Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis

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



Introduction

Educating the 21st Century student often entails numerous andsomewhat overwhelming challenges.

An ever-increasing number of students enter school withdeficits stemming from socio-economic to socio-linguistic

barriers.

At far too many campuses, resources, parental support, andcommunity support are limited.

Nevertheless, schools cannot evade their responsibility towardsproperly educating children.

Schools must be able to meet the challenge of educating allstudents in a manner and environment that allows them toreach their full potential.



Background of the Problem

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).



Statement of the Problem In response to the No Child Left

Behind Act of 2001, administrators,

counselors, teachers, students andparents are now strongly consideringthe benefits and disadvantages of transferring students to a selected

school of choice.



Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the study was three-fold:

The study assessed the academic impact on

transfer students.

The study assessed the social impact on transferstudents.

The study explored the perception of counselorson the academic and social impact of transferstudents.



Significance of the Study

The significance of the study was to ensurethat children across the country receive

the maximum benefit from the legislationprescribed in the NCLB.



Quantitative Research Questions

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?



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)



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)



Null Hypotheses

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.


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.




2006/2007 Reading Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scoresbetween transfer and non-transfer students in grade 6.


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.


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)




2005/2006 Mathematics grade point averages and 2006/2007 Mathematicsgrade point averages between transfer and non-transfer students in grade7.

H08: There are no statistically significant difference in the scores on the2005/2006 Reading grade point averages and 2006/2007 Reading grade

point averages between transfer and non-transfer students in grade 7.


2005/2006 Mathematics grade point averages and 2006/2007 Mathematicsgrade point averages between transfer and non-transfer students in grade

8.


2005/2006 Reading grade point averages and 2006/2007 Reading grade

point averages between transfer and non-transfer students in grade 8.

Null Hypotheses (continued)



Qualitative Research Question

11. Which factors in the school of choice schools docounselors perceive are the most helpful inassisting transfer students in grades 6-8?



Students often learn a

great deal simply byobserving other people

Teachers and parentsmust model appropriate

behaviors and take carethat they do not modelinappropriate behaviors

Students must believethat they are capable of accomplishing schooltasks

Describing the consequencesof behavior can effectivelyincrease the appropriate

behaviors and decrease inappropriate ones

Factors Impacting

Student SuccessDuring “School of Choice” Transition

Teachers should help

students set realisticexpectations for theiracademic accomplishments

Modeling provides analternative to shaping

for teaching newbehaviors

Teachers should

expose students to avariety of othermodels

Self-regulation

techniques providean effective methodfor improving studentbehavior

Diagrammatic format of Ormrod’s (1999) findings developed from

Albert Bandura’s Social Learning Theory

Conceptual Framework



Description of ResearchMethods

Research Methods:

Mixed-Methods Study

Triangulation

Quantitative Data

Descriptive Statistics

Independent t-tests (compare means)

Qualitative Data

Interviews



Research Design

Quantitative Data

2005/2006 and 2006/2007 Mathematics and

Reading Texas Assessment of Knowledge andSkills (TAKS) scores

6th grade - 2006/2007

7th and 8th grade – 2005/2006 and 2006/2007

Mathematics and Reading grade point averages 7th and 8th grade 2005/2006 and 2006/2007



Research Design (continued)

Quantitative Data

Independent variable

School Choice transfer students non-transfer students

Dependent variables Mathematics and Reading TAKS scores

Mathematics and Reading grade point averages




Quantitative Data

Descriptive Statistics included the following

information about the sample population:

Gender

Grade Level

Race Socio-economic Status




Quantitative Data

T-tests for independent means were calculated to

determine if differences existed with:

the Mathematics and Reading TAKS scores betweentransfer and non-transfer students in grades 6-8

the Mathematics and Reading grade point averages(G.P.A.) between transfer and non-transfer students ingrades 7-8




Qualitative Data

Interview questions were aligned with Albert Bandura’s SocialLearning Theory.

Counselor participants Structured Semistructured Interviews

Interview Questions

Feeling questions Sensory questions



Population and Sample

Quantitative

6th – 8th grade students from one large school district in Texas

Criterion Sampling – Transfer students School A = 100 transfer students School B = 68 transfer students. Total number of transfer students = 168

Stratified random sampling – Non-transfer students The number of non-transfer students were equal to the

number of cases of transfer students and were similar incertain demographics.



Population and Sample

Qualitative

Counselors that had the opportunity to observe

and interact directly with transfer students.

Criterion Case

Four Participants

Texas Certified



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



Instrumentation – Pilot Stud

Qualitative

The researcher piloted the

structured and semistructuredinterview questions to determine if the interview questions were clearlyworded with a panel of experts.



Data Analysis

Quantitative

Descriptive statistics were included demographicinformation about the transfer and non-transfer

students.

Demographic information included Gender

Grade Level Race Socio-economic Status



Data Analysis (continued)

Quantitative

T-tests for independent means were used tocompare means

The researcher applied the standard alphalevel: 0.05.

If P < 0.05, the null hypothesis was rejected



Data Analysis(continued) Qualitative

Counselor participant responses were aligned

with Albert Bandura’s Social Learning Theoryfactors.



Data Analysis (continued)

Peer debriefing and triangulation were used tosupport the statistical data gathered from the

quantitative and the qualitative portions of thestudy.



Quantitative Findings


Gender Transfer Non-transfer

Female 52.4% 57.1%Male 47.6% 42.9%



Quantitative Findings(continued)


Grade Level Transfer Non-transfer 6 66.7% 67.3%

7 16.1% 16.1%

8 17.3% 16.8%



Qualitative Findings (continued)


RaceTransfer Non-transfer

African-American 42.2% 42.2%Caucasian 3.0% 3.0%

Hispanic 39.9% 39.9%

Other14.9% 14.9%



Qualitative Findings (continued)


Socioeconomic Status Transfer Non-transfer

Eco. Disadv. 54.8% 54.8%

Not Eco. Disadv. 45.2% 45.2%



Quantitative Findings(continued) RQ1 - Are there differences in the 2006/2007 Mathematics Texas

Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scores between transfer andnon-transfer students in grade 6?

6th grade Mathematics TAKS 2006/2007

Mean Difference = 62.65

P = 0.05 (2-tailed significance) P < 0.05

Reject the null hypothesis

There was a statistically significant difference in the scores on the 2006/2007

Mathematics Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scores between transfer

and non-transfer students in grade 6.



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




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


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




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


P = 0.03

P < 0.05


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)



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


P = 0.01

P < 0.05


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.



P = 0.01

P < 0.05


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.




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?



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.


Mean Difference = -86.39 P = 0.14

P < 0.05


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.




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


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


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.


Q tit ti Fi di



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?



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.



P = 0.20

P < 0.05


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.


Q tit ti Fi di



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?


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.


Mean Difference = -2.55 P = 0.30

P < 0.05


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.


Q tit ti Fi di



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?



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.



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.




Qualitative Findings

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.’"



Qualitative Findings(continued) Factor B - Describing the consequences of behavior can effectively

increase the appropriate behaviors and decrease inappropriate ones.

teachers would provide an overview of “beginning of theyear guidelines” to establish behavior expectations

Counselors . . . emphasized that guidelines for transferstudents “did not vary from other students.”

Counselors . . . mentioned, “Teachers would try to contactparents and outline behavior expectations”

“Teachers paired students up with other students” Counselors explained, “With smaller classes, teachers had

better classroom management and more time to addressindividual needs.”

li i i di



Qualitative Findings(continued)

Factor C - Modeling provides an alternative to shaping for teachingnew behaviors.

Counselors stated, “Other students would be used asexamples”

teachers “used the school-wide reward system” “We paired students up with Student Ambassadors to help

them out and answer questions” teachers used principles in the “Well-Managed Classroom”

program to model appropriate behavior



Qualitative Findings(continued) Factor D - Teachers and parents must model appropriate behaviors

and take care that they do not model inappropriate behaviors.

“The parents wanted more for their students so the kidswanted more . . . The kids worked hard.”

Counselors said that interactions were “very similar.” “. . . if parents did not follow through, students often did not

follow through . . .” Counselors expressed, “. . . when students were forced to

transfer by parents, they ‘did into buy into it.’”




Factor E - Teachers should expose students to a variety of othermodels.

Counselors said, “using appropriate tone” and “speaking tostudents appropriate(ly)” were strategies used to modelappropriate behavior.

Counselors revealed . . . , “Teachers would treat studentswith respect and students would reciprocate that back.

When students communicated respectfully, teachers wouldrespond in kind.”

Counselors referenced district-wide social skills program,“. . . we have the Well-Managed Classroom, kind of like Boys

Town . . .”

Q lit ti Fi di




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




Factor G - Teachers should help students set realistic expectationsfor their academic accomplishments.

Counselors explained, “Holding all students to the samestandards regardless of the background and ethnicity.”

Counselors shared, “The bar was raised high for everyone.” Counselors shared, “Teachers stated what they expected

before the assignment was ever done . . .”

Q lit ti Fi di




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.”



Literature and Findings

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).




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).




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).



Conclusions

This study concludes :

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.



Recommendations

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.



Recommendations

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



Recommendations for FurtherStudy

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.



Recommendations for Further Study

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.



Recommendations for Further Study

A study could be conducted looking specifically atinstructional practices at school of choice campuses.

A study could be conducted looking specifically at

interventions at school of choice campuses.

A study could be conducted looking specifically atthe impact of transportation school of choicecampuses.

A study could be conducted looking at high schoolstudents transitioning to a school of choice.



References

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).



References

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

Newspapers database. (Document ID: 1640585541).

http://pace.berkeley.edu/pace_mobility.html

http://www.tea.state.tx.us/data.html

http://www.tea.state.tx.us/data.html

http://pace.berkeley.edu/pace_mobility.html



Thank You

Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis

Documents

Transcript of Dr. Michelle Cloud, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis