothesis
There was a statistically significant difference in the scores on the
2006/2007 Reading Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skillsscores between transfer and non-transfer students in grade 6.
Quantitative Findings
(continued)
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
RQ5 - Are there differences in the 2005/2006 Reading Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skillsscores and 2006/2007 Reading Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scores between transferand non-transfer students in grade 7?
7th grade Reading TAKS 2005/2006
Mean Difference = 200.53
P = 0.01
P < 0.05
Reject the null hypothesis
There was a statistically significant difference in the scores on the 2005/2006 Reading Texas
Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scores between transfer and non-transfer students in grade7.
7th grade Reading TAKS 2006/2007
Mean Difference = 150.42
P = 0.01
P < 0.05
Reject the null hypothesis
There was a statistically significant difference in the scores on the 2006/2007 Reading Texas
Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scores between transfer and non-transfer students in grade7.
Quantitative Findings(continued)
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
RQ6 - Are there differences in the 2005/2006 Reading TexasAssessment of Knowledge and Skills scores and 2006/2007 ReadingTexas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scores between transferand non-transfer students in grade 8?
8th grade Reading TAKS 2005/2006
Mean Difference = 42.87
P = 0.45
P < 0.05
Accept the null hypothesis
There was not a statistically significant difference in the scores on the 2005/2006 Reading
Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scores between transfer and non-transfer
students in grade 8.
8th grade Reading TAKS 2006/2007
Mean Difference = -86.39 P = 0.14
P < 0.05
Accept the null hypothesis
There was not a statistically significant difference in the scores on the 2006/2007 Reading
Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scores between transfer and non-transfer
students in grade 8.
Quantitative Findings(continued)
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
RQ7 - Are there differences in the 2005/2006 Mathematics grade point averages and2006/2007 Mathematics grade point averages between transfer and non-transferstudents in grade 7?
7th grade Mathematics Grade Point Averages 2005/2006
Mean Difference = 8.00
P = 0.02
P < 0.05
Reject the null hypothesis There was a statistically significant difference in the scores on the 2005/2006 Mathematics grade point
averages between transfer and non-transfer students in grade 7.
7th grade Mathematics Grade Point Averages 2006/2007
Mean Difference = 3.22
P = 0.10
P < 0.05
Accept the null hypothesis There was not a statistically significant difference in the scores on the 2006/2007 Mathematics grade point
averages between transfer and non-transfer students in grade 7.
Quantitative Findings(continued)
Q tit ti Fi di
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
RQ8 - Are there differences in the 2005/2206 Reading grade point averages and2006/2007 Reading grade point averages between transfer and non-transferstudents in grade 7?
7th grade Reading TAKS 2005/2006
Mean Difference = 4.40
P = 0.06
P < 0.05
Accept the null hypothesis There was not a statistically significant difference in the scores on the 2005/2006 Reading grade point averages between
transfer and non-transfer students in grade 7.
7th grade Reading TAKS 2006/2007
Mean Difference = 2.44
P = 0.20
P < 0.05
Accept the null hypothesis
There was not a statistically significant difference in the scores on the 2006/2007 Reading grade point averages betweentransfer and non-transfer students in grade 7.
Quantitative Findings(continued)
Q tit ti Fi di
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
RQ9 - Are there differences in the 2005/2006 Mathematics gradepoint averages and 2006/2007 Mathematics grade point averagesbetween transfer and non-transfer students in grade 8?
8th grade Reading TAKS 2005/2006
Mean Difference = -0.89
P = 0.60
P < 0.05 Accept the null hypothesis
There was not a statistically significant difference in the scores on the 2005/2006
Mathematics grade point averages between transfer and non-transfer students in grade
8.
8th grade Reading TAKS 2006/2007
Mean Difference = -2.55 P = 0.30
P < 0.05
Accept the null hypothesis
There was not a statistically significant difference in the scores on the 2006/2007
Mathematics grade point averages between transfer and non-transfer students in grade
8.
Quantitative Findings(continued)
Q tit ti Fi di
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
RQ10 - Are there differences in the 2005/2006 Reading grade point averagesand 2006/2007 Reading grade point averages between transfer and non-transfer students in grade 8?
8th grade Reading TAKS 2005/2006
Mean Difference = -3.66
P = 0.07
P < 0.05
Accept the null hypothesis There was not a statistically significant difference in the scores on the 2005/2006 Reading grade point averages
between transfer and non-transfer students in grade 8.
8th grade Reading TAKS 2006/2007
Mean Difference = -0.95
P = 0.58
P < 0.05
Accept the null hypothesis There was not a statistically significant difference in the scores on the 2006/2007 Reading grade point averages
between transfer and non-transfer students in grade 8.
Quantitative Findings(continued)
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
RQ11 - Which factors in the school of choice schools docounselors perceive are the most helpful in assisting transferstudents in grades 6-8?
Factor A - Students often learn a great deal simply byobserving other people.
“. . . teachers modeled appropriate study habits” “the use of organizers/agendas” closely “monitor(ing) assignments” assigning “checkpoints” to students tips on how to “take notes . . . study, divide up time to study”
“When . . . (teachers) realized students needed extra they letthem come in before school” “Teachers would usually pair up students” “All students (were) expected to follow the ‘Well-Managed
Classroom.’"
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
Factor F - Students must believe that they are capable of accomplishing school tasks.
“They [transfer students] had the perception that they coulddo whatever was asked of them.”
Counselors said, “Students expressed that they believedthey were capable of accomplishing school tasks through thework they submitted . . . Also, through communication withstudents and family members.”
Counselors expressed, “We found things that they werestrong in and used that to encourage them and bring themback around, in some cases they were artistic, athletic . . . togive them self esteem and motivate them.”
Q lit ti Fi di
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
Factor H - Self-regulation techniques provide an effective methodfor improving student behavior.
Counselors said, “Self-regulation had a major impact on thechoices students made.”
One counselor expressed self-regulation varied dependingon the student.
Counselors stated “. . . if they [transfer students] had sometype of disability . . . this had an impact on behavior andacademics.”
Counselors also expressed, “Until you get past behavior youcan’t even think about academics” and “Those [transferstudents] who came to us with major discipline problemscontinued on the same route.”
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
Mobility is associated with lower student achievement (Fowler-Finn, 2001).
An achievement gap exists between schools with a highmobility rate and those that are more stable (Kerbow, 1996).
Classroom instruction in schools with higher mobility rates ismore likely to be review oriented and have slowerinstructional pacing from month to month and grade to grade
(Kerbow, 1996).
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
High school students who change schools are at least twice aslikely not to graduate-research indicated that only 60 percent willgraduate (Rumberger, Larson, Ream & Palardy, 1999).
In all income categories, highly mobile students are more likely tobe retained a grade than children who do not change schools(Fowler-Finn, 2001).
Grade point averages are in part subjective due to
dependence of the educator responsible for assigning thegrade to make some judgments based on individualthinking (Stake, 2002).
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
A study revealed that student grades in core classes did not coincide with their resultson the state standardized test given at the end of the core courses (Vogell, 2009).
“People can learn by observing the behaviors of others . . . Reinforcement plays a rolein learning . . . Cognitive processes play a role in learning” (Kretchmar, 2008, p. 1).
“When new behavior is acquired through observation alone, the learning appears to becognitive” (Crain, 2000, p. 194).
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
school choice made a difference in students’ standardized testscores if
a) the student transitioned only once, and
b) the school employed Albert Bandura Social Learning Theoryfactors.
Students who transitioned twice - once from elementary into alow-performing intermediate school and then a second time intoa high-performing intermediate school - showed no statisticallysignificant change in standardized test scores.
There was no appreciable difference in student grade pointaverages, likely due to the subjective nature of individualteacher grading practices.
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
The following practical suggestions for applying thefindings regarding factors impacting student success ingrades 6-8 during school of choice transition at two middleschools on the findings are as follows:
Findings from this study should be shared with
legislators faced with current implications of the NoChild Left Behind Act of 2001.
Principals should share these findings with parentsfaced with the option of selecting a school of choice.
Educational leadership training programs shouldimplement material covering the implications of publicschools failing to meet adequate yearly progress (AYP)into their preparatory programs.
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
Teacher training programs should implementmaterial covering the implications of failing tomeet adequate yearly progress (AYP) into theirpreparatory programs.
Findings from this study should be shared withsurrounding schools and districts faced withdetermining which campuses would best serve as adesignated school of choice.
Models for implementing more strategies related toAlbert Bandura’s Social Learning Theory should beincluded in Educational Preparation Programs both
Teaching and Administrative.
Recommendations for Further
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
This study focused on factors impacting student success in grades 6-8during school of choice transition at two middle schools. The followingrecommendations for further research are as follows:
A study could be conducted where counselors are surveyed andinterviewed to examine factors impacting student success in grades6-8 for students who elect to remain at their home campus duringschool of choice transition.
A study could be conducted where principals are surveyed andinterviewed to determine their perceptions of factors impactingstudent success in grades 6-8 during school of choice transition.
A study could be conducted where parents are surveyed andinterviewed to determine their perceptions of factors impactingstudent success in grades 6-8 during school of choice transition.
A study could be conducted where teachers are surveyed andinterviewed to determine their perceptions of factors impactingstudent success in grades 6-8 during school of choice transition.
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
A study could be conducted where students are surveyed andinterviewed to determine their perceptions of factors impactingstudent success in grades 6-8 during school of choice transition.
A study could be conducted to explore how the success rate of students from specific races is impacted during school of choicetransition.
A study could be conducted analyzing factors impacting studentsuccess between transfer students at two different schools of choice.
A study could be conducted with a different instrument thataddresses the differences in the respondent’s mind between whatshould be present for factors impacting student success in grades 6-8 during school of choice transition and what actually is occurring on
the respondent’s campus.
A study could be conducted that includes both elementary and highschools. This study only included middle schools.
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. EducationalPsychologist, 28, 117-148.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Crain, W. (2000). Theories of development: Concepts and applications. Upper Saddle River, NJ: PrenticeHall.
Fowler-Finn, T. (2001). Student stability vs. mobility. School Administrator , 58(7), 36-40.
Fraenkel, J., & Wallen, N. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in education. 6th ed. New York:McGraw Hill.
Isaac, S. & Michael, W. (1997). Handbook in Research and Evaluation for Education and the BehavioralSciences (3rd ed.) San Diego, CA: EdiTs/Educational and Industrial Testing Services.
Kerbow, D. (1996). Patterns of urban student mobility and local school reform. Journal of Education for Students Placed At Risk , 1(2).
Kretchmar, J. (2008). Social Learning Theory . (pp. 1-1). Great Neck Publishing. Retrieved March 1, 2009,from the Research Starters - Education database.
Ormrod , J. E. (1999). Human learning (3rd ed) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Public Agenda, 1999).
8/14/2019 Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis
Rumberger, R., Larson, K., Ream, R., & Palardy, G. (1999). The educational consequences of mobility for California students and schools (PACE Policy Brief). Berkeley, CA: Policy Analysis for CaliforniaEducation. Available online: http://pace.berkeley.edu/pace_mobility.html
Sirkin, R. (2006). Statistics for the social sciences. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 45
Stake, R. (2002, August). Teachers conceptualizing student achievement. Teachers & Teaching, 8(3/4),303-312. Retrieved March 1, 2009, from the doi:10.1080/135406002100000459
Texas Education Agency (2008). Retrieved June 14, 2008, from http://www.tea.state.tx.us/data.html
United States Government Accountability Office. (2004). No child left behind act: Education needs toprovide additional technical assistance and conduct Implementation studies for school choiceprovision. (Highlights of GAO-05-7, a report to the Secretary of Education).
Vogell, H. (2009, February 8). Cover story: Are schools inflating grades? Marks from teachers, testscores vary widely: 'A' student can get 'F' on state's standardized tests. The Atlanta Journal –Constitution, p. A.1. Retrieved March 1, 2009, from the Accounting & Tax