A r... .u. e

1..

u £7,155
. of... n can
.. 4.3....
39.1.

.1

Er

t
3....
.i: I .3.
.nltl 1.;‘lauw..4.

HM.

 

II, I. f
A ... a I}.
wwwfliflhnr nun".
. 34.5,...332:
. ...
n .5 . a
. 1.5.8! A
tuft.” .331». '71.
S. - m .. ..r
J a . .r

i WM.”

I .1

. .r
‘0...

Q!
t
.

 

.1!

IL«
5...».

 

; . :37; pm

3
University __i

i

LIBRARY
gan State

ich

KM
L_

This is to certify that the
dissertation entitled

THE IMPACT OF ISTEP+ AND ACCOUNTABILITY POLICIES
ON TEACHERS IN A TITLE I SCHOOL: STORIES
TEACHERS TELL

presented by

CHRISTINE A. HUNT

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for the

PhD. degree in Curriculum, Teaching and
Educational Policy

 

we}

Major Professor’sLSignature
IQ // 3 / 0 7
/ I

Date

MSU is an amnnative-action, equal-opportunity employer

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
To AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/07 p:/CIRCIDateDue.indd-p.1

 

 

 

THE IMPACT OF ISTEP+ AND ACCOUNTABILITY POLICIES ON
TEACHERS IN A TITLE I SCHOOL: STORIES TEACHERS TELL

By

Christine A. Hunt

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Curriculum, Teaching, and Educational Policy

2007

ABSTRACT

THE IMPACT OF ISTEP+ AND ACCOUNTABILITY POLICIES ON
TEACHERS IN A TITLE I SCHOOL: STORIES TEACHERS TELL

By

Christine A. Hunt
This is an interpretative phenomenological case study of a Title I elementary school
facing the sanctions of the federal (No Child Left Behind) and state (Public Law 221)
accountability policies. The teachers in this school are negotiating the state mandated
test, Indiana Statewide Test for Educational Progress + (ISTEP+) and how this is used to
evaluate their teaching. Through this study, I want to tell the story of a recent event in
school history- schools that serve a population of students that are typically labeled as
high risk or disadvantaged based on the poverty level of the students in the school
negotiating high-stakes testing and the accountability policies that drive them. Data
collection employed a phenomenological approach to explore how teachers are making
sense of their experiences (Patton, 2002). Taking an interpretive approach to data
analysis, this study examines my interpretation of the meaning the teachers have of their
experiences with ISTEP+ and accountability policies (Schwandt, 1998). The purposes of
telling this story are to influence policy formation and implementation as well as inform

public debate and discussion on the topic of education accountability.

Copyright by
CHRISTINE A. HUNT
2007

DEDICATION
To the teachers, students, and parents of Marvel Elementary School
I hope that I have done justice to your story.
To My God and Lord for guiding me through this process.
To my family and friends who prayed for and supported me in this journey.
To the students, staff, and family members of Niemann Elementary School who inspired

me to pursue my doctorate.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I give thanks to the members of Marvel Elementary School for allowing me to
both hear and tell your stories. You openness and honesty have made this dissertation
possible. I hope that you find what I have said to be what you would want others to know
about this school.

I also want to thank the Northville School District for opening up one of your
elementary schools to this research. You have shown a dedication to the need for
research about what is happening in schools and how accountability policies are being
played out there. I deeply appreciate your trust.

Thanks to the faculty of the College of Education at Michigan State University for
providing me with thought provoking courses and making me think about education in
many different lights. You have helped me to grow as a teacher and a researcher. I am a
different person today because of you.

Completing my doctorate would not have been possible without the invaluable
support of and advice from Elizabeth Heilman. She played a significant role in my
decision to pursue my doctorate and brought me to Michigan State University. She
nurtured me in my scholarly pursuits in innumerable ways from providing me with
summer research assistance work to mothering me at times when I was struggling with
personal issues. She challenged me to think and to write more clearly. Through
sacrifices of time and energy, she has been a guiding force in the completion of this
dissertation. It is hard to express all that she has done for me and what she means to me.

A calm and steady presence, Dorthea Anagnostopoulos, has been instrumental in

my research. She listened intently and critiqued my work in ways that made me feel

better about it. In her class on social policy, my mind was opened to new ways of
thinking about the policy processes and workings. I appreciated her willingness to let us
speak, and then asked probing questions to make us think more deeply about our
convictions. The research she has done has also been a benefit in this dissertation.

In the summer of 2002, I came to visit Michigan State University to decide if this
was the place I wanted to continue my doctoral work. Brian Delaney played a pivotal
role in my decision when he asked, “Why not Michigan State?” In turning my thinking in
a different direction I realized that this was the right place for me to study. He listened to
me, challenged me to think more broadly, and directed me to a research fund so that I
could attend a conference where I was able to gather information I have used in this
dissertation. This quiet man has made a difference in how I think about teaching and
schools.

Throughout my doctoral coursework, I was looking for some concept that I
could use as my dissertation framework. Thankfully, Gary Sykes introduced me to
Carols Weiss and her use of the four 1’s in her examination of school reform. He
skillfully organized and our class discussions and presented various aspects of the
connections and disconnections between teaching and policy. His comments on my work
as well as suggestions for further reading were influential in this dissertation. I
appreciated his attentive ear, open door, and insightfiil feedback.

Finally, to my family and fi'iends who gave me what I needed throughout this
journey I give thanks. As the commercial states, this is priceless. When I think of all that
you did to help me on this road from moving furniture in and out of more places than I

want to think about to holding me accountable for completing chapters- there are no

vi

words to describe all that you did. Your prayers, listening ears and compassion were

what I needed.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................ xii
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................... xiii
CHAPTERI

PERSONAL CONTEXT: MY EXPERIENCE IN TITLE SCHOOLS AND MY
PURPOSES FOR RESEARCH

My Teaching Experience in an Indiana School ....................................... 1

My Story in Becoming a Teacher ....................................................... 3

Reflection: Path from Policy Consumer to Policy Researcher ...................... 9

My Purposes in This Research ......................................................... 11
CHAPTER 2

SCHOLARLY CONTEXT: WHAT RESEARCH SUGGESTS ABOUT HIGH-STAKES
TESTING

What We Know About High Stakes Testing and Its Impact ........................ 13
Evaluating NCLB Intentions and Effects ............................................. 16
Positives ............................................................................. l7
Negatives ............................................................................ 1 8
The Inevitable Complexity and Ambiguity of Findings ...................... 22
CHAPTER 3
RESERCH CONTEXT: METHODOLOGY AND STUDY DESIGN
Study Design ................................................................................ 30
Research Site ........................................................................... 30
Participants ............................................................................. 3 1
Interviews .............................................................................. 32
Observations ........................................................................... 36
Field Notes .............................................................................. 38
Documents .............................................................................. 39
Role of Researcher .......................................................................... 39
Analysis ....................................................................................... 41
Open and Selective Coding ........................................................... 43
Validation .................................................................................... 44
Presentation of Data ........................................................................ 45
Where Does This Belong? Or Does it Belong? ...................................................... 47
CHAPTER4

COMMUNITY CONTEXT: A RACIALLY DIVERSE POSTINDUSTRIAL
MIDWESTERN TOWN

A Brief History .............................................................................. 48
Northville Today: Some Facts and Figures ............................................. 50
A Journey Around Northville .............................................................. 51

viii

CHAPTER 5
MARVEL SCHOOL: A GLIMPSE INTO THE PAST AND PRESENT

A Ten Year History of Title I at Marvel Elementary School ........................ 56
A Glimpse Inside the Life of Marvel Elementary School Today .................... 59
Students ...................................................................................... 62
Teachers ..................................................................................... 65
CHAPTER 6
ANALYSIS: STORIES TEACHERS TELL
Why the Story Format .................................................................... 71
Defining Some Terms ..................................................................... 75
Genres ....................................................................................... 77
Moral Story: Is It Good and Right? ................................................................ 77
Power Story: Who has Control? ..................................................................... 79
Interpersonal Story: How Does Accountability Influence Relationships? ..... 82
Technical Story: What Does and Does Not Work? ........................................ 84
CHAPTER 7
CASE STUDY PARTICIPANTS: THE STORYTELLERS
Welcome to Ms. Lambert’s First Grade Classroom ................................... 86
Welcomes to Mr. Wilson’s Special Education Classroom ........................... 89
Welcome to Mrs. Johnson’s Fifth Grade Classroom .................................. 92
Welcome to Mr. Koselke’s World ........................................................ 96
A Preview of the Next Four Chapters .................................................. 101
CHAPTER 8
MORAL STORY: IS IT GOOD AND RIGHT?
Fairness ..................................................................................... 102
Is ISTEP+ F air? .............................................................................................. 103
Is NCLB Fair? ................................................................................................ 106
What is Fair for Special Education Students? ................................................ 107
Teacher Identity: What is a Good Teacher? .......................................................... 109
Student Growth ....................................................................... 109
All Can Learn ......................................................................... 1 11
Prepare for Life ........................................................................ 116
Touch the Lives of Students ......................................................... 121
How Laws Support or Don’t Support Teacher Identity ............................... 123
CHAPTER 9
POWER STORY: WHO HAS CONTROL?
Teachers Define Legitimate Control ..................................................... 126
How PL 221 has Legitimate Control ..................................................... 129
Teachers Define Illegitimate Control .................................................... 131
How Accountability Policies and Testing Have Illegitimate Control ............... 132
Politicians and Politics ................................................................ 133

ix

Surveillance .......................................................................... 138

AYP and Sanctions .................................................................. 140

ISTEP+ ................................................................................ 144

Pressure ................................................................................ 153

Obedience .................................................................................. 155

A Lack of Control ......................................................................... 156
CHAPTER 10

INTERPERSONAL STORY: HOW DOES ACCOUNTABILITY INFLUENCE
RELATIONSHIPS?

Relationships with Students .............................................................. 163
Relationships with Parents ............................................................... 166
Relationships with Colleagues ........................................................... 173
Relationships with District Administrators ............................................. 182
CHAPTER 11
TECHNICAL STORY: WHAT DOES AND DOES NOT WORK?
Overall Judgments About the Policies ................................................... 186
PL 221 .................................................................................. 186
NCLB ................................................................................... 190
Assessment .................................................................................. 193
ISTEP+ ....... ' ................................................................................ 1 99
Standards ..................................................................................... 209
Professional Development ................................................................. 214
CHAPTER 12
DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS
Key Findings ................................................................................ 220
Teachers and Students ................................................................ 221
Teachers and Policy ................................................................... 223
Teachers and ISTEP+ ................................................................. 225
My Findings and the Research Literature ................................................ 226
Teachers and Stress .................................................................... 228
Teachers and Instruction .............................................................. 230
Teachers and Assessment ............................................................ 232
Teachers and Teaching ............................................................... 233
Teachers and Social Factors ......................................................... 234
Policy and Social Factors ............................................................ 234
Policy and Professional Development ............................................. 235
Policy and Incentives ................................................................. 235
Implications .................................................................................. 236
Policymakers ........................................................................... 236
Teachers ................................................................................ 240
Researchers ............................................................................. 243
Community Members .................................................................. 244
Limitations ................................................................................... 245

Future Research ........................................................................... 246

CHAPTER 13
EPILOGUE: MARVEL SCHOOL TODAY
Changes at the School .................................................................... 249
AYP News ................................................................................. 250
Consequences .............................................................................. 25 1
More Bad News ........................................................................... 255
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Participants ................................................................ 259
Appendix B: Letters of Consent ......................................................... 260
Appendix C: Interview Questions ....................................................... 263
Appendix D: Professional Development Opportunities 2005-2006 ............... 265
Appendix E: Third Grade ISTEP+ Scores for Six Years ............................ 266
REFERENCES ................................................................................ 267

xi

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1 Number of teachers by grade level or program ..................... 32
Table 3.2 Observations ............................................................. 38
Table 3.3 Example of role—ordered matrix ....................................... 42
Table 5.1 Student demographics ................................................... 63
Table 5.2 Student attendance percentages ....................................... 64
Table 5.3 Percentage of students passing ISTEP+ .............................. 65
Table 13.1 Current student demographics ...................................... 252
Table D.1: Professional Development Opportunities for 2005-2006 ....... 265

xii

LIST OF FIGURES

Graph 5 .1 Years of experience ................................................. 66
Graph 5.2 Degrees held ......................................................... 66
Graph 5.3 Years of experience for participating teachers ................... 67
Graph 5.4 Degrees for participating teachers ................................. 67
Graph E.1: Third Grade ISTEP+ Scores for Six Years .................... 266

xiii

CHAPTER 1

PERSONAL CONTEXT: MY EXPERIENCE IN TITLE SCHOOLS AND MY
PURPOSES FOR RESEARCH

My Teaching Experience in an Indiana School

The fall brings a number of things into the lives of teachers in Indiana. New
students enter into their classrooms as a new academic year begins as well as the promise
of units, new and old, to teach and ideas to encounter. However, third through tenth
grade teachers also begin the year facing the responsibility of administering the state-
mandated test, Indiana Statewide Test of Educational Progress + (ISTEP+) to their new
students during the month of September. Instead of beginning the school year with the
exciting anticipation of making new friends and learning new things, teachers and
students across the state jump into the new school year with nerve wracking worries and
concerns about the making the grade on ISTEP+. In other words, after approximately a
month of meeting and working with these students, teachers in the state of Indiana are
required by the state accountability law, Public Law 221 (PL 221) to administer this test
that carries with it serious consequences for schools and teachers.

The state of Indiana began giving the ISTEP+ test in the spring of 1988.
However, this test has changed in many ways over the years: (a) testing moved from
spring to early fall, (b) consequences moved from students to the school, (0) test type
moved from norm-referenced to criterion referenced, and (d) from a test of strictly
multiple choice items to a combination of multiple choice and constructed response
items. Currently, teachers and schools are held accountable according to how their

students score on the test. According to PL 221, and the federal Title I law, No Child

Left Behind (N CLB), these scores demonstrate how well teachers in a school have taught
their students the state academic standards. Local newspapers as well as television and
radio stations across the state report the percentage of students who have passed and
failed the test. These numbers are then used to label the schools and ultimately the
teachers. Lisa Delpit (2003) shares an interesting thought about the role of laws such as
this when she states, “we in education often allow politicians to push us to act as if the
most important goal in our work is to raise test scores” (p. 14). The test is not validated
for this purpose. The test is being used by policymakers to “prove” that schools and
teachers are doing their job. As James Popham (2000) states, “Trying to measure
educational quality with a standardized test is like trying to measure temperature with a
tablespoon. It just won’t wor ” (p. 5).

Failing schools face a number of consequences beyond the embarrassment of the
public label. PL 221 and NCLB bring the threat of the loss of students and/or monies,
school reconstitution, or even closing the school. Schools and districts can be labeled
“failing” because they serve a poor or minority population that generally does not score
well on standardized tests. The laws also make it more likely to fail when a school serves
a number of different subgroups such as race, gender, socioeconomic status, and
disability. The school faces consequences when any single subgroup does not make the
state determined adequate yearly progress (AYP). The more subgroups a school serves,
the more ways that it has to fail to make AYP each year. The assumption is that using
tests with rewards and sanctions will lead to improved instruction and learning

(Hamilton, Stecher, and Klein, 2002).

Schools that do not want to face the consequences of sanctions are doing all they
can to raise the scores of their students. From after school programs in the fall, pro grams
in the summer prior to the beginning of the school year, to test preparation activities
throughout the grades and year, students and teachers are each focused on the single goal
of raising the test scores in order to avoid the consequences of accountability laws. These
are some of the costs associated with changes in school and classroom practices that
occur as a result of testing. “The evidence is clear that testing and accountability lead
teachers to reallocate their time away from some instructional activities and toward
others” (Hamilton, Stecher, and Klein, 2002, p. 9).

As a classroom teacher, more and more teaching at the beginning of each school
year revolved around preparing students for the test through the use of skill and drill
practice sheets. Students were broken into small groups during a majority of the day in
the weeks before the test to work with either one of the third grade or Title I teachers. An
after school program extended the amount of time students practiced for the test for a two
week period of time. The purpose of this concentration was to enable as many students
as possible to receive a passing score on the test.

These are activities that I personally experienced as a third grade teacher in a Title
I school. I strongly felt that the goal was merely to raise test scores in order to avoid
negative consequences. These were not the types of activities and polices I imagined
being involved with when I began my career or even when I become highly involved in
Title I School Improvement.

My Story in Becoming a Teacher

My earliest recollection of wanting to become a teacher is when I was in second
grade. I always enjoyed school and did well academically. I loved to read and solve
math problems. Playing the role of teacher with my sisters and fiiends in the basement
was another vivid childhood memory. Teaching and school are pleasant parts of my past.

While I did consider other career paths in passing, teaching was the one that stuck
with me from second grade on. When asked what I wanted to be when I grew up, a
teacher was nearly always my response. This choice became even more firmly engrained
during my senior year of high school based on two relevant experiences. First, I
rearranged my class schedule to include two hours of cadet teaching. I highly valued this
first toe into the waters of public school education. I worked one hour each weekday
afternoon in a fifth grade classroom. Grading papers, working with small groups and
individuals, and even teaching the students to sing Jingle Bells in Spanish were just a few
of the experiences I had during this time. On Sunday mornings, I taught a small group of
five and six year olds in a first grade Sunday school class at my church. Reading the
curriculum materials and the accompanying Bible stories, planning how best to get this
information across, telling the stories and learning from these young children about how
best to teach were some of the skills I began to use during this time. I went to college
with a clear vision of what I wanted to do with the rest of my life- teaching.

My four years of undergraduate work at Grace College in rural northern Indiana
helped me to know that I had made the right decision to become an elementary teacher.
During my coursework, I worked in classrooms where I further grew in regards to my
teaching abilities. Whether tutoring a student one on one in reading or implementing a

science unit with my fourth grade students during student teaching, I blossomed as a

teacher. It seemed so very natural for me to take what I knew and guide young children
into knowing this as well. I also encountered new experiences such as learning how to
talk with parents about their child’s school experiences.

The summer break began without a strong job prospect in sight. This was the
early eighties when jobs were scarce in northern Indiana. However, I had determined that
I would get a job no matter where I had to go. This is what led me to a teaching position
in southern Louisiana. Through a friend, I learned that this school district was looking
for teachers, so I applied, had a phone interview, and accepted a job over the phone. In
August of 1981, I packed up my car and traveled to southern Louisiana. It was here that I
had my first real encounters with poverty and the impacts it has on students. I taught in a
third grade classroom in a school that had been the black school prior to desegregation.
Cockroaches, a different language and lifestyle, new and unusual foods were just a few of
my cultural shocks. I did enjoy the students and helping them to grow as people. They
taught me to appreciate who they were and to stretch myself when my usual strategies did
not meet with the desired results. I also learned what it means to be the minority. I was
white in a predominantly African American community. I was from the north while the
vast majority of the people around me had been born and raised in the area.

At the end of the school year, I packed up my things, all my memories, and
moved back home. Over the next four years, I taught a split first and second grade class
at a private school, substitute taught, worked on my Master’s degree, and taught for two
years in a gifted and talented position in Wisconsin. This was the time when I gained
greater knowledge and understanding of differentiating instruction, ways to communicate

With parents, use of research in teaching, and the strengths and weaknesses of testing.

Afler two years in Wisconsin, I was able to acquire a position teaching in a gifted and
talented program close to home.

For five years I taught in this program. One of my responsibilities each spring
and fall was to gather and evaluate the data sent to me by district teachers to choose the
students who would be asked to be in the program. This meant examining their
standardized test scores along with teacher ratings and other relevant information
provided by the teachers. As would be expected, students from the schools with the
lowest poverty rate had the greatest number of students with high scores. The other
program teacher and I worked at creating as many opportunities as possible to include
students with strong scores from the Title I schools as well. When these students came to
the program there was a certain lack of prior knowledge, but there was still a desire to
learn and a work ethic. The number of students from Title I schools was low, but they
still were able to meet the expectations of the program.

Funding cuts in the district ended this program five years later. I found myself
back in a third grade classroom in a Title I school. This was a position I chose. Culture
shock awaited me in dealing with classroom management issues related to things that
happened in the neighborhood or because of a perceived injustice based on a look. The
various levels of learning were something I had not dealt with in several years. That
spring I gave ISTEP for the first time. In May when the scores were returned, several of
my students learned that they would spend part of their summer in school in order to be
promoted to fourth grade.

Over my ten years at Niemann Elementary School, I served on a number of

committees and had several opportunities to present at conferences. Research became a

highly valued commodity as the teachers at this school sought to improve the learning
opportunities for our students. Title I status helped us to make some changes through
allocation of resources. We piloted and implemented programs such as the Four Blocks
Literacy Model, Connected Learning Assures Student Success, and Math Their
Way/Math a Way of Thinking. Pushing into the classroom rather than pulling students
out also came when we became a Title I schoolwide school. Another significant change
we made in our reform efforts was to alter the school calendar to a year round one. These
changes came after much study of the research and discussion among the staff and
parents. The goal of each reform effort was an increase in student learning based on
multiple indictors including ISTEP+ and quarterly performance assessments.

During this time, Indiana was altering its educational policy as well as ISTEP. I
experienced first hand along with my colleagues and students these changes which
greatly elevated the consequences of not passing the test. I recall with great clarity
pouring over test results with colleagues and seeking to make sense of what this data had
to say about what my students knew and what I needed to alter about my instruction.
Reading these reports was not always easy as I tried to comprehend what some of the
subtest headings meant and how they correlated to the standards. I became frustrated
when these reports bolded stated that my students did not know how to edit their writing
when each day I witnessed their use of these techniques. As the level of the sanctions
increased and the scores meant more publicly, the more I railed at the perpetuation of
misperceptions about Niemann students and teachers because this did not fit with what I

knew to be true based on my ongoing daily interactions at the school.

I can also clearly remember the day the principal came to my fellow third grade
teacher and me to ask if more students had passed ISTEP+ this year. This level of
concern became more understandable when I learned that he had been castigated publicly
by a board member when he presented the school’s scores at a school board meeting.
What I had learned from research as well as from coursework in my Master’s program
did not make sense with what was happening at the school when it came to ISTEP+. My
daily assessments with my students were not always consistent with the test results. One
such example is a student who was good in math but did not always check his work
carefully. He understood how to do the computation and other math concepts, but his
maturity level was such that he did not review his work without some prodding. When
his math scores came back, he did not pass the math section. He missed the cut score by
one point. Two things came immediately to mind. One was that some careless mistakes
in computation gave him this designation because I knew he was more than capable of
doing the math. The other was that the standard error of the measure could just as easily
place him in the pass category. My frustration with the test and how it was used
increased.

My happiest memories of teaching at Niemann are not related to ISTEP+. They
are about my relationships and interactions with the students and staff. Lasting
friendships were created in my years at this school. Today when I enter the building for
any reason I feel as if I have come home. I can recall the relief I felt when ISTEP+ test
booklets were placed in the principal’s office for the last time, and I was able to leave
testing behind in order to explore the learning interests of my students. Reading books

together, modeling writing, conferencing with students, planning lessons and units with

my third grade colleague, and talking about family with other teachers at lunch are just a
few of my fondest memories. Teaching to me is about relationships and learning- not
about one test score or set of scores from a single test.

Reflection: Path from Policy Consumer to Policy Researcher

It was increasingly clear to me that high-stakes testing carries with it the potential
for a narrowing of the curriculum and the instructional techniques that teachers use in
their classrooms (Mc Neil, 2000; Popham, 2000). Professional organizations such as the
Intemational Reading Association (1999), National Education Association (2000), and
American Federation of Teachers (2001) have all generated statements of concern about
high-stakes testing and its impact on curriculum and instruction. Even the American
Educational Research Association (2001) states that, “curriculum and instruction may be
severely distorted if high test scores per se, rather than learning become the overriding
goal of classroom instruction.”

The pressure continues to mount not only for teachers as these laws hold schools
accountable for student learning based on a single set of test scores given at a single point
in the school year. Schools are expected to make AYP which means that scores must go
up every year by a percentage determined by the state or face consequences. Linn (2003)
makes a valuable point about these consequences when he says, “schools that continue to
fall into the improvement category may actually hinder educational excellence because
they implicitly encourage states to water down their content and performance standards in
order to reduce the risk of sanctions for their schools” (p. 8).

There were a number of specific aspects of this process that led me to my research

on accountability laws. One was the misuse of the scores to label schools. This is not the

purpose of the test. In fact, standardized tests are not validated for this purpose
(Hamilton, Stecher, and Klein, 2002; Thompson, 2001). This is information that seems
to be ignored by legislators and policymakers. A second item that concerned me was
related to how hard the students worked and how well they did based on other factors not
reported in the paper. As the teacher, I received information that showed the Normal
Curve Equivalent (N CE) that each student received as well as the Anticipated Normal
Curve Equivalent (ANCE) based on the Cognitive Skills Index (CSI) test they took. The
CSI is similar in nature to a group intelligence test. It was amazing to see the number of
students who failed to make the passing mark for the test to be considered proficient, but
who also had a higher NCE than their ANCE. For example, Susan had a total reading
NCE of 72, yet her ANCE based on her CS] was only 65. This demonstrated to me that
she was actually performing at a higher level than would be expected, yet she still did not
meet the criteria to pass the test. Susan and several of her classmates were doing better
on the test than would be expected; yet this information was not considered relevant. It
all came down to whether or not they had filled in enough of the correct bubbles to be
considered proficient.

I also became frustrated with test issues such as having questions about writing
that were out of context. For example, I did not believe that the multiple choice questions
about which if any of the punctuation choices were missing from a given sentence. This
did not demonstrate that they were able to edit their own writing. There were also only
four questions related to multiple meaning words. Missing one of these questions
because of unfamiliarity with the way the word is used means that a student is considered

not proficient. I believe that the test is unfair to some students, especially those who do

10

not come to school with the social and cultural capital necessary to pass these tests. The
most frequently missed of these four words was the lap. While the students understood
that a child would sit in mother’s lap they did not understand that lap could also be used
to describe how a kitten would drink its milk. These were often the students who did not
do well on the test. This does not meet the criteria for the types of measures Linn (2003)
describes when he states, “The measures that enter into the accountability system should
be broadly conceived and provide information on a wide range of outcome, contextual,
and process variables” (p. 3).
My Purposes in This Research

There are three main purposes of this study. First, I want to tell the story of a
Title I school facing high stakes testing and accountability policies. Through this story I
want to explore and make evident what is occurring in the lives of teachers in their
practice under the auspices of both the federal and state accountability policies- NCLB
and PL 221. What the teachers do and believe about these policies and how they
influence their practice is examined through the use of qualitative research. In this work, I
aim for multi-vocality not only because educators are different fiom each other but also
because educators experience are diverse. Each educator has multiple experiences and
even conflicting responses. Further, this research does not explore policy in a functional
analytic manner alone but aims instead for a deeper, more contextualized understanding
that considers a wide range of personal experiences as well as the broader history of the
school and the nature of the city in which this is occurring. All policies are enacted in
particular places with their own people, histories and challenges and I provide a window

into these contexts. A second purpose for this study is for this multi-level and multi-

ll

vocal portrayal to be used as a tool to influence policy formation at both the state and
federal levels. It is necessary for policymakers to be given an insight into what their
policy is doing at the school level. They need to be aware of the issues that teachers are
experiencing and the reality of diverse experience so that they will be able to make
better-inforrncd and perhaps more nuanced policy decisions. This may include revisions
to the current policies as they come to understand what is occurring in schools. Third,
this study can also influence policy implementation. Teachers reading this story will
have the opportunity to understand the purposes and impact of policy in different,
perhaps more complex ways. A fuller and richer understanding of the high stakes testing
that richly explores what is happening at one school can provide teachers with both a
clearer picture and with validation of the many meanings policy has for their own
teaching, their own school, and their own community.

This story is based on the overarching research question: What impact do ISTEP+
and the accountability policies of NCLB and PL 221 have on teachers in a school under
the threat of sanctions? In order to answer this question, theories of educational policy
and cuniculum and instruction were used. Carol Weiss’s (1995) educational policy
theory of the four I’s leads me to further questions. How are teachers’ professional and
personal interests influenced by accountability policies? What is the relationship
between these policies and teachers’ ideology? What role does information play as
teachers negotiate these policies? How do interests, ideology, and/or information
reinforce and/or conflict with one another? How does the school institution shape

teachers’ interests, ideology and information?

12

CHAPTER 2

SCHOLARLY CONTEXT: WHAT RESEARCH SUGGESTS ABOUT HIGH-STAKES
TESTING

lWrat We Know About High Stakes Testing and Its Impact

This chapter provides an overview of recent federal and state educational
accountability policies, as well as a review of research on such policies. I explore what
research suggests broadly about the effectiveness of these recent policies given its
intentions, what research suggest about the range of effects across varied contexts, and
finally what research has shown about the human dimension of how students, educators
and communities experience policy. For all of these aspects of policy and questions for
research, there exists diverse evidence and interpretation.

On January 8, 2002, President George W. Bush signed into law the reenactment
of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) which funds 10 federal
programs, the largest of which is Title I. The purposes of this federal policy and the state
policies it generates are to ensure a good education for all students, to improve education
through the use of standards and objective testing data, and to focus on what works
through the use of research (Hursh and Martina, 2003). The four guiding principles of
this legislation are accountability, parental and student choice, flexibility, and
scientifically based research (Corwin, 2003). These policies require states to put in place
a set of standards of what students are to know, have a test that is aligned with these
standards to evaluate student learning of them, and provide teachers with the capacity to
meet the standards (Carnoy and Loeb, 2002; Heubert and Hauser, 1999). The standards

are to be the knowledge and skills children will need for the future (Jacobs, 2003).

13

Students are then tested to evaluate how well they have learned these standards.
Testing is perceived as both a means of increasing achievement (Hillocks, 2002) and as a
method for gathering information (Hanson, 1993). Accountability policies then grant
either rewards or sanctions based on the results (Stecher and Hamilton, 2003) which are a
motivator to improve teaching and learning making these hi gh-stakes tests (Hamilton,
Stecher, and Klein, 2002).

NCLB mandates that all students in third through eighth grades will be tested in
literacy and math, with testing in science added in 2005. The ultimate goal of this law is
for 100% of American students to pass the state tests by 2014. In order to accomplish
this goal, each state sets yearly benchmarks of improvement for schools. This is known ,
as “adequate yearly progress” or AYP for short. Scores are not simply reported by school
alone, but are also disaggregated into subgroups such as gender, ethnicity, free/reduced or
paid lunch, special or general education, and English proficiency. Each subgroup has a
set AYP each year. If one subgroup does not make their AYP, the school fails to make
AYP. This means that each of these subgroups must each year make at least the set AYP
in literacy, math, and science in order for the school to make AYP.

Schools that do not make AYP face a variety of sanctions. The first level of sanctions
comes into play after two years of not making AYP. Parents may choose to send their
children to another school in the district that has made AYP. This option is offered to all
students in the school regardless of whether or not they are the students who did not pass
the test. This also means that the school’s Title I funds are diverted to transportation of
these students and not to the students still attending the school. Afier the third year of not

meeting the required scores, parents who have children at the school are also offered the

14

opportunity to receive afier school tutoring for their children. This is paid for out of the
school’s Title I funds. The next level of sanctions comes with five years of not making
AYP and can result in a takeover of the school by the state, moving staff, or school
reconstitution.
To summarize the major goals targeted by NCLB:
0 To close the achievement gap by requiring that all students be proficient in
reading, language arts, math and science by 2013-14
0 Increase parental involvement and input
0 Have highly qualified teachers and paraprofessionals in all classrooms
o Insure effective use of resources
0 Provide teachers with appropriate professional development
0 Use both rewards and sanctions as tools to meet the goals of this law
In order to meet these goals, states, school districts, and schools must meet certain
criteria which include:
0 State requirements
0 An accountability system approved by the US Department of
Education that includes sanctions and rewards
0 Academic standards and an aligned assessment
0 Set annual AYP benchmarks to meet the goal of all students to be
proficient by 2013-14
0 Provide the US Department of Education with annual updates on the
progress of each district and school

0 Generate a list of approved supplemental services providers

15

0 Provide support for schools that are not making AYP
0 Provide a list of acceptable accommodations for special education and
limited English proficiency students
0 District requirements
0 Create an improvement plan that utilizes scientifically based research
0 Publish accountability information
0 Notify parents about schools that do not meet AYP standards and
teachers that are do not meet the highly qualified standards
0 School requirements
0 Meet state AYP standards for each subgroup: ethnicity, socioeconomic
level, special or general education, gender, and English language
proficiency
0 Use disaggregated data to refine school improvement plan
0 Align instruction and curriculum with the state standards
0 Administer the state assessment
Evaluating NCLB Intentions and Effects
Accountability makes sense because the public has a right to know how its tax
dollars are spent to educate its children (Corbett and Wilson, 1991; O'Day, 2004). If
schools do well, they earn rewards for meeting the goals of the policy. If schools don't do
well, they receive sanctions. While everyone agrees on the need for and the goal of
accountability, not everyone agrees on how it should be accomplished (Linn, 2003). This
is because accountability policies have had both positive and negative consequences

(Linn, 2000; Madaus and Horn, 2000; Mehrens, 1998; Mathison and Freeman, 2003).

16

Schools are complex institutions nested within other complex institutions which
can cause the policies to produce different outcomes at each school (Cohen and Ball,
1999). The interrelated pieces of the school organization each react to the policies and
school reforms in differing ways. This makes evaluating the positive and negative
consequences more difficult because there have been conflicting studies about them.
What appears as a positive in one study can be a negative in another.

Positives.

Four positive consequences are covered in some literature on accountability
policies including teacher professionalism, student achievement, district leadership, and
public conversation. Teachers are perceived as increasing in professional status as they
have a greater number of conversations about teaching and learning (Cimbricz, 2002;
Jones and Whitford, 2000; National Governor's Association, 1999; Thompson, Sykes and
Skrla, 2004). There is also a sense that through standards and tests aligned with them,
teachers have increased in their understanding of and attention to issues of curriculum in
their teaching (Corbett and Wilson, 1991; Firestone, Fitz and Broadfoot, 1999; Hirsch,
1996; Jennings and Rentner, 2006; National Govemors' Association, 1999; Tyler, 1950).
Some studies have also examined the ways that the policies have motivated teachers to
make changes in their instruction (Hess, 2003; Jones and Whitford, 2000; Mathis, 2003).
The use of test results to plan instruction and professional development has also been
attributed to these policies in some studies (Carnoy and Loeb, 2002; Clotfelter and Ladd,
1996; Mathison and Freeman, 2003; National Govemors' Association, 1999).

Braun (2004) and Carnoy and Loch (2002) found strong correlations between

rising state test scores with an increase in scores from the National Assessment of

17

Academic Progress in math for all students, including minority students in states with
strong accountability policies leading them to the conclusion that student achievement is
increasing. A study by Thompson, Sykes and Skrla (2004) has provided some
information about the way accountability policies have clarified the purpose of the central
office administrators as they support school administrators and teachers in meeting the
goals of the policies in a variety of ways. Administrators perceive that the benefits of
these policies outweigh the costs as increased leverage allows them to implement reform
measures (Mabry and Margolis, 2006). Public conversation about the policies and tests
was noted by Anaagnostopolous (2003b) when she noted that teachers in Chicago openly
shared their concerns about the disconnection between the tests and the curriculum.
Democratic debate on the issues of accountability and testing is helpful to the work of
schools.

Negatives.

There are also a number of studies that demonstrate several negative
consequences related to curriculum and instruction, stress, the positioning of various
stakeholders, performance measures, and the policies. Some researchers have noted a
narrowing of the curriculum as teachers focus on what is on the test while ignoring other
important areas (Anagnostopolous, 2003b, 2005; Clotfelter and Ladd, 1996; Hillocks,
2002; Jones and Whitford, 2000). The Council for Basic Education (Zastrow, 2004)
sponsored a survey of 1,000 principals to gain understanding of how NCLB is
influencing instruction time and professional development in key subject areas, and

perhaps not surprisingly, they found that that schools are spending increased time on

18

reading, math, and science and much less time on literature, social studies, civics,
geography, languages, and the arts.

Teachers’ instruction also increasingly mirrors test format (Anagnostopolous,
2003b, 2005; Smith, 1991; Stecher and Hamilton, 2003). In Chicago, Anagnostopolous
(2005) found that teachers in an urban high school were failing to engage in discussions
of issues about a novel because the ideas the students wanted to talk about were not
covered on the test. She concludes that “efforts to raise standards through testing policies
can result in limiting students’ opportunities to construct understandings of curricular
texts and of the social ideas at their core” (p. 35).

Along with these, teachers also spent an increasing amount of time on test
preparation activities (Berliner and Biddle, 1995; Mathison and Freeman, 2003; Smith,
1991; Stecher and Hamilton, 2003). In Kentucky, Hillocks (2002) observed that in some
schools teachers focused on grammar and mechanics similar to the writing onstate
assessments rather than creative writing and analytic thinking. In a multi-year study of
NCLB, Jennings and Rentner (2006) noted that “71% of districts are reducing time spent
on other subjects in elementary schools- at least to some degree. The subject most
affected is social studies while physical education is least effected” (p. 110-111).

Teacher stress is another negative consequence that has been shared in some
research. They worry about the way these tests impact their students and the publication
of the scores (Smith, 1991). Teachers in a study by Mabry and Margolis (2006) were
highly concerned with the fear their students experienced because of the test. They also
worry because of issues of professional judgment such as feeling tensions caused by

teaching in ways that are counter to their professional judgment (McNeil, 2000;

19

Zancanella, 1992) or tension between differentiating instruction or preparing all students
for the test (Anagnostopolous, 2003b; Mathison and Freeman, 2003; McNeil, 2000). This
may lead to teachers leaving the profession or resorting to unethical behavior (Amerin
and Berliner, 2002; McNeil, 2000; Mehrens, 1998; Popham, 2005).

Students are positioned in several ways by tests and how they are used
especially those who are poor or minorities (Aleman, 2006; Madaus, 1988). Students
learning styles and needs are not met when they are taught in a test format (Jones and
Whitford, 2000) which can cause more and more students to quit school (Hursh and
Martina, 2003). High standards are not based on the individual student when all students
are held to the same set of standards (Linn, 2000). Test scores also position students in
negative ways when they are used to make decisions about the curriculum and instruction
they receive (Hanson, 1993, 2000; Smith, 1991). The low level thinking required by
many of the tests also positions students as certain types of readers, writers, and thinkers,
(Anagnostopolous, 2003b, 2005; Hillock, 2002). Aleman (2006) stated that “high-stakes
testing is not a measure of individual cognitive, developmental, or sociocultural growth”
(p. 28). Instead all students are made to be the same rather than to celebrate and
appreciate their unique characteristics.

Teachers are also positioned by the policies and tests. The test becomes the
authority rather than the teacher about matters of cuniculum and instruction
(Anagnostopolous, 2003b, 2005; Mathison and Freeman, 2003; McNeil, 2000). Policies
become a form of surveillance through administrative mandates about teaching

(Anagnostopolous, 2003b). They also contribute to how teachers view their students and

themselves (Hanson, 2000).

20

Schools are also positioned as they receive failing labels (Amerin and Berliner,
2002; Mathis, 2003). There are concerns with the level of capacity some schools have to
meet the goals of policies making the labels unfair (Lewis, 2002). There are also
negative consequences related to competition among schools especially for those without
the capacity to compete (Berliner and Biddle, 1995).

Policymakers have placed test experts in an uncomfortable position by requiring
them to do a task that may be beyond their reach alone (Hunter and Bartee, 2003; Lewis,
2002; Stecher and Hamilton, 2003). This is because testing cannot, by itself, provide all
the information needed to understand the problems and solutions of the complex
problems facing educators (Jones and Whitford, 2000). The accountability measurement
promised by policymakers is not always easy for test experts to provide (Cohen and Hill,
2001)

There are also studies about issues with the measures used in accountability
policies. A study by Amerin and Berliner (2002) called into question how well state tests
were demonstrating student achievement when the results of these tests were compared
with NAEP, SAT, ACT, and AP test results. “Test pollution” caused from teachers using
instruction that is similar to the test is another issue discussed in the literature as a
concern for the accuracy of the scores (Anagnostopolous, 2003b, 2005; Berliner and
Biddle, 1995; Madaus, 1988; Mathison and Freeman, 2003; Popham, 2005; Smith, 1991;
Stecher and Hamilton, 2003). This instruction has led many test experts to question
whether the results are valid (Allington, 2002; Amerin and Berliner, 2002; Linn, 2000;

Mehrens, 1998; Popham, 2005; Stecher and Hamilton, 2003). Other studies have

questioned how well test can be aligned with state standards (Hursh and Martina, 2003),

21

if there are enough items on the test to represent them (Mathis, 2003), and how much an
impact outside factors influence the results (Clotfelter and Ladd, 1996; Hursh and
Martina, 2003). Finally, there are also concerns about teachers not being included in test
construction and use (Madaus and Horn, 2000) and how this influences their use of the
scores (Heubert and Hauser, 1999).

Some research studies have also presented negative consequences related to the
policies themselves. One issue is that of bias; either through the standards (Berliner and
Biddle, 1995, Hunter and Bartee, 2003) or the test (Clotfelter and Ladd, 1996).
Accountability policies also are not taking into account factors outside the school that
make a difference in student achievement while making important decisions (Berliner
and Biddle, 1995; Covington, 1992; 0’ Day, 2002; Stecher and Hamilton, 2003). Other
researchers have discussed that a mismatch between the goals of the policy and the
instrument used for it has yielded counterproductive measures when instruction does not
meet the practice intended by the reform (Barnes, 2002; Berliner and Biddle, 1995;
Corbett and Wilson, 1991; Firestone, Mayrowetz, and Fairrnan, 1998; Hillocks, 2002;
Lewis, 2002).

The Inevitable Complexity and Ambiguity of Findings.

The research literature also includes a number of studies that result in a view of
accountability and reform that is not quite clear. This results from the complexity of
schools which makes accountability and reform less clearly defined. There have been
numerous reform efforts in American education over the years (Cohen and Ball, 1999;
Cuban, 1993; Kauchak and Eggen, 2005; Tyack and Cuban, 1995). Some have become

absorbed as part of the school culture while others have been either modified or

22

abandoned (Cuban, 1993, 2007). This seems to stem from the fact that schools are
complex organizations with multiple factors at play which can either advance or hinder
the reform efforts connected with accountability (Consortium for Policy Research in
Education, 2001). Assessing what happens in schools is difficult because what happens
there is very complex (Jones and Whitford, 2000). Some of these factors include schools,
resources, local community, and the American culture (Consortium for Policy Research
in Education, 2001; Cohen and Ball, 1999; O’Day, 2004; Tyack and Cuban, 1995).
Cohen and Ball (1999) examined the interconnection of teachers, students and resources
and how this influences reform and accountability and noted how each needs to be
considered individually as well as in connection with the others. With the assumption
that accountability will improve teaching (O’Day, 2004), it is necessary to realize that it
is easier said than done.

The diverse nature of teachers’ philosophies and backgrounds and the highly
diverse nature of their students and their communities is part of this complexity.
Increased support for and implementation of a reform is typically connected to the degee
it matches with teachers’ educational philosophies (Bulkley, Fairrnan, and Martinez,
2004; Mathison and Freeman, 2003; Mintrop, 2004; Schorr and Firestone, 2004). The
biographies of teachers also play a role in how they will respond to reform and
accountability policies (Cimbricz, 2002; Cohen and Ball, 1999; Heubert and Hauser,
1999; Zancanella, 1992). Teachers have varied levels of willingness to adapt to these
policies (O’Day, 2004). While most teachers seem to appreciate some aspects of
accountability, there are nuances of the policies they do not understand (Corcoran and

Christrnan, 2002). Some teachers, however, may perceive these policies as a lack of trust

23

from the government (Meier, 2004). Policies need to connect with how teachers
understand teaching, students, and learning (Anagnostopolous and Rutledge, 2007). For
example, teachers in a study expressed an appreciation for the state standards, but did not
find the consequences attached to the test results to be helpfiil (Mabry and Margolis,
2006). Unfortunately, research demonstrates that teachers and policymakers often have
different views and interpretations of policies (Cimbricz, 2002). Teachers and
policymakers also have different ways of thinking about students and instruction
(Elmore, 2002). Other factors that play a role in how teachers view and respond to these
policies include stress and frustration resulting from the policies (Mintrop, 2004).
Teachers also respond in different ways to the test based on their perceptions of the test
(Mintrop, 2004) and the poverty level of the school (Monfils, Firestone, Hicks, Martinez,
Schorr and Carnilli, 2004).

Students are widely diverse as well, and this diversity also makes evaluating
reforms and goals of accountability policies complex. Hunter and Bartee (2003) note that
multiple factors influence a student’s education. These factors include things that happen
outside of schools (Camilli and Monfils, 2004). Baker and Linn (2004) have stated that
student mobility needs to be considered when analyzing test results. Cohen and Ball
(1999) noted that in poverty schools the “emotional and health problems of students” (p.
1) interfered with their learning. Schools with larger numbers of students coming from
poverty backgrounds are presented with greater challenges (Berliner and Biddle, 1995).
These are also students who are living with more health problems as well as issues with
their home environment that makes learning more difficult (Berliner, 2005; Rothstein,

2004). Student biographies and life experiences have an impact on how they score on

24

tests (O’Day, 2004; Stecher and Hamilton, 2003). Cohen (1988) and Shulman (1987)
refer to teaching as an “impossible profession” because success is dependent on the client
rather than on the professional alone. Teachers are dependent on their students to be
validated through testing and accountability policies, yet all students are not the same
which is not taken into account in either the tests or the policies.

Schools themselves also bring complexity in the interactions of multiple
stakeholders. The sustainability of reform efforts has been linked to the level of support
school receives from the district (Consortium for Policy Research in Education, 2001) as
well as issues of teacher mobility (Baker and Linn, 2004; Consortium for Policy Research
in Education, 2001; Mintrop, 2004). Schools also exist within a larger institution known
as the district. Reform can become more difficult with multiple priorities from both these
groups (Mintrop, 2004). Schools themselves also have particular needs based on the type
of school, such elementary, middle or high school which increases complexity across a
district (Corcoran and Christrnan, 2002). The level of poverty in the school also makes a
difference in the focus of the school as well as how the teachers respond to the policies
and use data (Camilli and Monfils, 2004; Diamond and Spillane, 2004; Monfils, et al,
2004; O’Day, 2004). Other outside factors impact schools that need to be considered
when talking about reform include poverty, violence, drug abuse, and racism (Berliner
and Biddle, 1995). The level of internal accountability as well as the school culture
makes a difference in its reaction to accountability (Elmore, 2002).

Further, accountability policies themselves are complex. In order to meet their
intended goals, they must work through issues of knowing and defending the plan,

making it equitable, defining when and how rewards for improvement will be given,

25

provisions for professional development, and planning how to sustain the policy over
time so that schools are not pushed and pulled about by the political winds (Elmore,
Abelman and Fuhrman, 1996). Along with these factors, they also need to consider the
connections between the test, school culture, and teaching (Anagnostopolous and
Rutledge, 2007; Corcoran and Christrnan, 2002) as well as the factors that influence
students outside the school (Berliner, 2005; Camilli and Monfils, 2004). Complexity is
added to policies as they must address the challenges of including special education
students in the accountability process (Thurlow, 2004). Policies use rewards and
sanctions, but there is no clear evidence of the best combination for sustained change
(Cohen and Ball, 1999) as well as how they will work in practice (Firestone, Monfils,
Schorr, Hicks and Martinez, 2004). Competition results from the rewards and sanctions
of the policies (Berliner and Biddle, 1995; Covington, 1992; Hunter and Bartee, 2003;
Hursh and Marina, 2003). O’Day (2004) has stated that for accountability policies to
work teachers need to hold each other accountable as well as state agencies adding
another layer to accountability. There must be careful consideration of multiple factors
or the result may be that the policies end up working against their reform goals (Craig,
2004). Policies have both positive and negative consequences that need to be examined
carefully in order to make better policy (Linn, 2000, 2003).

As was detailed above, recent federal accountability policies rely on tests as the
measurement of whether the goals of the policies were achieved. It is however not that
simple to make a worthy test and from it confidently make the decisions that are required
in the policies. Baker and Linn (2004) share a number of factors that need to be

considered such as whether or not the test has validity for each purpose for the test and is

26

able to meet all the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Several studies
have also examined concerns about the connection between test results, instruction, and
the goals of reform efforts (Amerin and Berliner, 2002; Baker and Linn, 2004; Corbett
and Wilson, 1991). Rupp and Lesaux (2006) compared standardized tests with diagnostic
tests and concluded that “standards-based tests are of limited use for diagnostic decision
making at the level of the individual learner” (p. 331). Other questions have been raised
about the ability of a test to meet the goals of the policies, how effective the results are in
providing information for instructional purposes, and if the consequences of the test ends
up distracting teachers from the goals of improvement (O’Day, 2004). This brings up
concerns about misuse of test scores that may lead to mistakes in reform and other
decisions (Heuebrt and Hauser, 1999). Along with this are concerns about scores that
increase and then stagnate which may be caused by test pollution (Corcoran and
Christrnan, 2002). Tests also need to allow for accommodations for special education
students that mirror those they are receiving in the classrooms (Thurlow, 2004). Finally,
the use of a single test score can lead to public misperception of a school and teachers
(Madaus, 1988).

There is much written about NCLB and high-stakes testing with varying
perspectives about them. Some see this as a leverage tool to motivate teachers and
schools to work harder and smarter in order to lessen the achievement gap. Others find
this is to be a further perpetuate the one size fits all model of school. Teachers have
reacted to these policies as they have to others in the past, by making changes where they
must and making things fit in the best way they can (Cuban, 2007; Mabry and Margolis,

2006). In this study, we will look more deeply into the life of one school that is currently

27

facing the consequences of accountability. Teachers’ stories of what they are
experiencing as well as how they are coping with these policies will be explored in depth.
They will at times support as well as contradict some of what prior research had to say
about accountability policies.

This is what has been documented in previous research about accountability and
testing. The next chapter will outline in more detail this current study and what it will
bring to the scholarly context about these policies by examining in greater depth one
particular school that is living each day with the ramifications of the first level of

sanction of this policy.

28

CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH CONTEXT: METHODOLOGY AND STUDY DESIGN

This chapter will provide detail about the various research methods employed in
this study as well as the reasoning behind them. Choosing a research approach is based
on the question(s) being asked in the study. This study explored one Indiana Title I
school’s experiences with high stakes testing and accountability including how the
teachers, facing the imminent consequences of these laws, were doing their work. The
teachers in this school were negotiating ISTEP+ as mandated by the state and how this
was being used to evaluate the value of their teaching.

The nature of this inquiry allowed me to use two related qualitative approaches in
conjunction with each other: phenomenology and case study research. Phenomenology is
defined as a method used to understand how people experience their world (Creswell,
2003; Flyvbjerg, 2006; Patton, 2002; van Manen, 1990, 2002). It is concerned with
understanding a given phenomena from the perspective of those who have experienced it.
The goal of this type of study is to allow readers to see “the lived quality and significance
of the experience in a fuller or deeper manner” (van Manen, 1990, p. 10). It involves
“describing and clarifying” (Ray, 1994, p. 118) the lived experience so that readers can
grasp the essence of the event. In this study, the event being examined was how teachers
in an Indiana Title I school confronting the imminent consequences of accountability
were going about their work. The goal is for readers to grasp what it means to teach in
such a school.

Another approach used was case study research which is defined as “an

examination of a specific phenomenon such as a program, an event, a person, a process,

29

an institution, or a social group. The bounded system, or case, might be selected because
it is an instance of some concern, issue, or hypothesis” (Merriam, 1988, p. 9-10).
Learning in this methodology comes from being in the school context (Flyvbjerg, 2006).
Merriam’s (1988) four characteristics of a case study further demonstrate the
appropriateness of this methodology: (a) “particularistic” Q). 11): Title I school facing
sanctions, (b) “descriptive” (p. 11): evidence presented in the narrative form, (c)
“heuristic” (p. 13): yielding greater insight into what is experienced by these teachers,
and (d) “inductive” (p. 13): conclusions and implications are drawn from the data. Three
teachers and the principal were chosen for specific reasons to further explore the
accountability phenomenon. These teachers became cases to provide information on
what is happening because of accountability through the gathering of data in close
proximity to them (Creswell, 2003; Flyvbjerg, 2006). Through the words of these
educators, who are often not heard, more is known about a particular time and place- in
this study a Title 1 school in the time of accountability sanctions (Quantz, 1992b).
Study Design

Using the interplay of phenomenology and case study methodologies, I conducted
a three month inquiry of teachers as they went about their work in an Indiana Title I
school. This inquiry included thirteen 30-90 rrrinute interviews of teachers, including the
principal; approximately 18 hours of direct observation in three teachers’ classrooms;
multiple follow-up interviews of the four case study participants; and analysis of several
school documents. I was also able to informally observe in the classrooms of case study
participants as well as other teachers.

Research site.

30

I located my research at a Title 1 school in Indiana. I chose this as my research
site because these schools face sanctions for not making AYP under the state and federal
accountability laws and because I am familiar with the state standards, test, and
accountability policy. Marvel Elementary School, the study site, is part of a large school
district with several Title I schools. Marvel had not made AYP the previous year, and the
staff was concerned about the consequences of not making it again a second year, which
was during the study. In Indiana elementary schools, testing occurs in third through fifth
grades, yet all teachers at the schools know that these scores reflect on their teaching.
Elementary schools like Marvel that consist of kindergarten through fifth grades are also
responsible for the scores of the sixth grade students who were enrolled at the school for
a least 70% of the school days during the previous school year. All teachers are involved
in creating the school’s accreditation plan (PL 221/ SIP), participate in professional
development related to this plan, and will be impacted by possible sanctions.

This site and sampling for this study was purposeful (Patton, 1990). In order to
learn more about the impact of accountability on teachers, research needed to be done
within a system where accountability was a very present entity. This brought me to a
Title I school that had previously not made AYP and was concerned with impending
sanctions if AYP was not met a second year in a row. It is in this place that the
information needed to answer the research questions could be found. Teachers at the
school volunteered to be interviewed.

Participants.

In total, 13 classroom, special education, and Title I teachers as well as the

principal participated in the interview process of this study. Teachers volunteered to

31

participate in the interviews, but at least one teacher from each grade level and each
program (special education and Title I) were involved. The table below shows the total

number of teachers at each grade level or program along with the number who

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

participated.

Grade/ Program Total number in school Participated in interviews
Kindergarten 1.5 1

First 3 2

Second 3 2

Third 3 2

Fourth 3 1

Fifth 3 2

Special Education 2 1

Title I 2 2

 

 

 

Table 3.1 Number of teachers by grade level or program

After analyzing the data collected from interviews, three classroom teachers were
chosen for observations. Critical case sampling (Patton, 1990) was used which seeks to
choose individuals that “make a point” (p. 174). These are teachers that had something
significant to say about the accountability policies and ISTEP+. Through their words and
actions, a portrait of the school is created. The voices of other teachers are also included
as they both agree and disagree with what these teachers said and did. Further
explanation of the reasoning for the teachers chosen as case study participants is detailed
in chapter seven.

Interviews.

32

 

Weiss’s (1995) four I’s were used to generate the initial interview protocol. A
copy of the interview protocol is found in Appendix C. There were some questions that
reflected more than one of these concepts. The goal was to use these questions to
determine teachers’ thinking and understanding about these areas. Questions were
constructed to provide us the opportunity to “develop deep meaning together” (Riesmann,
1993, p. 55) during the course of the interviews. The questions for the interview protocol
were generated were based on the following list of ideas for interests, ideology,
information, and institution.

Interests:

0 Autonomy

0 Professionalism

0 Personal time

0 Respect for self. From community, parents, administrators, other educators

0 Professional growth

0 Relevant professional development

0 Salary, compensation

0 Recognition, acknowledgement

0 Balance

0 Mental, emotional, physical health

0 Support from teachers, parents, district

0 Materials and/or access to money to purchase materials
Ideology ’

0 Student learning

33

0 Role of education
0 Students
0 Subject matter
0 Developmentally appropriate instruction
0 Role of district, state government, federal government
0 Assessment
0 Best practices
Information
0 Professional development
0 Professional organizations
0 Professional literature
0 Conferences, workshops. I
0 Classes, coursework
0 Professional goals
Institution
0 Transactions with parents, students, teachers, staff
0 Physical building
0 Posters, bulletin boards
0 Teacher’s lounge, workroom
o Cafeteria
0 Equipment
0 Materials

0 Supplies

34

0 Mission statement

Interviews with teachers helped me to understand how they make instructional
decisions, what they know and believe about assessment, how they use their knowledge
and beliefs, and how accountability policies influence them. The interview process was
conducted over the months of March and April. All interviews were done at the school at
a time most convenient for the participant and took anywhere from 30-90 minutes.
Teachers that have been at the school for several years and the principal were also asked
to describe their recollections and understandings of the history of the school focusing on
the Title I program.

I see this research as storytelling (Britzrnan, 2000; Fontana and Frey, 2000); the
story of what it means to be an elementary school teacher at a Title I school in Indiana
and working through the consequences and issues of the state-mandated high-stakes test,
ISTEP+. The telling of this story comes from listening to the stories that these teachers
told me in both structured and unstructured interviews (F ontana and Frey, 2000).
Structured interviews were used at the beginning of my research in order to get to know
each teacher, how they navigate the test, and their knowledge and attitudes about it. By
getting to know each teacher’s thoughts and beliefs about the test, I was able to begin
unstructured interviews with this information. Teachers were able to have a conversation
with me based on open-ended questions I prepared. These were not questions that I
asked each participant, but used with discretion based on what I had learned from the
structured interviews as well as from the conversation that we had during the
unstructured interviews. These unstructured interviews allowed me to then move into

what Fontana and Frey (2000) termed creative interviewing. During the course of our

35

conversations, I was “collecting oral reports” (Fontana and Frey, 2000, p. 657) from the
participants about their teaching practice and how it is impacted by ISTEP+ and
accountability policies. Specifically, I sought to learn more about interests, ideology,
information, and institution.

Holstein and Gubrium (2002) also add to what it means to do creative
interviewing when they state that part of this process is to share my own “feeling and
deepest thoughts” (p. 117) in order to encourage the same fi'om my participants. As part
of the interview with the teachers, I also shared my feelings about the test and how it has
impacted me. This was also part of the process of gaining their trust- that they know that
I too have walked in their shoes. I was conscious, however, that what I shared could also
influence what they choose to share with me. I carefully considered what I choose to
share with them because of the impact on what they would tell me about their feelings
and thoughts concerning the test.

Another interviewing strategy that Holstein and Gubrium (2002) contributed is
the concept of the active interview. The interview is in a constant state of development
as I tap into the “interpretive capabilities” (Holstein and Gubrium, 2002, p. 119) of the
teachers during the course of the interview. In this way, the teachers I interviewed both
created the information concerning their beliefs and attitudes about the test and its impact
on their practice, but also collaborated with me in the interpretation of what they said.

Observations.

From these interviews, I chose three diverse teachers to observe as they taught in

their classrooms as well as observing the principal at various times throughout his day.

These were teachers who had different perspectives about the test and the policies.

36

Observations of the classroom teachers allowed me to understand the context in which
they teach and how that influenced their perspectives. I used Angrosino and Mays de
Perez’s (2000) three levels of observation to guide how I did them. First, I my
observation focused on description. How many students were in the class? How were
the desks arranged? What resources and materials were available? What was the ethnic
and gender makeup of the students? What time were subjects taught and for what length
of time? Having described the classroom, I moved to the next phase, focused
observation. Here I examined what instructional methods the teacher was using and how
time was spent in the classroom. This included comparing the instruction to Bloom’s
taxonomy to examine levels of activities and assignments. Other items for observation
included grouping patterns of students, and types of assessments that were used. Was the
instruction teacher or student directed? How often did the teacher use skill sheets that
mimic ISTEP+? What types of assessment did the teacher use and what do they tell the
teacher? What resources did the teacher use the most/ the least? Finally, I did selective
observations to compare the instruction in different content areas. How was the
instruction different or the same in language arts and social studies? How did the
instruction in math compare to that in science? Each level of observation provided me
with information to guide my interpretation of what was happening in the classroom and
how it connected with the four I’s. It also allowed me to compare what the teacher told
me in the interviews with what I saw during the observations.

Classroom observations allowed me to bring a context to the decisions that the
teachers are making and allowed the teacher and me the opportunity to reflect together

about how issues of assessment impact their teaching practice. In all, the three classroom

37

teachers were observed three times over a two and a half week time period. Each
observation lasted anywhere from 60 minutes to 165 minutes. Each teacher was observed
at least once in the morning and once in the afternoon. Table 3.3 shows the time of day,

number of minutes, and activities observed for each of the teachers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Teacher Observation 1 Observation 2 Observation 3
Ms. Lambert 1:30- 2:50 PM (80 12:30-2:00 PM (90 8:35-1 1 :20 AM
rrrin) min) (165 min)
Lay out of room Read aloud Morning work
Junior Achievement Math Working With
Math Silent reading Words
Read aloud Writing
End of day Read aloud
Reading
Mr. Wilson 8:45-1 1 :00 AM 8:55-11:20 AM 12:10-2z40 PM (150
(135 min) (145 min) min)
Lay of the room Morning work Read aloud
Spelling Reading Math
Community Circle Read aloud
Reading
Mrs. Johnson 9:10- 11:40 (150 10:30- 12:00 (90 12:40-lz45 (60
min.) min.) min.)
Lay out of room Social studies Social studies
Morning work Writing
Community circle
Math
Table 3.2 Observations

Interviews were, as much as possible, done after observations. Post-observation
interviews then focused on their reflection of the lesson and assessment(s) and how they
perceived it was or wasn’t related to ISTEP+. Other interviews also focused on their
general knowledge and use of assessment as well as their perceptions of ISTEP+.
Observations of the principal were done at various times throughout the days I was in the
school.

Field Notes.

38

 

Detailed field notes were compiled of classroom observations along with the
transcripts of the interviews and memos of the conversations with all teachers. These
allowed the teacher and me the opportunity to discuss together what happened in the
classroom while we constructed our interpretations of them both together and separately.
Conversations with the principal were conducted when possible to get insights into what
had been observed. The notes provided greater opportunity for a more complete
description and enabled us to analyze them through and with different foci in order to
make more informed judgments (Erickson, 1986). Interpretations from these notes built
the descriptions even further.

Documents.

Test data from the school and other documents related to instructional practice
were also examined. One in particular is the PL 221/ SIP document that schools complete
in order to receive accreditation from the state, this is the same document that is used by
the school as its Title I School Improvement Plan (SIP). Historical documents also
examined were the Comprehensive School Reform Demonstration Plan and other Title I
reports that were available. Other documents that were examined include the professional
development logs; the district report card form; quarterly assessment forms for reading,
writing, and math; and the Indiana Academic Standards. These provided a form of
documentation of what teachers are expected to do in their teaching. Questions related to
these documents also became part of the interviews and observations.

Role of Researcher
Creswell (2003) notes several issues that researchers need to address in their

study. One of these is the method used to gain access to the research site. Prior to

39

beginning my site research, I gained permission from the Michigan State University
Internal Review Board (IRB). Reviewers examined my interview questions and the steps
I would take to maintain confidentiality. Once I had received IRB approval, I gained
permission from the Northville School District by speaking with district administrators
and presenting documentation from my dissertation chair, the IRB approval, and a letter
from the principal of Marvel Elementary to the school board. After receiving school
board approval, I then met with the Marvel teachers at a monthly staff meeting. I
explained the nature of my research and what would be expected of them. A copy of the
letter of permission with a list of possible questions was handed out to the teachers.

As an elementary teacher now in the researcher role, I recognize that I have a
strong connection with the research site. The events that I record and how I see them are
influenced by my past experiences as a teacher. This is something that can both help and
harm my research. Marvel teachers were made aware that I had been a teacher facing the
issues of accountability prior to my graduate work. They were told my story of what had
led me to begin this study and my biases. I need to recognize and honor the fact that in
telling me their experiences, they are “creating their own history” (Casey, 1995/96, p.
232). This means that I need to take great care with how I interpret and represent them in
my writing.

Another role that I have as the researcher is to make the familiar strange to both
the teachers and myself (Crapanzano, 1986). After having been a teacher in a Title I
school for ten years, I am very familiar with what is involved in teaching at the school.
However, as a researcher I needed to look at teaching with fresh and different eyes and

provide the opportunity for the teachers I worked with to also generate a new view of

40

their teaching. As we both looked at this familiar place with new eyes we were able to
construct different pictures of their classrooms and teaching practices.

Through this process of learning from the Marvel teachers, I was changed. As
van Manen (1990) states, “phenomenological research is often itself a form of deep
learning, leading to a transformation of consciousness, heightened perceptiveness,
increased thoughtfulness and tact, and so on” (p. 163). Not only am I changing the
teachers through my interviews and observations, but what I learn throughout this process
has and will continue to change how I view teaching and accountability.

Analysis

My analysis was done on three levels, including theory-based coding using
Weiss’s four I ’3, open coding to explore the data in greater detail without a theory in
mind, and selective coding to deliberately code with particular concepts in mind. While
the theory based coding was used to set up this study, I found that what the teachers had
to say was more richly and accurately captured through the selective codes. These are the
four genres of stories told by these teachers: (a) moral stories of what is good and right,
(b) power stories about who has control, (c) interpersonal stories about how policies
affect their relationships, and ((1) technical stories about whether these policies were
effective or not.

I began by examining the data with the theory-based coding using Weiss’s (1995)
interests, ideology, information, and institution. A role-ordered matrix was used to
organize the data along these variables. This matrix “sorts data in its rows and columns
that have been gathered from or about a certain set of ‘role occupants’- data reflecting

their views” (Miles and Huberrnan, 1994, p. 123). The rows reflect the role that the

41

teachers have in the school by grade level or area (i.e. Title I or Special Education).
Individual teachers were also be listed by initials in each row so that comparisons could
be made both within and across roles. The columns were based on the key variables. The

codes were included on the matrix along with key words and phrases.

 

Teacher/Principal Interests Ideology Information Institution

 

Kindergarten

 

First Grade

 

Second Grade

 

Third Grade

 

Fourth Grade

 

Fifth Grade

 

Special

Education

 

Title I

 

 

Principal

 

 

 

 

 

Table 3.3 Example of role-ordered matrix

Miles and Huberrnan (1994) have described some tactics that were used in the
interpretation of the matrix. These include making comparisons and contrasts, noting
relations among variables, and counting. Making comparisons and contrasts guided in
making decisions on which teachers to observe as part of the study. It also highlighted
what was happening across the grade levels and among the majority of the teachers as
well as what was different. This provided information about the complexity of the

school. Noting relations among variables provided insight into how the four variables

42

 

work with or against one another. Finally, counting gave a sense of concrete numbers to
conclusions.

Open and selective coding.

Yet, through coding in this way and reading over what the teachers had to say, I
noticed that there were important ideas that were not captured by the theory-based coding
process. I then began a new open coding analysis. After repeatedly comparing and
contrasting the ideas, I began to notice that there were distinctions not only about what
was said about a topic such as the institution, but more powerfully there were distinctions
in the discourse the teachers used in their responses. I then began a new open coding
analysis. It seemed to me that the teachers were telling different types of stories about
the accountability phenomenon. With the idea of stories in mind, I coded the data again,
eventually arriving at four distinct genres of stories. Open coding (Strauss and Corbin,
1990) was used in the examination of interviews, observations, and documents. Multiple
readings of the transcripts of interviews, field notes from observations, and documents
provided evidence for patterns and themes that reoccur (Bogdan and Bilden, 1998; Miles
and Huberman, 1994; Patton, 2002).

Codes for each of the case study participants were reexamined to determine the fit
with the construct of each story genre based on the particular discourse used by the
teachers. A list of words and phrases for each discourse was generated to facilitate
coding. Responses were then categorized according to larger themes and ideas they
represented. These became the sub-headings for each of the genre sections. Data from
documents, observations, and interviews of other teachers were used as they reinforced or

contradicted what was said by the case study teachers. In this way the reader is able to

43

learn not only about the case study participants, but the other teachers and school context
also.
Validation

Validity questions whether the conclusions drawn in the study are legitimate.
There are several strategies used in qualitative research to enhance the validity of the
findings. For this study, four of these are used to address the issue of validity.

Triangulation of data was used with information gathered from interviews,
observations, and documents (Creswell, 2003; Meniam, 1988; Patton, 1990).
Interviewing teachers helped me to gain some insight into how they were or were not
making sense of the test and policies in their teaching. Observations allowed me to see
first-hand what was happening in their classrooms to connect with what we had
discussed. Examination of documents also added to my understanding of what was
happening at the school and with the teacher. Places where information from more than
one source reinforced conclusions strengthened it. The presentation of contradictory
information also allows the reader to realize that conclusions are more complex in some
areas.

Interviewing and observing teachers provided the essence that I as the researcher
had “been there” (Geertz, 1988, p. 5) with the teachers. The combination of “participant
observation with sensitive interviewing” (Erickson, 1986, p. 123) allowed me to gain
insights into the culture of each teacher’s classroom and the school culture also. It also
provided me with the environment necessary to work with the teachers in making sense

of, interpreting what was both seen and heard.

44

As I interviewed and observed the teachers, I was “noticing and describing
everyday events in the field setting, and in attempting to identify the significance of
actions in the events from the various points of view of the actors [teachers] themselves”
(Erickson, 1986, p. 121). It is through the use of the details of what I saw and heard that
allows the readers of the text to feel that they too have talked with this teacher and been a
part of their classroom (Geertz, 1988).

Along with triangulation and thick description, “peer examination” (Meniam,
1988, p. 169) or “peer debriefing” (Creswell, 2003, p. 196) was used. Elizabeth Heilman,
my dissertation chair, provided me with extensive feedback and assistance as I analyzed
data and made interpretations. This allowed me to share my thoughts and questions with
more knowledgeable others in the field of qualitative research. Their feedback was
invaluable and made a difference in how data was used and presented.

A last strategy that was used in this study is the examination of researcher bias
(Creswell, 2003; Merriam, 1988) or “credibility of the researcher” (Patton, 1990, p. 472).
This meant that as I was interpreting the data and writing my text, I had to closely and
carefully ask how my beliefs and values were influencing what I was writing. This was
discussed in the earlier section on the role of researcher. This is what also caused me to
carefully listen to and heed to feedback given to me during the peer
examination/debriefing.

Presentation of the data

The credibility of the written text rests in the “power of .. descriptions”

(Crapanzano, 1986, p. 58) or what Geertz (1973) referred to as thick descriptions of the

teachers. The interpretations of the data are the pictures of the classrooms that the

45

teachers and I are providing for the readers with the evidence of our interpretations
coming from combining multiple narratives into the four stories about their experiences
with accountability. These narratives provide “an analytic caricature” (Erickson, 1986, p.
150) of the classrooms and teachers. Readers will be able to feel as if they too have
talked with the teachers and been in the classrooms as they read the text.

The use of stories added depth and richness to the presentation of information and
findings about schools. Connelly and Clandinin (2000) note that the use of stories allows
the readers to know about how time, context, and relationships in schools and how these
interact in the stories of schools. There were four types or genres of stories: moral, power,
interpersonal, and technical. The particular language that teachers used defined the
stories. There were stories that were not as clearly defined and contained the language of
more than one genre. This may have occurred because the teacher was telling more than
one story or because of my perspective on what the teacher was saying or both. The
telling of stories is a more compelling way to relate what these teachers had to say than
simply relaying this information through the original four I topics. However, it is
important to note that as teachers talked about their interests, ideology, information, and
institution these stories were told. The four I’s are intertwined within the stories.

The text produced from this research is a bricolage in that I use pieces from
observations, interviews, and documents to create an interpretation in collaboration with
the teachers (Denzin and Lincoln, 2000). Those who have a positivist stance often look
on research as the source of “truth”. This idea is being reemphasized in these days of
“scientifically based research” (No Child Left Behind, 2002). However, there is no way

to tell the whole story of what it means to in a Title 1 school during these times of

46

reliance on ISTEP+. My role is to provide an interpretation of this or what Maxine
Greene (1994) refers to as “constructed reality” (p. 435). People, through the use of their
values and experiences, construct reality. I used my values and experiences as a teacher
in a Title I school to construct my interpretation of these teachers’ reality.

Where Does This Belong? 0r Does it Belong?

I began with an examination of interests, ideology, information, and institution in
generating the interview protocol for this study. Open coding of the transcripts guided
me to recognize that from these four topics, stories were told about life in this school.
Describing what is happening at this Title I school afforded the opportunity to use within
case analysis of the data (Miles and Huberman, 1994). The inner workings of the school
were examined and described as they related to the accountability policies. The key
variables of interests, information, ideology and institution guided this description.

While the school can be described as a whole, a fuller understanding of it can
occur by examining some individual teachers also. Three teachers with diverse responses
to the key variables were chosen for observations. Interviews with the principal added
further detail to this understanding. Cross case analysis was used to understand this
information. Analysis was done by locating comparable as well as contrasting views
from other teachers with what was stated by case study participants. As Miles and
Huberrnan (1994) note, “the aim is to see processes and outcomes across cases, to
understand how they are qualified by local conditions, and thus to develop more

sophisticated descriptions and more powerful conclusions” (p. 172).

47

CHAPTER 4
COMMUNITY CONTEXT: A RACIALLY DIVERSE POSTINDUSTRIAL
MIDWESTERN TOWN

In examining what is happening at a particular place within a cormnunity, it is
often worthwhile to learn more about the community itself. Schools are said to be a
reflection of the community in which they reside, so an exploration of the community can
provide other aspects to the picture of what is happening at this school. The students and
their families as well as many of the teachers live here. In order to understand the school,
you need to know something about the community as well. This chapter explores
historical and current information about the community to provide a context for what is
happening at the school.
A Brief History

Founded in the 18303, this city has grown from a small trading route village into
the largest community in the county. The earliest settlers came seeking opportunities for
land and making a better life for themselves. Some came from the eastern parts of the
United States while others arrived from several European as well as Middle Eastern
nations. With them, they brought their religious beliefs including various Christian
faiths, Jews, and Muslims. The ease of access to both land and water transportation was
one of the greatest lures to this part of Indiana.

Over the years, Northville citizens engaged in numerous industries. Access to a
wide variety of natural resources brought many industries and trades to the area over the
years. From the hey day of many types of manufacturing to lumber mills, banking,

tourism, as well as a wide variety of local businesses, Northville residents were able to

48

find work. While there were many job opportunities within the community, some also
found well paying jobs in other nearby communities. These were mainly jobs that
required little formal academic training.

The 1940’s and 50’s saw an increase in the number of manufacturing plants that
opened in this area. As more people had money to spend, an increase in the places to use
it came also. During the 1960’s a mall opened in the southern part of the community.
While this attracted shoppers from all over the county, it also drew people and business
away from the downtown area. The result was a loss of foot traffic in this part of town
while more of the former storefronts were either boarded up or became home to a wide
array of offices.

Time has changed some of the work options across this part of the state. In the
1980’s Northville, along with many other communities in this area of the Midwest, lost
many of the good paying manufacturing jobs as companies either closed or moved to
other areas. No longer were young men and women able to have easy access to jobs that
afforded them the expected middle class lifestyle as the citizens of Northville experienced
what it meant to be part of the “Rust Belt”.

Other changes came to this community as well. In the years following the First
World War, African Americans from the south moved to this community as well as
others in this part of the state for the manufacturing jobs and a better life. Northville
came to have the largest minority population in the county. While the rest of the county
was mainly white, this community had both whites and blacks. Another migration

occurred during World War Two as African Americans from the south filled positions at

49

defense plants. Over time, Afiican Americans from larger nearby communities migrated
to Northville in search of a different life.
Northville Today: Some Facts and Figures

This community has in recent years seen a slight decline in population yet it is
geographically near several growing communities. The 2000 US Census Bureau Report
showed that the population had a 3.2% decrease from 1990-2000. The number of males
and females within the community are very close to one another with a difference of less
than 300. The majority of the population, 68%, is white while 26% are black.
Approximately 3% of the community is Hispanic and 2.5% are classified as other. The
marital status statistics of the community include 63% married, 8% single males, and
29% single females.

Among the residents of this community, US Census data from 2000 reveals that
27% have an income under $20,000 while only 2% have an income between $100,000-
$125, 000. This means that over a quarter of the households in this community qualify
for subsidized housing. According to the 2000 US Census Bureau, the poverty rate in
Northville for 1999 was 13.3%. That means that more than one in ten people within
Northville were living below the poverty line. This correlates with the unemployment
statistics as well as the income statistics. Even though residents of this community were
working, they were more likely to work at lower paying jobs that kept them below the
poverty level.

The unemployment rate in this community hovers around 7%. The most recent

information from an agency that gathers these statistics puts the December 2005

50

unemployment rate at 7.2%. This is the highest rate in the county. The county
unemployment rate for the same time period was 6%.

Northville is governed by a mayor and city council. It offers its citizens a number
of services that range from police and fire protection to government subsidized housing
and bus service. The community also has a department that oversees civil rights issues so
that all members of Northville can be fairly treated. The Northville housing department
has a wait of over one year for the scattered site, single site, elderly, and handicapped
housing.

Healthcare in Northville consists of a hospital, a number of doctors and medical
clinics, and urgent care facilities. A local branch of the county health department is
located in Northville. This is where parents may take their children to get their
immunizations. It is located near one of the poor neighborhoods.

Education available to the citizens of Northville consists of the Northville
Community Schools, several parochial schools, as well as vocational and professional
institutions of higher education. There are also educational programs offered through
community organizations offered at several sites throughout the community covering the
range from technology to home repair.

A Journey Around Northville

On a clear late spring day, I take a drive around the Northville community. I
notice a number of things during this exploration. One feature that particularly stands out
to me is the large old homes that line the streets of the downtown area of the community.
Some are well kept and beautiful making me think of a bygone era when families would

have come home in horse drawn caniages and several children would have been running

51

through the halls playing games with one another. It was a time before the full intrusion
of electronic devices that entertain our children more and more today rather than physical
activity and imagination.

Further along the drive, I pass a shopping center filled with people out looking for
what they feel is needed or maybe out just wishing. The parking lots are nearly full of
cars, and their plates let me know that they have driven from locations near and not so
near. Northville includes a number of such shopping districts and this place seems to
have an energy all its own.

Yet, not too far down the road I come upon a neighborhood that has seen better
days. There are homes desperately in need of some carpentry and painting. The cars
parked along the streets are rusting and here and there a muffler is held on with wire. It is
apparent that there are people here that may not be making ends meet.

I turn south in my drive and pass by several other neighborhoods that show a
mixture of income levels. There are homes that are well kept with colorful
ornamentation decorating the yards. However, scattered among these homes are those
that remind me of the neighborhood that I just left. These are homes that look worn out
and in need of a face lift, but money may be an issue and a new roof is not a priority at
this time.

Winding along the road, I also come across another shopping center. This one
does not have the number of cars in the parking lot that the other one did. Curious, I
decide to go inside and visit this place. Inside I see the usual stores that appear to be
doing well. Walking out of one of these stores however brings a different impression, as

the interior of the center is far quieter. Continued investigation leads me to see several

52

store fronts with for lease signs. It seems that while this community has many retail
shopping centers for visitors, and stores that support ordinary life are not as popular.

In my travel, I have also noticed several manufacturing, service and businesses of
varying sizes. Observing the parking lots of some of these made it evident that there is
no longer the number of employees there once were. Others, however, seemed to be
bustling and doing well, reflecting the change from an industrial economy to a service
based economy. Other places of employment are scattered in various places around the
community including schools, offices, restaurants, services, and stores of many kinds.

I decided to travel outside the town limits to explore further. Surrounding the
community were subdivisions with newer and nicer homes. Farm fields were here and
there with their crops of corn and soybeans that are so prominent in Indiana. Yes, there
were homes out of the town limits that reminded me of the worn out houses in the poor
neighborhoods. Poverty is not limited to the town itself. However, I also saw many
homes that were newer and larger than the ones I saw in town. Those who could afford it
were moving out to the subdivisions outside the town limits.

This is a community that has evolved over the years. Today it is still changing
from a center of manufacturing to one of tourism. Life for some has not altered much
while for others the influx of new residents and retailers has made a difference in their
lives. This is a community that is in many ways similar to others in the area that is
coping with the changes that are part of our national history. America is also moving
from being an industrial nation to a place in transition. There are those with highly

skilled jobs with wages to match and then there are those who work in the service

53

industry. The declining middle class of Northville reflects what is happening in
communities across America.

Within this changing community rests an elementary school that reflects some of
what is happening in the larger community. Marvel Elementary School is in a state of
change as a growing number of students come from homes at or below the poverty level.

They come with less preparation for school and are changing in ethnicity as well.

54

CHAPTER 5
MARVEL SCHOOL: A GLIMPSE INTO THE PAST AND PRESENT

In this chapter, I will provide a brief history of Marvel Elementary School as well
as what it was like at the time of this study. Detailed descriptions of this school in forms
of data as well as written accounts will allow the reader to have a glimpse into what it
means to be a member of this school family. From this, a sense of how this school is
changing will be understood and how these changes reflect what is happening in the
larger community of Northville.

The original school structure, initially named Marshland School, was opened for
students in 1925 in a small community of the same name. Several additions were
constructed as the number of students attending the school grew. Sometime in the
1950’s, Marshland merged with nearby Northville, and the school became part of NCS.
Another change happened to this small school on the outskirts of Northville when the
name of the school was changed to Marvel. It was named after a past superintendent of
the NCS who had been instrumental in several advances to the district as well as being a
former teacher at this school.

The next major change happened as the school grew in size- both in the number
of students and the number of square feet. A major addition was built in the 1970’s. It
reflected a trend in education at the time- open concept buildings. The idea was that
children would be less restricted by age and grade levels as they were able to freely move
to appropriate groupings with other students at a similar level of learning. While the
teachers at this school embraced this style of teaching at first, they eventually reverted to

teaching in a traditional classroom fashion.

55

The most recent changes that have happened at this school are related to the
students who attend the school. For many years this school housed grades kindergarten
through sixth. However, in the 1990’s, NCS followed the movement of many Indiana
school districts and instituted middle schools taking the sixth graders out of the
elementary buildings. Not long after that, the district Title I program began a preschool
program and housed one of the classes at Marvel.

A T err Year History of Title I at Marvel Elementary School

Teachers who have been at Marvel for over twenty years cannot remember a time
when it was not a Title I school. However, the delivery of the program as well as the
number of Title 1 staff have changed over the years. Previous to the 1994-95 school year,
Marvel’s Title I program was similar to that of programs at many other elementary
schools throughout the district and state. Students were identified as being in need of
assistance with reading through achievement testing and teacher recommendation. The
students who met the program’s criteria were then selected to receive services from the
members of the Title 1 staff in a pull out situation. The students would leave the regular
education classroom with a Title I staff member and receive one on one or small group
help with reading that was targeted to their specific reading difficulties. The Title I staff
at Marvel at that time consisted of two certified reading teachers and two assistants.

However, this program began to change a little bit at a time. In May of 1995, one
Title I teacher and some of the first and second grade teachers went to North Carolina to
visit schools using the Four Blocks Literacy Model that the Title I teacher had read about
in The Reading Teacher. This program appeared to meet the needs of the students that

had been identified by the teachers through analysis of assessment data. After observing

56

this program and receiving more information from teachers who helped to develop and
implement this program, it was determined to pilot it at the school. In the fall of 1996,
the first and second grade teachers along with one Title I teacher and two assistants began
a trial run of Four Blocks at Marvel Elementary.

Another change also occurred in the Title I program during the 1996-1997 school
year. Students were no longer identified and pulled out to receive services in the
program. Instead all students in the school were able to interact with and receive
instruction from the Title I staff as the schoolwide program was implemented. Rather
than the Title I staff members coming into the classroom to pull select students out, now
they came into the classroom to work with the general education teacher and all of the
students. There were times when the Title I staff members would pull particular students
out for more intensive services. With another teacher in the classroom, students were
often broken up into smaller groups so that they could receive more attention.

The following year another change occurred in the Title I program. With an
increase in funding it was possible to pay one of the kindergarten teachers a half day to
teach what was labeled an extended day kindergarten class. Now students at the
kindergarten level were able to receive more services based on need. At the beginning of
the school year, all kindergarteners were given a series of tests. From analysis of this
data, students who had the greatest needs were offered the opportunity to attend the new
program. These students were part of a regular morning kindergarten program, but in the
afternoon they received remedial services so that they would be better prepared for first

grade. This program ended after the 2002-2003 school year because of funding issues.

57

The district also added another Title I program at the school. The district had
decided to add preschool programs into some of the Title I schools. Marvel was chosen
as one of the sites for this program. Preschool students who would one day attend one of
the designated district schools could apply for this program. These students were then
assessed and members of the preschool staff went to visit the home. Based on the
assessment data and the home visit, students were chosen to attend this program. While
this program was not part of Marvel’s Title I program, it did impact some of the students
who would one day come into the kindergarten program at this school.

Staffing changes also occurred during this time period. While the targeted
assisted program consisted of two Title I reading teachers and two assistants, the program
had expanded to include three reading teachers and three assistants as well as the
extended day kindergarten teacher, the preschool teacher, and two preschool assistants.
In other words, the Title I staff at Marvel Elementary School increased from four people
to 9.5 people, an increase of 137.5%! It should be noted that the preschool teacher and
two assistants were housed at Marvel but served students that would attend other school
in the district as well.

Other program enhancements that occurred at Marvel included giving the
responsibility of one of the Title 1 teachers to be the parent involvement coordinator.
This teacher worked in the classroom part of the day, but also had time set aside to plan
and run parent workshops as well as other activities that would bring parents into closer
connection with the school. One of the efforts included reenergizing and renaming the
parent group. This group worked with fund raising efforts as well as organizing events

that brought parents into the schools.

58

Another change in the Title I program occurred when Marvel applied for and
received a Comprehensive Reform Demonstration Grant in the 1999-2000 school year.
This grant offered more opportunities for teachers to receive professional development
and materials for instruction that were connected with the goals of the grant. Now
teachers had time once a month to meet in grade level teams to plan and analyze data.
Greater understanding and implementation of research based programs was possible
because of shared language and focused professional development. Money was available
for teachers to purchase items so that they could implement programs. For example,
teachers were able to purchase bins and a wide variety of texts for students to use during
the Self Selected Reading portion of the Four Blocks Literacy Model. A wide variety of
math materials were also purchased so that students had what they needed for Math Their
Way or Math A Way of Thinking lessons. Classrooms were transformed as teachers
purchased lamps and other decorative items to make the rooms more inviting. Even
though the funding ended in 2002, the many program changes exist still today.

A Glimpse Inside the Life of Marvel Elementary School Today

To get an understanding of a slice of life at Marvel today, let’s follow Jamil as he
begins his day as a second grader at this school. He arrives on the school bus that picked
him up at his bus stop along with other children from the housing authority project. He
and his friend Kareem are discussing what they plan to do at lunch recess. Kareem is in
another second grade class. As the boys are on their way inside, James comes up behind
them and shouts, “BOO!” The boys let James know in no uncertain terms that they do not

appreciate his joke. Angry words are exchanged as they enter the building.

59

Mr. Koeslke, the principal, is greeting students as they come in and hears this
exchange. He immediately steps in to calm this argument before it escalates to physical
violence. There is a history of problems between them that often begins with something
that happened in the neighborhood and finds its way to the school. In a calm voice, Mr.
Koeslke asks, “What’s the problem?” Immediately he is bombarded by three young
voices.

“One at a time please,” asks Mr. Koeslke, “I won’t be able to help you resolve
this issue if I don’t hear what you each have to say. Jamil, would you please tell me what
is happening.”

One at a time the boys tell their story and through patient negotiation that has
been perfected with practice, the boys are able to come to a peaceful resolution. Jamil
and Kareem head toward the cafeteria for breakfast while James, who had breakfast at
home, goes directly to the gym to wait for the morning bell.

Jamil decides to have cereal for breakfast while Kareem chooses to have Pop
Tarts. They go through the line and say hello to Mrs. Jackson, the head of the school
cafeteria. She punches their names on the computer to note that they have had breakfast.
They are among the students who do not have to pay for their meals because of their
parents’ income levels. They head to an empty table where they sit next to each other
and talk about the police raid on a neighboring apartment building the previous evening.
When they are finished with their breakfast, they join many of the other students in the
gym to wait for the morning bell.

At 8:30 the bell rings and teachers begin to come into the gym to retrieve their

students. Voices bounce off the gym walls and ceiling as numerous conversations

60

continue. Mr. Koeslke and several assistants line the students up as the teachers enter the
gym. The students are arranged in groups around the gym by grade level and teacher.
Some sit on the bleachers, others sit on the floor, and some sit on benches that line one
side of the gym. One by one the classes leave the gym. Jamil and Kareem share a nod as
a reminder of their plans for recess as they each head off in their class lines- Jamil with
Mr. Jones and Kareem with Mrs. Press.

On entering his classroom, Jamil notices that Anissa is absent again today. This
makes three days in a row that she has missed school. She is famous for telling her
mother that she doesn’t want to go to school, and her mother gives in rather than arguing
with her about attending school. Jamil wonders if she will miss so much school this year
that she will be retained. He remembers hearing that this almost happened to her at the
end of first grade. Of course, Anissa has also let it be known that her family may soon be
moving out of state, so this may not happen after all.

The day begins, and the second graders move through math which is much more
interesting this year with the new math program. They also spend time reading books of
their own choosing. Jamil finds a book in his group’s crate on basketball and wonders if
Mr. Jones put it there for him because he knows how much J arnil loves reading about this
sport. He really wants to make it to the NBA. He so wants to play for his favorite team,
the Orlando Magic. He can just picture himself out there on the court!

Time passes slowly when the subject he is working on is not of interest, but more
quickly when it is one he enjoys. Before long, recess arrives and Jamil rushes to get the
basketball from the closet. Unfortunately, he is not fast enough and Karen gets the ball

before he does. An argument erupts over the ball, and Mr. Jones intervenes to resolve the

61

situation. An angry Jamil joins Kareem outside and complains about the class having
only one basketball. They had begun the year with three, but two had mysteriously
disappeared leaving them with only one. Kareem tells Jamil it will be all right, and they
soon join another group of boys who were able to claim one of the coveted basketballs.

The day continues with writing lessons, followed by lunch, another highly
contested game of basketball at lunch recess, science, and a quick character education
lesson complete the school day. Jamil has had the opportunity to work on his own and in
a small group with other students. He has listened to his teacher lecture, although Mr.
Jones does not do this often, as well as explore the content in various ways.

As the day ends, students in the second grade gather their materials. Loud voices
are heard in the hallway as two students voice frustration with one another over who
made an inappropriate comment first. Each vehemently asserts that the other said
something bad first, and they are unwilling to let the matter go. Mr. Jones decides to
send the students to the office to cool down before they go their separate ways. He hopes
that Mr. Koeslke has more luck with them than he did. Finally, the second bell rings and
students line the balls on their way to multiple locations. Kareem high-fives Jamil in the
ball as he leaves to get on the bus. Other students go to another door to be picked up by
their parents. Jamil is on his way to the cafeteria for the after school program. His
mother won’t be home until after five, so he stays at school and receives a snack, help
with his homework, and more time to hone his basketball skills in the gym.

Students
As the snapshot story of Jamil suggests, many students at Marvel face difficult

personal and academic challenges. In the year this research was conducted, students at

62

this school included 79% free and reduced lunch with a transience rate of 45%. Historical

documents from 1999-00, 2002-03 and 2004-05 provide some history of changes in

student demographics at this school. Table 5.1 provides information on the percent of

students by ethnicity, mobility rate, and poverty rate as determined by the percentage of

students receiving free or reduced lunch.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1999-2000 2002-03 2004-05
African American 41.3 47 56
Hispanic 2 2 1
White 54 46 42
Multiracial 2.7 5 l
Mobility 12 58 45
Free/reduced lunch 58.6 78 79

 

 

 

 

Table 5.1 Student demographics

Some facts that become apparent while examining this five year time period are

that:

o The African American student population is increasing

0 The white student population is decreasing

o The number of students receiving free and reduced lunch is increasing

0 The mobility rate increased drastically and then slightly decreased.

The number of students in the school also changed as noted in each of the

documents. There were 335 students in 1999-2000, 349 in 2002-03 and 372 in 2004-05.

This means that more students are attending Marvel Elementary School. More of these

students are African American and fewer are white. An increasing number of these

63

 

students come from homes below the poverty line, and almost half of them have either
recently moved into or out of this school.

Another piece of student demographic data that was available on the Indiana
Department of Education website has to do with school attendance rate. Information on

the table represents the attendance rate as a percent.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Year Marvel State
1999-00 92.5 95.9
2000-01 93.2 95.7
2001-02 94.7 95.9
2002-03 94.4 95.8
2003-04 95.4 95.9
2004-05 95.1 95.9

 

 

 

Table 5.2 Student attendance percentages

While Marvel has not reached the same attendance rate as the state average, it has
increased from the 1999-00 school year to the 2004-05 school year. It is interesting to
note that while the state rate stays fairly steady, the Marvel attendance rate is more
volatile.

Since the fall of 2003, elementary students at Marvel have taken ISTEP+ in third,
fourth, and fifth grades. The 2004 test scores are the first to be used for accountability
purposes in the areas of English/Language Arts and math. Prior to this the state law only
required third, sixth, and eighth grade students to take the test. The current test is given
in late September and covers the standards that were taught in the previous grade levels.

In other words, the fifth grade ISTEP+ covers the English/Language Arts, math, and

64

 

science standards from first through fourth grades. Students at Marvel have scored below
the state average on this test since it began as a norm-referenced test in the late 1980’s.
The table below shows the percent of students at each grade level that passed the

various sections of the 2004 ISTEP+. The state average is presented in the parentheses.

 

 

 

 

 

Grade English/language Math Science
Third 25118;) (76%) 46% (74%)

Fourth 47% (74%) 50% (74%)

Fifth 54% (73%) 60% (73%) 33% (60%)

 

 

 

 

Table 5.3 Percentage of students passing ISTEP+
The Marvel students consistently score below the state average. This year the differences
in math steadily decreased from third grade to fifth. The results are less clear in
English/Language Arts where the differences are closer for third and fifth graders, yet are
much greater for fourth graders. The difference for science is the greatest which would
seem to indicate that this is an area that needs to be addressed by the Marvel teachers.
However, this is only the second year the science test has been administered, so there
may also be concerns with what is covered on the test. Appendix E contains test data for
third grade from 1999-2003.
Teachers

During the 2004-05 school year there were a total of 28 teachers working at
Marvel as listed by the Indiana Department of Education website. These include general
education, special education, physical education, Title 1, art, music, and speech teachers.
Two of the teachers work a half-day at Marvel and the other half at another district

school. One classroom teacher does not hold an Indiana license, but all the others hold

65

 

the correct license and would be considered highly qualified. Graphs 5 .1 and 5.2 provide

more information on the years of experience and degrees held by these teachers.

 

Years of Experience

Number of teacher:

 

20+ 16t020 111015 6to10 0-5

Years of Experelnce

 

 

 

Graph 5.1 Years of Experience

 

Degree

15.5
15
14.5
14
13.5
13
12.5

Number

 

Bachelor's Master's
Degree

 

 

 

Graph 5.2 Degrees held

For the purposes of this study, I only interviewed and observed general education,
special education, and Title I teachers because it is the work they do with students that is
being tested. The demographics for this smaller group are very similar to the larger

group when comparing percentages for the type of degree held by the teachers. The

greatest differences occur in the years of experience category, but they range from two
through six percent difference. The greatest differences occur at the six to ten and zero to
five year categories which have differences respectively of four percent and six percent.

In raw numbers, these are differences of one or two teachers.

 

Years of Experience

    

20+ 16—20 11 to 15 6 to 10 0-5

 

 

 

Graph 5.3 Years of experience for participating teachers

 

Degree

12.5

11.5
11
10.5
10

 

Bachelor‘s Master's

 

 

 

Graph 5.4 Degree for participating teachers
Teachers at Marvel Elementary School have participated in professional

development for a number of years. Like most schools, this was at times hit or miss.

67

There were times when the teachers chose to attend workshops that were of interest to
them but were not part of the overall school plan. Through my conversations with these
teachers, I was able to determine that there came a point in time where professional
development became more focused and schoolwide. In fact, Mr. Gobel recalled that this
became more evident when the school became a Title I schoolwide school. By this time,
through analysis of some data, the teachers at this school targeted particular areas of the
curriculum for greater focus. Teachers became more deliberate on what they were
teaching in language arts and math based on an examination of test data and professional
development opportunities.

Documents from the school demonstrate that teachers in this building were
focusing on particular areas for professional development. The Four Blocks Literacy
Model was the object of professional development from teachers attending one day
workshops to a consultant coming into the school to work with teachers in their
classrooms. Math Their Way/Math a Way of Thinking was the program chosen to help
teachers increase students’ abilities in math. Week-long training, purchase of materials,
and math consultants who came to the classrooms were all aspects for this program.
Many schools in the state were also becoming part of a program called Connected
Learning Assure Student Success (CLASS). This was another program that was part of
the professional development plan at Marvel. A coach from the program came to the
school as well as teachers observing the way the program worked at other schools and
sharing this with the teachers. Two other areas that were strongly connected with this
program were the use of portfolios and curriculum integration. Teachers at this school

were all receiving training through attendance at workshops, consultants that came to the

68

school, reading of professional materials, or teachers becoming experts and sharing their
expertise during school in-service days. Teachers had been part of the process of
choosing these areas of focus and were working together to master these programs all
with the goal of raising the level of their students.

The 2004-05 school professional development log provides data concerning the
types of professional development that the teachers received during this school year. As
would be expected when considering the data on years of experience, some of the
teachers did not participate in the professional development when the focus began in the
1996-1997 school year. Therefore, newer teachers are continuously being trained in
particular areas so that the staff has a common language and way of teaching. Mr.
Koeslke, the principal, has stated that this has been a challenge. Rather than having a
well-trained staff working to refine their teaching methods, he is constantly working to
bring new staff members up to speed with the programs.

Examination of the professional development log yields the following
information:

(a) teachers were involved in a total of 57 professional development opportunities

(b) the majority of these (70%) were offered by the district

(c) three major areas of concentration for these were English/language arts, math, and
technology

((1) the focus for English/language arts was on the Four Blocks program (71%)

(e) the focus for math was the new Everyday Math program that had been adopted by

the district this year (94%)

(f) all of the technology trainings were offered by the district

69

(g) forty percent of these were related to the new program on the computers that
allowed teachers to assign learning activities to their students
(h) twelve other opportunities were placed in a miscellaneous category and ranged
from discipline to report cards.
The table in Appendix D provides the data on these professional development
opportunities.

As noted previously, both Marvel Elementary School and the Northville
community are undergoing changes. These are not always easy to address and especially
not during a time of increased accountability in education. While the staff members of
this school have historically read and used research to continually refine their teaching
practices in order to meet student learning needs, the demands of testing and making
AYP have interfered with this process. What these teachers have to say in the coming
chapters tells how they are impacted by accountability and testing and in many ways
reflects what is happening in other schools as well because they share very similar

characteristics.

70

CHAPTER 6
ANALYSIS: STORIES TEACHERS TELL

The goals of this chapter are to: (a) discuss why the story format is used to
communicate what these teachers shared in interviews, observations, and conversations
about teaching in a Title I school under threat of accountability sanctions, (b) define the
terms that will be used, and (c) define and delineate each story genre. Life can be
conceived of as a series of stories that fit into a multitude of categories or genres, and this
was the case for the teachers of Marvel Elementary School. Throughout our
conversations, the teachers and I created a variety of stories as they discussed what was
happening in their lives (Mishler, 1986) as it related to accountability. They had many
different stories to tell about what it means to be a teacher in a Title I school serving
students from less advantaged backgrounds while coping with the realities of
accountability from local, state, and federal levels. These stories are “powerful modes of
knowing” (Brody, Witherall, Donald, and Lundblad, 1991, p. 276) their daily experiences
at this school. They also provide readers with a more “holistic view of the phenomena”
(Craig, 1997) of accountability at a Title I school.
Why the Story Format

Through the process of telling stories, teachers make sense of and give meaning to
what is occurring in their lives (Casey, 1993, 1995/96; Florio-Ruane, 1991; Heilman,
2005: Savolainen, 2004; Witherall and Noddings, 1991). It allows teachers to recognize
that what they know and have to say has value and through them they are able to create
information that is valuable to others as well (Gitlin, Bringhurst, Bums, Cooley, Myers,

Price, Russell, and Tiess, 1992). Human beings have an intrinsic need to make sense of

71

what is happening in their lives. As teachers prepare students for the test, give the state
test, analyze the data, or make instructional decisions based on data from a variety of
resources; they are seeking to make sense of the information. Why is this information
important? How do the data fit or don’t fit with one another? How does this connect with
my teaching experiences, life stories, and identities? As teachers are making sense of
what is happening, they are also giving contextualized and personal meaning to it.
Because teachers have different backgrounds and experiences, they have different ways
to make sense of and give meaning to these events.

The use of the story format also “reveals or explores our humanity” (Taylor,
1996, p. 17). As we listen to what teachers are saying through these stories, we are able
to recognize that they are humans struggling and coping with a variety of life
experiences. Teachers are often viewed as an authority figure without a life outside the
classroom or even as the voice that says “blah, blah blah” like in the Peanuts cartoons.
These stories allow readers to gain some insight into the human and vulnerable side of
teachers (Riesmann, 1993). Teachers are sharing pieces of their professional biographies
with the goal of “making history become personal- of telling the story of another person’s
life for a purpose” (Kridel, 1998, p. 125). They allow us to know about frustrations, joys,
concerns, hopes, and other experiences teachers go through in their daily lives. Stories
are not only about who they are as teachers but also about their lives outside of the school
walls. We come to see through the stories who teachers are as human beings and what
they find of value and importance in life (Savolainen, 2004).

Teacher stories are also what Palmer (1998) refer to as the inner landscapes of a

teacher’s life. They are guiding students into becoming members of society, modeling

72

 

proper behavior, holding high expectations, comforting and caring for students, and
making a difference in lives. There is value in using teacher stories to examine and work
through the issues they face in their teaching and lives (Casey, 1995/96). J alongo and
Isenberg (1995) as cited in Schwarz (2001) note that each story “documents lived
classroom experience” (p. 4) which has value to all who are interested in education and
give an inside view of school culture (Riesmann, 1993). As Florio-Ruane (1991) states,
“teachers’ stories are a largely untapped source of information about teaching” (p. 242).
Using the story approach demonstrates respect for the teachers as “active critical beings”
who are part of the research process (Gitlin, et a1, 1992, p. 32). The stories of teaching in
a Title I school grappling with accountability and sanctions allows the reader to recognize
the “complexities and contradictions” (Flyvberg, 2006) of their professional lives.

The stories teachers tell are also a way to “create and bond together a community”
(Taylor, 1996, p. 122). What the teachers told me are also things that they share with one
another in a variety of contexts from the workroom, conversations on the phone, and with
parents. They are generated as teachers and students spend five and a half hours a day
together for 180 days of the year. Teachers, staff members, district administrators,
parents, and students are all members of this community. Experiences and events that
generate these stories occur at the school as well as in the community, state, and nation.
In this way a variety of communities are created that includes the immediate school,
district, state, and national communities. Accountability laws have bonded together these
communities in a variety of ways and for differing purposes.

Witherall and Noddings (1991) note that stories are used to entertain, explain,

motivate, and convince readers. They are a way that connects on many levels with

73

readers and can generate a variety of responses. In keeping with the three purposes I
have for this research, the story format makes sense as I want to explain what is
happening at this Title I school in the current era of accountability as well as to convince
and motivate teachers, legislators, and members of the community to meet the purposes
of policy formation and implementation.

The story format has many advantages in the presentation of what I have learned
from these teachers. It is a way for teachers to make sense of and give meaning to their
teaching. The humanity of teachers as well as the culture of schools is also presented to
readers. The creation of community is another value to stories whether it is among
teachers, between various members of the school, or amongst individuals in the district,
state, or nation. Sharing what was learned as story also connects well with the three
purposes of this study. It is my goal that by reading and carefully considering the stories
will “lead to new insights, compassionate judgment, and the creation of shared
knowledge and meanings that can inform professional practice” (W itherall and Noddings,
l991,p.8)

These stories were told to me as a researcher trying to understand what was
happening in their lives as teachers were facing high stakes accountability policies. As
they tell me their stories, I placed my own interpretation on what they had to say based on
my own “cultural understandings” (Mishler, 1986, p. 95). My understandings of their
stories are colored by my experiences as a teacher in a Title 1 school in this state. These
teachers were aware that in many respects I had walked in their shoes. This in turn

influenced what and how they told me their stories. I also need to consider that as

74

teachers tell their stories and I write them, there is a “negotiation of power” (Grumet,
1991, p. 68 as cited in Casey, 1995/96, p. 219) occurring between us.
Defining Some Terms

There are several terms that are used when discussing stories and research about
stories including the words story, narrative, and discourse. It is of value to examine how
other research has defined and used these terms, and then to identify how these terms are
being used in this particular research study.

Some authors describe particular aspects or characteristics of story in order to
make known what it is. Miller (1998) has noted that the process of writing stories, like
the ones in this study which are about the lived experiences of people, is fluid and ever
evolving. Along the same lines, Murray (2003) stated that research is about telling a
story that has a structure and a “social nature” (p. 98). Another quality of story research
is that it touches both the mind and the heart of readers (Taylor, 1996). Sfard and Prusak
(2005) state that stories are to be “reifying, endorsable, and significant” (p. 16).

Other authors delineate particular elements that are part of a story. As an
elementary teacher, I would have my students use a story map to locate the characters,
setting, problem, events, and solution in a story as well as examine their own story
writings for these elements. Kainan (2002) noted that a story consists of events, plot and
characters to convey a particular meaning. Chaitin (2003) adds to this list setting, climax,
and solution. A story also needs to have order, a context, and make sense of events
(Riesmann, 1993).

In some research, the terms story and narrative are used interchangeably (Chaitin,

2003; Sfard and Prusak, 2005; Witherall and Noddings, 1991). However, other authors

75

classify narrative in particular ways that make it different from the term story. Kristeva
(2001) as quoted in Britzman (2003) defined narrative as “the ability to put biography
into words” (p. 23). Narrative is also seen as the smaller segments or chapters of a longer
life story (Juzwik, 2006). Riesmann (1993) referred to narrative as the “talk organized
around consequential events” (p. 3). Elliott’s (2005) criteria for a narrative are that it is
to be chronological, meaningful, and social.

In the creation and interpretation of a story or narrative, discourse is examined.
There are multiple definitions for this term that at times stand in opposition to one
another (Schreiber and Moring, 2001). Some authors have defined discourse as the
language that is used, whether spoken or written, that gives meaning to what is under
discussion through interpretation (Savolainen, 2004; Schreiber and Moring, 2001). It is
also based on the context of the situation in which the language is being used and the
relationship between the speaker and the listener (Stillar, 1998).

For this study, the terms story, narrative, and discourse are defined as follows:

0 Story is a compilation or collection of connected narratives that provide a wider
picture of the lived experience of teachers in a Title I school. Using a quilt
metaphor, the story is the entire quilt that is made up of several pieces. It is in
seeing all the pieces as a whole that the art of the quilt can be appreciated and
understood.

0 Narratives are the pieces and parts of a larger story that generate the events,
characters, and plot of the larger story. They are a slice of life in the school as
viewed by a particular character and move the story along. Following the quilt

metaphor, narratives are the squares that make up the quilt. Each square provides

76

something that is necessary for the entire quilt. They are pieced together in a
particular way to tell the story.
0 Discourse consists of the particular words or actions that give meaning to what is

said or seen in the narrative. The choice of words and the way they are organized

give meaning and boundaries to what is said. Examination of discourse is a

minute inspection of the narrative. On a quilt, the discourse consists of the

fiagments of fabrics used by the quilter for specific purposes. The way that the

pieces are sewn together creates the individual squares.
Genres

As I reviewed, coded, and recoded my data numerous times, I realized that the
narratives told by the teachers from Marvel Elementary School can be usefully placed
into four story genres: moral, power, interpersonal, and technical. The language or
discourse teachers used for each story genre have distinct characteristics (Casey, 1993).
There are times when it was difficult to make these distinctions as multiple genre
characteristics were evident in the narrative. Bakhtin, as cited in Casey (1993) and
Quantz (1992b), referred to this as having multiple voices. His theorizing helps to
recognize that these voices intersect at times and a narrative may appear to fit in more
than one story genre. The deciding factor became what discourse was central to what
was said in the narrative.

Moral Story Genre: Is it Good and Right?.

The moral story of Marvel teachers reflects their ethics and values or life
principles (Taylor, 1996). These are what guide teachers as individuals to make

judgments about what is right/ good or wrong/bad. These are personal judgments based

77

on a variety of factors and therefore cannot be proven to be true or false. Instead they are
a matter of individual beliefs rather than a set of absolute truths. C. S. Lewis (1972)
referred to these principles when discussing moral rules that maintain order in society.
They are what bring a sense of order and well-being to the community. Noddings (1998)
notes that a central aspect to moral narratives is an individual being consciously
concerned about the events and experiences of another’s life. Catholic nuns who were
teachers shared moral stories as they talked about “what ought to be” (Casey, 1993, p.
48).

Teacher identity is another part of their moral story. This is an ever-evolving,
individual, and complex tool teachers use to make sense of what it means to be a good
teacher (Beijaard, Meijer, and Verloop, 2004). Experiences and relationships in the lives
of teachers create and re-create the teaching self (Kelchtermans, 1993). It is the push and
pull of both the forces within the teacher as well as those from outside the teacher that
make a difference in how teachers view themselves (Palmer, 1998). Included in their
teacher identity is what they understand the purpose of education is to be such as the
good of society (Carr, 1993), preparation for work and civic responsibilities (Heilman, in
press), or to provide an opportunity for a better life (Nieto, 2003). Another aspect of
teacher identity is the reason for choosing this profession such as being of service to
others (Nieto, 2003), a calling (Schwarz, 1998), or because of the children (Casey and
Apple, 1989). Teachers have strong beliefs and values related to their teaching creating
their “professional selflrood” (Pomson, 2005, p. 795) which are often connected to

children such as their belief that all children can learn (Nieto, 2003), they make a

78

difference (Provenzo and McCloskey, 1996), and meeting students’ individual learning
needs (Goodman and Lesnick, 2001).

Another aspect of teacher identity is the way teachers view themselves or how
others have portrayed teachers in the media. Some of these archetypes are noble in
character such as the priest (Mayes, 2002), elder (Fischer and Kiefer, 1994), hero (Ayers,
1994), or savior (Trier, 2001). Others are nurturing such as the parent (Kantor, 1994),
mother (Hobson, 1994; Mayes, 2002; Newman, 2001), advocate (Fischer and Kiefer,
1994), gardener (Joseph and Bumaford, 1994), therapist (Fisher and Kiefer, 1994; Joseph
and Bumaford, 1994), or role model (Jackson, Boostrom, and Hansen, 1993). Still others
are more cerebral as teachers see themselves as a scholar (Joseph, 1994; Nieto, 2003),
philosopher (Mayes, 2002), or interpreter (Fischer and Kiefer, 1994).

The discourse used by teachers that defined narratives as part of the moral story
included: make a difference, all can learn, believe, I am, fair, bias, demeaning, good
people, contribute, and as professionals. The wording of some questions created a
context to generate moral narratives as well. Why did you become a teacher? What do
you like best about teaching? What aspects of your profession are most important to
you? What are your rewards? What is the purpose of education? What is your teaching
philosophy? What is the purpose of NCLB?

Power Story Genre: Who has Control ?.

This story is told as teachers talk about issues of authority and control. It is about
who is making the decisions and how these decisions impact the professional lives of
teachers as well as their students. Power stories also relate to how these decisions

influence and reflect the reputation of teachers and schools through the use of labels that

79

are publicized in local media. There are sources of authority teachers’ view as legitimate
and illegitimate as well as places where teachers have no control.

Legitimate forms of control are those that value and support teachers in their
work. This type of story “heals and empowers” (Palmer, 1998) the hearts of teachers as
they feel a sense of respect for and from students, parents, administrators, and the
community. When teachers determine what their work entails based on their professional
wisdom, they have control over what they do. Professional autonomy is a dream for
teachers in their work which is often created through loose coupling generated by the lack
of connections between the various levels of governance in education (Shulman, 1983).
The teacher experiences a respect for their professional knowledge and judgment as they
are able to employ it to make decisions. In the daily lives of teachers, another source of
legitimate control comes as the students demonstrate respect for teachers’ authority
(Provenzo and McCloskey, 1996). Educational policies that demonstrate respect for
teachers as professionals are viewed as legitimate forms of control because they are
working with teachers in their work.

Unfortunately, there are also illegitimate forms of control which teachers
experience as a form of disrespect for their professional knowledge and abilities. As
these forms of control influence what is happening in the school and classroom, teachers
live with horror stories in which teachers become the victims of educational policies and
the system (Heilman, 2005).

Not surprisingly, teachers harbor their own nightmares. These portray a besieged

and beleaguered group of dedicated professional, inadequately appreciated or

compensated, attempting to instruct responsibly and flexibly under impossible

80

conditions. They are subject to endless mandates and directives emanating from

faceless bureaucrats pursuing patently political agendas. These policies not only

dictate frequently absurd practices, they typically conflict with the policies
transmitted from other agencies, the courts, or from other levels of government

(Shulman, 1983, p. 485).

Teachers feel a loss of control over their work as they are told what to do by others that
they believe do not know or understand what it means to teach (Altenbaugh, 1992b;
Casey and Apple, 1989; Provenzo and McCloskey, 1996; Quantz, 1992a). Teachers
become de-professionalized as they now become simply “managers of classroom
procedures” (Casey and Apple, 1989, p. 178) rather than wise educators carefully
utilizing a specialized body of knowledge in order to accomplish their teaching goals.
Teachers are also experiencing an increasing lack of respect from students and parents as
they fear being sued by parents as well as from administrators when they do not receive
support in their work (Provenzo and McCloskey, 1996).

There are also areas where teachers feel they have no control such as homes and
society. Cohen (2006) stated that there is “a growing awareness that students with
significant social, emotional, and/or behavioral needs pose a great challenge to preK-12
educators” (p. 208). Students are coming to school with needs and issues that make the
work of teaching more difficult due to things that are beyond the control of the teacher.
Teachers become angry with how the injustices of society and educational policies are
imposed on students and teachers (N ieto, 2003). Teachers who are evaluated by the
policies as succeeding or failing are also working daily with students who are living in

poverty, often without proper nutrition or health care. They feel that they are put into a

81

no-win situation as they are unable to control factors in the lives of their students that
would be more conducive to learning, yet they are held accountable for their students’
learning at the same level as children who are well-fed and whose health needs are
attended to (Provenzo and McCloskey, 1996).

The discourse of power includes a wide range of words that reflect where teachers
do and do not have control as well as their feelings about the legitimacy of the control.
The words and phrases used for legitimate control included: we said, us saying, and we
want. Those for illegitimate control included: should, supposed to, make sure, battle,
sanction, restricted, forced, have to, drive, do what you’re told, all about the scores,
pressure, no choice, judged, dread, don’t understand, monitoring, political, and
everything. For the narratives about lack of control, the words and phrases included:
problems, can’t control, lack respect, baggage, and challenges.

Interpersonal Story Genre: How Does it A flect Relationships .7.

School is a social institution where throughout the course of the day, teachers
interact with students, teachers, other staff members, parents, and administrators. Their
stories about life and work in schools also reflect these various relationships.
Kelchtermans (1993) noted that these relationships were a source of “job satisfaction” (p.
212) for teachers. While listening to teachers’ narratives, Casey (1993) heard about
issues of relationships with families, connections with students, and writing curriculum
with colleagues. Relationships are started and sustained through what Noddings (1991)
refers to as interpersonal reasoning which consists of five significant features: “an
attitude of solicitude or care, attention, flexibility, effort aimed at cultivating the

relationship, and a search for an appropriate response” (p. 163).

82

Another major element of these relationships is that of trust. Bryk and Schneider
(2002) noted that a higher level of trust amongst the various school stakeholders makes a
difference in the implementation of reform efforts and school improvement. This means
that for accountability policies to make the most impact in schools, high levels of trust
needs to exist among those involved. This trust is built through interactions and
relationships. They also noted four things that played a role in creating and increasing
trust: being listened to, having concern for the well-being of another, the ability to obtain
desired objectives, and walking the talk. Meier (1995) also noticed that trust was built
both in and out of the school as the stakeholders related to one another in other contexts.

A significant relationship is formed between the teacher and students. As noted
earlier, teachers often choose this profession because of the value they place on the
relationships they are able to form with students (Casey and Apple, 1989; Green and
Manke, 1994; Nieto, 2003; Schubert, 1991). This relationship often begins with students
in the classroom but also extends past that time as well as students move through grade
levels and beyond into adulthood. These relationships are a reward of teaching and
include student learning as well as respect (Lortie, 1975). In his study of teachers,
Jackson (1990) also noted that teachers make personal and at times deep connections
with students. There is a bond that is formed between teacher and students.

Teachers also form relationships with parents. The strength of these relationships
varies based on a number of factors. They may also continue on beyond the time that the
teacher has a student in the classroom. Strong relationships are built as teachers
demonstrate respect for parents’ roles and abilities (Bryk and Schneider, 2002). Teachers

have also noted that family circumstances can make a difference in parent support and

83

involvement in education (McLaughlin and Talbert, 2001). This may result in either
weaker relationships as teachers and parents are disconnected with one another or toward
stronger ones if efforts are made to address these situations.

Finally, teachers have relationships with other teachers and members of the school
staff as well as with a variety of administrators. Pomson (2005) examined a continuum
of school community among teachers from cooperation to collegiality to collaboration. It
is the area of collaboration that teachers are able to develop in ways that allow teachers to
grow as professionals. In the area of school improvement, Bryk and Schneider (2002)
noted that teachers need to have shared visions about curriculum, instruction, discipline
and children in order to meet the goals of reform. There needs to be shared decision-
making as well as the ability for teachers to agree to disagree at times (Meier, 1995).
Principals play a role in teacher relationships when teachers perceive that they are all
treated the same (Bryk and Schneider, 2002) and there is “trust and respect for the history
and culture of a school or teacher community” (McLaughlin and Talbert, 2001 , p. 100).

Some of the words and phrases used most often by teachers that indicated
interpersonal narratives included: interacting, we, us, relationships, collaboration, talk,
communication, rapport, connection, together, love, and share. The focus of this
discourse is on the relationships and bonds that exist or do not exist among the school’s
stakeholders.

Technical Story Genre: Does It Work?.

These are the stories of what does and doesn’t work in these classrooms. This is
the type of discourse or story about high stakes testing that is often of most interest to

policymakers. Teachers tell technical narratives as they discuss how reforms and the

84

accountability policies have or haven’t helped their students to learn and their teaching to
improve. These narratives join together to create the technical story of how teachers
understand their “practical experiences” (Schubert, 1991, p. 208). Bruner (1996) would
refer to this as “folk pedagogy” while Shulman (1987) would call it “knowledge base for
teaching.” Palmer (1998) refers to this as the “intellectual” aspect of teaching as it relates
to what teachers know about students, how they learn, and the content that is being
presented. Teachers are using their professional knowledge to create lessons and
experiences that will guide their students’ learning. Teachers seek to employ those
strategies that work with their students and to assess this learning in ways that best suit
the students. They also examine reform and policy efforts in light of what is best for their
students based on their professional judgment. Teachers tell some technical stories
through questions such as when one third grade teacher asks, “For No Child Left Behind-
what is it actually doing? Is it actually working? Is it firrthering education or is it
hindering education? ISTEP- is it a valid measure of what students actually know?” This
is the story of how accountability does or does not function in a Title I school.

Some of the discourse that caused the narratives to be labeled technical included:
helps, helpful, focus, refocus, makes sense, you can see, good, practical, applicable,
works, and useful. These demonstrate whether or not something does or doesn’t fimction
well for a teacher and how it makes their job easier or harder based on what teachers see

in their work at this school.

85

CHAPTER 7
CASE STUDY PARTICIPANTS: THE STORYTELLERS

This chapter introduces the case study participants who tell the moral, power,
interpersonal, and technical stories of what it means to work in a school where the
realities of accountability are ever present. Three teachers and the school principal
agreed to be the main participants for this study. They were each chosen for a variety of
reasons that relate to their knowledge of the policies and test, views and beliefs about
accountability, and role in the school. Ms. Lambert, Mr. Wilson, Mrs. Johnson, and Mr.
Koselke (all pseudonyms) each have some unique things to say while they also reflect
many of the views and beliefs of their colleagues. Three of the teachers have personal
connections with NCS schools in that Ms. Lambert is a NCS graduate, Mr. Wilson’s
children all graduated from these schools, and Mrs. Johnson’s children are currently
attending a school in the district. Each case study participant will be introduced first with
a brief bio graphic description followed by a narrative portraying part of a day in their
school experience. While the names of students are fictitious, the situations that are
described are actual events that occurred while I was observing at the school.
Welcome to Ms. Lambert 's First Grade Classroom

Ms. Lambert is a reserved middle-aged woman who loves to work with the
younger children. She is especially close with her mother who often comes into the
classroom to work with the students. She is an accomplished baker and often brings her
creations to the school for all to enjoy. As a veteran first grade teacher with a Master’s
Degree in Elementary Education, Ms. Lambert has worked with students at Marvel

School for over ten years. Ms. Lambert attended Northville Community Schools and was

86

pleased to get a teaching job in the district. She has never given ISTEP+, and what she
knows about it is from things she has heard from her colleagues. She is unsure of how
what she does as a first grade teacher makes a difference on the test, but she would like to
know. Her views and beliefs about the test and accountability were mainly negative, but
she also asked many questions throughout the interview and during observations which
demonstrated some uncertainty about them. When discussing the connection between
professional deve10pment and accountability she states with a level of frustration,
“Doesn’t it all come back to this?” She also refers to ISTEP+ as a “horrible monster”
that “make schools look bad.”

Organized chaos is the term that came to mind as I entered Ms. Larnbert’s first
grade classroom on a bright spring morning. The room seemed to be full to overflowing
with desks, books, containers of varied sizes, computers and even a piano. Further
observation showed that there was an order to all this apparent clutter. The desks were in
the shape of a large oblong while crates stood in front of the desks with items the students
would need for some activities. On the walls were several different math posters and
charts while a Word Wall lined another board.

As the first bell rang, children began to fill the hall outside the classroom. They
hung up coats and backpacks, entered the room, and began their day with what appeared
to be a routine as all knew what to do. In all, there are 19 students in the classroom-
twelve males and seven females. They began by making corrections to the sentences on
the board and then solving the math problem on the overhead. The morning routine also

included turning in homework and placing a sticker on a chart. After about 20 minutes,

87

Ms. Lambert went over the day’s agenda with the students, answered questions, and
complimented them on the good work they are doing.

After a quick restroom break, students actively participated in a six minute Word
Wall lesson. Ms. Lambert displayed the words which they said together and then spelled
orally. As they were spelling the words, some were also laying on the floor making the
letters with their bodies or making the letters using sign language.

The writing lesson that followed was the district mandated quarterly writing
assessment. This very closely resembled the format of the ISTEP+ writing section.
Students were given a tri-fold paper that included a writing prompt, pre-writing graphic
organizer, blank lines for writing, and an editing checklist. Ms. Lambert encouraged the
students to do their best and that this would be easy. This was followed by step-by-step
directions of how to complete this assessment. Ten minutes after students began writing,
one stated that he was finished and read his piece to Ms. Lambert. As other students
finished, they took books from their desks and read. Thirty-five minutes after this
assessment began; all but one student was done. While this student finished in the hall,
the rest of the class listened to a short read aloud and then took another restroom break.

Soon Mr. Gobel and Mrs. Grabble appeared at the classroom door to pick up their
small groups. As part of the school’s Title I schoolwide plan, a Title I teacher, assistant
and the classroom teacher each work with a small group of students. After the two
groups left, Ms. Lambert began work with her group of six students. Today’s goal was to
complete the quarterly reading assessment with some of the students in the group. While
she was assessing one on one, the other students were working on a subtraction packet.

Two students were assessed for fluency and comprehension as they read aloud a grade

88

level text. When this was done, Ms. Lambert called the students to the rug and read them
a little book.

The other groups began to return to the classroom at 11:15. Students worked in
their small groups for approximately 40 minutes. It was now time for students to prepare
for lunch. Coats were put on, students lined up quietly in the hall, and soon this group of
first graders was on their way to the cafeteria for lunch followed by time on the
playground to use up some of their energy. It has been almost three hours since the
students had walked into their classroom earlier in the morning, and they needed some
time to run and play.

Welcome to Mr. Wilson ’s Primary Special Education Classroom

A tall, distinguished looking older gentleman, Mr. Wilson probably has the
longest tenure at Marvel and is nearing retirement. He is fast becoming a talented
magician and will often amaze Marvel students with slight of hand tricks. He teaches
primary special education students, but he also works with some upper grade children in
his classroom because their learning levels are similar to his students. This teacher
working with kindergarteners to fifth graders is a real parental figure to his students as he
not only talks about how students learning is more than academics in school, but also
teaches this as he feeds them and enforces the use of polite manners in simple activities
such as saying “thank you” when receiving a snack and waiting for all students to be
served before eating. During the interview it became apparent that Mr. Wilson is acting
as a street level bureaucrat when it comes to the test and policies. With state and federal
special education laws as well as documents in the form of IEPs, his priorities are

different. He finds ISTEP+ “not too appropriate for my students,” and his answers to

89

questions on the policies were more about the special education ones rather than the
NCLB and PL 221. He finds IDEA and Article 7 to be of greater importance to what he
does as a teacher than the other laws. His tenure at the school also brought an interesting
note in that he believes the improvement inherent in the policies “would take place
without those.” This knowledge comes from serving on numerous reform committees
throughout his time at Marvel.

At first glance this room appeared to be like any other elementary classroom.
There were 18 desks assembled in rows, four computers sat on tables along one wall
waiting to be used, bookshelves were lined with children’s reading material, and bulletin
boards adorned the walls with items ranging from math to a Word Wall. There were also
some more homey items in the room. A rug with an upholstered chair was in one comer
of the room, on the other side of the room stood a small refrigerator with a coffeepot atop
it, and on the countertop under the windows were a microwave and a toaster.

The morning bell buzzed, but there were no students in the room because they
were in their general education classrooms for morning announcements. As the sound of
young voices over the PA system faded away, students of various ages and sizes began to
trickle into the room. Their familiarity with the morning routine was evident as they
began correcting the sentences on the board or completing the papers that are given to
them by Mrs. Weaver, the assistant. Pencil on paper, the rustle of turning pages, and
voices saying “Good morning” were heard during this time.

Five minutes later, Mr. Wilson began his lesson even as a few more students enter
the room. He began by sharing with the class why he was gone the previous day, and that

he had missed the students. The lesson for this morning was on listening comprehension

9O

and following directions related to the book Bread and Jam for Frances. Occasionally,
Mr. Wilson would ask a recall comprehension question as he was reading. He also asked
for a prediction about what the morning snack would be as he was reading. It seemed as
if some students sitting in the back of the room were not paying attention. Next, they
were given a series of worksheets that were related to the book. Mr. Wilson read the
directions to the class for each sheet and called on students to answer questions about the
directions to be sure that they knew what to do.

Now the students were called to the rug in one comer of the room where they
would do a lesson on a packet called News to You. The lesson began with students
sharing important news in their lives. As one student shared, Mr. Wilson asked very
specific questions and made comments that demonstrated he was well acquainted with
this student’s family. For ten minutes, the sounds of student and teacher voices could be
heard as they read through the packet together. Interestingly, a student fell asleep during
the reading, and Mr. Wilson seemed to accept this. Another student in the class was this
girl’s sibling and stated that she had not felt well. This girl was allowed to sleep at other
times of observation and was even covered with a blanket.

Students were sent back to their seats to begin working on their various
worksheets related to the book lesson as well as the News to You. Students were allowed
to work on their own or in small groups. They were also given the choice of the order in
which the sheets are completed. One student seemed to have a great need for adult
assistance. Mr. Wilson later shared that he believed this student had “learned
helplessness”. He was so used to adult help with learning activities that he often did not

even try on his own.

91

Fifteen minutes into this project, one student was chosen to pass out the day’s
snack of bread and jam. He was chosen because he enjoys hands on tasks and had
demonstrated a level of responsibility for this task. Mr. Wilson was concerned not only
with the students’ academic learning, but their social and emotional well-being as well.
This is borne out as the students politely responded to one another when asked if the
day’s snack is desired. “Please” and “thank you” were words that dropped naturally from
their lips throughout this routine. After everyone had been served, seconds were offered
and many accepted.

At 10:20, four students left while the others continued to work on the
assignments. Again a comfortable routine was observed as students turned in their
completed assignments to be checked. Work that was completed correctly would lead to
points later turned in for classroom money to be used at the classroom store on Friday. At
11:00, another seven students left for lunch. The remaining two students left at 11:20.
The room remained empty of students until more students began to trickle back in about
an hour later.

Welcome to Mrs. Johnson ’3 Fifth Grade Classroom

The youngest of the three teachers, Mrs. Johnson moves around her classroom
with energy and enthusiasm in each step. She needs this to keep up with her two young
children as well as the students in her class. She was moved to fifth grade a year and a
half ago when the kindergarten enrollment at the school decreased. It was a difficult
transition the first year, but now she loves working with the older students. She is
currently completing her Master’s coursework through an online program. Through the

interview, conversations, and observations, her use of what she has learned during the

92

coursework on Multiple Intelligences became evident. Observations also demonstrated
her emotional connection with her students. These are also seen in her beliefs about
education in general, ISTEP+, and accountability. She has passionate views on the need
to have un-graded schools that allow students to learn at their own pace. She has given
the test twice and stated that “It’s not fair- biased. Most of the questions that I’ve ran
across on that test in the past have not hit culture experiences of our classroom.” She also
has a clear understanding of the purpose of the policies.

It is— the purpose of the state law is to make sure our school has goals set so that

we are achieving actually No Child Left Behind. They kind of go hand in hand.

It’s a three year program that is for the betterment of the school so that we have a

plan that we— it’s really goals- how we want our school to look.

Other comments from the interview and conversations revealed her favorable opinion of
PL 221 while she has a negative opinion of NCLB. Recently she has also had
experiences in teaching in the summer and after-school remediation programs offered by
the district.

Above the classroom door a shimmering sign with silver fiinge said “Welcome to
Paradise.” Upon entering the room, I found an eclectic mix of typical and atypical
classroom accouterrnents. There were the desks arranged in various groupings along
with a lone desk directly next to the teacher’s. Both tall and shorter bookshelves as well
as bins with books were around the room filled with a mix of books for students. Behind
Mrs. Johnson’s desk was another bookshelf that held teacher’s manuals as well as other
reading materials she would use. Computers were ready and waiting to be used while

some of the walls had Word Walls or bulletin boards with motivational posters or

93

sayings. Near the entrance to the room was a whiteboard with the day’s agenda written
on one side.

Along with these were some less typical items that made this classroom unique in
character. There were the pink and white flamingo lights lining the edges of the student
mailboxes near the door with a glowing yellow lava lamp on top. In one comer of the
room stood an inflated palm tree with pillows arranged in a haphazard fashion underneath
it. A long table covered with a yellow cotton tablecloth held a variety of papers and
paper trays where students placed completed work as well as picked up their assignments
for the day. Near the chalkboard, a padded rocking chair invited someone to sit and read.
There on the tile floor by the sink was a worn black and white Mickey Mouse rug.

As the students enter, it was apparent that they know and were comfortable with
the routine. They came in, read both sides of the board, put things away and began the
morning work. There was some movement in and out of the classroom as students used
the restroom or retrieved a forgotten item in a backpack in the hall. A quick count
showed that there were 19 students in this class- of these there are slightly more boys
than girls and a fairly even distribution of black to white students.

During the course of the morning students were involved in three different
activities. The day began with the students and teacher participating in a two minute
community circle. As a stuffed pink flamingo was tossed from one person to another,
students shared one fun thing done over the weekend in whispers or conversational tones.
A feeling of trust among all in the room could be sensed as they shared pieces of their

lives with one another.

94

Next, was an 80 minute math lesson comprised of multiple parts. Students first
quickly and confidently reviewed Friday’s math lesson while the sound of chalk on the
board alerted students to the fact that Mrs. Johnson was drawing the student’s response
on the board for her visual learners. The day’s lesson soon began on how to find the area
of a quadrilateral beginning with 3 examples given verbally for auditory learners and
written on the board for the visual learners. During independent practice, the sound of
pencil to paper could be heard along with the soft voices of students and teacher as she
asked questions about the strategies being used to solve a problem. “Give me five,”
requested Mrs. Johnson with her hand in the air. This was followed by more guided
practice because several students were moving off track. Once again the sound of pencils
on paper could be heard as they completed a few more problems on their own. With
fifteen minutes left for math, students put away their books and quickly gathered
materials to play one of the assigned math games. Voices were never above the level
needed to have a conversation with the person across the desk while dice clinked across
them.

After the math games materials were quickly put away, Mrs. Johnson began a 40
minute lesson on writing with a focus on using the Indiana Developmental Writing
Rubric to revise and edit. While this was a teacher directed lesson, students shared their
ideas for the edits needed on students’ rough drafts. Each student had a copy as the class
went over one piece sentence by sentence giving possible edits. Through consensus a
decision was made on which edit was the best.

It had been a busy morning in Mrs. Johnson’s fifth grade classroom. In the three

and a half hours that I was able to observe this room, I saw students working individually

95

and in pairs. 1 saw teacher directed instruction that moved to more student directed
instruction. The rapport and trust among the students and with the teacher became
apparent as they interacted throughout the morning.
Welcome to Mr. Koselke ’s World

The final participant is the principal, Mr. Koselke, who has recently obtained his
administrator’s license and Master’s degree. He is in his mid-thirties, married with three
children who attend school in a neighboring district. Recently, he has used his athletic
abilities to coach different sports teams in order to spend more time with his children. An
avid mystery reader and writer, he is very involved with the local amateur writers group
that meets once a month at the public library. In his first year as principal at Marvel, he
is using the experiences he gained as a teacher at another NCS school. Each morning
during announcements, he tells two jokes as a way to start the day for students and
teachers with some humor. While teaching, he gave ISTEP+ and was a leader in the
school’s professional development program. He is also very adept at writing grants for
various initiatives. His expertise with professional development, data analysis, and
research are being put to use as Marvel principal. He is well respected by the members of
the staff which became evident when several named him as a valued resource at the
school and a source of support in their teaching. Many of the teachers at Marvel also
served with him on committees when he was a teacher which has given him a level of
trust with his staff that many new administrators do not have.

The sun was shining, the early morning spring air was fresh from the rain last
night, and the road at this hour of the morning was fairly free of traffic. Mr. Koselke had

the radio tuned to an oldies station, and he was singing along with the radio. He was

96

willing and eager to begin this new chapter in his career as an educator. He was someone
who enjoyed a new challenge and was open to learning new things. Innovation and
research were his passions. In fact, he had led some teacher discussion groups about
some new programs that were being considered at the school where he had taught. Now
he had an even greater opportunity to influence change for students as a school
administrator. At this moment in time, life was good for Marvin Koselke.

At this point in the drive, his mind was in a happy place, yet at he neared Marvel
Elementary School, a change came to the direction of his thoughts. On his desk were
three bus reports turned in by the drivers after the afternoon routes. This was one part of
his job that was not appealing to him. Why can’t the students get along with one another
long enough to get home at the end of the day? Why was it so hard for them to transfer
what they had learned about fiiendship and caring for others beyond the classroom and
onto the bus ride home? He knew one of the first things he would have to do this
moming was to call in the students to have a chat. He had already talked with their
parents on the phone the previous afternoon. It had delayed his departure for home
causing him to miss the beginning of his son’s baseball game. However, from experience
he knew it was better to contact the parents as soon as he could rather than wait until the
next morning.

As Marvin pulled into the school parking lot, he noticed that a few of the teachers
were already at the school. They didn’t need to be there for another hour, but these
monring people used this quiet time to prepare for whatever they had planned for the day
as well as considering several backup plans in case things don’t go as expected. He

smiled as he walked into the building thinking about the dedication so many of the staff

97

members had for their students. While these teachers were here early with more coming
shortly, there were also several who were at the school well after their contractual day
ended doing the same thing. He really couldn’t ask for a better staff: a mix of veteran
and new teachers who were devoted professionals.

His thoughts now carried him, as he walked into his office, to the professional
development program that was scheduled for next week. In his head, he was making a
mental list of what he needed to check on and have ready before that afternoon session.
Professional development was one of his real passions and therefore this responsibility
was no chore for him. In fact, he was eager to hear what the consultant would have to
say after her morning observing some of the teachers. It was always useful to have a
fresh perspective on how the teachers were implementing this research-based math
program. What she had to say in the afternoon session to the teachers as well as the
feedback she would give him personally would go a long way in making this program
work well. The proof, as far as the state was concerned, was how well the students did
on the math portion of the test next fall. For Mr. Koselke and his staff, this proof came
from how well the students did on their performance assessments, daily assignments, and
conversations about math. This they knew was what told the real story of what the
students knew about math.

Marvin settled into his chair with the sunshine pouring in his windows. He closed
his eyes, took a deep breath, and calmed his thoughts. He found that doing this in the
morning helped him to focus better and not become carried helter-skelter with all the
things that would come throughout the day. You never knew what would happen in the

day. While he had a schedule for the day planned out, he knew that this could easily fly

98

out the window with any number of issues. At this moment he tried to remember if there
had ever been a day since taking this position where his daily agenda had gone smoothly.
Probably once in a while, but none in recent memory came to mind. Oh well, he did
enjoy the challenge of dealing with some chaos although there were times when he could
do with less.

Just as he was ready to send some emails to the appropriate teachers to send the
bus referral students to his office after morning announcements, his phone rang. “Good
morning, Marvel Elementary School. Mr. Koselke speaking.” It was the superintendent’s
secretary letting him know that the administrator’s meeting was being changed to this
afternoon at 1:00. Well, Marvin thought that really puts a wrench into the schedule, and
he balled up the piece of paper so carefully written the previous afternoon. What else
could happen? He grabbed a sheet of clean paper and made an alternate schedule that he
hoped would last at least for another hour. After that he began to do some other .
necessary paperwork while he still had some time.

In no time at all, he looked at the clock and realized that the first bus would be
coming at any moment. One thing he made a concerted effort to do each morning was to
stand by the front doors either inside or outside the building to greet the students as they
entered. This he found had been helpful in preparing teachers for any concerns that he
noticed with students. The way they acted and talked as they walked in first thing in the
morning had been a good barometer of how they were feeling. As he began to walk out
of the building, the smell of breakfast pizza wafted down the hall. He would have to
remember to grab one to have as a midmoming snack- if he had time for that or even

remembered that he had one.

99

As he exited the building, the noise of the bus made its anival known even before
he saw it turn the comer. Soon it stopped at the front of the building and let its
passengers off. There was the sound of young students talking to one another. Two
young ladies deep in conversation almost bumped into Mr. Koselke as he greeted them
with a warm, “Good morning. Are you ready for a great day?” The girls smiled brightly
and in unison said, “Good morning Mr. Koselke. Yes, we are.” More buses came to
drop off their charges, and soon the noise of children talking took over the morning air.
Mr. Koselke carefully eyed the students to get a read on how their moming had been so
far. Two of the bus referral students walked by with heads down. He made a point of
greeting them with a polite “Good morning.” They gave a subdued response that let him
know their parents had already had a talk with them. Their remorse may be short lived,
but it was better than nothing. A young boy in Mr. Wilson’s special education class
grabbed his attention as Mr. Koselke heard his strident voice make a rude comment to
another student. Another bad morning would ensue if he didn’t intervene soon and then
give Mr. Wilson a heads up. This he had learned from previous experience. A little time
in the counselor’s office coloring and having a calm conversation with an adult had
always worked in the past.

The morning was just beginning for the students, but Mr. Koselke had been at
school for the better part of two hours with many more ahead. There was the cafeteria to
monitor as well as talking with the counselor and Mr. Wilson before he assisted the
fourth grade students who were learning to take over monring announcements. Next
would be his conversations with the bus referral students and then morning rounds. If all

went well, two teacher observations were scheduled for the morning. This was his

100

favorite part of the day- being in the classroom with teachers and students. Lunch time
monitoring with few if no discipline issues would be welcome before he would need to
leave for the administrator’s meeting. Oh, and he needed to remember to pick up that
breakfast pizza. Another day at Marvel Elementary began with all its joys and
challenges.
A Preview of the Next Four Chapters

In the next four chapters, the moral, power, interpersonal and power stories of the
Marvel teachers will be shared. The case study participants’ stories are fore-fi'onted
while other teachers’ voices are brought alongside to compare and contrast with their
stories. In listening to what these teachers had to say, more can be learned about what is
happening in their lives because of accountability policies.

The chapters are arranged according to the story genres. Each chapter begins with
a brief review of what the story genre entails followed by the narratives of the case study
teachers along with comparisons and contrasts with the other teachers in the building who
were interviewed. As experiences from observations, further conversations, and
documents interact with these narratives, they will be included to enrich them. This
collection of narratives composes each of the stories. It is through this diverse and rich
description that readers will have greater insights into what these teachers are

experiencing at Marvel Elementary School.

101

CHAPTER 8
MORAL STORY: IS IT GOOD AND RIGHT?

The moral story of Marvel teachers relates what they believe to be good and right
in life as well as in their teaching profession. The first set of narratives in this story tells
about the life principle of what is fair. In these narratives, they explain what they believe
to be fair and what is not fair. Another term that is sometimes used in their unfair
narratives is bias. To these teachers, bias is a form of unfaimess and is connected to their
students. They talk less about what is unfair to them and more about what is unfair to
their students. A second set of narratives defines and describes their teacher identity or
what they believe a good teacher is like. Each set of narratives is also connected to
accountability in some way. The teachers expressed ways that the laws and testing are
unfair and biased as well as ways they do and do not sustain their teaching principles.

Moral discourse is characterized by the use of words that involve values and
ethics. Words and phrases that are part of this include: make a difference, all can learn,
believe, I am, fair, bias, demeaning, good people, contribute, and as professionals. In
some cases, the words used within the question led to moral discourse that was implied in
the response. Words or phrases from these questions included: why teach, like best,
important aspects of profession, rewards, purpose of, and philosophy.

Fairness

Fairness is a life principle that teachers strongly believe in. Teachers instruct
students through lessons and role modeling the importance of fairness. One aspect of the
reform program the teachers are using, CLASS, enumerates several Life Skills that

include elements of fairness such as respect, integrity, and caring. Posters about these

102

skills are found all over the building. This program was chosen to instill these values
within the students which demonstrate how valuable this principle is to these teachers.
Fairness has high regard.

Is ISTEP+ Fair?.

One place where teachers have concerns about the fairness of accountability is
associated with their experiences with ISTEP+. Five teachers spoke frankly about their
concerns about the fairness of this test. For Mrs. Johnson, this is based on her
understanding of cultural bias and previous experiences with the test.

I don’t like it. It’s not fair- biased. Most of the questions that I’ve ran across on

that test in the past have not hit culture experiences of our classroom. There are

things on there that they are- they ask that I don’t feel our students have had any
past experiences of and so I don’t feel they’re fair.
There are questions her students are unable to answer, not because they do not know the
standard, but because of the question used to assess their mastery of it. Mr. Koselke has
the same opinion.
Is ISTEP fair for all children? Sometimes there are culturally biases in some of
the test items although they say there’re not, I believe they are. I think if you- you
know reworded some of the questions in language my kids would relate more to
they could answer and be more interested in it and what was going on.
The ways questions are worded make it less understandable for Marvel students. There is
a concern that how the questions are posed interferes with the students’ abilities to
answer them. The impression then is that theydo not know the standards when a

question worded in a more culturally sensitive way would yield a different result.

103

Cultural bias has been an issue that has arisen in the past when it comes to standardized
tests. As a classroom teacher, I had the same concerns when I gave ISTEP, and my
students were asked to use lap in multiple ways. They understood lap as something a
person had when they were seated but not as a way a cat would drink its milk. They were
scored as not proficient in multiple meanings of words when the problem was with the
particular word chosen.

The two third grade teachers also had concerns about the fairness of ISTEP+. Mr.
Morgan stated his belief that the test is not fair and then gave an example of a past test
question that shows bias.

CH: What are your feelings about ISTEP and why do you feel that way?

EM: See now this stems back to me being little. I hate it. I really hate it. I mean-

I just was never a good test taker. I’m just really not myself so that’s why I find it

so important that I have other types of assessment. And I think that it’s partially

unfair to the children because they’ve left second grade. They’re out there all
summer not even thinking about school. They come in. We have like two weeks
and then they have to take this big test and they don’t even understand. You

know and I don’t impart to my children that I don’t like it because if they knew I

didn’t like it they’re not going to work hard to do it. But I just don’t- I don’t think

it gives you an accurate assessment. I don’t think it covers- I don’t think it’s
culturally biased. I think they put some things on there

CH: You don’t think it’s culturally biased or you think it’s culturally biased?

EM: I think it’s culturally biased. I’m sorry. I think that they don’t-let me

explain. I don’t think that they- you know they’re talking about a vacation. Well,

104

some of our children may have not of gone on a vacation- you know- you never-

you know and then they have this whole paragraph a vacation and they don’t have

a clue. It’s not fair.

There are assumptions within test questions that children use particular words or have
had certain experiences that help them to answer the question. Without this background
knowledge, they are unable to answer the question. The question becomes more about
their prior knowledge than about their understanding of the standard.

Mrs. Harding started off expressing the same concerns about the cultural bias of
the test and then provided another fairness concern Mr. Morgan touched on briefly. This
concern is based on an experience she had while giving the test in September.

It’s biased. I’ve heard on some standardized testing- it may not be ISTEP in

particular— but using certain terminologies that one subculture knows and another

doesn’t. I don’t that it accurately portrays what a student knows because a lot of
students don’t take tests well or they tense up during a test if they don’t know
something. I had one student who almost had to stop altogether because he was
so frustrated and he almost had to let him go out in the hall for a little bit and
come back to it. But finally we got through it. I think it’s a large stressor for
students- weight put on it. And they know that whether someone has told them
that before or if they have somehow figured it out on their own.

Not only are there concerns about the cultural fairness of the test but also how fair the test

is to those students with test anxiety. Students who become frustrated with this type of

test, especially those that are timed, are likely to not do well on the test. Mrs. Harding

and Mr. Morgan both articulate their belief that it is not fair to state that a student has not

105

mastered a standard because they do not do well on standardized tests. It is unfair to
make such determinations based solely on one form of assessment when another may
produce different results.

Is NCLB Fair?.

Mrs. Johnson talked about a dilemma she is facing with a particular student in her
class. This young man sits near her desk, and she often gives him one on one attention.
She has found that he is often more engaged in his work after she has had time to work
with him in this manner first. He has struggled this year, and it is nearing the time when
Mrs. Johnson will need to decide if he will move on to middle school or spend another
year in fifih grade. NCLB has made this decision even more difficult for her as the
consequences of not passing the test in the next grade level will have ramifications for
Marvel in making AYP.

I’m not going to flunk a kid that gives effort. If they are truly interested and it’s

kind of interesting- No Child Left Behind, but if they’re showing me effort and

they’re working their little hearts out it is not fair to flunk them. Based because

they can’t do a fifth grade standard that they couldn’t do- I mean they can’t do a

fifth grade standard yet they couldn’t do the fourth grade standard or the third

grade- you’re building them up for failure because you’re going to keep adding to
them yet you’re not letting them achieve what they need to achieve before they go
on. So, in fifth grade I’m not going to- kind of a double standard- isn’t it.
Her moral dilemma is whether or not to retain a student who is making a concerted effort
to master the standards. To this student it becomes a stain on his reputation if he is kept

in the fifth grade and may destroy his willingness to continue trying. Yet, with the advent

106

of standards and testing, this becomes a more difficult call to make. Her teacher identity
narratives provide more insight into her concerns about the fairness of NCLB.

What is F air for Special Education Students ?.

NCLB requires that special education students are given the same test as general
education students. Their IEP is to define what accommodations they will be given, but
their score become a part of the total school’s scores. Special education is also a
subgroup used for determining AYP which means that they need to improve at the same
rate as other subgroups in the school.

There are other issues that interfere with the learning of special education students
as noted by Mr. Wilson, “My main concern is with putting all the disabilities together
because it makes it difficult. There are seven disabilities here and these children cannot
possibly get what they need when there are that many disabilities and class size.” Mr.
Wilson not only has a large number of disabilities represented in his classroom, he also
has a large number of students, in some cases more than in general education classrooms.
While all his students are rarely in the classroom at the same time, he is responsible for
meeting the learning needs of 26 students from kindergarten to fifth grades.

While Mr. Wilson did not use the phrase “not fair” in his narrative about his class
size, Mr. Morgan did use this when conveying his concerns about the number of students
in this classroom.

I don’t like that it’s so overcrowded in special ed that I’m sending my children to

an equivalent class size. I don’t think it’s fair. I don’t think it’s fair to the

teacher. I don’t think it’s fair to the children. I don’t think it’s fair to me. I don’t

107

think it’s fair to everyone. I don’t know really what we could do about that just as

a school.

It is unfair for students with special learning needs to be in a classroom with so many
students they are unable to receive the attention they need. It is also unfair to the special
education teacher to be responsible for meeting the learning needs of so many students,
and it is unfair to Mr. Morgan to send his students to a classroom where he knows they
will not get their learning needs met due to circumstances beyond the control of the
special education teacher. This unfairness is amplified in the current accountability
climate. The stakes have been raised for Mr. Wilson to raise the scores of his students.
However, neither teacher connected the unfairness of the class size to accountability.
This is something that is not fair at any time.

Mr. Melville did connect testing special education students with his fairness
principle. In his interview, he stated that he sees himself as a caring and sensitive person,
and this trait is connected to his issues with testing special education students. It is
unclear if the students he is referring to are Mr. Wilson’s or are in the other special
education teacher’s class. He does believe that requiring students to take this test does
not meet his criteria for fairness.

And it’s not fair for some of the special ed kids who have to do the exact same

test. It just doesn’t seem fair to make those kids sit there and cry. Yeah, they

might get to take it in another environment or certain parts are read to them but
it’s still- I don’t know- I think they should invalidate a few more than what they
do. It makes- plus our school looks bad because we have all the special ed kids

here. So then we’re considered bottom of the totem pole sometimes.

108

Teacher Identity: What is a Good Teacher

Teachers have definite beliefs about what a good teacher is based on their
education and teaching experiences. Marvel teachers delineated four particular aspects of
what makes a good teacher as well as how the accountability laws and testing impact
these significant professional values.

Student Growth.

When teachers talked about the reasons they became a teacher or what they found
most rewarding as a teacher, eleven of the thirteen teachers talked about the value of
student growth. Teachers communicated this in three different ways. One shared by Mr.
Koselke and Mr. Morgan is simply stating that growth is something they value.

Mr. Koselke: Growth- watching students grow and mature and staff too.

Mr. Morgan: Their growth- growth. Academic if you will or emotional. It doesn’t

necessarily have to be all academic growth.

Growth is important for students and teachers for the principal while Mr. Morgan valued
both intellectual and emotional growth of his students.

Another group of teachers appreciate student growth from the perspective of the
end of the school year. They are awed by how the students have changed over this ten
month time span that is often overlooked in day to day classroom interactions.

Mrs. Archer: Rewards of teaching? Seeing the achievement of the kids, it’s

rewarding at the end of the year to know where these kids have come from to see

where they are when they’re leaving.

Mrs. Harding: Seeing the kids grow and change over the course of a year. It’s

amazing though this is my first year how much the kids have changed in a year. I

109

didn’t think- it surprises me how much they’ve changed- I didn’t think they would
change so much throughout the course of the year. That out of anything is the
best part.
Mr. Melville: Best-working with kids and maybe the kids that really seem to
improve throughout the year. Like I just did report cards and I have a girl that
was struggling. I was just about to put her through on GEI because she was
reading at such a low level. But I paired her with other kids and she’s most
improved. She’s honorable mention which is next to being on the honor roll.
And that’s my favorite part is when you see a kid that made progress.
This is a more reflective view of student growth.
The majority of teachers used the light bulb analogy to represent student growth.
This often occurs in moments that happen when suddenly a student who has been
struggling with a concept or skill grasps it and is able to put it to use.
Mrs. Lambert: I especially- I haven’t taught that many different grades but
especially first grade when that light bulb goes off. Like for instance, I have a
couple of people in here that at the beginning of the year I was thinking about I
might have to retain. And now all of a sudden they’re getting it and it’s so
exciting. And I’m like “Wow!” That- I mean it- especially in first grade you see
such a difference in some cases between when they walk in in the fall and leave in
the spring. It’s amazing.
Mrs. Kaiser: The children I think- my students. You know there’s nothing like
seeing a light bulb come. on in a child’s face when they finally get something. I

mean you know when they understand something or at the beginning of the year

110

you see how they come in and then by the end of the year when we do our little
program for our parents and kind of go through what we’ve done all year it’s like
“Wow, we really did get somewhere!”

Mr. Jones: The light bulbs that go off.

Mr. Gobel: Well I like the ah ha moments when you, when you can just really see
kids- light bulb turn on and um I like doing hands on things with the kids.

Mrs. Gable: My reward is when they’re sitting there looking at you like a deer in
the headlights and all of a sudden a light in their own head goes on- something
clicked after you said something 13 different ways- it finally- oh now I see.

Mrs. Gordon: I know that I’m reaching the kids. When it’s making sense to them
and I’ve found a way to make it make sense to them. And I see the light bulb go
off. I’m quite sure that 125% of the other people will have said the same thing,
but it’s a wonderful feeling and therefore, when it happens- and not always does it

happen- but when it happens it’s a wonderful moment.

In whatever format, student growth is a significant aspect of teacher identity. Good

teachers are those who appreciate and are rewarded by student growth.

All Can Learn.

Secondly, good teachers believe that all students can learn. This value was most

often shared in their response to a question about their philosophy of education and

named by eleven of the teachers. In these narratives, they also shared other aspects of

this belief such as each student having particular learning strengths or that learning is

more than academics. Ms. Lambert and Mrs. Johnson connected their beliefs about a]

students learning with the theory of Multiple Intelligences. Ms. Lambert stated it simply,

lll

“All children can learn to a certain degree” and connected with this is her confidence in
Gardner’s theory of Multiple Intelligences.
Part of the CLASS program when we’re talking about Multiple Intelligences
trying to figure out how children learn best and I don’t always do it to the best- I
know I could be doing it better- at least I hope I could be doing it better- but being
able to find that niche that every child- you know what I’m saying. And that is
part of what CLASS brought us- I mean it introduced it to us and I’ve tried to
learn more about it as I’ve gone on.
Classroom observations showed that she does utilize this theory in her teaching to an
extent. She has posters for each of the intelligences in her classroom and was using these
as a tool when answering a question about how her students learn.
This is a real hands-on group. This is a group that needs lots of- is that what you
mean? This is a group that needs lots of- for instance I’ve got one boy in here
who is very art smart- he can do lots of things through that and several of the
kids- they’re learning sign language really well. That’s a bad question because
it’s a good question. It’s not a here do this paper all day long and I don’t think
most can especially at this age. They’re not- they have to be more hands on.
They’re more movement, music- actually some of them are pretty nature smart
too- a couple of them are really into science and that’s what we have been talking
about- animals and plants and things like that. I’m looking at my smarts up there.
During a spelling lesson, some students were observed lying on the floor and using their
bodies to make the letters to spell words while others used sign language to make the

letters with their fingers. There were times when this teacher used alternate methods of

112

instruction that were most suited to her students learning needs based on this theory. It is

what she does as a good teacher.

Mrs. Johnson is another strong proponent of this theory and has taken a course on

this theory in her Master’s work along with attending special CLASS training on it as

well.

My teaching philosophy is that I try very hard to incorporate every aspect of every
intelligence throughout my teaching day because children do not learn the same,
nor will they be on the same page when they leave this room at the end of the
year. But if they have gained throughout the year from where they were when
they first came in here - that is my biggest challenge and my biggest step and that
is my goal. And it’s evident in my teaching because I make sure I use all those
intelligences even if it’s moving around or I try to build activities around every
learning style. I don’t believe that all students should sit for half the day in their
chairs doing paper and pencil activities when children nowadays don’t learn like
that- they haven’t learned like that for a long time and I don’t believe they learn
like that now, so I try to incorporate all different learning styles into that- because
I don’t learn in the same way as everybody else in here. So, trying to build and

strengthen other intelligences beyond their dominant one.

Mrs. Johnson knows that her students can learn but also recognizes that each has their

own way to learn as well as their own rate of learning. As a good teacher, her obligation

is to know the ways each student learns and use this information in her work. This means

teaching and assessing students according to their learning strengths as well as helping

students to become more adept at using strategies where they are weaker. Another

113

teacher who was at Marvel when they received CLASS training as part of the CSRD
reform efforts also shared his faith in this theory.

Mr. Gobel: I feel like umm, I feel like everybody can learn, but that some kids

have a potential. I mean you and you can cap that potential. You know this

business that every child can learn period— I don’t think there’s a one size fits all.

And I think- I do agree with the multiple intelligences. I do think that kids learn

in different ways, at their own time and their own speed- all the active learning

stuff. And I think it’s up to the teacher to see those individual needs- to help them
meet that potential.
Coupled with their belief that all children can learn is the belief that each student has
certain learning strengths that need to influence how teachers work with them. A good
teacher accepts leaming differences and does not attempt to make all students learn in the
same way.

Mr. Koselke’s narrative demonstrates that his philosophy is grounded in his
interactions with Marvel students. This is more than a response to an undergraduate
question or an essay answer on a job application. This belief statement is firmly
established in his work with students.

Philosophy of education- I guess you could say I’m a constructivist in a way. I

think that’s what that is when you believe that kids learn more by doing and by

you know hands-on and having experiences which I feel our kids are very lacking
in. I feel our kids are so far behind when they come to us that we have to go back
and you know kind of try to help build some of that prior knowledge. And all

children can learn but not at the same rate or at the same time. And I’m not a real

114

 

firm believer in you know sticking children in grade levels. If it was up to me I’d

have multiage classrooms and no grades.

Students all learn. Most learn best through active participation which reflects what Ms.
Lambert said about her students learn best. He says something further when he says that
they also learn at their own rate and because of this he feels that grade levels are
inappropriate. In this part of his narrative he reflects a belief statement Mrs. Johnson
expressed when she said, “Grades are demeaning. If you multiage children, which I think
is a great thing, if you multiage group them based on what they’re ready to do I feel like
they’ll not only- I think they learn more.” Both of these teachers have a strong belief in
appreciating and accepting the rates at which each student learns.

Two other teachers also expressed their belief that students learn and develop at
their own times. Mrs. Kaiser, as a kindergarten teacher, has noted the differences in her
students when they come to her classroom- some are ready for school activities and
others are not.

I believe that they’re all capable of learning something. I think that some at this

age have more- are more developmentally ready to do the academics of

schoolwork and some aren’t ready for that. I think that some even at this early
age are more capable than others.
There are differences in learning rates as early as kindergarten. Five year old children are
not all ready for kindergarten and the academic work they will encounter there. It is not
that they are incapable of working, but that they are on a different clock. Mrs. Gable
summed it up this way, “And- so yes we can all learn but I don’t- we certainly don’t learn

at the same rate and we certainly can’t learn all of the same things- some things just don’t

115

click for some kids.” Good teachers know students can leam while also recognizing that
each learns at their own speed. As Mrs. Harding stated, it is then the responsibility of the
good teacher to ensure that each student has the opportunity to learn.

All children are capable of learning, no matter if they have learning disabilities,

they maybe not catch on as well, but all students are able to learn. A teacher has

to find a way to make the students learn the best that they can. So, I guess I

would say all students are capable of learning. It just depends on the teacher to

bring that out in them.

Mr. Wilson’s belief statement about all children learning took a slightly different
path. He is concerned with more than his student’s academic needs which is evident
when he said, “I think that all students can learn if they are given all of the optimal
conditions. I also believe that it has a lot more to do- a lot more than just reading, writing
and math.” What his students can and will learn in his classroom goes beyond reading,
writing, and math as it encompasses manners, how to get along with one another, and
self-respect. He does this through “a lot of the Life Skills, 3 lot of values, a lot of things
that I really would like to see them get at home. I fill in the gaps.” Students learning to
say “thank you” when receiving a snack or waiting until all students are served before
eating were some of the skills I observed students using in his room. A good teacher is
attuned to and instructs in the areas of values as well as the academic standards the state
tests. For Mr. Wilson, these may be even more important.

Prepare for Life.

Another aspect of good teachers is the understanding of and responsibility for

preparing students for life beyond the classroom. The work of teachers does not stop at

116

the school door but is part of the life of each student they touch. As teachers reflected on
the purpose of education, they shared three different ways that good teachers prepare
students for life.

Teaching as enabling students to be lifelong learners has been an education
belief statement, and some teachers at Marvel strongly hold this in their conception of
what it means to be a good teacher. In three responses, Ms. Lambert spoke about her
goal of preparing students to be lifelong learners.

I’m going to be real redundant here- to become a lifelong learner. You need to
learn how to think and that’s part of what teachers are here for- to help them learn
how to use their brains, learn how to think. Half of the things that they’re going
to be doing when they grow up haven’t even been invented yet. They need to
know how to do problem solving.
Mrs. Gordon also believes that the role of a good teacher is to teach students how to learn
so that they are able to apply the skills and concepts as needed. They no longer depend
on the teacher.
The other part is being- I hate to say this but being a lifelong learner. So that you
can pick up- you know how to learn. You have the meta-cognition. You know
when you’re learning and when you’re not and what you have to do in order to
learn it.
Good teachers teach students how to think and apply what they have learned to other
situations. They also support students in learning how to recognize when they don’t

know something and how to rectify the situation. Knowing how to learn is a skill that

117

students will need to use all during their lives and goes beyond the state standards. It is
about preparing students for life beyond school.

While five other teachers did not use the term lifelong learners, they also believe
that teachers prepare students by teaching them the skills and abilities they will need to
know and be able to use throughout their lives. A straightforward statement from Mr.
Koselke articulated it this way, “To give children tools that they need to be successful in
life.” Teachers are ensuring that students have all the necessary equipment they will need
to do well in their lives. Each teacher is adding a new tool or reinforcing an old tool so
that students will be ready and able to meet the challenges and responsibilities of life.
Mr. Jones’s agrees with Mr. Koselke, “I think education should give children the tools
they need to have a happy life.”

In sharing her belief about the purpose of education, Mrs. Gable defined more
specifically what these tools are and connected these to the concept of a lifelong learner.
I believe that you need to be educated enough that you can get out of your

parents’ house. You can be self-supporting— depend on yourself- responsible

enough for yourself that you don’t have to depend on the government for things-
so that you don’t have to depend on your neighbor for things- so that you don’t
have to- you need to be able to- you need to be able to know how to leam- to
know where to go to look up things you don’t know because nobody can know
everything- you need to be able to know how to find out information that you
need to live.

In order to have a successfirl and happy life, students need to have the skills and abilities

to meet their daily needs without financial support from their families or the government.

118

They have learned where to go for information they need and how to employ it. This also
includes the values of responsibility and independence. Education is about preparing
students with both the academics and the values they will need in their lives.

While Mr. Melville also believes that education prepares students for life, he sees
it as something that helps them to have a better life than their parents.

Obviously to educate children so that they don’t wind up- well I have 19 kids and

out of those l9, 14 of them their parents are incarcerated. I know this because

I’ve had them for two years, but gosh I hope that they can get educated- further

their education- even go to college. I don’t want to see them get in that same

vicious cycle that their parents and their parents’ parents came from. I may be

living in a fantasy but I think that’s the purpose- to just move kids up the ladder a

little bit further than where their parents were.

Marvel students who have the skills and abilities to learn and become independent
individuals are able to have a better life than their parents. This teacher has seen where
the parents are, and she wants her students to do more with their lives. Having a happy
and successful life is about staying out of jail, possibly going to college, and attaining or
coming closer to attaining the American dream.

Mrs. Kaiser begins her narrative of the purpose of education with the concept that
teachers provide students with what they need to lead contented lives but then adds the
third view of contributing to society.

I think that the purpose of education is to give everybody the skills that they need

to make themselves better and help live in the world and make it a better place. I

think that the more that you can read the better you become as a person and the

119

more you learn you pass that on to other people by the way you act and what you

do and what you become. 7
Students who have learned the skills and abilities to be successful and happy in life will
in turn become contributing members of society. From leaming to read, think, and
question, students are able to comprehend how they are able to make a difference in this
world in some way. They are also able to use these abilities to touch the lives of others
also. Teachers are not only preparing their students for life but through them are
touching the lives of others as well. A good teacher has a far reaching responsibility
when this is considered and is something this teacher takes seriously in her work.

Education and teaching as a way to contribute to society was a central idea in the
narratives of Mrs. Johnson and three other teachers.

The purpose of education again is to- let these- precisely in fifth grade to let the

students feel valued so that they feel value enough in themselves to go on

throughout life and hopefully to make something of themselves that again is

positive. So that they’re not making negative contributions to the society.
Her moral obligation is show her students that they have worth and to encourage a sense
of self-respect so that they will be contributing members of the community. A good
teacher does more than instruct students in the academic curriculum by meeting the
students’ social and emotional needs as well so they are ready for what lies ahead in their
lives.

Mrs. Johnson is not alone in this belief as three other Marvel teachers also believe
that the purpose of education is to prepare students to be good citizens locally and

globally. Mrs. Harding: “To hold people for a society to move forward. Have future

120

leaders- training future leaders- and every part of society. They need to be ready to be
out in the world.” Mr. Gobel: “The purpose of education is to be productive- for kids to
become productive citizens. Umm, a sense of citizenship -to fit in an increasing global
society.” Mr. Morgan: “The purpose of education- to impart and strengthen our society
so that they can become educators and leaders of different professions. I think education
is extremely important.” Teachers hold a sacred duty in preparing each student for what
is ahead so that they can in turn prepare following generations, be leaders, and to make a
positive impact in the world.

Touch the Lives of Students.

Nine of the thirteen teachers used very specific discourse to talk about their belief
in touching the lives of students. This part of their teacher identity is intertwined with
their belief about preparing them for the future in that what they do now will have an
impact in the students’ lives in the future as well. It is about something they are able to
do for the student to make their lives fuller and more meaningful. Mr. Koselke’s
statements, “trying to help make a difference in some children’s lives” and “we might
help make a difference for those kids” were echoed by other teachers. For Mr. Wilson it
is, “not only the academic skills but to just become good people.” In their work with
students who are from lives and homes that are in trouble, these teachers see themselves
as someone that can meet their needs now to alter the path the students may take later.

Mrs. Johnson and Ms. Lambert touch the lives of their students by being a
positive influence on them. Like Mr. Wilson, they see this as something that is beyond

what is listed on the state standards.

121

Mrs. Johnson: The aspects of my profession that are most important to me would

be making sure that every student in my room each year leaves out of here with

something positive that they have taken away from me. Whether it be academic,

social, behavior, whatever— I want to be remembered as a teacher that influenced

them in some way—hopefully not negatively.

Ms. Lambert: They need more positive influences in their life. And hopefully I’m

contributing to that.
Being a positive force in the students’ lives now is their moral imperative because this
influence will be something they will carry with them throughout their lives. Teachers
see a need to be filled, and they take this obligation sincerely. It is their perception of
what a good teacher does, especially those who work with students who have no or few
constructive role models in their lives. They have a calling to serve children from less
fortunate homes by touching their lives for the better.

Mr. Morgan: And so it’s important to me to be a positive influence. That’s

probably my most important thing.

Mrs. Harding: 1 think being there for the students is probably the most important

part of being a teacher. I know especially here the students are not- their home

lives may not be the greatest. So, I’m here for them to lean on somewhat because

they may not be getting that at home.

Mrs. Gable: I like making a difference in a kid’s life which is why I’d much rather

teach here than say at Westville where anybody can teach them.

122

Mrs. Gordon: I always I think-beginning of the career through now- the idea that

you might possibly impact somebody positively. I mean-it’s- you know there’s a

good chance that you will do that.

How Laws Support or Don ’t Support Teacher Identity

A good teacher is rewarded not by money but by seeing students grow and change
academically, emotionally, and socially. Teachers have a deep-seated belief that all
students can learn but not all in the same way that comes from their work experiences
with students. They prepare students for life in many ways including being a good role
model. The question is how accountability and testing supports these teacher identity
beliefs.

Teachers understand the purpose of NCLB in ways that match its stated goal. Ms.
Lambert said that this policy is to make sure each child receives “the full education that
they deserve,” yet she then wonder how “realistic” the law is when it implies that all
children are “college bound” or have the same interests and abilities. Mrs. Johnson stated
it as a way to ensure students receive “equal and opportune available resources for them
to learn as best as we can provide.” Yet later she emphatically states, “I don’t feel like the
students are benefiting from No Child Left Behind because I don’t think that they— we’re
pushing them on without them really being ready to be pushed on.” Both these teachers
do not see how this law meets the intended purpose or supports their belief that students
learn at their own rate and in their own way. Instead it seems to push students to be the
same or what Mr. Gobel referred to as “one size fits all.”

In his statement, Mr. Koselke sees the goal of this law as a tool “to help everyone

focus on where we were not succeeding with kids.” While he believes that more teachers

123

are paying attention to achievement gaps, the law “does not think about what schools are
supposed to do- there again because yes, there are these gaps but there are reasons for
these gaps because the kids are already disadvantaged in coming to us.” Mr. Koselke
wants to make a difference and provide students with the tools they will need to be
successful adults, but this law is not helping him to meet this goal. He knows that his
students come to him without prior knowledge that makes learning more difficult, but this
law does not provide what he needs to address these gaps.

In other stories, teachers talk more about the policies in ways that connect with
their teacher identity. The power story is about the legitimate control policies have which
can be connected to their goals in teaching. The technical story tells how the laws do or
don’t work for teaching and learning. How teachers view NCLB, PL 221, and ISTEP+
adds something to how they affect their teacher identity. In general, most of the teachers
felt that these policies were of no value to anyone. These negative comments seemed

directed more to NCLB and ISTEP+, as other comments about PL 221 were positive.

124

CHAPTER 9
POWER STORY: WHO HAS CONTROL?

The power story of Marvel teachers reveals what they experience in relation to
issues of control and authority. In this story teachers talk about who has control over
their teaching at this Title I school, the extent of the control, how it impacts the reputation
of the school, and who gets to say what is real and true about teaching. Two forms of
control or authority exist: legitimate and illegitimate. Legitimate control empowers and
supports teachers in their work at a Title 1 school as teachers and the control source have
formed an alliance to work together in order to meet the educational needs of students.
Illegitimate control, on the other hand, is the antithesis of legitimate control as it
disempowers teachers and works against what they are doing to improve the education
their students receive. This often is the result of clashing ideologies between the teachers
and the source of control, and teachers find themselves told what to do rather than having
a voice in their work. They feel de-professionalized, initated, and frustrated as they feel
as if their hands are tied.

The discourse of legitimate authority included we said, us saying, and we want
because these words imply that the teachers have some say in the reform and
improvement process. Words and phrases that indicated illegitimate control included:
should, supposed to, make sure, battle, sanction, restricted, forced, have to, drive, do what
you’re told, all about scores, pressure, no choice, judged, dread, don’t understand,
monitoring, political, and everything. Other discourse was about the lack of control
teachers experienced such as: problems, can’t control, lack respect, baggage, and

challenges.

125

Teachers Define Legitimate Control

Teachers understand that there needs to be a control source that holds them
accountable as is reflected in Mrs. Kaiser’s comment:

And I guess there has to be certain standards and stuff for— to make sure we all do

our jobs because if there aren’t then there’s going to be some people that might

not. And I guess that we need to be held accountable.
They accept this as part of their responsibility for their work but also have some views
about what this control should be. This control belongs in the hands of both the federal
and state levels of government. There were two perspectives on what this control should
comprise: general guidelines and financial support.

According to Ms.Lambert, the federal and state levels of government do have a
responsibility to schools which is to “Well I suppose there have to be some guidelines.
But they’re- other than general guidelines.” Both levels of government have a role to
play in education, but this is to be one that provides direction for teachers in their work.
Mrs. Gordon expands on what these guidelines are and how they differ at each level. The
federal government should be:

a cheerleader and as a- and I would go along with the idea of a department of

education that sets up a range of standards- an acceptable, general range of

curricula that could exist within the states. So you know it has its place.
The appropriate form of control from the federal government is to provide a broad
structure for education as well as options that states can choose from as they determine
what education will be in their particular state. There is a place for involvement of the

federal government in schools for Mrs. Gordon, however it is the role of the state to “set

126

the curriculum in general, can set standards in general, graduation requirements. There
needs to be a governmental body at some point. So I- I don’t you know really have a
problem with state government being strongly involved.” Each level of government has a
role in education, but the state’s role is greater in scope than the federal government for
this teacher. However, she sees the control of both the federal and state governments is
to provide schools with over—arching requirements and allow educators to use their
professional knowledge to meet these in the way that is best for their students.

Another view of the legitimate authority of the state and/or federal levels of
government described by four teachers was the responsibility to fund education. Mrs.
Johnson said it this way:

Federal government is supposed to support education monetarily or whatever I

guess. I feel like the federal government should help by providing us with the

things, skills, whatever it is needed to make our students more successful. And I

feel that same thing for the state.

Mr. Wilson, Mr. Gobel, and Mrs. Kaiser expressed the same thought that one or both
governmental bodies are responsible for providing the necessary funding for education.
This is then used by teachers to acquire the resources needed, including materials and
professional training, to educate their students. These teachers accept the role of
governmental authority in teaching as it provides the wherewithal to do their work in
ways that best meets the needs of their students.

Mr. Jones agrees that funding is part of the role of these governmental bodies, but
it also includes a responsibility for the federal government to “support legislation that

allows teachers to teach and learners to learn according to individual needs,” and the state

127

to “work with the educators and the administrators on the lower levels.” The federal
government needs to pass legislation that works with teachers to improve the education
their students are receiving. In this way they are working in cooperation and
collaboration with educators across the nation to strengthen the education of all students.
The state also works with teachers as they play a very active role in the education
process. The emphasis of what Mr. Jones is saying has to do with a partnership between
teachers and those in control at the federal and state levels of government. Improving
schools is something teachers and legislators work on together in order to provide the
best education possible for students.

One interesting view of the legitimate role of each level of government came from
Mrs. Harding as she does not feel the federal government should have any control in the
area of education because this role belongs to the states.

The state- the responsibility of education falls squarely on the shoulders of the

state. They need to fund it. They need to monitor it, which they try to do with the

ISTEP. Funded programs that were set forth. It is the responsibility of the state

to provide a free and appropriate education.

It is the state that is to fund and hold schools accountable, but only the state has this
responsibility to the citizens of the state. Her comment seems to reflect her
understanding of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution which states limits on the
authority of the federal government to those items specifically designated in the
document. Since education is not a power designated to the national government in the

Constitution, it belongs solely to the states and the people.

128

Teachers have defined what they feel to be the legitimate control of both the state
and federal levels of government. Some teachers see this as government outlining in
broad terms the responsibilities teachers have and expectations for schools. Along with
this, some feel the state has greater authority to make finer decisions about curriculum
and other standards for schools. Another legitimate area of control for government is to
provide teachers with the funding needed to do their work.

How PL 221 has Legitimate Control

Together the Marvel teachers generated the PL 221 that also serves as the SIP
necessary for Title I. This is a three year plan for improvement is something teachers
have control over. They generated goals based on student data for made for improving
student reading, writing, and math. Each one of these goals also included: (a)
professional development, (b) parent involvement, and (c) benchmarks for monitoring
improvement. Using the state framework as well as support from state consultants,
teachers worked together to evaluate the current level of student learning to create a plan
for improvement specific to the students at the school. Teachers also evaluate the
progress on these goals and are able to revise it each year.

All four of the case study participants as well as another teacher think that PL 221
meets the criteria for legitimate authority. A reason for this is that the law sets out the
guidelines schools need for accountability that the teachers then use to determine what
are the most appropriate way to accomplish this at their school. Teachers are empowered
by this legislation as they are given the authority from the state to determine what will
enhance student learning at their school. This gives them a sense of ownership for the

accountability goals.

129

Mrs. Lambert: Again, I know its guidelines. I know there- it’s us saying what
we ’re going to do. ..

Mr. Wilson: it gives people a feeling that they need to be accountable because we
have it on paper- it’s written- it’s what we said that we ’re going to do.

Mrs. Johnson: It’s a three year program that is for the betterment of the school so
that we have a plan that we- it’s really goals- how we want our school to look.
Mr. Koselke: we don’t bring them up at every staff meeting but I mean usually
everything that we do is focused on the goals. You know there’s a reason- that’s
why we built our professional development and all that around it. And even at
some of the staff meetings, we look at the goals and what we ’re doing to meet
them or what things we said we ’d do and haven’t or what are we still going to do
or do we need to revise it.

Mr. Morgan: My teacher improvement plan or whatever- it’s directly impacts
your School hnprovement Plan or a specific area of it. And so I usually - usually
I’m focusing more on the math School Improvement part but I you know make
sure I’m doing all those things that are on that School Improvement Plan. Things

we said we ’d do, I want to make sure I’ve done them.

There is a sense of collaboration as the teachers are working with the state to improve

teaching and learning at Marvel as they talk about what they have said they would do and

what they are doing to meet their goals. The state law, PL 221, has legitimate authority

because it consists of a set of guidelines that supports teachers in their work to make the

education they provide to Marvel students better. It is something that they have

ownership of, and they want to follow because it is what they said they would do.

130

Teachers are empowered by this plan to refine their practice so their students can receive
the best possible education.
Teachers Define Illegitimate Control
Legitimate control is something that makes these teachers feel respected as
professionals when they work with the state to improve their work. Unfortunately
teachers are also experiencing forms of illegitimate authority. Mr. Koselke’s narrative
defrnes his experiences with illegitimate control and also offers a glimpse into the
frustration and annoyance it engenders in him.
CH: What do you believe is the role of the federal government in education?
MK: You don’t really want to know that.
CH: Okay.
MK: The federal government is- is becoming increasingly involved in education-
more so than ever in the past and are making more decisions that are affecting us
locally and within our states than ever before.
CH: What is the role of the state government in education?
MK: Same thing. They are being directed by the federal guidelines. They have
some- you know play value- autonomy- whatever you want to call it- they have
some- but they are restricted by those federal guidelines. And I feel that the
federal guidelines are tied more and more to funding. You know there’s more
increased accountability and more sanctions for schools that get any type of
federal fimding.
Teachers feel that government has the authority to fund schools. However, the state is

now being controlled by the federal government in a way that is illegitimate as they

131

manipulate federal money for schools to follow more specific guidelines for education.
This is a significant concern for Mr. Archer as she finds that the legislation is limiting her
professional autonomy.

Loosing that control I suppose. With all of the standards and all of the tests that

we’re already having to do it- our report card is- I can see it getting worse and

worse as far as them telling us what to do.
This teacher has lost control over her work as the federal and state governments are
telling her what to do in her classroom. The role of government is no longer about
general guidelines, funding schools, and working with teachers in providing a good
education to students. It is now about the government taking more and more control
away from the teachers who are the professionals in the classroom.
How Accountability Policies and Testing Have Illegitimate Control

NCLB, PL 221, and ISTEP+ are each exerting illegitimate control in teachers’
classrooms. The politicians who enact these policies and make disparaging remarks
about the poor state of education do not truly know what it is like to teach in a Title I
schools and are damaging the work of teachers as well as their reputation. There is also a
sense that someone is always watching them as they work with students because these
policies become a form of surveillance to ensure that teachers are doing what they are
supposed to do. Teachers spoke specifically of the impact AYP and the threat of
sanctions imposed by NCLB has on their work and reputation which increases pressure to
raise test scores. The instrument used to monitor teachers and determine AYP is ISTEP+

which then gains control over what and how teachers teach. Test results reported

132

publicly have taken control over the reputation of teachers and schools. Each of these
illegitimate control issues were shared by these teachers.

Politicians and Politics.

The current accountability policies, especially NCLB, are viewed negatively by
Marvel teachers as they become more intrusive in their work. When asked about the
purpose of NCLB, Ms. Lambert answered, “I actually have it. I read a little bit of it and
then I just thought. I just got irritated with it and stopped reading it. T o irritate us.”
While PL 221 is experienced in ways as a legitimate form of control, there are also ways
that it is illegitimate. As noted in an earlier quote by Mr. Koselke, this is because of the
control the federal government has over the state through funding. Four different views
on politicians and accountability convey how and why this control is illegitimate: (a) lack
of understanding about teaching and schools, (b) no teacher input, (c), alternative agenda,
(d) political rhetoric.

Three teachers stated their dissatisfaction by saying that the individuals
responsible for these education laws do not understand what it means to teach at a Title I
school. Mrs. Lambert said, “They’re not in our shoes and they’re acting like they know
what we’re doing and they don ’t. Neither of them does.” Mrs. Gable echoes this with
her statement.

I think a lot of it is done by people that they make up the rules that they’ve never

been in a classroom. And when they go visit, they tend to visit better schools.

They’re not down in the trenches I guess you could say. And so they’re making

up these rules without the knowledge I think- the first hand knowledge- you know

they’re not being a primary source shall we say.

133

The lack of presence in Title I schools is a key issue in the narrative that politicians are an
illegitimate authority because they are missing a true understanding of what is happening
at these schools. Politicians who do not take the time to understand what is involved in
the work of teachers and the life of a Title 1 school are not the people who should be
making such far reaching decisions about them. It takes individuals who have fuller
concept of what is involved in teaching in these schools to make informed and reasonable
decisions about how to improve education for the children in them. Without this
knowledge, they are making poor and uniformed mandates.

Politicians seem to desire to address the gaps between students from different
backgrounds. One of the goals of NCLB is:

closing the achievement gap between high- and low- performing children,

especially the achievement gaps between minority and nonminority students, and

between disadvantaged children and their more advantaged peers (SEC. 1001.3).
Marvel teachers agree that these need to be discussed and dealt with in a positive manner.
However, as Mr. Koselke stated, there are reasons for these gaps that politicians either do
not know about or are not addressing that have an impact on schools, teachers, and
students.

And that’s where I think No Child Left Behind does not think about what schools

are supposed to do- there again because yes, there are these gaps but there are

reasons for these gaps because the kids are already disadvantaged in coming to us.

And if we’re supposed to you know progress the same amount of time as

everybody else, then we need more resources and we need earlier programs that

134

catch them before they come to school to help the family like social services and

things. You know we have to do that if we expect to try to catch these kids up.
To meet the goal of closing achievement gaps, the politicians first need to understand the
root causes and factors for the gaps. It is not until these are addressed as well that Mr.
Koselke will find the politicians as a legitimate source of control in the education of his
students. As greater, earlier, and more appropriate resources are provided to schools and
other agencies to meet the needs of poor families, Mr. Koselke believes these
achievement gaps will lessen. Politicians need to show a commitment to a broader range
of services to the children and their families even before they come to school to really
make a difference in their future education.

In the process of generating these policies it seems that politicians do not seek
input fi'om the people closest to the situation- the teachers. Mrs. Johnson and Mrs.
Archer both questioned why those making the policies do not invite teacher participation
in the process.

Mrs. Johnson: Yeah, why aren’t there more educators involved in some of this

decision making? I mean if they’re going to make a decision about education

why wouldn’t you use people that have gotten that background- that use that
background. There are a lot of people that I know that would be willing to put
their two cents in.

Mrs. Archer: When are they going to get people who have been in the classroom

to put their two cents in on these laws as they’re coming down?

These teachers are voicing their fi'ustration with politicians who are not seeking or

receiving advice from teachers who are closest to the situation and therefore more

135

knowledgeable about school improvement in the law making process. They feel shut out
from something that has a direct impact on what they do. There is a sense that teachers
are not viewed as professionals when they are not consulted by politicians. Being denied
access to this process causes them to see the control of these laws and the lawmakers as
illegitimate.

In another narrative, Mr. Koselke also communicated his thinking that politicians
are making ill informed pieces of legislation including issues related to how schools are
firnded and the sanctions that are a central force within the policies. While talking about
his concerns with firnding, he expressed the idea that these politicians have an alternative
agenda in mind for public education.

Funding- firnding is a concern right now. Politicians making decisions who don ’t

have a clue- who haven’t been in the classrooms or in the educational setting and

I feel like a lot of the decisions are based on no prior knowledge and yeah that

concerns me- that really upsets me- I don’t like where we’re going right now- I

don’t like where we’re at with public education at all. I feel like public education

is in peril, and I feel like everything is being promoted to charter and non-pubs.

And you know they’re getting increased funding and we’re getting decreased

funding. We’re getting sanctioned— held to higher accountability with less

funding. That’s a big concern for me.
He is worried that there is a hidden goal in accountability policies which is to end public
education in order to privatize it. He was the only teacher to make reference to
privatization being an unspoken motive for accountability policies. This may be

connected to the courses he had recently taken for his administrator’s license. In other

136

conversations with this new principal it became apparent that these policies were a major
topic of conversation in the courses.

When teachers feel that these laws are more about political rhetoric, they react
negatively to the policies and the politicians. While some teachers find PL 221 to be a
legitimate control, Mr. Jones views it and NCLB in the same manner. To him they are
both ways that politicians can make teachers the scapegoats of the public outcry against
the state of education in America. News reports that state as fact that American students
are less prepared than other students in industrialized nations and government reports
such as A Nation at Risk (1983) cerate a public panic concerning education that
politicians need to respond to. They do this by faulting the nation’s teachers.

CH: What is the purpose of the federal law known as No Child Left Behind?

EJ: I think originally the purpose of No Child Left Behind was to- let me think for

a minute- I think it was to create accountability for educators and school systems

to explain the waning scores in the United States. I think they passed the buck.

CH: And what is the purpose of Public Law 221?

EJ: Educator accountability. Placing blame- I think it has to do with placing

blame.

Mrs. Gordon similarly stated an idea that politicians are blaming teachers for the poor
perception of American education.

It’s probably a well-intentioned effort to help children who come from- especially

from disadvantaged environments- to be able to function in this society. I believe

that this is the pretty much the stated purpose. I believe that is the intended

purpose. I believe there are other things that go along with that- because it made

137

for a good campaign slogan back in the year 2000. That’s not to say that there

aren’t other pe0ple who have very good campaign slogans because there are.

That was- that was going to fill that part of the platform- that part of the approach.

And we were to look to the state of Texas in order to view just how successful

that had been apparently. And even at the time we knew this was not perfection

any more than any other program was.
While there may be a noble purpose behind this law, there is still the feeling that political
rhetoric and politics played a major role in the creation of this policy. There was a need
to make it publicly clear that George W. Bush was the right person to be president
because he had a proven and successful plan ready to make America’s schools the best in
the world.

The authority of this president is not legitimate when his laws are more about
rhetoric and less about the realities of schools, especially those serving at-risk and
disadvantaged students. Mrs. Gordon alluded to George Bush in her comment above, but
Mrs. Lambert explicitly singled him out when she said, “He should keep his nose out of
it.” Politicians, including President Bush, are seen as not supporting schools as they
enact laws without teacher input and consideration for the larger social situations that are
a part of the lives of students from less advantaged home lives. As they place sole
responsibility for a seeming lack of student learning at the feet of teachers, they
antagonize teachers. The control and authority of these politicians in the eyes of teachers
becomes increasingly illegitimate.

Surveillance.

138

Another response to the policies is to view them as a form of surveillance that was
put in place by politicians to keep an eye on teachers’ work. This is similar in nature to
Bentham’s idea of a panopticon as described by Foucault (1955) which is an all-seeing
eye or watchtower. This becomes a way to maintain order at all times through an
invisible presence, a sense of being watched without knowing who is watching. Mrs.
Lambert, Mrs. Johnson, and Mr. Morgan consider accountability policies to be a form of
control as it monitors teachers’ work. It is like someone is always watching them without
teachers knowing who is watching. The invisible yet real presence of accountability is
ever present in the classrooms of Title I teachers.

Mrs. Lambert, in seeking to make sense of the purpose for PL 221, asked, “So
why has that all of a sudden come into play? Because people weren’t doing what they
were supposed to be doing so they needed some sort of paper trail?” She doesn’t
understand why the current accountability system needed to exist except as a way to
monitor or keep track of teachers who were not meeting their professional obligations.
Mrs. Johnson, who finds some aspects of PL 221 to be legitimate, also questioned the
need for both accountability policies.

All of them. Why— where did they come from? Why were they established?

What drove the decision for No Child Left Behind? Did they think that because

children- they don’t feel that children are working up to the standards that they

had to put a law in place to make sure that the teachers are doing their jobs? I

mean it’s silly.

She seems to be saying that teachers are professionals and as such are responsible for

doing their work. They do not need these policies to keep track of what they are doing.

139

Instead, they need to be treated as professionals. Mr. Morgan understood that one
instrument used by the policies to monitor teachers’ work was ISTEP+. “So that the state
knows if you ’re doing your job.”

The teachers become the prisoners being controlled while the politicians are the
guards maintaining order through surveillance. The panopticon takes on the form of
ISTEP+ and other documentation used for accountability purposes. These teachers sense
that someone else is forcing them to provide evidence that they are properly carrying out
the duties of their work rather than working in partnership with governmental leaders to
demonstrate what is happening at schools. There concern is not about being accountable
but about how this is occurring. Being under surveillance by people that do not know
about life in their school is an unacceptable source of control for these teachers.

A YP and Sanctions.

Under NCLB, sanctions are imposed based on AYP as determined by the state.
ISTEP+ is the instrument chosen by the state legislature in PL 221 to determine AYP.
The reason for AYP is to provide annual benchmarks for progress toward “narrowing the
achievement gaps” (NCLB, 2002, See. 1111.b.2.B) for each subgroup of students in the
areas of reading, writing, math, and science. These student groups include (a) low
income homes, (b) minority populations, (c) special education, and ((1) English language
learners. AYP progress for each of these subgroups in each of the disciplines is then used
to give sanctions or rewards “to hold local educational agencies and public elementary
schools and secondary schools accountable for student achievement” (N CLB, 2002, Sec.

1111.b.2.A.iii).

140

When talking about the role NCLB and PL 221 have at the school, Mr. Koselke’s
narrative expressed his concerns about AYP and sanctions.
Well, they’re there but we try not to focus on it as far as being hung over our
heads because that is kind of how it is with us- is that- you know okay its hung
over our heads and we know we can try different things- but trying different
things, implementing new programs, a new strategy all takes time to show gain.
And just like with Everyday Math, this is the implementation year, so we
probably won’t show you know real good gains maybe till next two, three years
with that- because everybody’s adjusting to the program, how to use it, you know
people are at different stages, you know and some are behind where they’re
supposed to be because they struggled with you know different things and the
kids have struggled with it because it’s a whole new way. So, I think- I think that
drives it. And I think- I think kind of that dread of did we meet AYP this year?
You know did we not? What’s everyone going to think if we didn’t? And I think
it’s almost kind of a negative thing because we know if we didn’t we’re going to
be sanctioned and put into school improvement. And even though your efforts are
good and even though you can increase overall as a school, if you don’t meet each
subgroup category which includes your special education students- you’re not
going to make AYP. So, I think that part it plays in is that yes we do more
probably collaboration, reflection, analyzing data but yet its kind of a you know-
we’ve been forced to do it kind of thing, you know but we’ve always done it

because it’s Title 1. It’s helped improve some things but other things we would

141

have done anyway. And then again you’ve got the thing hanging over you head is

a negative.

While the teachers try not to let these have control over what happens at the school, their
presence is constantly felt. There are concerns about what will happen if AYP is not
achieved, how others will view the school and teachers, and the lack of value placed on
ways they have improved. The goal is not about how teachers are improving their work
but at meeting the benchmark of AYP. This is also an unknown factor for these teachers
even though they already had the test results. Teachers are unable to determine from
them whether or not they have made this all important goal for each discipline and each
subgroup. In my conversations with them, this was like an invisible ax hanging over
their heads.

Achieving AYP becomes the goal when it “drives” what is happening at the
school rather than student learning and professional knowledge. Reponses fiom other
teachers reflect the control AYP and sanctions has at Marvel. Mrs. Johnson stated that:

They have to drive it. We don 't want to fail. And if you don ’t play into it and do

“what you ’re told ” then we’re going to end up getting the short end of the stick.

Next year if they don’t feel- if there’s a Title 1 school and the child doesn’t feel

like or the parent doesn’t feel like the child is learning in that Title I school then

they can switch them to another school. And the funding goes with them. The
year after that it’s going to be even worse, we were just talking about this. You
gotta do what you gotta do because it ’s the law.

The fear of not making the grade when it comes to AYP is the ultimate force in teaching

at this Title I school because of the threat of the sanctions the school could face if they

142

don’t. Teachers do not feel they are respected as professionals or know what is real about
their work. Test results and making AYP are now the authority of what is true about their
teaching. As Mrs. Johnson later stated:
It’s all about scores. How can we increase our scores? I can go off on a tangent
on that too. We’re trying to increase test scores when we know darn well that I’ve
got 19 students in here and not all 19 are going to pass the test. It’s not going to
happen because not everybody learns the same way so how can they be assessed
in one way. You’re assessing 19 different leaming styles on one way.
What Mrs. Johnson knows is true about student learning and assessment no longer is
valued as a source of information because there is one authority authorized by NCLB
which is ISTEP+, a paper and pencil test.
The fear of possible sanctions is in evidence from other teachers as well.
Mrs. Kaiser: Well yeah see when it starts saying that if you don’t pass and you
know you’re red flagged and now your kids can go to a dzfiprent school because
you didn’t- so many kids didn’t- and that I don’t know- you know. And I think
you also have to look at the kinds of children you have you know.
Mrs. Archer: It’s a big influence on the way that we teach- what we teach. We try
to do everything we can to get the kids to pass their tests too so that we can make
grade as a school.
Mrs. Harding: 1 think it plays a large role. If AYP isn’t met, soon it may become
a choice school. So, I think it plays a large role in that if we don’t perform and

make adequate yearly progress the school won ’t be here.

143

Teachers are afraid for the reputation of the school as AYP could cause them to be
labeled as a failing school. Another sanction teachers are worried about is becoming a
choice school and possibly loosing students to other schools in the district that are
making AYP. This is a very real possibility as Marvel had not made AYP the previous
year. Along with the loss of students comes the loss of Title I funds that are used to
transport these students to another school.

1ST EP+.

ISTEP+, a criterion-referenced test based on the Indiana Academic Standards, is
given in third through tenth grades. It consists of a multiple choice section covering
English/language arts and math as well as two constructed response sections for these
same disciplines. A multiple choice science test has been added at fifth grade in recent
years. The results of this test are used to determine whether or not the school has made
AYP as mandated by NCLB and for school improvement based on criteria outlined in PL
221.

There were four forms of control teachers discussed in relation to this test (a)
teaching to the test, (b) test preparation, (c) curriculum, and (d) comparisons. Through
each of these, teachers shared how this test has control over what they do within their
classrooms and their feelings of powerlessness when it comes to this test.

Three teachers openly shared that this test impacts how they teach in their
classrooms as they want to teach in a way that will help students to be successful on the
test. Mrs. Lambert, a first grade teacher who does not give the test, even feels the need to

teach in ways that are similar to the test.

144

Well, we have to get them ready for the test. We have to get them ready to learn
how to- I think it’s stressed more now that you have to teach them test taking
skills such as filling in the bubble, not scribbling- I mean at this level- filling in
the bubble not scribbling all over the page, paying attention, being an active
listener during directions, things like that. I think test taking skills are a bigger
issue now than they were- not that they shouldn’t have been before because
anything helps at any young age. The sooner they learn the better. Teaching
practice not testing. We have to teach the standards that they’re going to end up
being tested on. And unfortunately that’s what a lot of pressure is to do is to
teach to the test even though you’re not supposed to.
First grade students are being prepared for success at testing. While the standards are
what are taught, they are taught and assessed in ways that mimic the test so that students
will be prepared for what lies in the future.
Mr. Melville, a fifth grade teacher who gives the test, noted that he has altered his
teaching practice so that his students will be successful on the test.
Well, it’s gotten more and more to where you’re teaching to the test. I mean I’m
going to be honest again you do- I do and I’m not the only one. I don’t know how
many people would answer that honestly but. Hey this is going to be on ISTEP,
you have to know this. And the kids all say “If we fail the ISTEP do we fail fifth
grade?” So they’re concerned too. So you do want to make sure you are covering
things that you happened to notice that were on there- like I was really watching
close on the science this year because it was new. And science gets left behind

so. It has changed my teaching practice, yeah.

145

There is a sense that teaching to the test is not what teachers would consider to be the
professional thing to do, but it is what he does in his classroom. The test has control over
his work, and this is something that other teachers may do but try to hide. This test not
only controls Mr. Melville’s work, but the emotions of his students as well as they worry
about passing the test in order to move on to the next grade level.

Mrs. Gable, a fourth grade teacher, talked about teaching to the test in connection
with test preparation.

I just think we spend a whole big chunk teaching towards the test or reviewing to

get to the test. And then we spend a couple of weeks taking the test. There’s a

whole lot of time all on this test.

Teaching to the test, preparing for the test, and giving the test all effect the teaching and
learning in her classroom. It has control over what she teaches and how she teaches until
at least the test is completed in late September or early October.

Mrs. Gable and five other teachers discussed the role of test preparation in the
school and classrooms. Through their narratives, it becomes clear that the first weeks of
the school year are geared toward what will be covered on the test. However, it also
reaches into what happens before school starts in the summer as well as after school once
the year begins. Test preparation is pervasive in the lives of the teachers and students of
Marvel. Mr. Koselke provided this overview of what this encompasses.

Okay, I let the staff know what resources are available to help with preparation

like Department of Ed website and release test items- things like that that they can

use for review or drill. Also collect information from the staff for like Jump Start

program- you know what standards are we the lowest on, what materials do we

146

need to collect and then help collect materials and resources to be used for Jump
Start programs and after school remediation programs. And then to prepare, I
think giving them the information and help- and having them help analyze it as far
as where our kids low and not meeting it and what do we need you know address
it and make it better for the following year. I think you know doing that helping
them kind of with preparation. And then the kids, we kind of hype it up on the
announcements, and you know do your personal best, show what you know type
thing you know- try to get them a little more motivated about it- a little more
pride instilled in them. And then as a staff we do some focus groups, you know
Title I teachers collaborate with the classroom teachers to do some small group
instruction you know and focus groups on— on review and test skills- test taking
skills. In the past we’ve done some after school groups as well. We didn’t do that
this year because we had Jump Start and we felt like both would be too much you
know, but we did Jump Start and then we did the focus groups for a portion of the
day. It’s getting harder to do that though because of the other added grade levels-
so now you have third, fourth, and fifth that you have to do small group work
with. So you can’t get to them all every day. We used to do it you know every

day. Now it’s you know a couple times a week that you do it grade level.

A massive amount of time and energy is spent even in preparing what students need to

review in order to be successful on the test as well as the time spent in the actual

classroom review. It even influences what is said on morning announcements as Mr.

Koselke does what he can to give students a positive attitude about taking the test. From

late August until the end of September, test preparation is in full swing.

147

Like Mrs. Gable, Mrs. Johnson also focuses on test preparation at the beginning
of the school year.
Well, at the beginning of the year there’s “remediation” to get the learners ready-
the middle bubbles to push them up. The beginning of the year, we’re reviewing.
So rather than going straight into curriculum, we spend our time reviewing for a
test that the state weights but not anybody else.
The goals of raising the test scores of some students and reviewing for the test have
control over her curriculum at the start of the school year. This test is not as valuable to
this teacher as it is to the state education powers.
Mr. Gobel has been involved in the summer program called Jump Start that is
geared towards coaching struggling students with the goal of getting them to pass the test.
Well, I see where the needs are- I see what they’re- I look at the data for the kids
and for the class and I look at NWEA and ISTEP from the previous year and like
if they’re low in algebra or umm computation, problem solving give them various
things. We pull the old ISTEP tests off the computer- the problems to show kids.
The one big thing is to get them to try to use written communication to explain
what they’ve done. I remember last year at the beginning of ISTEP I gave them
or Jump Start rather I remember one math problem and I explained over and over
now they- first we did a sample and wrote down how we solved it. And they- you
know together we did it. Then I gave them- and I told them that on ISTEP you
get several points- one’s for the correct answer, one’s for if you show how you
did it, if you didn’t do it you get no points, blah, blah, blah. So then I finally gave

them a problem on their own- one child in ten or twelve wrote down how he

148

solved it. I said- and the rest of them got the right answer because it was fairly
easy- I said he got 2 points, the rest of you got 1. They go oh, oh we got the right
answer. I said yeah but you didn’t write down how. So it was like an eye opener.
I told them and told them and told them, but until they did it themselves they
didn’t get it. So, I you know I try to make-I guess I try to give them test taking
skills and I try to let them know what’s expected of them without teaching to the
test and without you know saying you have to do this and let’s write a script on it
you know. Just give them a variety of situations that they have to write an answer
for.

Mr. Gobel is teaching his students how to be successftrl on the test and meet the
requirements to get a good score, especially for the constructed response section of the
math test. The primary goal is not mastery of the grade level standards in math, but in
explaining the reasoning used in generating the answer. Teaching is centered on the
skills of successfully taking this particular test based on Mr. Gobel’s previous
experiences with it and is done repeatedly until the students understand what is expected.

Mrs. Gordon has also worked on test taking skills as part of the Jump Start
program in the areas of reading and writing. She also shared more about the control
ISTEP+ has over her Title I teaching responsibilities as the school year begins.

Then once the school year fully begins, Title 1 tends to work with- in that past it

was all third grade- now of course we kind of spread out. We still have a big
emphasis on third grade but we’ve gone and done more. I’ve taken small groups
in here and again whatever we do is going to be seen and compared to previous

ISTEP tests. So, we look at the writing section and the writing prompts. We look

149

at writing prompts that were used in the past. The same timing is used. So, we’re

very IS T EP focused until the ISTEP is finally given that’s a major part of what I

do with kids.
Title I teachers work almost exclusively with third, fourth, and fifth grade teachers and
students until testing is completed in the fall. It has control over what the teachers teach
as well as which students are serviced by this program. As these teachers work to
prepare their students, they use activities that are comparable to previous tests and imitate
the timing of the test as well. ISTEP+ is a controlling factor with both general education
and Title 1 teachers.

Mr. Koselke also noted another way that this test has control over the work of
Marvel teachers.

And I think too that some curriculum choices— I mean let’s face it we’re not going

to focus as hard on social studies and science if they’re not being tested on the

ISTEP because you’re not being judged on those. You’re being judged on

reading, writing and math.
Teachers are spending the majority of the day on the academic disciplines that are on the
test at the expense of science and social studies. The emphasis on reading, writing and
math is also reflected in the new district report card and professional development. Two
thirds of the report card is devoted to these three areas. A grade level curriculum map is
on the back of the card as well but only for reading, writing and math. Each of these
disciplines is broken down further on the front of the card where teachers can note where
students have and haven’t mastered particular standards. This is not the case for science

and social studies that have two lines: understands basic concepts and participation.

150

These are the same lines used for art, music, and physical education. ISTEP+ controls

what and how teachers teach. Professional development is also geared towards them as

well.

Another issue that teachers experience as illegitimate control based on test scores

is their use to compare schools that results in making the school look bad. Both fifth

grade teachers, Mrs. Johnson and Mr. Melville, think that test scores are being used to

make comparisons among schools.

There is no purpose. I don’t know. I don’t know. I don’t know what the purpose
of ISTEP is. Being from Iowa, we had the Iowa Test of Basic Skills. I don’t
remember the Iowa Test of Basic Skills weighing as much as ISTEP. And I don’t
know if it’s just because I’m a teacher now, but I don’t know. I don’t know what

they use it for except that to see who ’s ahead and behind. And to me that’s silly.

In this teacher’s experience, test results are used for the purpose of rating schools, and

this is a wrong use of these scores. It is not prOper to use the scores in this way.

SCOICS.

Mr. Melville expanded more on how schools are compared through the use of test

I think I feel like I said before about assessment why I feel kind of negatively
towards it is just because the timing and the comparison of one school district
versus another versus more student progress. I mean it’s in the media- people
look at that and judge schools. And it’s not fair for some of the special ed kids
who have to do the exact same test. It just doesn’t seem fair to make those kids
sit there and cry. Yeah, they might get to take it in another environment or certain

parts are read to them but it’s still- I don’t know- I think they should invalidate a

151

few more than what they do. It makes- plus our school looks bad because we
have all the special ed kids here. So then we’re considered bottom of the totem
pole sometimes.
Schools are judged by their scores as they are reported by the media. Schools like
Marvel are labeled failing when they have a large population of special education
students who take this test and are unable to meet the cut score standard. The test and
results also has power over the emotions of the students when they cry because they feel
they are unable to answer the questions. Test scores are used to make this school look
bad which in the lived experience of these teachers it is not.
Ms. Lambert also noted that test scores are used to make the school look bad in a
very public way which reflects poorly on the teachers.
Okay, then they said, “Well this isn’t good enough. We need to be more specific
and we need to make schools look bad.” So they created the ISTEP. Standardized
tests by itself are not a bad idea- you find out where the kids are. That way you
know what to work on and where they need help. To base every single thing on
one test is ludicrous. To have it be front page news that five schools did not pass
ISTEP so therefore you don’t want your kids going there is ridiculous.
The test is not the culprit, but the powers that created the test seemed to have a sinister
purpose in mind when they made it. In the paper, the scores take on an authority to label
a school that is not appropriate in the eyes of this teacher. She feels they do not provide
the information about a school on which to make the decision of whether or not parents
should send their children there. These scores are not a legitimate authority in telling

what is real and true about a particular school and its teachers. Mrs. Gable stated her

152

concerns over ISTEP+ this way, “Well I am concerned with it because it affects us
financially and reputationally.” These scores have been given an authority that
influences how other people outside the school view the school and the teachers in a way
that does not reflect what is true about the school. This authority is not valid and reliable
in the eyes of these teachers because it does not present what they know from their daily
life at Marvel.

Pressure.

Along with a feeling of imitation a propos NCLB, teachers also experience
pressure. “I think it puts more pressure in an unrealistic way without the funding,” stated
Mr. Wilson. This piece of legislation pressures teachers with obligations but does not
provide the resources to meet these obligations. This lack of organizational support
makes this law illegitimate. There is a sense that the teachers have to accomplish the
goals without any further resources to meet them which pressures teachers to do more in
a way that doe not match Mr. Wilson’s teaching reality.

Mr. Jones expanded on what this pressure does to teachers.

I think that they’re always looming over our heads. I think that- I think that we all

feel pressured and that we all feel- we’re not of value sometimes- that our efforts

are not recognized and that the children’s efforts are not recognized. I think we’re
all very protective of these kids and I think that when someone says to us “Marvel
scored lowest on the ISTEP”— I think it’s very hurtful for that reason.

The pressure of accountability, especially in regards to NCLB and ISTEP+, controls how

teachers view their work at Marvel. Mrs. Gable further develops this point.

153

What is the purpose of No Child Left Behind? Is it to keep teachers feeling bad
about themselves? Is it to feel kicked in the teeth daily because by golly
everything that shows up- like we made huge gains last year from our fourth
graders that we had last year to the fifth grade- they’re fifth graders now- we’ve
had compliments from the fifth grade teachers, we’ve had scores that show so
much growth, but we still suck. But we’ve shown great growth. That’s my point.
If you’re way down here in the toilet, you know well if you can get where your
head’s above water that’s good but you still need to be way up here walking on
water. Well we’re not anywhere’s near to walking on water and yet we’re
supposed to be.
The pressure has control over Mrs. Gable and her perception of what she does when it
evaluates her work and tells her she is inadequate for this work. Teachers’ worth is
solely judged by making particular growth scores on a single test rather than by
appreciating the growth made by students that have struggled with the test from the start.
Accountability according to Mrs. Gable also:
It’s always breathing down our neck. We’re always being reminded about it. It’s
always- it’s like you can’t go a day without hearing something about it. “Oh we
have to do that because otherwise they’re going to get” you know. If I think
about it too much I just get so discouraged and pissed off.
The control of this law reaches daily into the work of this teacher each day. There is a
fear of what may happen at Marvel if they do not meet the AYP standards and what this
will mean for the reputation and stability of the school. The fear of sanctions is what is

causing this. It is not about empowering teachers but about making them afraid. This has

154

impacted the school as noted by Mr. Gobel, “changed the whole din of the school- the
whole ambiance or whatever you want to call it. It’s like the accountability- it seems like
there’s more pressure.”
Obedience
While teachers find the control and authority of accountability to be illegitimate,
they still feel that as the current law their responsibility is to obey these laws. Ms.
Lambert stated it this way, “Well I have to- we’re- I don ’t have choices in many respects.
It’s not a-I don’t think that- I don’t like the ISTEP so therefore I’m not going to- there are
certain things I have to do as a teacher.” Four other teachers also expressed their view
that as a teacher they needed to follow the laws even though they did not agree with them
completely.
Mr. Morgan: Those rules-you know they’re laws or whatever so they have to be
implemented in the school and being able to be seen by the state. So, I think we
implement them and do our best with what we have.
Mrs. Harding: Actually, you have to honor No Child Left Behind and PL 221.
Mrs. Gable: You know there are things we ’re told we need to do because of this
law. Well, so then we have to change things so that we’re doing that now.
Mrs. Gordon: Ever since Arnold appeared many years ago now- it’s probably
been at least 10 maybe even longer— it became extremely clear that there needed
to be a closer relationship between how we taught and what was going to appear
on that test. I think people fought that because they did not have the Arnold

experience that I had which was you don ’t have a choice- this is the way it is and

155

it’s better for kids by the way, but you don ’t have a choice and this is the way it

is.
As long as NCLB and PL 221 are the law, these teachers will obey them. Obedience to
these laws they do not agree with is part of their responsibility as teachers. Disobedience
and revolt did not seem to be on their agenda. They may participate in professional
forums that speak out against these policies or even talk with governmental
representatives about their concerns, but they will not simply ignore these policies.
Whether or not they agree with them, they are currently the law of the land, and as such
are to be followed.
A Lack of Control

In their time working with Marvel students, teachers have encountered some
things over which they have no control because they happen at the students’ homes. The
topics teachers talked about included: (a) family problems, (b) lack of experiences prior
to school, (c) student discipline, and (d) a respect for education. While teachers have no
control over these, they are directly connected to student learning and accountability.

In his position as principal, Mr. Koselke has a wide understanding of what is
happening in the homes of Marvel students. He hears things fiom them as they talk with
him as well as what he learns from teachers, other parents, the school counselor, the
social worker, and the local paper. From this, he has a glimpse into the daily life of his
students

Solve everybody’s problems- all the children would be well fed and have
wonderful households and parents- loving, caring parents- not have to be home

alone and be babysitters to their siblings and not have to have police come to their

156

home and arrest their you know parents and family members and I mean that is
where our biggest problems he is things we can ’t control- things that are out of
our control. If I could, I’d help change that stuff because that would cut down so
much on the kids’ attitudes.
Teachers have no control over what is happening at home while they have the students or
what that home life was like prior to the students coming to Marvel. Yet, what happened
at home, the values and experiences, has a tremendous impact on what students do at
school. Accountability amplifies their concerns over these issues as they work hard to
raise scores and implement programs so students can learn while knowing that there are
some things they have no control over that have a significant influence over this work.
Mr. Gordon talked about how these problems enter into his work with students
and how they disrupt what she is doing with her students.
I don’t really mind unmotivated students, but I do mind students who had other
problems in their personal and family lives that then bring that into my learning
environment. And I see it as- when I’m in control which is almost always- it’s
my learning environment. And I feel upset and sad that awfirl things have to
happen to kids, but if there were some way to compartrnentalize, I can ’t go into
their homes and try to straighten things out but they can certainly come into my
learning environment and sabotage it. And that is disturbing to me.
What happens in the homes and neighborhoods is coming into the classrooms at Marvel
and disrupting the leaming and teaching. As much as Mrs. Gordon tries to prevent it
from impacting what she does with her students, it seems to at times have a life of its own

that even this veteran teacher has no way to control.

157

Mr. Wilson also is concerned with the home lives of his students as he described
some of the issues he saw interfering with learning.
This is a tad negative, but I believe that they are extremely needy in many areas
that have nothing to do with a classroom. And I think that that’s what makes
learning very difficult for them. The reason I believe that is I have several
children this year with no mothers, I have many who come hungry and dirty and
very emotionally hungry.
To be able to teach students and have them master the material, they need to feel safe and
secure both at home and school. Until this security is met, learning is more difficult for
students. They have physical needs such as clean clothes and nourishing food as well as
emotional needs such as love and attention from family members. Mr. Wilson knows
that many of his students are not receiving these at home which makes his work with the
students even harder to do.
Mrs. Kaiser provided a more concrete example of this as she spoke about her
concerns with the home life of one of her students.
My goodness, poor Willie, he lives in a house- in his own family there’s seven
boys- and he’s the youngest and now I just found out because we went to GEI’s
for two cousins and there’s seven in that family- and they all live in the same
house. There are 14 children and two women in an apartment in Merrihill. Now
come on! I have a book buddy- one of his brother’s is a book buddy- and he was
so tired he told his teacher he didn’t sleep because they kept pulling the covers off
of him. Poor kid! You can’t come to school and learn if you’re thinking- God

only knows what’s happening in some of these homes!

158

This teacher has no control over the living situation her students are in, but they do have a
direct impact on their learning. While in a first grade classroom, I was able to spend time
with one of Willie’s brothers. Through our conversation I learned that he had a bad
toothache which was interfering with his learning. These are just two examples of how
family problems are impeding the learning of students, and teachers who are held
accountable for this learning have no control over them.

Mr. Jones in speaking about his fi'ustrations with family issues and accountability
reiterates what Mr. Koselke said.

I’d like to know how they can put a time limit on- on raising scores when there is

so much that we don ’t have any control over- for example, home life, chemical

problems, physical problems, emotional problems, things like that.
Marvel teachers are much attuned to the family issues and problems that impact the lives
of their students. They know fiom first-hand experience how this makes a difference in
their learning. They do their very best to work to meet the needs of their students while
teaching them the standards. ' When accountability policies put unrealistic time
restrictions on this learning without acknowledging the problems children face, teachers
become frustrated. They are being held responsible for something that is not completely
in their control.

A second area where teachers have no control in homes is in the prior experiences
the children have before they come to school. This is often connected with poverty.
When talking about this issue, Mr. Koselke did not assign blame but simply stated:

I believe the students at this school have a lot of family problems and a lot of

disadvantages. And that is not a racial or an ethnic thing. I believe that is a

159

poverty- that is a socioeconomic thing because they can’t afford and can’t

experience a lot of the things that they need to do- don ’t have the resources to do

a lot of the things that they need to do with their kids to further their education-

progress them where they should to be. So I feel our kids are at risk. I feel the

majority of our kids are at risk and high poverty you know kids. I feel they can
learn just like other kids. But I feel like they are already disadvantaged you know
many of them in coming in.
The children can learn, but there are experiences many other students have had prior to
school that these students have not had. Teaching at the school becomes about filling in
the missing pieces so that students can learn and use the standards. This means that
Marvel students will need more time to master the material because of the time needed to
bring them to where other students already are firnctioning.

As a Title 1 teacher, Mr. Gobel works with students from many classrooms in the
school. In his years of experience with the students across the grade levels, he has
witnessed how poverty impacts student learning as they lack both experiences and the
resources to attain some experiences.

I think we’re limited by our children’s experiences. They know you know. Not

only do these kids not have books in their houses a lot of them, they can’t afford

them. But it just— yeah it limits it because of their experiences and their prior
knowledge and all that stuff.
What teachers are able to do with students connected to the standards is restricted by
what students have been exposed to before school as well as the resources families have

available to purchase items that support learning.

160

When comparing her former kindergarten students with the ones she has met and
discussed with Mrs. Kaiser, Mrs. Johnson also noted that students are less prepared for
school now than when she first began teaching at Marvel.

My concerns are that the children coming in are lower and lower academically.

They’re not coming in with so much of the experiences or the you know anything

as far as like what- even when I first started nine and a half years ago- you know

the kids that came to me nine and a half years ago I feel had even a little bit more
emotional security than they do now.
Students are lacking academic preparation as well as the emotional security that this
teacher feels is need for students to be successful at school. Mrs. Kaiser gave more
specifics to reinforce Mrs. Johnson’s observation.

Well, I guess I believe that- because I teach the younger children, I really think

that there are some things that are developmentally appropriate and that children

come into kindergarten at all different stages of development. And a lot of it
happens because of what has happened to them at home- like what kind of things
that they’ve been exposed to at home in their own environment. If they’ve been
exposed to you know being able to read a book or use a pencil and crayons and
those kinds of things, then they’re kind of ready for that. But I really do think that
children come to school developmentally ready and you can’t always rush that
process. And I’m— that’s what scares me the most- is that sometimes we’re held
accountable for things and they might be beyond our control.

Mrs. Kaiser afforded me the opportunity to work with her students on occasion. I noted

that some of the students did not know how to spell their names, the letters of the

161

alphabet, or the sounds of the letters. I know that my niece went into kindergarten with
many of these skills, yet some of these students were struggling with this. These are
skills and concepts that they only seem to get at school and were not taught prior to
school and rarely reinforced at home. It will take longer for these students to master the

early literacy skills because of situations that are outside of Mrs. Kaiser’s control.

162

CHAPTER 10
INTERPERSONAL STORY: HOW DOES ACCOUNTABILITY INFLUENCE
RELATIONSHIPS?

This chapter examines the narratives teachers tell about their relationships with
students, parents, colleagues, and the district administration as well as how these are
impacted by ISTEP+ and accountability policies. Interpersonal narratives and the story
that together they tell are about issues of trust, communication, connections, and
collegiality. The narratives about relationships with students are upbeat in that the
teachers value their bond with students. Parent relationships are a mixture of some
positive and some negative narratives. For the most part, associations with colleagues are
strong and congenial. There were two very distinct teacher narratives about district
administrators that were exactly the opposite of one another. While these were told by
only a few teachers, they are strongly related to accountability and testing.

The discourse of interpersonal narratives includes: interacting, we, us,
relationships, collaboration, talk, communicate, rapport, connection, together, love, and
share. These words signify an association of some type. In some cases these are positive
relationships indicated by other words used in the narrative while in others they are
negative.

Relationships with Students

Teacher narratives about relationships with their students are strongly connected
to their moral narratives of teacher identity. As teachers touch the lives of students, they
build strong and significant relationships with them. Mr. Wilson’s narratives were

mainly centered on his students and reflect their importance in his work.

163

CH: What aspects of your profession are most important to you and why?

DF: Rapport with my children because most of the kids I see really need an adult

in their life that they know cares and that they can turn to.

CH: What are your rewards?

DF: Connection with the kids.

His connections with his students were also seen during the observations. Before a
lesson on News to You, he asked the students to share news from their lives. As students
shared something about family members, he would make comments that demonstrated he
knew these people well. One moming a sentence on the board that students were to
correct told the students he had missed them the day before. He also noted that he often
provides snacks for his students in the morning because he worries that they do not get
fed at home.

In his work as principal at Marvel, Mr. Koselke also talked about the rewards that
come from “clicking with some of the students.” Mr. Koselke likes to spend his time
with the students. He greets them in the morning as they get off the bus, he is in the
cafeteria at breakfast and lunch monitoring behavior and talking with the students, and he
ends each day by seeing the students off as they go to their buses. He knows that by
building relationships with the students through conversations and being present in the
school, he will have a sure foundation on which to work with the students for any
purpose.

Two other teachers also find having relationships with their students to be of great
value to their work and lives. Mr. Morgan’s close ties with his students are apparent in

this narrative.

164

Even when I have a bad day, I’m glad to have a job, and I love these kids, and I
would- and I’ll miss these kids when this year ends too. I think that I have a very
rewarding class and they’ve worked really hard and I think that that’s a good
reward in itself.
This response may be connected to the fact that this is his first classroom. Although he
has worked in schools before, this is his first full-time teaching assignment and his first
class. However, the bonds that he has with his students are important, and he values his
students. In her position as a Title 1 teacher, Mrs. Gordon does not have a single group of
students to work with all day. Nonetheless, she does find that connecting with students in
her work is important. “So, you know interacting with the kids is a neat thing to do. I
kind of- it always kind of surprises me- because I’m kind of a social isolate, but I actually
enjoy working with the kids.”

Some teacher narratives were specific about relationships with the types of
students to which Marvel caters- students fiom poor homes. They have an understanding
that these students need them more than other students might. Their connections with
these students provide something that they may not get from anyone else. During the
course of the interviews, three case study teachers talked about this. Mr. Wilson said, “I
love working with this type of children- meaning special ed and as opposed to rich
snobs.” Mrs. Johnson stated, “I love the kids; I love the challenge of having these types
of kids. I don’t think I’d honestly be happy somewhere where they’re Fruity Pebbles.”
When asked to explain what she meant by Fruity Pebbles, she defined it as meaning
students who are well-behaved all the time and seemingly have no problems. It would

seem Mr. Melville feels the same way as Mrs. Johnson, “I like the kids at this school.

165

I’ve been in Catholic school. I’ve student taught at a more affluent school- not really
affluent but more than here. I guess I say I like the kids.” Mr. Koselke put it this way,
“With all their challenges and difficulties- baggage- I love the kids.” Relationships with
Marvel students are important, and this is increased because these are students who need
these adults. Even though Marvel students are challenging and have some difficult needs
to deal with, these teachers desire to build and maintain relationships with them. Their
narratives about accountability and testing did not reflect any tensions in these
relationships.

Relationships with Parents

Teachers recognize that they need to have a relationship with students’ parents
and how this makes a difference in their work with the students. Section 1118 of NCLB
is dedicated to parent involvement in Title I schools. This has been something that
Marvel has addressed in the past as can be seen in Marvel’s School Improvement Plan
and was also part of the CSRD plan. For several years, there was even a member of the
Title I staff at this school who was responsible for coordinating parent involvement
activities.

While parent involvement is something that is an important element in school
improvement at Marvel, there is some concern that parents are not as involved as they
need to be. Mr. Gobel shared his concerns about the lack of Marvel parents participating
in activities designed for increasing connections between the school and parents.

If I could just wave a magic wand, I would have parents come in more and be

more involved. We had an Everyday Math for parents seminar planned, and I

166

think 16 parents came and only 4 were Marvel. See, that’s what the state wants us
to do. ..
As a Title I teacher, Mr. Gobel is very much aware of the struggles the school will
encounter with Title I officials because of a disappointing level of parent involvement in
state approved activities. In another part of the interview, he made another comment
about parent involvement.
Well, I remember years ago when Jane was at the ad building, I can’t think of her
last name, and we made these mats- it was for primary kids. And they had
numbers on there and letters and they could write or draw or draw a picture and
write about it with a grease pen because they were laminated and stuff like that.
And the state said “No, that’s not family involvement.” And it was bringing
learning into their houses you know. But it was more parent workshops on
parenting skills; you know it kind of went to that and all the fim stuff went away.
And really parent involvement dropped off because our parents do like the fim
stuff. We have some very young, unskilled parents and they’re just like the kids-
they want the firn stuff.
Frustration with the state and parents is part of this narrative. Parent involvement in Title
1 activities is decreasing due in part to how the state is now defining what is and isn’t
parent involvement in the laws. The law, as directed by NCLB, is limiting what the
school can count as worthwhile parent involvement. In this it is taking away the types of
activities that are most meaningful for parents and that builds connections between home
and school. He sees how the law is having a negative impact on the relationship between

the school and parents which is counter to what the teachers and the law desire.

167

Along with the frustration at the law, there is also some with the parents as well.
He refers to them as immature and not interested in activities that would be beneficial.
As more and more parents do not come to workshops that are designed to strengthen
education, this attitude about the immaturity of parents can build among the teachers.
This has the potential to do great harm to the relationships teachers have with parents as
the teachers see them as less capable. Mrs. Johnson seemed to think along these lines
when she stated:

I think that the parents are younger and younger and they don’t know how to-

they don’t know what to give to their kids that would benefit them in the best

way. And a good example of this is when I grew up my parents gave to me
emotional- I could tell they loved me. They gave me that love, they showed me
love- not by buying me material goods but by sitting down with me and spending
time with me. And I don’t feel like a lot of the parents today do that.
Perceptions of parents are not positive which can harm the relationships teachers have
with the parents of their students.

Parent involvement is not limited to participation in Title I activities but also
includes parents being involved in what is happening in the classroom. Mrs. Harding
shared that what she likes least about teaching at Marvel is “probably not enough parent
involvement. I wish if I had more parents involved it would make my job a whole lot
easier. And it would help my students be more successful.” Parents working with their
children influence what is occurring in the classroom. As parents are seen as not being
involved in their child’s education, teachers perceive that this makes their work more

difficult. Parent involvement in classroom activities enhances what teachers are doing.

168

There is a sense that as teacher accountability increases, there will be an increase in the
frustration that teachers feel about the lack of parent involvement in the day to day
activities of the classroom. This could be seen in Mrs. Gable’s questions: “Somewhere-
you know it’s always the school’s fault- it’s always the state’s fault-it’s always the— you
know when is it the kid’s fault? When is it the parent’s fault?” and “You need to have
standards, but by god where’s the parental standards?” This teacher is concerned about
the school’s increasing accountability which in turn causes her to feel frustration with
parents. Accountability is negatively affecting how these teachers perceive the parents.

Communication was another topic that was discussed by some teachers that
resulted in mixed narratives. Some teachers had consistent and positive communication
with parents.

Mrs. Johnson: What interactions do I have with parents? Consistent. I try to stay

in contact with them as much as possible. Beginning of the year I called everyone

and welcomed them to my room. I try not to just contact them with the negatives,

but also with the positives because I want them to have a good experience as well

as their children in room.

Mr. Jones: I have a positive relationship I think with most of my parents. My

parents know they can call me at home. They and they do.
These two teachers have good communication with parents which promotes positive
relationships. While Mrs. Johnson is concerned with the emotional stability the children
receive from their parents, she does have good communication with them.

However, this is not the experience of all the teachers in the building. Mrs.

Lambert finds that she reaches out to parents, but that they do not reciprocate.

169

I mean I write a note home this year- I’ve written a note home every Monday to

them telling them if they have any questions or concerns to contact me and I give

them my number and extension every week. Have I heard from them? No.
Other teachers are also having difficult in getting responses from parents. Mrs. Harding
notes that her interactions with parents are “few and far between.” Mrs. Gable noted that
“And you send stuff home. You send it home with the brother or the sister or something
like that too. You don’t ever get any kind of a response.” These teachers struggle to
develop relationships with parents through communication. They do not feel that the
parents are responding whether it is about behavior, classroom needs and events, or
assignments. This lack of communication deepens their frustration with parents and their
involvement in their children’s education. In this time of accountability, this magnifies
the communication breakdown.

A central aspect of the accountability laws is the state test, ISTEP+. Teachers
were asked about how they discuss test results with parents. Mr. Koselke, the school’s
principal, noted that when the scores go home few parents call to discuss the meaning of
the results and are more interested in what remediation opportunities are available to their
children.

A few but not too many. We’ve had a few. Mostly wanting to know what

opportunities they’re going to have to go to you know remediation or summer

school or you know things like that is their concerns. You know what they can do
or how can they help improve the areas.
Mr. Wilson also noted, “I do only if it comes up at a case conference or an annual case

review. There’s really not much interest shown.” It is not clear whether or not the

170

parents asked or were concerned about these scores or if they were brought up by a
member of the case conference team. Mrs. Gable, a fourth grade teacher, also talked
about the lack of parent interest in these scores.
You know I don’t think I had any parent in here this year ‘cause we don’t have
them when you have parent-teacher conferences. So, you send them home with
the kid. I didn’t have one that called to say anything about it. I spoke with one
parent just yesterday. We’re talking about possible retention and I told her, “if
you noticed, if you remember back to when we sent the ISTEP results home she
failed both of them.” “Yeah, I saw that.” That was it. So, parents aren’t
interested
If the teacher brought them up in regards to retention, then the scores were discussed.
These are scores that have a major impact on the school, yet the parents do not seem
concerned with them.
Mr. Koselke, as principal, has numerous interactions with parents in the day to
day running of the school.
Positive and negative- I have both. I try to you know be involved in Marvel
Parent Teacher Team and things that they’re doing you know and help and I try to
meet with them when they meet monthly. And I you know meet with Margie, the
home-school coordinator on a regular basis to discuss things and she’s kind of the
liaison between me and the parent group. And that’s positive you know that’s all
usually positive stuff. If they have a concern, you know they submit it to me or
they come to me. I see what I can do or who I can find you know to address it if I

can’t. So you know 1 think most of that’s positive. I’ve had other positive you

171

know parent contacts too. I’ve had a lot of parents you know tell me how good
they think teachers are and you know really give positive feedback about some of
the programs and some of the staff. And that’s a good thing. The- you know case
conferences always involve parents. And sometimes those are positive and
sometimes they’re negative, but for the most part it’s good to have the parent
there to have input you know on things. Negative— I’ve had parents that- you
know the biggest negative things I have with parents are behavior issues. You
know when I have to call home and say so and so is suspended because they got
in a fight with Johnny and you know he shouldn’t have done this and this is the
rules. You know sometimes they take issue with that. They don’t think it’s fair.
It’s the other kids. It’s not their child’s fault. You know I’ve had a lot of that
type of stuff. And then the well “What about the other kid” and that sort of stuff
you know and you get into all that conversations and everything. And then I’ve
had some parents call about little issues with teachers like they didn’t send home a
newsletter or they didn’t send- you know what I mean- just little stuff- maybe
with some communications issues with teachers. It’s just mostly the things I’ve
dealt with.

This has also been the experience of Mr. Morgan, a third grade teacher.
I have some really good interactions. I have like one mom that comes in every
week and she wants to be here and be like the classroom mom if you will. And I
have some that I’ve tried to get in various times and they just don’t come. And I
have some that call often to check on their children or I’ll call them. I have some

that are on behavior plans that I call here and there. And I call not because it’s

172

always bad. Because if you call because it’s always bad- how disheartening is

that. I mean I would be discouraged as a parent too. So I think you know based

on the child and their parents’ will to want to be here, I think- I depend on them as

much as they’ll let me. I want them to be here. I want them to be involved. I

want them to ask questions. I want them to bring me the report cards and

question, “Why is this that way or this way?” You know I don’t want it to just

come back signed and never hear about it again.
Relationships with Colleagues

As the teachers talked about resources at Marvel and what they would keep about
the school, the principal, Mr. Koselke was mentioned by seven of the twelve teachers.
Throughout the course of his interview, Mr. Wilson shared how valuable Mr. Koslke is to
his work. “I have an excellent principal who will help me find any resources I need” and
“There’s a good resource- my principal.” During observations, I noted that Mr. Koselke
came to Mr. Wilson’s room to discuss student concerns. On one occasion, he alerted to
Mr. Wilson to something that one student said in the cafeteria while eating lunch. This
gave Mr. Wilson a heads up to how this student was feeling that day and how he should
best approach her during class.

Openness and honesty are character traits that build trust and are important to
Mrs. Johnson.

What else would 1 keep? I’d keep Marvin as principal- he’s awesome. He gets

frustrated, but he tells it how it is, and he doesn’t play. He doesn’t pretend that

he’s someone he’s not. He’s genuine.

173

Marvin Koselke is someone that these teachers trust which is a significant factor in
school reform. The teachers respect and are willing to listen to what his ideas and
suggestions. Mr. Jones noted that he “admires” the fact that Mr. Koselke sees things
through teachers’ perspectives because he was a teacher before becoming an
administrator. Other teachers used words and phrases such as “very confident”, “one of
the best that I’ve seen anywhere”, and “supportive.” Mrs. Gordon’s comments about Mr.
Koselke are interesting, “But through the years what I’ve seen is a sense of joy in what
we’re doing, and I think with Marvin that’s increased again. Marvin has some charisma.
He has a certain amount of homey comfortable charisma.” It is this encouraging and
respectful relationship with the principal that will enable Marvel teachers to work
together in addressing all the varied issues that arise from hi gh-stakes testing and
accountability.
As the principal of the school, Mr. Koselke has a more global perspective on the
working relationships of the staff. In two separate narratives, he finds that:
we work very well together as a staff and that we are willing to take risks. We
always have been and I still think we’re still this way. You know in a lot of cases
we’re the first ones to pilot something or we’re the ones that will volunteer you
know to have something at our school or you know whatever. I feel it’s more
innovative. I really do. And I think that’s all part of who we are as a staff. We
work well together and support each other well.

And I like my staff. I like the atmosphere here. We work well together and so I

feel loyal to it you know.

174

In these responses he shared ways what he values about his staff. They a) take risks and
are open and willing to try new things to benefit students, b) work well together and
support each other, and c) generate a positive school climate.

Other teachers echo these as well. Two other teachers specifically talked about
the willingness of the staff to try new things and be innovative.

Mrs. Kaiser: I mean this building is not at all afraid to take a risk. I mean I’ll tell

you what- we have gone and done more things to try to help our children learn

than- because it used to just drive me nuts at some of the other things- some of the

other schools and they could just sit in their seats and read the workbook.

Mr. Melville: Like I said before they do try a lot of new things. They really look

at every angle right on how they can help right down to transportation. They’re

very accommodating.
Other teachers saw the benefit of teachers being open-minded which engenders a climate
where it is safe to take risks. Mrs. Lambert stated, “as a staff we’re really open-minded
about things. I mean we will try anything to help these kids learn- you know” and Mr.
Morgan said, “And our open mindedness- you know like to try things- report cards and
things- everyone else is complaining- I think it’s kind of- it’s not a big deal.” A staff that
is willing to try new things is important to these teachers and something that they find in
their professional relationships at Marvel.

They also work well together and support each other in their work. A significant
way that they do this is in data analysis and collaboration. Six of the twelve teachers
stated that they accomplish this as they can talk to and learn from one another. As Ms.

Lambert notes, “Resources- the people here are the most beneficial.” Others who agree

175

with this statement are Mrs. Gordon: “I feel free to talk to just almost anybody about
anything that has to do with being a teacher and otherwise. So, that’s all good”; Mrs.
Archer: “I believe that the most beneficial resources are other staff members because
they’ve had experience with whatever they’re passing on to you- whether it worked or
whether it didn’t”; Mr. Jones: “they’ve taught and they’ve experienced so much more
than I have. And quite often in a situation where I have no idea how to handle it, they’ve
already had to handle that 10 times so they’re able to guide me”; Mrs. Harding: “Other
teachers I think would be the most beneficial resources because any issue that you have,
any problem you have, any assistance you need in teaching- they’ve done it- a lot of
them. They have the experience to assist in about any facet of teaching in the
classroom”; and Mr. Melville: “I will say that I do get- I’ve got an experienced person on
each side of me. I do go to my- I ask for peer- my other teachers to help me sometimes.”
While several of the teachers feel that they can approach any teacher for advice,
this is not true for all. Mrs. Gable also finds the other Marvel teachers a great resource
but adds a caveat:
I would say probably being comfortable enough to be able to go to another
teacher directly and say, “What would you do?” I mean there’s teachers in here I
wouldn’t ask them anything for god for- you know. God forbid I you know not
the right person to talk to them, but then there’s- like Luann that was down here.
I feel very comfortable I could go to her and ask her, “What do you think?
Should I do this? Should I do that?” And that I think is probably- because then
she has the experience that I don’t have. I mean she’s been in elementary as far as

I know her whole career. And so you know that I find to be beneficial- to be able

176

to go to certain teachers that you’re comfortable to ask advice and what they
know.

The level of trust and respect for what they can learn from one another is limited by those

with whom they have a positive working relationship. Not all the teachers at this

building feel like they can go to any other teacher to get advice. Mr. Gobel also talked

about this in his comfort level in sharing his professional thoughts and ideas with other

teachers in this building.
I think it’s a pretty good rapport. I think at times I have to bite my tongue
because I do a lot of research and I see people doing things that I think could be
done a better way or not at all or- I’m patting myself on the back. But when you
do know things and I think you do too Chris because of your education- you see
things that you just want to throw stuff out and say that’s (inaudible). And you
just have to hold back. But you know, I think sometimes I’ll make a suggestion-
some teachers are receptive to it. I’ll say “Oh, I have some material for that.
Would you like to use it if you’re doing a lesson on that?” Its how you approach
them you know. And some teachers are welcome to it and others aren’t so. But
with Title I we try to make available different resources you know if we see a
teacher doing that- and some teachers, some people ask and some people seem to
appreciate help or your comments or constructive criticism and others you know-
it’s just human nature- leave me alone, I’ll do it my way.

Some teachers are open and appreciate what others have to say while others are not. This

may depend on the level of trust and respect that is built among the teachers. While not

177

all teachers seem to listen to all others, it does seem that all teachers do have other
teachers in the building that they feel they can go to and discuss their work.

Another contrasting comment from Mrs. Johnson was, “we talk about school but
we don’t talk about our techniques per se.” She seems to have a concern over what the
teachers talk about with one another. It may be that they talk some about the
instructional strategies they use but do not go into enough depth and critique to be as
meaningful as she believes these professional conversations could be.

The third thing that Mr. Koselke mentioned was the positive atmosphere in the
building which contributes to the working relationships. Two other teachers also talked
about this during the interviews. Mrs. Archer said, “It’s a friendly place to come in to- to
work for. We try to make it as comfortable a place as we can for the kids and parents.”
Mrs. Gordon noted, “there’s always been a positive spirit generally associated with this
school. Now often that’s found in any elementary school. I feel a bit more like its home
and that it’s positive generally.” The climate of this building makes it conducive for
teachers to do their work with one another and their students.

As a Title I school and with the current state of accountability, these teachers
meet often for data analysis and collaboration. Once a month each grade level team
meets for about two and a half hour. During this time they analyze data, discuss
instructional units, and student behavior. Each time the grade level teams meet for
collaboration, they complete a Rubric for Collaboration. The items included on it include
discussion of strategies, analysis of assessment data, and interpersonal dynamics. Mr.
Koselke also is part of these meetings on occasion, “sometimes I meet with them in

collaboration- I go to their collaboration meetings sometimes and sit in and answer

178

questions or you know talk to them.” Mr. Gobel shared what the basic goal of these
meetings.
Well, part of that is with collaboration with the classroom teachers- we have that
monthly collaboration at all grade levels, half day. Which I think is a neat thing.
Analyze data. Look at the trends and patterns of what they- of their strengths and
weaknesses. Um, I kind of— in my group, you know, I know what they’re doing
in the classroom, you know what their- where they’re at and kind of go along with
that. And state standards of course.
These monthly meetings afford these teachers an opportunity to look at the data as well
as draw conclusions about their teaching and student leaming based on this data.
A part of the collaboration includes discussion of ISTEP+ results. Mr. Morgan
provided a glimpse into the third grade meeting when they were being discussed.
EM: Like I said, I take it and I go to Mrs. Harding and we have like those
coordination days and we look at like how our children did in specific areas and
maybe sometimes it’s because I’m weaker in that area and you know that person’s
stronger in that area. It just helps to kind of compare and kind of contrast what’s
going on with other students and other schools too in the district. I mean I don’t
have very specific data like I have my own. But we all do and it kind of helps to
see
CH: So you learn by just looking at them and talking about it with your
colleagues.
EM: Right, with my colleagues. Then we figure out ways that we’re going to

attack it so that next year they are prepared for it.

179

These teachers work together to make sense of the reports and use this information to
help them to know how to work with their students in the year to come. Mrs. Harding,
one of Mr. Morgan’s grade level colleagues made this statement about ISTEP+
discussions that agrees with Mr. Morgan’s: “For the teachers, its comparing data, seeing
what maybe as a grade level needs to be furthered, what else needs to be taught, what else
we need to do to really teach our students.”

Another area of concern connected to ISTEP+ is how other teachers perceive one
another based on the test results. In a narrative on AYP, Mr. Koselke posed this question,
“What’s everyone going to think if we didn’t?” He has some concerns about what people
across the community as well as in the district will think about Marvel if they do not meet
the AYP criteria. This same concern was expressed by three teachers. Mrs. Kaiser is
concerned with how the school is perceived by other teachers in the district because of
the scores former Marvel students are receiving while at other schools in the district.

Then those ones where you know you have the lowest- the students’ that have the

most lowest scores are probably you know the ones you know that everybody

kind of looks down on and thinks, “Oh, you know they don’t know anything.

And nobody’s doing anything in their buildings.” But I think that this building

has always been one of the hardest working buildings in the system. But then

how would I know, I’ve never been in anywhere else. And that’s just what I

think, but from hearsay and from things I know about as to where my children

have gone, I do believe that this is one of the hardest working buildings in town.

180

Mr. Jones, as a second grade teacher, seems to be concerned with what his fellow Marvel
teachers in the upper grades think about his teaching. There is also a sense that this is
inevitable based on the nature of the accountability laws.
And I think that- as far as adult relationships- I think that it- it causes- I think it
causes a little bit of resentment- like “Well if you’d have gotten your kids to
second grade level before they got to second grade level then I would have an
easier time.” They’re probably thinking if Mr. Jones would have gotten those
kids to third grade level before- you know what I mean? It causes us to have a bit
of resentment toward each other as teachers, especially grade level to grade level-
without us wanting it to- I just think that it’s there.
Mrs. Harding sees how the laws put a strain on relationships among educators, especially
classroom teachers.
Actually, you have to honor No Child Left Behind and PL 221. I would say
somewhat it puts a stress on professional relationships because if you’re not
performing at an adequate level, you may not be doing as well as it should and
then it comes back on the teacher.
Accountability can have a negative impact on the professional relationships Marvel
teachers have with one another as well as with those from other schools. At times this
may be simply the perception of the teachers based on how they may think other teachers
are seeing them as professionals, but it may also be based on things that they experience
in their interactions with other teachers.
Data analysis of ISTEP+ results and quarterly assessment results has been part of

three of the eight staff meetings including. It may be part of other meetings when they

181

scrutinize the SIP. This happened at five meetings as well as at two professional
development workshops.

When Mr. Wilson talked about the impact of accountability laws on his
professional relationships, he noted that they try to make light of the pressure they
experience from one law in particular, NCLB. “It just- it has such a negative ring
throughout any professional relationships that I have that it’s almost- we almost have to
just joke about it.” One way that the teachers are dealing with NCLB is to joke about it.
This seems to be a way teachers are coping with the law so that it does not have a
negative impact on their relationships.

Mrs. Gordon connected accountability with the professional relationships the
Marvel teachers have. “I’d say that to the degree that we do have a professional
collegiality- that can go back to 221- a professional as opposed to social and emotional
collegiality. That- I have to give credit there.” What is interesting is that during her
reflection on her statement, she singled out PL 221 as the law deserving of credit for
collegiality. This reflects what many teachers feel; that PL 221 is more worthwhile than
NCLB. This may be because PL 221 was already in effect when NCLB was enacted. In
this way, one of the accountability laws is seen as a support to professional relationships.
Relationships with District Administration

There were two conflicting narratives told by some of the teachers about their
relationship with the district administrators. One case study participant, Mrs. Johnson,
was very vocal in her negative feeling toward them in responses to three different
questions.

CH: Okay, what do you like least about teaching?

182

JJ : I don’t care for the administration um and I’m talking the administration
building people that are telling us things that we need to do that have never came
into our classrooms to see what we do on a day to day basis. Not saying teaching,
but some of the things we have to deal with and that they expect out of us without
umm actually knowing what it is that we’re doing in the first place, you know.
Giving us extra things to do that they think is going to help you know like even
behavior of the children or whatever the case may be and then never- never
stepping a foot in here to see what we deal with.

CH: How do you feel this school is similar to other schools and then how is it
different?

JJ: I feel like this school has- I don’t think we’re the only school that has a lot of
needs. I don’t feel like we’re the lowest income school. There are a couple of
schools in Michigan City that have the needs that we have. It’s different because
it’s an old building with bad heating. It’s- I feel like we get some unfair treatment
because of- I feel like it’s a dumping ground sometimes. When they feel like they
don’t-they can’t put students anywhere else they’ll put the students at Niemann
because we have a couple of special ed teachers that are phenomenal.

JJ: What do you like the least? I like the least that- again I feel like sometimes
Niemann gets ignored through some of the administration building because I
think they feel like we’re low achievers at times and we’re not. We were right up
there this year. And I feel like they sometimes- well they’re not going to get any

better so why give them any extra help or whatever.

183

Mrs. Johnson has strong negative feelings about the district administrators based on what
she has seen and heard from them. She believes that because the school has not done as
well on ISTEP+ as other schools, it has become the “dumping ground” for the district.
Accountability and ISTEP+ play a significant role in her relationship with these
administrators.

However, an opposite narrative is told by other teachers. As some teachers talked
about resources, something that helps and supports teachers in their work, two teachers
noted that the district administrators fall into the category for them. Mr. Morgan stated,
“I feel pretty confident in our administrative staff at the ad building. I mean I think that
they try to look out for us as much as they can.” Mr. Gobel also finds these
administrators to be helpful.

I have a question about curriculum or well- infonnation’s just there if you have a

question about something or whether it’s cuniculum or umm instructional

practice or an idea for something. And I think our ad building’s a good resource.

I consider that a resource- our ad building. I think the people there- if you have a

real question about something- you know we call and ask or stuff like that.
He also is not pleased with teachers who make the types of comments made by Mrs.
Johnson about them.

Well really or you know they’ll say “Let someone from the ad building come here

and do this with these kids” or something. Well, no this is what you have to do. I

mean this is my thought- you have to find a way to do it. This is your job- you

find a way to do it. But I don’t say that out loud.

184

These competing relationships with district administrators can have a toll on the
relationships of some Marvel teachers. As some teachers complain that district leaders
are putting undo pressure on them, others may not respond openly but harbor concerns
about the way these teachers are viewing these administrators. As negative consequences
from accountability come into play, these may have a more visible influence on the
relationships of teachers in the building.

In this time of accountability, the relationship these two teachers have with the
district administrators is a positive one. Mrs. Gordon, a Title I teacher has had positive
experiences in gaining needed information from these individuals. Mr. Morgan finds that
rather than being against Marvel teachers, they do what they can to support the teachers
in their work. They have a contrasting narrative about their relationship with the district
administrators. As the pressure mounts and sanctions come into play, these narratives

may change.

185

CHAPTER 11
TECHNICAL STORY: WHAT DOES AND DOES NOT WORK?

In this chapter, the technical story is told about what these teachers find does and
doesn’t work about high-stakes testing and accountability when it comes to the day to day
life of a Title I school. This story is based on the experiences these teachers have related
to how ISTEP+ and the policies support or impede their teaching and student leanring.
Technical narratives that compose this story involve the overall judgments about policies
as well as specifics about assessment and ISTEP+, professional development, and
standards.

The discourse teachers use when telling technical narratives centers on
professional judgment about whether or not policies and related activities properly
function. The words and phrases used by teachers included helps, focus, make sense,
good, practical, applicable, and useful.

Overall Judgments About the Policies

Two accountability policies, NCLB and PL 221, are the focus of what these
teachers discussed in their technical narratives. There are aspects of each policy that
teachers find to be worthwhile, but it is PL 221 that teachers found to have value as it
helped them to do their work. Even as they recognized and agreed with the intent of
NCLB, their opinion is that it is not meeting this all important goal.

PL 221.

PL 221 works for Marvel teachers as they perceive that it supports them by
providing the direction and focus needed for school reform and improvement. Mr.

Koselke noted that his understanding of the purpose of the law is “to increase

186

accountability. Focus schools more on school improvement. Really looking at what
you’re doing and what’s working and what’s not.” For Mr. Wilson, this law meets the
intended purpose, “Well, I think it- it gives direction to where we’re heading and where
we’re trying to get- like I think Public Law does.” This law works as the teachers
determine what needs to be accomplished and then are allowed to decide how to meet
these goals. It works as teachers have ownership in the school reform process because
they are accountable to themselves first.

Other teachers also consider that this law works in the school as they were called
upon to use their professional wisdom to analyze data, read research, set goals, learn
about and implement programs, and evaluate progress made towards their goals. Mrs.
Kaiser found that this law enabled the teachers to examine what was and wasn’t working
at the school so that they could then make the appropriate adjustments in what they were
doing to meet the school’s goals.

Well that helps each school kind of be more site based management. You know

kind of figure out for their students, for their teachers, for their parents and you

know what they need to do at that school to help those students in that school
learn. And I think that it’s probably good for us to look at those kinds of things
and be more conscious and really try to do the right things for the kind of kids you
have in each particular school.
Mrs. Gordon, a Title I teacher who is very involved in writing the SIP that is also used for
PL 221, also had noted that this law assists Marvel teachers.
As opposed to the stated purpose, my understanding of the purpose is to develop

an understanding of what has happened as a result of this is to develop a sense of

187

collegiality so that the school is consistent in what it is offering to children- not

only in terms of the stated subject matter but in terms of methods of teaching,

methods of assessment and agreed upon goals. No problem with the idea at all or

the intent of its predecessors. I think at Marvel I get the feeling that there is a

certain amount of success to it. So, that rather pleases me.

Consistency, which this law supports, is a valued asset for this teacher. In her experience
at Marvel, she has witnessed how this has assisted teachers to improve teaching practices
and students’ learning. Goal setting and common language has been the foundation for
previous reform efforts such as the CSRD work that aided teachers in becoming more
adept at their work, and PL 221 has sustained these efforts.

While teachers appreciate how PL 221 works in their judgment, there are still
questions about what role NCLB has and how it will impact the benefits they experience
from the state law. Mrs. Johnson provided an example of how PL 221 has refined her
instruction to increase student learning, yet at the end she questions the role of NCLB in
the schools’ reform efforts.

The Public Law 221 really does drive what we are working on from year to year.

For instance, math being one of the areas that we needed to look at to increase our

students’ scores. I really feel like we’re going to do that. The year before- the

prior time we did the 3 year plan was it was language arts driven and we did- we

improved our scores one year by 11%. So, I think its working-Public Law 221. I

still don’t know about the No Child Left Behind.

These same ideas are reflected in these observations from Mrs. Gordon.

188

It’s pretty intimately connected to Public Law 221. Again, no problem really with
Public Law 221. It gives you some structure. It gives you some goals within your
own school and that you have some chance of being able to talk to someone else-
you know language that they might well understand in terms of where we are
going as a faculty, as a staff. So, there’s a pretty strong connection with Public
Law 221. I guess my view on No Child Left Behind on the other hand is that this
too shall pass.
PL 221 has been in place long enough for these teachers to know through experience that
there are aspects of it that work, but the federal law has not been in place long enough for
them to make a definitive judgment. Questions still exist when it comes to how
beneficial NCLB will be to the work of teachers and students. These teachers are also
concerned with the label their school will receive based on the AYP requirement of this
law which may account for their reservations.
Mr. Koselke was able to find some advantage in NCLB as well, but it was almost
as a last resort in his thinking.
And I think the only thing that No Child Left Behind and Public Law 221 have
done is to help focus schools on improvement. You know help focus them as a
whole on what can we do to make this better or make all kids meet these
requirements.
There is some value to both policies as they each ask teachers to keep school
improvement as a central aspect of their work because this will in turn facilitate greater
student learning. Mrs. Kaiser also finds some benefit in these policies with her comment,

“Well, I think that they’re like a guidepost for us.” They do serve a beneficial purpose

189

for what the teachers and students do at Marvel. In the same vein, Mr. Gobel noted, “I
see we’re more focused in our goals and our professional development. You know
instead of each teacher having a separate goal and this teacher doing this. You know,
there’s more consistency in the cuniculum.” Consistency for Mr. Gobel goes beyond PL
221 as another teacher stated and is part of NCLB as well. These laws are a unifying
force when it comes to curriculum, goals for improvement, and the professional
development needed to accomplish these goals.

NCLB.

The narratives of NCLB explicate the reservations teachers have about this policy
as they express their concerns and questions about it. At the time of these interviews, the
teachers were unsure whether the school would or would not suffer the sanctions of this
policy. Mrs. Lambert asked, “Okay, No Child Left Behind- is it designed so that they
believe every child is college bound? Or are they more realistic? l’m under the
impression they’re not very realistic about it.” Mr. Wilson and Mr. Koselke both have
concerns about the highly qualified section of the policy. Mr. Wilson’s concern had to do
with how this impacts special education teachers and the current shortage of licensed
teachers in this area.

DW: Part of No Child Left Behind- I’m vague— it’s something about special ed

teachers like if they teach math they have to have a math degree- do you know

about that?

CH: It’s the highly qualified section of the

190

 

DW: And is that just for past elementary? Do you know the answer? And the
shortage- because there’s already a shortage and if people are expected to fulfill
that- actually on all those areas I’d like to know where they’re headed.
Mr. Wilson is unclear into how the highly qualified section will work. There could be a
concern about special education classroom sizes increasing because of a decrease in the
number of available teachers. Mr. Wilson is already dealing with more students than he
believes is workable. Increasing the number of students he is responsible for because of
NCLB does not work for him or his students.

Mr. Koselke’s quandary is with the way this impacts paraprofessionals at the
school. It does not work for him when individuals who he knows from first-hand
observation are effective in working with students are now expected to pass a test.

least for teachers as far as highly trained- which is questionable to me in some

cases because I have paras who have worked for you know 13 years who have to

now all of a sudden pass the test in order to be highly qualified when their
experience that they’ve had and all the training that they’ve had counts for
nothing. So I have an issue with that- that someone could come- walk right in,
pass this test and be deemed highly qualified who may have never spent any time
in a classroom or had any professional development. So yeah I kind of have an
issue with that.

For this principal, a law that deems a paraprofessional worthy of working at a Title 1

school based solely on a test does not work. It also does not work to require well-

qualified people to pass a test when they are currently performing in an exemplary

fashion with the students under the auspices of the principal and Title 1 teachers.

191

Another concern raised in teacher responses was that there was either no benefit
to the policies or that the benefit was questionable at best. This is reflected in Mrs.
Johnson’s earlier quote when she was unclear about the benefits of NCLB while there
was a benefit to PL 221. Mr. Wilson’s concern about this law rests in a significant flaw
in it. “Great ideas on paper with not enough funding. That’s my opinion of it.” Other
teachers were unable to identify any benefits or stated that no one benefited from the
policy. Mrs. Larnbert’s thinking was that, “We don’t. I’m trying to think who does.
Even the- I would think even the schools that don’t have to worry about it; I don’t know
how they benefit from it.” Mr. Jones agreed with the thought that no one benefits and
expands on that by telling why this does not work for any teacher or student.

EJ: Nobody. I don’t think it’s good for anybody.

CH: Alright, then who is- then who is not privileged would be?

EJ: Everyone.

CH: Everyone.

EJ: I think low functioning- functioning is not the right word. I think schools that

are perceived to be low don’t benefit. I think schools and children who are

perceived to be high do not benefit. I don’t think anybody benefits.

CH: And why do you believe that?

EJ : Because there are just not provisions made for enrichment. It’s kind of like

making everyone the same and I don’t think trying to make everyone the same- I

know it’s impossible and I don’t think it’s healthy. I don’t think that we should in

this world where they keep preaching individualism and acceptance but yet you

know we’re all supposed to be the same. I don’t think that’s good for anybody-

192

anybody- any student, any educator, any school system. It might be temporarily

nice for the school systems that are growing- that are getting the funding. But I

think in the long run, it’s just not going to be good for anybody.
Mandating that all students learn at the same rate does not work for Mr. Jones- not even
for students from schools that have done well on ISTEP+ in the past. His comment
reflects back to what Ms. Lambert asked about how realistic this law was when it came to
student leaming. Other teachers, based on their years of teaching experience, know that
requiring the same level of learning from all students at the same time does not work.
NCLB seems to be doing just that as it requires all students to pass the same test at the
same time. This is a law that with time will be seen to not function in the best interests of
teaching and learning at any school or for any student. In the judgment of these teachers,
this law has several flaws that cause them concern for how it will impact their work as
well as the ones they work with, their students.
Assessment

Assessment is a customary part of teachers’ work. Marvel teachers know that
assessments are useful in guiding their instruction as it demonstrates students’ strengths
and weaknesses over particular material. Ms. Lambert, Mr. Wilson, and Mr. Koselke,
three of the case study participants each spoke about how they use assessment.

CH: What do you believe is the purpose of assessment?

ML: To see where they are- to see where they need improvement- to see what you

can maybe not push so much because they’re getting it or they’ve gotten it and

you can work on more things they need help on.

CH: How do you use assessment in your classroom?

193

ML: Anywhere paperwork, tests, observation, all kinds, actual tests of sorts.
CH: And then when you have that information from those assessments, what do
you do with it?
ML: Cry. You see what you still need to work on. Or if it’s only one or two are
that are having problems, then maybe you can buddy them up or group them up
differently, so that the whole class doesn’t need to work on something they
already know how to do.
Ms. Lambert uses a wide array of assessments in her work to direct her instruction
whether it is moving on to a new topic because students have demonstrated mastery or
partnering students in an effort that students who know the material will be able to
present it in a way that other students will grasp more readily. Mr. Wilson uses it in
similar ways but relies more on informal observations to direct his teaching.
CH: What do you believe is the purpose of assessment?
DW: So that you can be a diagnostic teacher. So that you can see where the
strengths and weaknesses are and try to strengthen the areas that need to be
strengthened.
CH: How do you use assessment in your classroom?
DW: This is probably this year my weakest area. I would like to use the same
pieces that the other- that general ed uses and haven’t had a chance. Its more- in
my case this year especially— it’s been more observation.
CH: How do you use- then from your observation then how do you use what

you’ve learned?

194

DW: To try to create lessons then that will hit the areas where that particular
student needs help. This is my areas that I would like to firm up.
As a former classroom teacher, Mr. Koselke also used assessment to guide his teaching.
As a principal, he also understands and uses assessment to make schoolwide decisions
such as professional development. It becomes not only a tool for student learning but for
teacher learning also.
CH: And what do you believe is the purpose of assessment?
MK: I think assessment shows them and us where they’re at. It helps kids set
goals for themselves. And it helps us adjust our instruction to meet the needs of
the kids. And you know it shows what areas we’re weak and strong in- not only
that individual student but the teachers and the school in general. I mean you can
look for trends and patterns.
CH: How- how is assessment used here at this school?
MK: Just for some of those things. We analyze quarterly performance
assessments in reading writing and math- look for individual student needs and
then we find the areas that are challenges- considered to be challenges and adjust
or make instructional strategies to meet those. And it’s a continuous assessment
of where you’re at. Like with writing they can be strong in one area but weak in
another area, so you have to adjust your instruction to address that. And then we
also use it for professional development to see what areas we need you know
more help in as a staff. You know where do we need to focus our professional

development?

195

 

Mr. Koselke’s views on the functions of assessment are a reflection of how it is used in
school reform documents, the current PL 221/SIP and the old CSRD plan. The teachers
in this school take assessment seriously and use it in their classrooms. It is also a central
part of what teachers discuss in their monthly collaboration meetings as could be seen in
the two of the documents they complete each time they meet. On these forms, which are
turned in to Mr. Koselke, teachers include issues of data based on assessment. The
Rubric for Collaboration lists some possible data sources such as running records,
performance assessment, and rubrics aligned with state standards. They then need to
determine what instructional practices will be used based on the information gathered
fiom data analysis.

Five of the other teachers; Mrs. Archer, Mr. Jones, Mr. Morgan, Mrs. Harding,
and Mr. Gobel; also talked about the use of assessment to guide their instruction in ways
that are similar to what the case study participants related. The varied day to day forms
of assessment these teachers use are effective in directing their work with students. From
them, they are able to discem what students know and don’t know so that they are able to
tailor their instruction appropriately as well as evaluate their own work. One thing,
according to Mr. Jones, they are able to learn fi'om it is “whether or not your instruction
is good.” It also helps Mr. Morgan to either “re-tweak the way that I’ve taught
something” or “gauge my lessons.”

Another way teachers successfully utilize assessment is in differentiating and
individualizing instruction based on their students’ needs.

Mr. Gobel: Well, I kind of level some of the lessons I do. You know and I can

see if there’s a student that really struggles and won’t embarrass them cause if I

196

-—'

know they’re trying and I might have something on the computer or else in a
lower level book or something or an activity for them to do to work on- I have
magnets all over you know they can make words with. If I know there are kids
that work ahead real quickly I also do the same thing. I try to have vocabulary
activities they can do or word games to keep them challenged.

Mrs. Harding: 1 use it as a tool to monitor progress. Not all students master

everything that they come across, so assessments are a way to see what needs to

be done next— what to move forward with- if I need to stay back and re-teach
something or if they’ve all got it move on to the next.
Assessment is used by these teachers to know what the learning needs are of particular
students so that they are able to work smarter. They are able to know what each student
has and has not mastered as well as plan ways to match instruction to the their student. In
this way students are receiving the instruction that is right for them.

Mrs. Johnson talked about a particular format of assessment that works effectively
for her to understand what students know and are able to do connected to the standards.
During the interview she talked about the use of rubrics twice, and I was able to observe a
lesson where she used a rubric with her students.

CH: How do you use assessment in your classroom?

JJ: In that way- what I just said. I use assessment by seeing exactly the growth of

each individual student. The math program this year is awesome with that. It

does an individual basis- you can see by use of checklists just where people are-

where students are from page to page. Even as simple as a game that they’ve

197

learned and if they understand how to play the game and they’re playing it the
right way- assessment through games- math games.
CH: What else do you use assessment for? So, you use it to see
I] : For growth
CH: For growth- is there anything else you use assessment for?
JJ: 1 like to know where each individual student is and I like them to see where
they’re at. So, I rubric- they know rubrics in here- they see me- I show them the
rubrics before we do something- whether it’s a writing rubric or a math rubric or a
book rubric on what books they like- whatever it is- they see it- they know it and
then when after I rubric or assess it then they get to see their scores.
She uses rubrics when her students complete performance assessments. She finds that
these are a source of the most accurate information about what her students know on a
given topic or standard.
As far as like assessment, the paper and pencil thing, I just don’t do as much of
because I grew into teaching with rubrics. I’m familiar with rubrics. I’m most
comfortable with that level of assessment. To see gain and growth, I think those
are more accurate than pencil and paper.
Rubrics are an effective form of assessment for Mrs. Johnson because they provide her
the information to see how each student is growing and progressing on an individual
basis. Their use is flexible so that she can assess students in a variety of ways which is
very important to her. She wants something that allows her to evaluate student learning

in a wide array of contexts, and rubrics meet this need.

198

 

During one observation, Mrs. Johnson used the Indiana Developmental Writing
Rubric with her students to evaluate particular pieces of writing. A holistic version of
this rubric is used to score constructed response items on the writing portion of ISTEP+.
Mrs. Johnson typed and printed pieces of student writing but did not include names. As a
group, the class read a piece and then critiqued it one line at a time. Students offered
their critiques and suggestions for revising and improving each piece presented based on
some aspect of the rubric. Students appeared to have good command of the rubric and
what the benchmarks referred to. This was an example of Mrs. Johnson using the rubric
to guide student learning.
ISTEP+

Indiana teachers have been using ISTEP since the late 1980’s, but it has changed
over time. What began as a norm referenced version of the California Achievement Test
evolved into a criterion referenced test based on the Indiana State Academic Standards.
This test meets the requirement of NCLB:

a set of hi gh-quality, yearly student academic assessments that include at a

minimum, academic assessments in mathematics, reading or language arts, and

science that will be used as the primary means of determining the yearly

performance of the State and of each local education agency and school in the

state in enabling all children to meet the State’s challenging academic standards

(Sec. 1111.b.3.A).
One requirement for these state level tests is that they “produce individual student

interpretive, descriptive, and diagnostic reports, consistent with clause (iii) that allow

199

parents, teachers, and principals to understand and address the specific academic needs of
students” (Sec. 1 1 1 .b.3.A.xii).

Teachers’ responses to questions about ISTEP+ demonstrated that in their
judgment this test does not meet the criteria of the law. While they find the assessments
they use in their classroom worthwhile in making instructional decisions, the state test
that is to be used for accountability purposes provides very limited useful information.

Mr. Wilson seems to want ISTEP+ to have the value the law states:

I think in philosophy it’s a good idea in that the purpose is a good idea in that you

know it would be an assessment piece to show what kids need and to more or less

gauge how well the teacher is doing in the school and the system is doing- in

theory.
Yet for him this good theory does not materialize into a workable piece of assessment as
he stated that it has no connection to his teaching. “Almost none. Wrong answer. It’s not
too appropriate for my students.” For Mr. Wilson, this test is not the appropriate piece to
evaluate his students’ learning because they are not functioning at their grade level and is
therefore not useful to him. It does not help him to do his work to know what the
learning needs of his students are. He stated his evaluation of how ISTEP+ helps him in
a succinct response, “I can’t say that it is.”

Mrs. Johnson also finds that this test is not appropriate for her students. Her
reasoning is based on her belief that not all students are able to demonstrate what they
know and are able to do on a paper and pencil test. “Well, not everybody takes a test
with paper and pencil and is successful. Even growing up when I was a child, I was

horrible at test taking.” Her strongly held belief in Gardner’s theory of Multiple

200

Intelligences is such that she does not find a single type of test to be useful and that the
most useful form of testing is based on each student’s particular learning strength as well
as how the material was presented during instruction. The one seemingly useful aspect of
this test is that scores for some students are helpful when they coincide with her own
assessments and opinions of student learning.
If it is- it’s good to see- you can see where your students are individually. I had a
lot that did pass plus this year, so it reconfirms that in a way that pretty much
what they’re doing on ISTEP- no I can’t even say that. I was going to say- pretty
much what they do on ISTEP is what they’re doing in the room. The pass pluses
are, but when they say that they haven’t passed, you know did not pass and they
show a score, it’s not really that helpfiil.
Two sets of scores are useful in her work as they provide further evidence that they are
knowledgeable about certain material. However, there is not enough information given
for the students who failed the test because she does not have specifics about what caused
this failure. “Unless I get their individual tests back and see exactly what they missed.
How is that helpful or not helpful?” Mrs. Gable agreed with the need to get the student
work back.
When you get it back it’s a- I would like to see what my kids wrote down and
what it is they want and it’s like you know don’t really get all that. And you do
get samples of a question that was- an open-ended question that is worth so many
points and this one is worth only that many points. But I’d like to have our kids’

stuff back- here’s what they wrote- because we don’t grade them, so I don’t know

201

what they wrote. I don’t go stare over the tops of their backs because that just

makes them paranoid. I’m not seeing what they’re putting in there.

A score alone without the piece is not helpful to the teachers. Without the pieces in fi'ont
of them along with the scores, teachers are unable to use them to make adjustments to
writing instruction for individual students. Their needs are less clear and the score
becomes simply a number without a real value to the teacher it was meant to assist.

Mrs. Johnson is not the only teacher with strong beliefs about Multiple
Intelligences and proper assessment. Mr. Morgan also talked about the value of using a
variety of assessments to evaluate student learning based on this theory. From ISTEP+
he comes to know which students will do well on paper and pencil forms of assessment
and which will not. It seems that for this teacher ISTEP+ is effective with academic
needs when it comes to gauging the types of assessments he will use in his classroom for
each student.

Well, it helped me to see who were really strong test takers and who were weaker

test takers. And it helped me gear my other assessments. So if I know that Cindy

over here doesn’t know how to take a test, she’s not going to be a real successful
test taker. But that doesn’t meant that she can’t you know do really good at other
types of assessments. So, it helped me just learn how to figure out each child’s
level of taking tests is. How they feel about it, what kind of anxiety does it
produce, you know different things that would go along with tests.

Mr. Jones is also of the opinion that a single paper and pencil test is not an appropriate

instrument to evaluate student learning.

202

I think a lot the kids just are not properly assessed in that way. I think that if

ISTEP had a written version, an oral version, a kinesthetic version- I think that

our kids would do much, much better. I just don’t think that this is the way that

everyone can present what they have learned.
The uses of ISTEP+ are limited for these teachers as they do not meet the criteria teachers
have for valuable assessment information or when scores are meaningless because not
enough information is given to teachers to make informed instructional decisions for
students.

The ISTEP+ reports are not useful to the teachers as is reflected in Mrs. Johnson’s
response, “I can’t make sense of the ISTEP reports. I’ve gotten a book and its taking the
time to sit down and do it. Like I said, I need an in-service on how to interpret all that.”
While the teachers at this school have received several workshops about data analysis and
even some on ISTEP+, there is still uncertainty about how to interpret and use the scores
in the reports. Mrs. Harding provided some further insight into this dilemma about
reports.

EH: Through the numbers and the heading that are- go along with the printout.

It’s hard because the heading they give you are kind of vague of the topics that

were covered. So, you kind of have to figure out exactly what they’re hitting on.

CH: What does this mean?

EH: Correct, it’s here but- what’s it actually telling you?

The reports contain scores but what these mean is not clear to teachers which makes them
less than useful understanding what particular aspects of the standards students haven’t

mastered.

203

For Mrs. Gable trying to make sense of these reports becomes an imposition on
her time which is a precious commodity for most teachers.

It’s a lot of time for the teachers because then to- in order to- you know then they

want you to look at the data you got. Well when do we do that? On our own

time. Okay now you do that and you’ve got to figure out what the booklet that
they do give you back- well know here’s how they’re doing this- here’s how
we’re doing that. Well again when do we do that?

A later response demonstrated that she has taken her time to make sense of these reports.
I read through the stuff that they have. I you know 1 take my own time and I do
that. But then as for- as it’s all broken down, I can’t remember what’s broken
down into what- nor do I care to. That’s just stuff that I flush you know.

Once she gets some sense of the scores, they are forgotten. This would imply that what

she has discovered fi'om the scores was not useful to her work with students. They

become something that she promptly forgets.

Teachers have a variety of concerns about ISTEP+ that seem to interfere with any
usefulness of the test. Questions about the scoring of the constructed response portion of
the test were something that caused apprehension in five teachers. Twice Mrs. Johnson
expressed her uncertainty about this as she asked about whom is scoring the tests.
“General question is I’d like to know why they aren’t picking educators to come up with-
to grade the ISTEP.” While later she asked, “Who grades them? Honestly, how do they
hire the people to grade them? What kind of degree do they have? I’m not talking about
the bubbles. I’m talking about the writing part.” Mr. Jones expressed similar concerns,

“I’d like to know more about the people that score it and their credentials and how

204

they’re chosen and who decided how they’re chosen.” There is a concern that the people
who are scoring this part of the test are not qualified as teachers. This diminished the
value of the scores to this teacher. As a teacher, I had heard rumors of Kelly Girls being
hired to score this part of the test which caused me unease as well in believing that these
scores were in any way a true reflection of my students’ writing abilities. Mr. Melville’s
query seems to show that my trepidation about these scores continues.

I guess you hear so many rumors of who’s actually on the parts that aren’t

scantron- who’s really grading those? Because you hear stories of who they are

and it makes a huge difference as to who is doing some of that grading.
As long as teachers are not informed about who is scoring the constructed response items,
these scores will be questioned and possibly found as unusable.

Another concern about scoring was expressed by Mr. Gobel which came from his
attendance at scoring workshops conducted by people from the Indiana Department of
Education who are responsible for ISTEP+.

And, umm, it’s been awhile. But see when I went to the ISTEP training a year

ago, the ISTEP scoring training that Marvin went to this year, I there was and I

did the- 1 don’t know if I did math or reading now- maybe both- at the third grade

level- it was math- and I came up with a question that nobody could give me an

answer on and they said they would ask Bruce Wesley and they got him involved
and they, “Well, we really didn’t know.” And you know and I mean we left the
place and there was not an answer on that. Because I do that, I delve into that and

I say, “But now, if this is what they want, this is how they asked it, and this is

how it’s answered, why is it wrong?” You know, and they couldn’t give me an

205

answer on that. And the whole group you know got, “Well, yeah, yeah.” So, I-
the scoring- the scoring I think is a problem. I think it’s subjective.
Mrs. Harding had also voiced concerns about the subjectivity of the scoring process
which also makes these scores less important for teachers in their work with students.
And also how some things are scored because with writing it seemed like there
was a variety of scores that could have been possible for certain writing pieces
and you know different scorers score different ways. How can the state so that all
the scorers are on the same page?
Mr. Koselke has tried to inform Marvel teachers more about this scoring process by
conducting a workshop that included scoring practice. Instead this seemed to add to the
confirsion as Mrs. Gordon noted:
There are things that pop up on occasion such as the famous writing rubric
questions where local teachers would be given the same anchor papers and asked
to evaluate them and we were inevitably far more critical of the students’ work
than the people in Indianapolis or wherever they were. So that’s- that I’m a little
uncomfortable at times when I think about that.
As long as teachers have concerns about the qualifications of the scorers and the process,
these scores will continue to be suspect and of little value to their work in teaching
students to write.
There are several reasons the state test does not work for these teachers in doing
their job: (a) not the correct form of assessment for particular students because of their

learning level or style, (b) lack of information on student work, (c) lack of clarity in

206

reports, and (d) questions and concerns about scoring constructed response items. Mrs.
Gordon seemed to summarize the teachers’ central issue with this test.
I think- I think that I’d really like to have a deep inner sense or belief or
knowledge that it was really valid- that it actually is- that what I’m really finding
from it- really tells me what it says it’s telling me. That’s my intention or way of
saying it at least. For the most part, I kind of trust it. I have reservations.
There is a nagging doubt as to whether or not this test, including the multiple choice
sections, is really a demonstration of what students know. There is a lack of trust in these
scores which makes them less practical and effective for teachers to use in their work.
One way that test results can be useful to Marvel teachers was pointed out by Mr.
Koselke. In his experience, when scores are examined longitudinally, patterns and trends
can be seen which provides information about student learning that he and the teachers
are able to address.
You can look for some like patterns of things that the kids are low at overall
across the school and at different grade levels as far as what areas we need to
focus in. Like we know that we’re low in vocabulary. That’s something that
we’re low in consistently in ISTEP so that’s probably something we need to you
know try to focus on and boost with our kids. We’re also low in communication
in math- written you know math communication- which is their reasoning of how
they did something on paper. You know they always struggle with that when they
have to show or tell how they got the solution. So we’ve been working on ways

to deveIOp that.

207

Examination of data over time is effective in highlighting areas of weakness. Once these
areas have been identified, teachers at Marvel are able to set goals so they can make
changes in their instruction while receiving focused professional development to meet
these goals. Future test results as well as other forms of data are used as benchmarks to
evaluate their progress in meeting their goals.

ISTEP+ still remains for these teachers one tool in their assessment repertoire, but
one that is not of the highest significance. As Mr. Koselke noted, “Another thing is why
do we base everything you know on ISTEP when there are other measures of
performance that are done more fiequently throughout the year? That would seem to
make more sense.” A similar response from Mr. Wilson was, “I just feel like there’s a lot
more that teachers see every day go on. I’m not sure how accurate the picture can always
be of how they’re doing.” It makes more sense for these teachers to use other forms of
assessment to make accountability decisions and evaluate school performance. The
reason for this according to Mr. Koselke is:

I feel that ISTEP is a snapshot on a given day of a student’s performance. I don’t

feel that it’s a compilation. I don’t feel that it’s the be all to end all. You know I

just- I don’t feel that we should base everything we do in education and in

government on one standardized test. And the reason I feel that way is because
kids have many disadvantages as far as like our kids- with testing anxiety, testing
vocabulary and you know just testing situations. And it’s- it’s just really difficult

I think for our kids. I think we can get more by their performance assessments

and portfolios.

208

ISTEP+ results are a piece, but only a limited piece, in the overall picture of what Marvel
students know and are able to do related to Indiana State Academic Standards. Other
forms of assessment that teachers do with students present richer, greater, and more
immediate information that needs to be included when making evaluative decisions on
student learning and progress by teachers in school improvement efforts. One set of test
results does not work as an instrument for accountability for these teachers who are savvy
consumers of data.

Standards

Both accountability policies call for the use of standards for students. NCLB
refers to them as “challenging State academic standards” (Sec. 1001). In the state of
Indiana, teachers have been required to use Proficiencies, Essential Skills, and now
Indiana State Academic Standards in their teaching. The concept of grade level standards
is nothing new to Marvel teachers. These same standards are the basis for each grade
level ISTEP+. Since the students take the test in the fall, the standards that are tested are
the ones from the previous grade levels.

Predominantly the teachers’ responses to the standards were positive. The
standards are helpful to teachers in their work as they provide a guide and fi'amework for
what they need to accomplish with their students during the course of the school year.

Mrs. Lambert: Well you need guidelines. I shouldn’t say you need- guidelines are

helpful. If you know what to teach them, I guess you don’t need the guidelines.

They’re helpful and they do keep it consistent from classroom to, I mean if

children move from school to school which is what our clientele tends to do, at

209

 

least they’ll be learning the same types of things no matter where they go if they

stay in the system.

Mrs. Johnson: So, it’s a guidance tool. It’s an instructional tool for me.
Standards are useful in two ways for these teachers: guide for instruction and consistent
instruction. In a school where the mobility rate has increased over the last several years,
the standards are a tool that helps teachers to have some idea of what students have been
exposed to in previous grade levels. They also provide a framework of what that they
can use to plan their curriculum for the year as they know what they are expected to teach
and what their students are expected to learn.

Two other Marvel teachers expressed similar appreciation for the standards as
they provide the basis for their work with students.

Mrs. Archer: Those are the categories of- fundamentals that will get them through

life. Standards are broken down into grade levels to make it appropriate for the

age of the child- to make it manageable to teach.

Mrs. Kaiser: Well then I think the state then comes down with the standards that

they want us- every- the students in that state to meet per grade level. And I don’t

mind those standards. But then I’m at a whole different place with being at
kindergarten being at the very beginning. I don’t have as many— you know I’ve
seen you know first grade, second grade- they just keep getting more and more.

But it helps me to stay on task to know what it is 1 need to cover for these kids to

have a good background so that they can go on to first grade and do what they

need to do there. And I think it’s kind of nice to have a building— it’s almost

though like we don’t need textbooks anymore. Those state standards should be

210

our textbooks. And then we just put those into our programs like Four Block and

you know what I mean.

The state standards are an effective tool teachers use in their work with students. It is a
map or outline of what concepts and ideas need to be covered during that grade level.
They detail what students need to know and be able to know from year to year. Now
instead of strictly relying on textbooks, teachers have a more functional tool for their
work. From kindergarten to fifth grade, the teachers find the standards to be a
constructive element of accountability.

While many comments regarding standards were positive, some were mixed. Mr.
Wilson, as a special education teacher, makes his instructional decisions “based on the
state standards and where the student is functioning at that time which leads into the
IEP.” His concern also is connected with the issue of standards assigned to particular
grade levels. When it comes time for him to complete the district report card for each
student, he encounters problems: “the way the general ed report cards don’t fit special ed.
1 have a fifth grader that is working at a kindergarten level, so of course when you mark
all the areas it’s no progress.” Each grade level report card reflects that grade level’s
standards for the areas of reading, writing, and math. On the back of the report is the
district curriculum map for these areas. This format is new and reflects the importance
the district is giving to these standards as well as keeping parents informed about student
progress based on these standards. Mr. Wilson has students with a wide array of
academic levels that do not match their assigned grade levels. Having the standards as a
prominent element of the report cards does not provide him the necessary tool to report

how students are progressing what they are learning in class. They are functioning on

211

and learning other grade level standards that are not part of the report card they are given.
Having grade level standards on the report card does not work for Mr. Wilson in
reporting student progress to parents on a quarterly basis.

Mr. Koselke’s narrative on standards spoke of his concerns with standards, yet it
begins with thoughts that are similar to the previous teacher as he talked about how they
are useful in giving a focus and letting teachers know what they are responsible for
teaching. As he continued, he voiced two concerns: retention and the number of
standards required at each grade level.

Standards I think- I think it’s important to have some standards across you know

the level because you have to kind of focus in on what they should and need to

know for each level. The problem in that is that if they don’t know them at that
grade level then you have to make the decision if you’re going to retain them or
pass them on knowing that they don’t know the standards that they need to know
for the grade level before. If we really held back all the kids that didn’t master all
the standards that they were supposed to at that grade level you know we’d have
major chaos because of our grade level system. That’s why I’m not you know for
that. I’d rather have multi-age- you know no grades- and just they progress

through when they learn standards that they need for each level. But I think it’s a

good thing to have a guide- you know kind of a curriculum map for teachers so

they know what they’re responsible for and what the kids are supposed to be
learning at their level. And subject areas you know go right along with that. We

have standards for all of them now. The problem is where do you fit them in?

212

You know the standards have expanded really what has to be taught but nothing

has been dropped.
The current grade level system in place in American education does not work for Mr.
Koselke, and standards required by accountability not only reinforce this system but
make it even worse. Teachers and principals now face the dilemma of placing students in
the next grade level when they have not yet mastered all the standards or retaining
students with the hope that another year at a particular grade level will “catch them up” to
their academic peers in the years to come. In his professional opinion, retention does not
work for Mr. Koselke, and grade level standards aggravate and magnify this situation.

Mrs. Gable also voiced some concern over standards and retention that is
somewhat different from the principal’s.

They’re huge in the way that we have to teach to the standards. The thing I don’t

understand though is why Northville is still, “We have to teach to the standard for

Indiana,” but if this kid is not meeting that standard we’re not allowed to hold

them back more than once. And if we’re teaching to the standard and that kid

can’t do that standard well then that kid shouldn’t be going on.
Her concern is that at some point the district retention policy interferes with a teacher’s
decision about the best grade level placement for the student. The effectiveness of the
standards for student learning is seemingly negated by this policy.

The other concern Mr. Koselke conveyed in his earlier quote has to do with the
number of standards teachers need to teach and students need to master on a yearly basis.
There are standards for the four core academic areas: English/Language Arts, math,

science, and social studies, as well as for art, music, and physical education. Each

213

succeeding grade level has a greater number of standards that students are required to
master. Teachers and students become overwhelmed with the number of standards that
does not allow all students to master them. While standards provide a guide for what
teachers are to do, this guide can become ineffective when the number goes above a
saturation point. Teachers become fi'ustrated in their work and students are less able to
learn when there are too many standards to master before moving on to the next grade
level.
Professional Development

Section 1001.10 of NCLB states that one way to accomplish the goal of the law is
by “significantly elevating the quality of instruction by providing the staff with
substantial opportunities for professional development.” This is another aspect of the
accountability policy that has worked for Marvel educators. However, this did not begin
with these accountability policies. During the 1990’s, this school received a CSRD grant
under the previous ESEA law which focused professional development on school reform
efforts. Examination of the CSRD document included the school’s goals as well as
professional development provided in order to meet these goals. Marvel teachers are
. accustomed to receiving training that is directly connected to school improvement.

Marvel teachers articulated their appreciation for the professional development
program at the school. Whether it was consultants brought in to assist teachers in
meeting their PL 221 goals or workshops they attended on educating Afiican males, these
teachers found that professional development worked because it helped them in their

daily classroom work. Ms. Lambert said:

214

Well, generally speaking you get something out of every time. So, whether it was
something you learned before and just reminded of and you say oh, yeah that’s a
good idea and I want to do that again or I want to do that now and I wasn’t ready
before. That type of thing. No, do they need to be as long as they are necessarily
any workshop you go to- no. You know it seems you can fit in a couple of hours
what it takes. You know what I’m saying. But you generally get something out
any workshop.
These workshops help her to do her job as they refresh her skills as well as add new and
effective instructional techniques to her teaching repertoire. Her only concern is about
the time length of these workshops, but even the long ones are worthwhile to her work.
Mr. Wilson has also found these workshops and trainings to be of value to his work.
I’ve actually gained some real practical ideas that I can use readily. Reinforced
things that I should be doing and clarification I think. Like with the math, it has
really probably told me a lot of things that I just didn’t catch or didn’t read in the
material.
As these opportunities focus on what teachers are doing in their classrooms and support
their work in meeting the improvement goals, they qualify as a valuable resource for
teachers.
Mr. Koselke described how professional development is focused on the school’s
improvement goals and is practical as consultants come into the classrooms to work with
teachers. He also finds the professional library to sustain what teachers have learned as

they have access to materials that help them to apply what they learned into their

215

classrooms. He is able to be a more effective principal through what he receives, and he

has seen teachers become more effective also.
Resources- professional development we have a- each school has allotted you
know professional development funds to use building based as you want- you
know which we tie those to our School Improvement goals which are based on
improving achievement in reading, writing and math. And so our programs to
help do that are Everyday Math and Four Blocks and then we have also tried to
help address the climate and discipline issues with some professional
development based on CLASS and we’ve been to some other things like dealing
with tough students, positive discipline, educating Afiican American male, some
of those different things. So, those are some resources and then we also have
books, book study groups- you know together with the principals we do- did one
on the achievement gap and good principal techniques. And then this year we’ve
done classroom walk through training- we’ve done 2 days of that- which is to help
us be more effective in what we’re looking for when we go into a classroom and
to be able to identify the instructional strategies and standards being taught in a
more concise manner.
What would I keep? Professional development- it’s excellent. We have a highly
focused professional development program.
The most beneficial resources- I would say there again the professional
development opportunities that we have- the speakers, the consultants, people that

we have come in to work with the staff you know I think has been really

216

beneficial. And we have an excellent professional library that we keep updated-
you know and current materials. I think that’s really beneficial too.
Other teachers also told about how they are able to translate what they learn in
professional development into their teaching.
Mrs. Kaiser: Well, I think learning about things that- learning about different
ideas or strategies that will help you then when we have somebody come in and
actually show you and you take them back to the classroom and try them. Then
you find out if they work or they don’t work or you tweak them so that they work
best for you and for what you’re trying to get across to the kids. Is that what you
kind of mean? Yeah, okay. It’s kind of what I try to do. Oh, you see something at
a workshop- at one of the banked days or whatever and you go, “Okay I think I’ll
try that.” And then you try it and if it works- yeah and if it doesn’t you might fix
it a little so it’ll work better or else you drop it and you try something else.
Mr. Jones: they give me fresh ideas. They give me more- like the autism training
and the CLASS training- they give me more insight into how to keep my
instruction positive and how to understand why certain children act the way they
do. I just think- I just think they keep you fresh. I think with our population the
kids get bored very, very, very easily and I think that with having to address all
the different intelligences and leaming styles, I think that we need that input all
the time because- to keep every child with every learning style from getting bored

is a huge deal as you know.

217

Mr. Gobel: they’ve given me new, fresh ideas on how to reach different kids- you
know different learning styles, umm different personalities, different umm the
different needs of kids.

Mrs. Archer: They’ve given me more ideas- different management ideas for
setting up Four Blocks- different ways to teach each block and the same with
Everyday Math.

Mrs. Gable: It changes me a little- it’s like “Oh that sounds so good!” I try that
and that it’s like dang that was really hard to do. You know it’s a little at a time.
You can do little. You know if you change too much it’s like you bite off more
than you can chew and you just feel overwhelmed and it’s like, “Crinriny, how am
I ever going to?” But it changes it a little at a time. You bring in a little from
here, a little from there and see what works you keep and what doesn’t you toss.
You might try something that didn’t work with one class, say the next year and try
that and see and if it doesn’t work a couple times- say I won’t bother with that
again. But you know you listen to that and you start weighing things on what you
know from your own experiences or from other things that you read about or
whatever. And you know you’re balancing them out trying to figure out what
would - “Well yeah I could see that point.” Well let’s see how that goes. And
what you can change about it. You’re always trying to make- if you’re a teacher
worth your spit at all- you’re always trying to do what’s better for the kids.

Mrs. Harding: it gives me more different ways to teach in other ways it validates

what 1 am already doing.

218

Mrs. Gordon: They were relatively informal but were well planned and well
presented and took me back to things that were presented earlier that I don’t do as
much as I should. And tended to force me a little bit out of my rut or made me
more comfortable in forcing myself to get out of a rut. So, those are useful.
Mr. Morgan: Because if I’m not learning then you know I’m not going to grow as
a teacher either. I think it’s important that I learn as much as they learn. And I
think that Marsha really is supportive about that and wants you to learn and wants
you to go to these things so it helps- because it directly impacts your teaching.
You know I go to a really great session on Four Blocks, I come back and I’m re-
energized about the Words Block you know. I just think it’s important. It
directly impacts it.
Teachers are able to take pragmatic ideas from their professional development to use in
whatever way works for them with their students. They also gain new ideas to tr}I that
refine and improve their teaching skills. New approaches are given that make it possible
for their students to learn the standards. As these things occur, teachers deem

professional development to be worthwhile.

219

CHAPTER 12
DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

The purpose of this research was to explore what was happening at an Indiana
Title I school due to accountability and high-stakes testing. In this research, I wanted
readers to understand accountability fiom the perspective of the teachers and how it
impacts their work on multiple levels. The previous chapters shared the moral, power,
interpersonal, and technical stories of teachers as they live and work with the realities of
NCLB, PL 221, and ISTEP+. Teachers and schools are complex, and how they respond
to policies and testing is complex as well.

In this chapter, I will share some key findings of my research. These are the
narratives that were talked about by a majority of the teachers, especially the four diverse
case study participants. With their differing perspectives and knowledge of the policies
and testing, issues that are of significance to all or many of them are of value to this
research. Next, I will discuss how my research contributes to current literature on
teaching and policy. The teaching literature includes teacher stress, instruction,
assessment, teaching, and social factors. The policy literature includes social factors,
professional development, and incentives. lrnplications for policymakers, teachers,
researchers, and community will be delineated in the following section. Then, I will
discuss my study’s limitations including the short time span under which it was
conducted, only a single school was studied, and the interpretation of the researcher.
Finally, I will present some thoughts about future research to develop more
understanding of teacher stories related to accountability.

Key Findings

220

This research examined the interactions of teachers’ work, accountability policies,
and high-stakes testing. While ESEA has been in existence and a part of teachers’ work
for four decades, the most recent legislation which states its purpose as “to ensure that all
children have a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high-quality education”
(Sec. 1001) has increased the responsibility of teachers to provide proof that their work is
meeting this goal. Standards and hi gh-stakes testing are the instruments used by the
policy to evaluate how well this goal is being met by teachers. Sanctions and rewards are
the levers used to ensure compliance with the law. Under this legislation, each state is
also required to enact an accountability policy, generate standards, and create a test of the
standards. In Indiana, NCLB, PL 221, and ISTEP+ each play a role in the work of
teachers throughout the state. The key findings for these influences include teachers and
students, teachers and policy, and teachers and ISTEP+.

Issues that two or more case study participants shared in their narratives became
part of the key findings. Since these teaches were chosen because of their diverse
knowledge about the policies and test, those issues that were discussed by at least two of
them suggests that it is an issue for most teachers. These issues were often also talked
about by other teachers as well.

Teachers and Students.

Teaching is a profession that allows those who work in it to touch the lives of
students in many positive ways. In their moral narratives, all four case study participants
along with other teachers shared the value they place on making a difference or being a

positive influence on the lives of their students. As they see ways that they have

influenced their students academically, socially, or emotionally; these teachers are

221

rewarded in their work. In another moral narrative, teachers described how they are able
to see the impact they are having in the students’ lives through student learning and
growth. They have a deep belief that all students can learn which they know is true in
their daily interactions with students. Connected to this belief is that students learn in a
variety of ways. It is the teacher’s obligation to know how each one learns and teach
accordingly such as through projects that involve hands-on activities and experiences
according to three case study participants.

In order to evaluate student learning, teachers employ a variety of assessment
tools. In their technical narratives, the teachers in this study noted that observation and
performance assessment were most preferred because they allow them to see what
concepts and skills the students have and haven’t mastered. They are also able to use a
variety of types of assessments in order to assess in ways that are closer to the students’
learning styles. These forms of assessment are what provide the necessary information to
plan instruction for the class as a whole as well as for individual students. Other
observations also provide information about student growth. Teachers talked about
seeing the “light bulb” go on when students were able to grasp something that had been
previously out of reach. This is a valued reward for teachers which they see in their
interactions with students around content.

Relationships with students, told in interpersonal narratives, are an important
aspect of making a difference. Each teacher shared something about the value they place
on making and sustaining connections with students, parents, and colleagues. They love
the students even though they are at times described as “challenging” or “at risk”.

Teachers find value in having strong bonds with the students they work with.

222

Relationships with parents are something these teachers desire as well but are harder to
maintain. Some teachers discussed how strong their connections are with parents while
others struggled in making these bonds even though they did things to create them. Yet,
these teachers recognize that part of teaching students, helping them to learn and grow,
and to make a difference in their lives requires partnering with parents in order to
accomplish these important goals. Relationships with colleagues are of great worth to the
teachers as they find one another to be the best resource in the school in their work with
students. Whether they vent about their reservations and wonies related to
accountability, ask how best to deal with a fi'ustrating situation, or collaborate with one
another regarding instruction; Marvel teachers rely on each other for support to do what
is “best for kids.”

Teachers acknowledge that influences from outside the school walls make a
difference in the lives of their students and their work with them. Issues of poverty were
spoken of by several teachers and how this impacts their students when they come to
school. Even as they know all students can learn, there are concerns about prior
knowledge that students do not have which means that their students start at a different
level than students in other schools. Yet, these are the children with whom they want to
work. Students are exposed to and experience life issues that make the work of teaching
and learning more difficult. There are things about students that are outside the control of
the teachers. They understand and accept this while working hard to counteract these
influences on the lives of their students. Before learning can begin, there are times when
teachers need to attend to other student needs.

Teachers and Policy.

223

PL 221 and NCLB were the accountability policies teachers talked about in their
narratives. Each has an influence on this school, and teachers have opinions of them
based on their experiences as well as things they have read and heard. Teachers had
differing reactions to these two accountability policies.

PL 221 was considered by many teachers to be a positive policy in many ways.
There were some teachers who expressed reservations, but most teachers found particular
aspects of this policy to be positive. It should be noted that this policy was in place two
years before NCLB. One requirement of this policy is that the teachers and other
stakeholders generate a design for improvement known as the PL 221 Plan. In this three
year plan, teachers set goals based on data, chose programs that will help them meet these
goals, determine benchmarks to evaluate growth as well as the instruments to be used for
this, and plans for professional development and parent involvement. Teachers, in power
and technical narratives, found that this policy gives them authority over their work and
opportunities to collaborate. Professional development that is practical and meaningful to
their classrooms in meeting the goals they set enhances their sense of professionalism.
The standards mandated by this policy have also helped these teachers to know what they
need to do in their work with students. They provide a roadmap and bring consistency at
grade levels which helps them to deal with the high mobility rate of students.

NCLB had very severe negative narratives from these teachers. While a few
teachers acknowledged the connection between these two policies, this made little
difference in the way they judged this current reenactment of ESEA. Viewing this policy
as having no benefit was a reaction based on the belief that it does not support their work.

Several teachers were able to state that the purpose of the law was to provide all students

224

with a good education, but they feel that this will not be the outcome of this law. Two
aspects of it were part of what teachers talked about the most: reliance on a single test
and sanctions for not making AYP. For the PL 221 plan, schools use multiple forms of
data to evaluate the reform efforts. However, NCLB uses a single indicator, ISTEP+ for
Indiana schools, to determine AYP. In their professional judgment this does not reflect
what students know and are able to do in connection with the standards. Teachers also
spoke of “fear” and “dread” in association with this law. This comes from the sanctions
that could be imposed on schools that do not make AYP. These teachers have seen their
students grow, but feel that AYP will not reflect this growth and lead to sanctions against
this school, most inrminently the loss of some funds. They are also concerned with the
public reputation of the school as test results and labels are communicated in the media
and loss of students.

Another view teachers have of NCLB is that it is too political. They question how
pragmatic this policy is and think that it is more about making the right political
statements rather than seriously attending to the needs of schools that serve poor and
minority students. While Mr. Koselke found some value in the law in calling public
attention to achievement gaps, he finds other parts of the law, specifically sanctions based
on a single test, to be counterproductive. Teachers are wary of a law that seems to make
the teachers to be the scapegoat without acknowledging the social factors that play a
powerful role in student achievement.

Teachers and IS T EP+.

Their narratives on valuable assessments were centered on teacher made forms of

assessment or informal student observations, not on ISTEP+. Narratives about this test

225

were negative in nature. Mr. Koselke thinks that this test does help in making some long
term school-wide decisions, but agrees with the other teachers that this is not the
instrument that guides teachers in making instructional decisions or evaluating school
progress in meeting accountability goals. The vast majority of teachers rarely if ever use
data from the reports to make instructional decisions.

Several teachers voiced concerns about the test and these doubts make them even
more skeptical of the usefulness of the results. Teachers who have given the test find
some questions to be culturally biased. There were also misgivings about using a paper
and pencil test to evaluate student learning when not all students performed well on these
tests. Teachers’ beliefs about student learning and assessment do not correspond to this
test. ISTEP+ as a measure of student mastery of the Indiana State Academic Standards is
not the right tool in the professional reasoning of these teachers.

Yet, teachers also discussed at length the activities that happen at the school
connected to test preparation. While ISTEP+ is not considered a valuable form of
assessment for these teachers in their work with students, they do spend a significant
amount of time on preparing their students at all levels for the test. From the
kindergarten teacher laying a “foundation”; to first grade teachers teaching test taking
skills; to the third, fourth, and fifth grade teachers with the assistance of the Title 1
teachers doing small group review and remediation; test preparation is a significant part
of the cuniculum at the beginning of the school year whether the teachers use the results
or not for instructional purposes.

My Findings and the Research Literature

226

There are many studies that are concerned with the accountability and schools.
These studies relate to: teachers’ views of and responses to accountability and high-stakes
testing, influences on instruction, connection to assessment, and policy issues. Other
education literature connects with other aspects of my research as well: why choose to
teach and the influences of poverty on education.

My research covers a gamut of what life is like in one school dealing with the
realities of accountability and hi gh-stakes testing. It is an in-depth look that opens the
reader to the ways teachers are working with students while negotiating these policies. It
also demonstrates the interactions of various aspects of teachers’ lives. Just like schools,
teachers’ lives are complex including moral, power, interpersonal, and technical aspects.
This research presents the complexities of a school and the teachers who work there. To
examine how they are reacting, it is necessary to study each of these aspects of teachers
to get a broader image of what how they are dealing with accountability. As we
understand more about teachers’ moral narratives, we can see how accountability does
and does not match their beliefs and values. Further insight is gained fi'om knowing how
they define legitimate control and what this looks like in practice. The way
accountability has impacted relationships is an area where my research adds something to
the literature. Teachers live in a world of relationships that are pushed and pulled in
certain ways because of accountability. The technical story adds more to the literature
about how they react to accountability. It is in not only reading these four stories
separately but in perceiving how they interact with one another that this research presents

more to the literature.

227

In doing this study, I sought to give teachers, like the ones I had worked with for
ten years, an opportunity to make their voice heard about teaching and accountability. It
is a look at a school from a teacher’s perspective because I feel that I have walked in their
shoes. I understand what they are confronting in their work at an Indiana Title I school.
This feeling has been reinforced as I have had the opportunity to discuss my research
with other teachers in the state, and they tell me similar narratives.

Teachers and Stress.

The stress teachers experience due to accountability has been documented in
several studies (Craig, 2004; Mathison and Freeman, 2006; McCarty and Lambert, 2006;
McNeil, 2000; Mintrop, 2004: Schorr and Firestone, 2004: Smith, 1991; Zancanella,
1992). Teacher stress was part of several different aspects of teaching in a Title I school
coping with accountability. Stress is a result of the publication of scores in the local
media and how this impacts the school’s reputation. Mathison and Freeman (2006) and
Mintrop (2004) have documented this in teachers from New York, Maryland, and
Kentucky. Teachers in Indiana are concerned with this as well demonstrating that stress
is not a localized reaction but is something teachers from many states are experiencing no
matter which type of test is used or the state accountability policy. My research does add
how this stress impacts other aspects of a teacher’s life such as their relationships with
other teachers and how it compromises their professional ethics through test preparation.

District administrators, because of concerns over accountability, are adding to the
stress of teachers. Teachers in two Kentucky schools (Mintrop, 2004) expressed similar
concerns about these administrators as they make decisions that teachers perceive as a

negative reaction to the school because of their status. Mrs. Johnson made this clear

228

when she understood the district to use Marvel as the “dumping ground” and that they
place a larger number of special education students at this school. In contrast to
Mathison and Freeman (2006) and Mabry and Margolis (2006), this study did not find
there to be stress between the principal and the teachers. Instead, my research showed
how they were both experiencing stress which seemed to draw them together. Mr.
Koselke, the principal, did not see NCLB as a law that supported school improvement but
as a detriment to ways the teachers at this school had been making progress in the past.

In this study, the principal and teachers were working in cooperation to meet the demands
of accountability and cope with the decisions of the district administrators.

Mintrop (2004) noted that stress and accountability were causing teachers to leave
their schools. In contrast, the participants in my study did not choose to leave Marvel but
were placed in other schools because of a reduction in force across the district. Marvel
teachers were still committed to teaching at this school which may be due to the nature of
their relationship with the principal. Teachers in this study also noted the importance
they placed on working with these students which is another factor that contributed to
their willingness to stay. There was something about their need to work with students
from low socioeconomic homes that helped them endure the stress of accountability.

This study does provide some of the information that McCarthy and Lambert
(2006) call for, “Nevertheless, future research is needed to document the demanding
conditions under which teachers perform, understand the resources they find most
helpfirl, and evaluate interventions that can bring new resources to them in an effective
manner” (p. 222). In all four stories, teachers provided details about the conditions under

which they work in this Indiana Title 1 school as well as what resources they do and do

229

not find useful in doing their work. Teachers talk about the factors they do not have
control over and how these impact their work with students. Their views on professional
development and relationships with colleagues tell some about which interventions they
found useful as well as the resources that have enabled them to refine their practice in
ways that impact student learning.

Teachers and Instruction.

Other literature is concerned with how teachers react to accountability in terms of
instruction. There have been studies of how teachers move into survival mode in their
teaching and do all they can to make the grade through intensive test preparation
(Bulkley, Fairman, and Martinez, 2004; Camilli and Monfils, 2004; Corcoran and
Christrnan, 2002; Diamond and Spillane, 2004; Mintrop, 2004; Monfils, et a1, 2004;
Wood, 2004). Marvel teachers talked in some detail about the test preparation that
happens at this school. Like teachers in previous studies (Camilli and Monfils, 2004;
Mintrop, 2004), the reason for all they do is connected to their desire to get as many
students as possible to pass the test so that they do not get labeled as a failing school and
face sanctions. What they do does not match their professional wisdom, but they do it out
of a sense of survival as a school.

In some cases, Marvel teachers use both instructional techniques that are reform
oriented as well as those similar to the test. In contrast to other studies that found
teachers focusing more on test preparation than reform efforts (Bulkley, Fainnan, and
Martinez, 2004; Diamond and Spillane, 2004; Monfils, et a1, 2004), they are attempting
to use both the “quick fixes” of test preparation and the “in-depth strategies” connected to

reform programs (Bulkley, F airman, and Martinez, 2004, p. 126) that connect with their

230

professional judgment. However, the beginning of the school year for third, fourth, and
fifth grades is focused on preparing students for the test while other times of the year they
employ reform instructional techniques.

Marvel teachers appreciate standards that provide both guidance and consistency
which seems to demonstrate that they would meet Corcoran and Christrnan’s (2002) label
of “competent teachers” (p. 12). Yet, these same teachers also use test preparation
activities that they found less competent teachers using instead of the standards. This is
seen even as the teachers pay attention to particular items on the test so that they can use
these to know what to focus on. Prior tests become the guidance tool in teaching students
rather than the standards. They do this as a defense against the failing label. While they
have worked hard and have strong professional beliefs that are reform-oriented, they find
themselves being “defensive” teachers.

Teachers have employed ways to work or cope with educational policies and
Marvel teachers are no different. Webb (2006) found teachers who negotiated policies by
making determinations of what they would honor of the policies in light of their students’
learning needs. When the policy negatively impacted this, they chose to ignore the
policy. Their primary goal was student learning. One Marvel teacher’s narratives
reflected this. Mr. Wilson often set aside ISTEP+ and NCLB as he focused his attention
on special education laws and students’ lEPs to guide his instruction. These were
policies that supported his students’ learning. Other teachers felt a desire to do this but
were unable to for some reason. An example of this would be the narrative Mr. Koselke
and Mrs. Johnson told about non-graded schools which they both felt would be more

beneficial to students, yet they felt that this was outside their power. While teachers want

231

to pick and choose what they pay attention to in the policy, they still are controlled by it
unless there are other competing policies that make this possible.

Teachers and Assessment.

Marvel teachers found little use for ISTEP+ in making instructional decisions. In
a study comparing the Texas state test with a test that is under the control of the teacher,
Yeh (2006) found that the test teachers had greater control of provided more useful
results in making instructional decisions. Like these teachers, Marvel teachers found that
ISTEP+ scores were of little use because they came to the teachers so long after the test
was given. The speed of the feedback to the teachers makes a great difference. Other
forms of assessment were useful to teachers, such as the computer based assessment
information after students took a Northwest Education Assessment test. Another issue
that Marvel teachers had with ISTEP+ was the lack of clarity about what concepts were
and were not mastered. Teachers are able to use assessment data that is quick and
meaningful, however ISTEP+ data does not meet these criteria.

ISTEP+ is a criterion-referenced test that includes multiple choice tests in
English/language arts and math as well as constructed response test in these two areas.
At the elementary level, fifth graders take a science test also. In contrast, Mintrop’s
(2004) study of Maryland and Kentucky was based on other types of tests. Maryland’s
test was performance-based where students used “critical thinking, problem-solving, and
the integration of knowledge from multiple fields of study” (p. 7). The test in Kentucky
was made up of multiple parts including ones that were similar to ISTEP+ but also
included writing portfolios. The New Jersey study test in the study by Firestone, Schorr,

Monfils and colleagues (2004) is made up of perforrrrance-based tasks that mimic the

232

instruction required by the state law. Comparing and contrasting the ways these different
types of high-stakes tests impact teachers is important as policymakers, teachers, and test
experts look for more information about the consequences of testing on classrooms.

Marvel teachers value the use of multiple indicators in making their instructional
decisions. Using formats that meet the learning strengths of their students or using data
from varied assessments are what works for these teachers. Their stories reinforce what
other studies have concluded about the benefit of multiple indicators to make
instructional decisions and evaluate student learning as well as the work of teachers
(Herman, 2004; Popham, 2005).

Teachers and Teaching.

Teachers choose this profession because of the children and the ways they are
able to influence their lives in multiple ways (Cochran-Smith, 2003; Darling-Hammond,
2004; Gerstl-Pepin, 2006; Mintrop, 2004; Provenzo and McCloskey, 1996). Through
their stories, Marvel teachers also stated that touching the lives of their students was an
important part of their teaching. From Mr. Wilson’s need to have “rapport” with his
students to Ms. Lambert’s desire to be a “positive influence” on her students, teachers
find one of the basic elements of their profession is to be able to impact the lives of their
students. In schools like Marvel, where so many students live in poverty, this becomes
even more essential as these teachers see themselves as someone who can guide their
students into a happy and productive life through education. This research makes clear
how pivotal connecting with students and having a positive effect on their lives is to
teachers. It colors how teachers do their work and experience accountability and hi gh-

stakes testing.

233

Teachers and Social Factors.

Marvel teachers work with a majority of students who live in poverty and this has
made a difference in how they view accountability and testing. As Mr. Koselke said,
teachers recognize the reason for the academic gaps accountability policies seek to
eliminate. They are not ignoring them. In their narratives about the lives of their
students, teachers echoed Gerstl-Pepin (2006), “lower income children and those living in
poverty are the ones that are most likely to come to school unprepared, and this adds a
layer of complexity to the work that teachers do” (p. 157). Specific examples of this are
told in the narratives of what teachers have no control of when it comes to students.
Teachers are struggling with the fairness of accountability policies that hold them
responsible for factors that are outside of their control (Corcoran and Christrnan, 2002;
Gerstl-Pepin, 2006).

Policy and Social Factors.

Berliner (2006) and Rothstein (2004) have clearly presented the facts and issues
of how social factors play a significant role in schools. They have also connected these
to concerns about reform and accountability. My research has provided readers with
names of students and teachers who exemplify these facts and issues. Mrs. Kaiser shared
how Willie is living in a two bedroom home with thirteen other people and how this is
impacting the sleep the children get before coming to school. Mr. Koselke shared how he
wanted to solve students’ problems and gave examples of arrests in the homes and being
home alone. Other teachers talked about the lack of prior knowledge students have
which they connected to a lack of resources to purchase books and other materials.

Teachers find that their students are not read to at home by adults. While reading

234

Berliner and Rothstein, I was able to connect the issues they were discussing with
students and teachers at Marvel.

Policy and Professional Development.

Organizational capacity is an essential element in school reform and improvement
(Corcoran and Christrnan, 2002; Darling—Hammond, 2004; Firestone, Monfils, Schorr,
Hicks, and Martinez, 2004; Newmann, et al., 1997). Professional development that is
practical and meets the goals of reform has great value to teachers as it enhances their
professional skills. Many Marvel teachers told of the value they received from
professional development. In my research, some of these were at determined by the
district while others were based on the school’s PL 221/SIP which was written by the
teachers. Teachers find value in capacity building activities that are immediate to what
they are doing in their classrooms, and those that they were able to choose based on their
professional judgment of what they needed to know in order to meet the goals of their
improvement plan. Professional development empowers teachers and is more likely to
change their instruction when it meets these criteria. This research not only shows the
value of professional development but what teachers are looking from it.

Policy and Incentives.

Current accountability policies employ particular policy levers to ensure that the
desired changes will occur in schools (McDonnell and Elmore, 1987). The levers of
sanctions and rewards used in NCLB and PL 221 are based on whether schools met their
particular AYP goals based on ISTEP+. Diamond and Spillane (2004) noted that
teachers from low performing schools react differently to sanctions and rewards than

teachers from high performing schools. Marvel teachers demonstrated a mixture of these

235

responses to the levers. Like teachers from low performing schools, they concentrated on
ways to meet AYP by spending time in test preparation activities in an effort to get more
students to pass the test. They also spent more time on the subject areas that were tested
at the expense of science and social studies. However, when it came to data analysis,
these teachers spent time examining information they gathered on their students as they
collaborated with one another. Marvel teachers had received professional development in
the area of data analysis and were honing their skills in this area, focusing more on
performance assessments rather than ISTEP+. This research reveals the role that
specified time for data analysis in collaboration and professional development has when
it comes to the response of teachers from low performing schools to policy sanctions and
rewards.
Implications

Policymakers, teachers, researchers, and community members can each take
something fi'om the stories of Marvel teachers. They help all to understand teachers and
their work as well as how they understand the current accountability policies. This
research contributes some very personal knowledge about teachers that was obtained
from an in—depth small scale study. It allows for the voices of teachers to come through
rather than to be covered up in statistics and other forms of “hard data.”

Policymakers.

Something teachers want from policymakers is respect for their profession. There
are several ways that they can show this respect for them that will make a difference in

the implementation of school reform policies. These include things as simple as making

236

teachers an essential part of the policymaking process to providing the necessary
financial support to sustain reform in school.

One question asked by two Marvel teachers was why teachers were not asked
their ideas and opinions of the policies. They were frustrated about being shut out of the
process of designing their profession’s accountability process. As policymakers pay
attention to what teaches have to say, they are demonstrating respect for teachers and
their expertise in their work (Altenbaugh, 1992a; Casey, 1993). Carefully choosing some
influential teachers to be responsible for monitoring the work of teachers can cause
diffusion to occur as these teachers impact other teachers with the need to meet the
requirements of accountability (Gladwell, 2000). Connecting with teachers in this way
gives them ownership and control over their work which has led to greater changes in
schools (Cohen and Ball, 1999; Corcoran and Christrnan, 2002; Mintrop, 2004). As
Tronto (1993) noted, conflicts arise when those who take care of and those who give care
have different views about what needs to be done in the work of caring which can be
resolved through the contact and connection of these two distinct groups. For education,
this means that the federal and state policymakers, the ones who take care of education,
must make deliberate efforts to build dynamic relationships with educators, the ones who
give care, in order to generate powerful and significant policies that will positively
influence school reform.

PL 221 was viewed by Marvel teachers in a positive light because this law gave
teachers ownership of the improvement plan and allowed teachers to use their
professional judgment to make decisions. Professional development was another key

factor for these teachers as it increased the organizational capacity of teachers to meet the

237

reform goals (Elmore, 2002; Mintrop, 2004, Newmann, et al., 1997; Popham, 2005).
Teachers determined in their plan what workshops they needed to meet the goals of this
plan. The vast majority of Marvel teachers found that there was something they could
learn from these workshops. This was further enhanced as teachers were afforded time to
collaborate with one another (N ieto, 2003; O’Day, 2004). Marvel teachers talked about
the need to be “lifelong learners” which they were able to do through professional
development. They knew the purpose for their learning and how this would allow them
to be better teachers. The direct connection to student learning made this a highly valued
commodity. These are not teachers resting on their laurels but ones who want to refine
their abilities to address the needs of their students. Policies that provide support and
time for changes in practice are more successful (Consortium for Policy Research in
Education, 2001; Elmore, 2002; Schorr and Firestone, 2004).

Respect for teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning is also necessary. It is
important that policymakers understand that teachers see teaching as a service to the
students (Cochran-Smith, 2003). In the stories, teachers shared some of their beliefs
about teaching such as making a difference, students learn at their own pace and ways,
assessment needs to match instruction and done in multiple ways, and students’
backgrounds play a role in their learning. Policies that support these beliefs are more
likely to be sustained while policies that do not are less likely to have a positive impact
on schools. Marvel teachers have very negative reactions to NCLB and ISTEP+ because
they do not match these beliefs. One example of this is the use of a single test to evaluate
the school. Teachers believe that one paper and pencil test is not the appropriate way to

evaluate student leaming because some students will not do well on this type of test.

238

Other teachers are concerned about cultural bias in the test which means that some
students are not afforded the opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge of the
standards. Policies that make use of multiple forms of assessment data are more in line
with teachers’ beliefs.

The work of teachers can be considered as giving care of students, and the role of
policymakers is then to make a plan to take care of schools so teachers can be successful
in their work (Tronto, 1993). There is reciprocity in accountability when looking at
policies this way. Just as teachers are accountable for meeting the learning needs of their
students, policymakers are responsible for providing the necessary structures in place for
them to meet this significant responsibility. Policymakers need to set standards for
teachers and themselves, delineate responsibilities at all levels from the legislature to the
classroom, and provide the appropriate measures for the policies (Oakes, Blasi, and
Rogers, 2004). Reciprocity also should extend to parents and students as policymakers
attend to what they have to say about the needs of education in their communities (Oakes,
Blasi, and Rogers, 2004).

The work of teaching does not occur in a vacuum but is influenced greatly by the
backgrounds and home lives of students. Policymakers need to respect that teachers are
working within the larger social situations if their students and policy needs to reflect this
(Berliner, 2005; Camilli and Monfils, 2004; Gerstl-Pepin, 2006; Rothstein, 2004). Daily
the Marvel teachers were coping with what this means as they do their work. This may
mean that they need to take extra time preparing students with particular background
knowledge so they can understand a new concept, or it may mean that teachers need to

conduct a community circle so they can work out a neighborhood problem in a civil way.

239

Policymakers need to recognize that all students do not come to school with the same sets
of skills and prior knowledge. Mr. Gobel noted that some students have a good
understanding of bootlegging and how to play Grand Theft Auto, but these same students
struggle with the letters of the alphabet and their sounds. Some students in Mrs. Kaiser’s
kindergarten class had never written their name or been read to before coming to
kindergarten. They are not on the same timetable to learning as students from more
privileged backgrounds. Policies that lump all students together into a “one size fits all”
are demonstrating a lack of respect for students and the teachers who are doing all they
can to teach them. Schools and the work of teachers is one part of a larger and more
complex social policy.

Teachers.

There are three important ideas teachers can acquire from this research: learn
about policies and testing, speak to others, and honor your profession. The first is the
need for teachers to learn about and understand education policies and testing. Marvel
teachers had many questions and misperceptions about both the policies and the test.
Before teachers can be a valued part of the discussion, they need to be well-informed
about the policies and test. Some of the questions that teachers asked were ones I had
myself before I began my doctoral studies such as the history of ESEA, the validity of
ISTEP+ and the use of results to evaluate a school, and how the constructed response
items were scored. Being better informed about both these entities is essential as they
each have an impact on the work of teachers. Teachers need to critically read the
policies, test manuals, and current education research with the goal of having a strong

grounding in what is happening in their profession as well as to create and articulate

240

reasoned arguments about educational reform. Taking the time to learn more about
policies and testing prepares teachers to speak intelligently and convincingly to
policymakers, parents, community members, and other education stakeholders about
them.

Armed with information, teachers are now able to talk with various interested
parties about their concerns and ideas about accountability and testing. It is important
that teachers make their voices heard on these issues (Darling-Hammond, 1998; Gitlin, et
a1, 1992; Kohn, 2004; Schwarz, 2001). This discussion includes teachers talking with
one another (Gunzenhauser, 2003; Wasserman, 2001), others in the educational
community, and the broader community. Marvel teachers seemed to discuss these
policies on a more limited basis. They learned about them during staff meetings when
Mr. Koselke gave them particular information, but the discussion among teachers was
more limited to venting and complaining about them. While speaking about
accountability and testing, teachers are also able to be an activist working in the interests
of their students (Cochran-Smith, 2003; Gerstl-Pepin, 2006). Carefully crafting
arguments with concrete examples based on the students they work with can give
strength to what teachers have to say. Marvel teachers’ stories provide some of the
evidence for their arguments about the unfairness and bias of ISTEP+ that others need to
hear. The impact of poverty on student learning is another narrative that can be used by
teachers in advocating for greater social services for students at this school.

In today’s accountability climate, it can be hard for teachers to feel good about
their chosen profession. Marvel teachers are dealing with multiple forms of stress in their

work. As some noted, their students can be “challenging” to work with as they bring

241

their “baggage” to school and it disrupts learning. A student falling asleep in class,
students hitting each other on the playground because their parents have told them it is
okay to hit someone back, or needing to review a concept once again that students should
have mastered the previous year are all struggles these teachers talked about in their
work. In these days of labeling and accountability, it can become disheartening to be a
teacher in a school that is struggling to make AYP. Reading these stories can cause
teachers to reflect on their own stories as well. Teachers who make a difference, respect
student learning, and make use of professional development are a few examples of how
they can recognize their professionalism and not be discouraged by negative labels and
talk. Hollingsworth (1998) learned through the works of Maxine Greene of the need for
teachers to pay attention to their stories so they gain and keep control over their teacher
selves. Teachers also honor their profession as they learn from and skillfully use
professional development for purposes of reform (Cohen and Ball, 1999; Consortium for
Policy Research in Education, 2001, Elmore, 2002; Schorr and Firestone, 2004). Two
Marvel teachers shared that they did not think that the accountability policies were
needed at this school because the teachers at this school were already committed to
improving student learning. Creating and sustaining this form of internal accountability
is another way teachers honor their profession as they hold one another accountable.

Teachers also honor their profession as their moral stories about students include
both caring and competence. It is not enough to just care for their physical and emotional
needs but to also meet their intellectual needs as well. It is the responsibility of teachers
to be competent in their profession so that they can ensure that all the students are

provided with the best education possible. They must recognize this responsibility and

242

follow through on it with professional knowledge and skill. Teachers honor their
profession as they draw on “professional ethics” (Tronto, 1993, p. 134) daily in their
interactions with their students. The focus is on all the needs of the student and providing
these needs with competence.

This reading of teacher stories needs to be done from a critical viewpoint. It is to
be done with the intent to discover what they are doing well as well as where they need to
improve. An example of this from some of the stories from Marvel teachers was the way
they talked about parents in very negative terms. Through reading and reflecting on
these, teachers can make a conscious choice to alter their opinion of parents.

Researchers.

With testing as a central component to accountability, there is a need for further
research on issues in Marvel teachers’ stories. These include test preparation, the uses
and misuses of standardized test scores, testing and learning styles, grading and accuracy
of constructed response items, and cultural bias. Research that addresses these specific
concerns about ISTEP+ is something Marvel teachers want. Broader questions also exist
that are connected to these stories. Research on the best and most appropriate
accommodations for special education students (Thurlow, 2004) may allay many of Mr.
Wilson’s reservations about the test. How well does the test measure the impact of
instruction is another significant question in light of the purpose of accountability
(Popham, 2005). Examination of ISTEP+ and how well the standards are covered
(Popham, 2005) would also be meaningful to these teachers who have doubts about this.
Mrs. Gordon asked a question about the validity of the test, while other teachers

expressed doubts about this test being used to make evaluative decisions. In seeking to

243

answer these questions, I was unable to locate consequential validity studies for this test
which presents a need for this research. Baker and Linn (2004) are concerned with “the
capacity of users to understand and interpret information” (p. 48). There were varied
responses from Marvel teachers about this issue. Further research on teachers’ abilities to
use test data is needed. Research on the impact of consequences (Cohen and Ball, 1999;
Elmore, 2004; Stecher and Hamilton, 2003) as well their connection with testing and
teaching (Cimbricz, 2002) needs to be done so teachers have more information.

Teachers have particular beliefs about and uses of assessment in their work, but
current accountability policies seem show a distrust of their competence in this area.
Members of the research community could make a difference when it comes to this
disconnect between teachers and policymakers by more closely examining what teachers
know about and how they use assessment in their work. This would help teachers to
hone their assessment skills as well as provide policymakers with greater insights into
teachers’ assessment abilities. Testing experts, teachers, and policymakers need to build
and maintain a constructive dialogue about assessment issues (Madaus and Horn, 2000).

Community Members

Reading or listening to this research can offer these individuals with greater
insights into what is happening at this school as well as other schools like it. They can
see what teachers do each day as they address the needs of their students. The
complexity of the lives of teachers can be understood as they read the various stories.
They can learn what is important to teachers, their joys and fears, and what their work
requires of them each day. This information enables community members to make their

own judgments about the value of teachers at schools. They should come to understand

244

that what happens at a school cannot be summed up with a single test score. Their views
on accountability and testing are widened by gaining the perspectives of a group of
teachers. Equipped with information and their judgments, community members are
better able to participate in open and honest discussions about testing and accountability.
Members of the school, local, state, and national communities need to be part of this
conversation with teachers, researchers, and policymakers as the issues are far ranging.
Public debate among all members of the community is needed to remind us that a good
education is at the core of accountability (Consortium for Policy Research in Education,
2001; Pignatelli, 1998).
Limitations

This is a study done in a single school over the course of a three month period.
There are issues that may not be present in this study because of being in one school for a
short amount of time. For example, I have a record of what was done at the beginning of
the year in preparing the students for the test, but this is recall information rather than
experienced by the researcher in this case. However, as a teacher before going to the
university, I was involved in similar activities so I feel that I have some understanding of
what occurred. A yearlong study of a school would yield a greater amount of data that
could add richer flavor and texture to the teachers’ stories. This would also allow for
participation in professional development teachers received as well as more observations.
Unfortunately, the end of the school year was fast approaching when I was able to do my
observations. Having more flexibility in time to observe and notice what was happening

at the school would have been helpful.

245

What I have found interesting, however, is that when I have shared my research
with other educators, it has resonated with them. One such instance was in talking about
my data with a close friend who is a principal in a community located near Northville.
Even though the students at her school have historically done well on ISTEP+, many of
the issues I shared with her from my data were things that she saw happening at her
school. My findings seem to fit other Indiana schools. I noticed this also when I shared
this information as part of a job interview at a university in another state. The teacher
educators I was talking with stated that what I was finding among the Marvel teachers in
Indiana were very similar to what the teachers in their state were experiencing.

Another limitation to my study is that it presents my interpretation of the data.
Even with the efforts I made to limit researcher bias, I realize that my teacher self is very
much invested in what I am saying and how I understand what is happening at this
school. It may well be that someone without my strong connections with Title I
elementary schools and with strong feelings about ISTEP+ may interpret what teachers
had to say in a different way. However, my background also means that there are things
Marvel teachers said that I have prior knowledge of which enhances my understanding of
what was happening there. I also became close to some of the teachers as well as
invested in the school. These also color how I understand and write about accountability
at Marvel.

Future research

One area for future research would be to take the story theory to learn about what

students are experiencing in relation to accountability policies. A central aspect of the

teachers’ stories in this research was about students which initiates the question of what

246

students believe, where they feel control or a loss of it, how this influences their
relationships, and what does and doesn’t help them to learn. Teachers are one part of the
school that is being held accountable. A fuller picture, or a larger quilt, could be seen by
asking questions about students’ views and understandings of school. This research
could include not only what happens at school, but also aspects such as homework, early
literacy experiences, how they define right from wrong, healthcare, family issues, and
many other questions that come from some of the stories teachers about students. This
research could also look at what happens to the students as they prepare for and take the
test as well as what happens when they receive their scores. In Indiana, remediation
programs have become a major response to accountability. Focusing on how students
experience these programs provides more information about students and accountability.

This study focused on one school in an Indiana district, yet as I discussed my
research with other educators what I said seemed to resonate with them. This has led me
to an informal assumption that teachers in schools of all kinds across the country have
very similar stories to tell about the impact of accountability on their teaching. An
inquiry that takes into account various differences such as location of the school,
socioeconomic levels of the students, level of parent involvement, size of the school, ages
and grade levels, and other school demographic features could provide a richer picture of
the influence of accountability and how teachers are responding to it. Exploring
similarities as well as differences can be useful to a wide array of education stakeholders
as they plan, enact, and implement legislation as well as school reform.

Another way to conduct a research study about how teachers are experiencing

accountability would be through the lens of the different types of policies and their

247

consequences. Stecher and Hamilton (2003) noted that there is not enough research on
the positive and negative consequences of high stakes testing. Comparing teacher stories
about the consequences of their state’s accountability policy can be used to inform
policymakers about the best and most effective forms of sanctions and incentives from
the perspective of those who are closest to them.

Marvel teachers talked at length about their views about assessment and ISTEP+.
They talked about what they thought was good and bad about the test as well as what
they have done in response to AYP. There are several ways that the teachers of this
school are working to raise the scores through test preparation. Questions remain about
how teachers instructional responses to the sanctions of accountability based on a single
test score are improving student learning (Cimbricz, 2002). More research on how

teachers are responding as well as how this connects with student learning is needed.

248

CHAPTER 13
EPILOGUE: MARVEL SCHOOL TODAY

It was the spring semester of 2005 when I had the opportunity to interview and
observe the teachers of Marvel Elementary School. At that time the school was
completing the first year knowing that they had not made AYP. During the time I was
there, the teachers and principal were still waiting to hear from the Indiana Department of
Education whether or not they had made AYP for the 2004-05 school year based on the
results of ISTEP+ given during September. While waiting to hear their fate, other things
occurred to change the dynamics of this school.

Changes at the School

First, reduction in force notices went out to many teachers across the district
including four at Marvel. One of the interviewed teachers received one of these notices
that she would not have a job the next year. As time went on though, three of these
teachers received positions in the district. Two of them each went to a different middle
school as they had the proper licensure for those positions, and that is where there were
open jobs while another went to another elementary school in the district. Two
elementary teachers fi'om other district schools who had been let go were called back also
but to the positions at Marvel.

This meant that there were open positions at kindergarten, third grade, and fourth
grade. A fifth grade teacher decided to move to one of the open third grade positions and
a new teacher took the fifth grade position. The other third grade position went to one of
the new teachers. The fourth grade position was filled by a teacher who had been at

Marvel previously and therefore knew about most of the reform efforts in the School

249

Improvement Plan. It was, however, not her wish to come back to this school that she
had worked so hard to leave. The kindergarten position was filled by another teacher
from the district. This meant that only the teachers at the first and second grade levels
would be the same for the 2005-06 school year. Every other grade level was
experiencing some change in teaching staff.

A YP News

On May 27, 2005, Mr. Koselke sent a letter home to parents letting them know
that the school had not made AYP for the second year in a row. In this letter, the parents
were informed that the school’s overall English/Language Arts scores missed the
required goal by 0.9% and the Afiican American English/Language Arts scores missed
their goal also. An appeal for a waiver had been sent to the Indiana Department of
Education, and the school was waiting for their decision. This waiver presented evidence
of student learning based on other assessment data the school had collected throughout
the year. The consequences for the school if the waiver was not granted were included as
well.

Shortly after the school year ended, Mr. Koselke received the state’s denial of
Marvel’s waiver. He then wrote a letter to the parents informing of this and what their
options were. Parents had the opportunity to apply to send their children to one of two
neighboring schools that had some space and had made AYP with transportation costs
coming out of Marvel’s Title I budget. All applications were to be picked up and
dropped off at the administration building. Parents were also given the option to call Mr.
Koselke for further information. The cost for mailing all the letters also came from

Marvel’s Title I budget.

250

During the summer of 2005, Northville Community Schools conducted both
summer school and a special program known as Jump Start. Summer school was a
required four week program for the students who did not pass both the math and the
English/Language Arts sections of ISTEP+. However, there were no consequences for
the students who did not choose to attend. Thirty-four students from Marvel attended this
program. The two week Jump Start program was offered to students who failed one of
the sections of the test but with no consequences for not attending. Forty Marvel students
attended this program.

Consequences

As the 2005-06 school year was about to begin, Mr. Koselke learned several
things that would make even more changes occur at the school for the year to come.

First, a total of 32 students would not be attending the school as a consequence of not
making AYP. These students’ parents had chosen to send them to one of the neighboring
elementary schools. This included a number of kindergarten students whose parents
chose not to send their students to Marvel. In phone conversations with some of these
parents, Mr. Koselke learned that some of them had heard rumors about the students at
the school, and they did not want their children to go to the same school with them. Most
of the students that left went to Parkside Elementary. Parkside’s building was built
during the 1990’s and is the newest in the district. The vast majority of the students that
left were white.

With the loss of these students, Marvel also lost two teachers- one third and one
fifth. This now meant that the school had lost a section in both these grade levels. These

teachers were assigned to other schools with larger than expected enrollment. The third

251

grade teacher learned shortly before school started that she was being reassigned to
another school. The fifth grade teacher however was reassigned a few days after the
school year had begun. This meant that the students who were in her class were divided
and placed into one of the other two fifth grade classrooms.

Student demographics also changed at Marvel.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2004-2005 2005-2006
Total students 373 332
Black 209 l 88
White 1 57 l 16
Multiracial 4 l 9
Hispanic 3 6
Native American 0 2
Free/Reduced 283 292
Lunch
Paid Lunch 90 40

 

 

 

 

 

Table 13.1 Current student demographics
There were 40 fewer students at Marvel during the last school year. The greatest ethnic
group drop was for white students. Yet, at the same time the total number of students
fell, the number of students on free or reduced lunch rose. An increasing percentage of
students at the school are from homes in poverty.

Shortly after the school year began, test preparation got under way at Marvel. For
four weeks the Title I staff members worked with small groups of third, fourth and fifth

grade students with activities that were similar to the test including reading, writing and

252

math. The activities covered those areas where the students had scored poorly on the
previous year’s test. Test preparation became a central focus in the early days of the
school year.

Three times throughout the course of the year Marvel also offered a one hour after
school remediation program to students. In the fall and spring it was open to first through
fifth graders while in the winter it was open to second through fifth graders. Students in
this program had either failed one or both sections of ISTEP+ for third through fifth
graders and NWEA scores for second graders. In total the program covered 20 weeks of
the 36 week school year. Sixty students came to the fall program while there were forty
in each of the winter and spring sessions.

Some curriculum changes crept into Marvel during the course of the year as well.
Teachers had less and less time to teach using the Four Blocks Literacy Model that is in
the School Improvement Plan as the district began pushing the use of other programs,
Making Meaning and Wilson Reading. Because teachers were required by the district to
try out these programs, there was not time to accomplish the Four Blocks program. It
also made it more difficult for teachers to plan and implement thematic units which are
another part of the School Improvement Plan. Mr. Koselke stated that the plan the
teachers had put together was becoming fragmented. What is interesting is that the
current School Improvement Plan is in many respects an extension of the CSRD plan the
school had implemented previously. Scores had improved during that time, but teacher
and student mobility as well as district influence has diminished this plan.

Professional development continued at the school. Marvel sponsored professional

development focused on math and data analysis. The math consultant worked with

253

teachers for multiple days twice during the year in their classrooms, as a whole staff, with
grade level teams, and with individual teachers before and after school. The training was
focused on how to connect the Everyday Math program to the math assessment program
the teachers are using for quarterly assessments. The data analysis consultant came
twice. The first time, teachers worked with her to analyze student mistakes on
constructed response items on ISTEP+. The second time teachers analyzed quarterly
assessment, NWEA, and ISTEP+ results and used this to set goals for the following year.
Eight teachers also attended a Four Blocks writing workshop. Mr. Koselke also asked
each grade level to present something they were doing that connected with a School
Improvement Plan goal at a staff meeting. Some examples were first grade presenting on
Wilson Reading and second grade presenting on integrating science and language arts.

The district also sponsored professional development. All teachers went to a
series of three workshops on reading comprehension. All special education as well as
first and second grade teachers went to Wilson Reading training, 40 Developmental
Assets workshop, and each school had someone come in to work with teachers in
connection with Compass Odyssey, an educational software program used throughout the
district. The district also had a full day workshop on collaboration. Mr. Koselke
commented that what was presented was much the same as what the teachers at Marvel
were already doing. In fact, a teacher that had been at Marvel and is currently at another
school in the district made a comment that the teachers at Marvel were doing this in the
past.

Monthly coordination meetings continued at Marvel. Each month the grade level

teams were released from their classrooms for a half day to analyze data and plan

254

together. Substitute teachers were hired with Title 1 money to teach the classes while the
teachers reflected on student learning and planned what to cover next in the curriculum in
grade level teams.

More Bad News

The anival of bad news came to Marvel when it was learned that for the third year
in a row they did not make AYP. This year the out of the 10 areas where it is computed,
the students did not make AYP in overall English/Language Arts, White
English/Language Arts, Free/Reduced English/Language Arts, Special Education
English/Language Arts and Special Education Math. They were moved to the
Supplemental Services level of PL 221 sanctions because of failing to make AYP in
overall English/Language Arts again. However, they did make AYP for Black
English/Language Arts which had not happened the previous year.

The result of not making AYP is that Mr. Koselke had to send letters home to all
parents to offer them one of two options: school choice or supplemental services. This
fall 46 students will be attending one of the neighboring schools. Of these students, 19 of
them have never attended Marvel because of either attending private school or through
babysitter transfers. Again the majority of the parents chose to send their children to
Parkside even though this school did not make AYP in three areas the previous year. No
parents who chose to keep their children at Marvel took advantage of the supplemental
services that were also offered.

Another change occurred at Marvel and in the Northville Community Schools.
The central office decided that Title 1 services would be redistributed in the 2006-07

school year. One of the closed elementary schools was refurbished and made into an

255

early childhood center to serve the students. This school is located in one of the poorer
areas of the city. Title I schools are also all offering all day kindergarten. This will be
offered to students who are the lowest on the district screening. There will be two full
day kindergarten classrooms at Marvel. However, this also meant a change in the
school’s Title I staff. The two Title I teachers were both assigned to regular classrooms;
one at Marvel and the other at the high school because of licensing. The preschool
teacher and aid were moved to the early childhood school. The home school coordinator
position was eliminated and the two instructional assistants were sent to other buildings.

The school also no longer had control of their Title I budget as they had in the
past. With the loss of teachers, the only students who would receive Title I services at
the school would be the full day kindergarten students. Teachers also no longer had
monthly coordination meetings, but now met once a quarter to analyze data and plan.
What the teachers had been doing eight months of the year was now reduced to four
times a year.

Several teachers were also be shuffled around for the 2006-07 school year. A
kindergarten teacher who had been at Marvel previously joined the veteran kindergarten
teacher in the two full day classrooms. One first grade teacher moved to second to join a
veteran second grade teacher and one of the Title I teachers. A second grade teacher was
moved to the open first grade while another second grade teacher looped with his class
and moved to third grade with one of the fourth grade teachers. One third grade teacher
moved to fifth grade while another was moved to another building involuntarily. The

fourth grade retained two teachers at this grade level. In all, one teacher was coming into

256

the school, two teachers were leaving (one involuntarily and the other through

retirement), and five teachers were moving to different grade levels.

257

APPENDICES

258

Teacher’s Name
Mrs. Kaiser
Ms. Lambert
Mrs. Archer
Mr. Jones
Mr. Morgan
Mrs. Harding
Mrs. Gable
Mrs. Johnson
Mr. Melville
Mr. Wilson
Mr. Gobel
Mrs. Gordon

Mr. Koselke

APPENDIX A

PARTICIPANTS

Grade Level
Kindergarten
First Grade
First Grade
Second Grade
Third Grade
Third Grade
Fourth Grade
Fifth Grade
Fifth Grade
Primary Special Education
Title I

Title I

Principal

259

APPENDIX B
LETTERS OF CONSENT

Christine A. Hunt

Doctoral Student

Department of Curriculum, Teaching and Educational Policy
College of Education

Michigan State University

Study Title: The Impact of ISTEP+ and Accountability Policies on Teachers in a Title I
School

Home address: 302 E. 10th St.

La Porte, IN 46350

Phone: 219-325-3828

Email: huntchr5@msu.edu

 

Dear Teacher,

Three years ago I left my classroom at Niemann to pursue a doctorate in education. I am
at the dissertation stage in this journey and am seeking to learn more about how ISTEP+
and accountability policies are affecting teachers in their daily practice. To accomplish
this goal, I have chosen to do a case study of a Title I School in the Michigan City Area
Schools through structured and unstructured interviews, observations and examination of
relevant documents.

The first step in this process is to interview as many teachers in the building as I can.
You give your consent to be interviewed by signing and returning this letter to me. To
help you make an informed decision about your participation, I have included the list of
structured interview questions. Please read them over prior to making a decision about
your participation. This interview should take approximately 30-45 minutes. If you
choose to participate, please sign the letter and give to the secretary in the office. She
will get these letters to me. I will then call you to set up a date and time to do this
interview. Unstructured interviews may be necessary to follow-up on the first interview
or to get deeper understanding of your responses. The time of these interviews will be
varied, but will be at your consent and at the best possible time for you.

The structured interview will be audio-taped and some unstructured ones may also be
taped. These tapes will be transcribed, and all tapes, transcripts and notes will be kept
locked up in my home. This information will not be shared with anyone else other than
the members of my dissertation committee. All names and identifying information will
be kept confidential, and no participant will be identifiable in the dissertation. Your
privacy will be protested to the maximum extent allowable by law.

Participation in these interviews is voluntary, and you may choose not to participate at
all. If you choose to participate, you may still choose to withdraw at any time without

260

any penalty. During the interview, you may also choose to not answer any questions
without any penalty also.

If you have any questions or concerns about these interviews, please contact either
Christine Hunt (phone: 219-325-3 828; email huntchr5@msu.edu) or Elizabeth Heilman
(phone: 517-432-4860; email eheilman@msu.edu). If you have any questions or concerns
regarding your rights as a study participant, or are dissatisfied at any time with any aspect
of this study, you may contact- anonymously, if you wish- Peter Vasilenko, Ph. D., Chair
of eh University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects (U CRIHS) by phone
(517-355-2180), fax (517-432-4503) or email (ucrihs@msu.edu) or regular mail (202
Olds Hall, East Lansing, MI 48824).

 

Sincerely,

Christine A. Hunt

You indicate your voluntary agreement to participate by signing and returning this letter.

 

Signature Date

Christine A. Hunt

Doctoral Student

Department of Curriculum, Teaching and Educational Policy
College of Education

Michigan State University

Study Title: The Impact of ISTEP+ and Accountability Policies on Teachers in a Title I
School

Home address: 302 E. 10th St.

La Porte, IN 463 50

Phone: 219-325-3828

Email: huntchr5@msu.edu

 

Dear Teacher,

1 have enjoyed the opportunity to discuss with you the way ISTEP+ and accountability
policies have affected you in your teaching practice. It is from these conversations that l
have chosen three teachers, each with a differing type of experience with the test and
policies, to observe in their classrooms. This letter is to seek your consent to observe you
in your classroom.

Observing in the classroom will allow me to get to know something about the context in
which you teach and how this influences what you shared in the interviews. There are

261

three levels of observation; description of your classroom, instructional methods and time
use, and selective observation of content areas. Observations allow me to connect what
we discussed in our interviews with your daily teaching practice.

I will take notes of what I observe in your classroom. These notes will be shared with
you as we work together to make sense of them. However, no one else will have access to
these notes, and they will be kept under lock and key at my home. Observations will be
arranged at your convenience and will last the length of time that we agree upon based on
what will be observed as well as the purpose of the observation.

Participation in these observations is voluntary, and you may choose not to participate.
If you choose to participate, please sign this letter and give it to the secretary in the
office. I will contact you to set up a time for an initial observation. You may still choose
to withdraw at any time without any penalty.

If you have any questions or concerns about these interviews, please contact either
Christine Hunt (phone: 219-325-3 828; email: huntchr5@msu.edu) or Elizabeth Heilman
(phone: 517-432-4860; email: eheilman@msu.edu). If you have any questions or
concerns regarding your rights as a study participant, or are dissatisfied at any time with
any aspect of this study, you may contact- anonymously, if you wish— Peter Vasilenko,
Ph. D., Chair of eh University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects
(UCRIHS) by phone (517-355-2180), fax (517-432-4503) or email (ucrihs@msu.edu) or
regular mail (202 Olds Hall, East Lansing, MI 48824).

 

Sincerely,

Christine A. Hunt

You indicate your voluntary agreement to participate by signing and returning this letter
to me.

 

Signature Date

262

Interests

rows

APPENDIX C

INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

Why did you become a teacher?

What do you like best about teaching?

What do you like least about teaching?

What resources do you have available to you in your teaching?

What are your feelings about your salary and benefits?

What aspects of your profession are the most important to you? Why?
What are your concerns? What are your rewards?

What is your teaching philosophy? How is it evident in your teaching?

What do you believe is the purpose of education?

What do you believe is the purpose of assessment?

How do you assessment in your classroom?

What are your feelings about ISTEP+? Why do you feel this way?

What do you believe is the role of the federal government in education? What
do you believe is the role of the state government in education?

How do your students learn?

How can you tell if your students are or aren’t learning?

How do you make your instructional decisions?

10. What do you believe about your students? Why do you believe that?

11. What rs the role of subject matter in teaching and learning?
Information
1. What is the purpose of the federal law known as No Child Left Behind?
2. What is the purpose of the state law known as Public Law 221?
3. What is the purpose of ISTEP+?
4. How have your learned about the policies? How have you learned about the

5.
6.
7.

8.
9.

10.

11.

test?

What are your questions about No Child Left Behind? About Public Law
221? About ISTEP+?

What connection, if any, do you see between the test and your teaching
practice?

How do you learn about issues of instruction, curriculum and assessment?
How has this refined your teaching practice?

How is this refinement connected to the accountability policies No Child Left
Behind and/or Public Law 221?

What classes have you taken recently? How have they helped you grow as a
professional?

Why did you choose those classes?

263

12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
l7.
l8.

19.
20.

Institution
1 .

PWSP‘MPP’P

10.

12.

What workshops or conferences have you attended recently? How have they
helped you? If not, why were they unhelpful?

How do you discuss ISTEP test scores with parents? How do you discuss
them with other teachers?

What do you do in your classroom to prepare your students for the ISTEP
test?

What do you do in your classroom to prepare yourself for giving the ISTEP
test? ‘

What would you like to know about the ISTEP test?

How is the ISTEP test helpful to you?

How have you learned to make sense of the ISTEP reports?

How confident are you in understanding these reports?

How do you make sense of the various ISTEP reports?

Who do you believe is privileged by these accountability policies? Who is not
privileged by them? Why do you believe this?

How does this shape your practice?

How does this influence your professional and/or personal relationships?
What role do the policies play in your school?

What happens in the school because of the policies?

How would you describe your school?

How do you feel this school is similar to other schools? How is it different?
What do you like best about this school? What do you like the least?

How often do you consider or focus on the goals of the school’s School
Improvement Plan?

What would you change about this school? What would you keep?

. What interactions do you have with parents? What interactions do you have

with other teachers in this school? What interactions do you have with the
staff?

What resources available at this school are the most beneficial? Which are the
least beneficial? Why?

264

APPENDIX D

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR 2005-2006

D- District sponsored workshop

M- Marvel sponsored workshop

0- Other organization sponsored workshop

(n)- Number of times offered

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

English/Language Math Technology Miscellaneous
Arts
3 Blocks Everyday Math Kidspiration Report Cards
D(l) D(12) D(l) D(l)
Building Blocks Math Exemplars Project Indiana ISTEP+ Science
D (l) M (3) D (l) Improvements
D (1)
Four Blocks Data Analysis Webquest ISTAR
D(4)M(3)O(l) M(l) D(l) D(l)
Wilson Reading DOE Math Rubric Web Page Autism
D(l) O(1) D(3) D(l)
Writing Digital Images Building
M (l) D (1) Developmental
Assets
D (1)
Data Analysis Classroom News Safe Physical
M (l) D (l) Interventions
D (1)
Guided Reading Compass Odyssey CLASS
00) Df5) M(1)0(1)
Lexile
O (1)
Poverty
0 (l)
Achievement Gap
0 (l)

 

New Teacher
Training Academy
D (1)

 

 

 

 

 

Discipline with
Dignity
0 (1)

 

Table Appendix D.l

 

APPENDIX E

THIRD GRADE ISTEP+ SCORES FOR SIX YEARS

 

Third Grade ISTEP Scores

  

70
g 60
g 40 lEng/LA
E 30 IMath
g 20
n- 10
0

 

1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05
Year

 

 

Graph Appendix E]

266

 

References

Aleman, A. M. M. (2006). Latino demographics, democratic individuality, and
educational accountability: A pragmatist’s view. Educational Researcher, 35 (7),
25-31.

Allington, R. L. (2002). Big brother and the National Reading Curriculum:
How ideology trumped evidence. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Altenbaugh, R. J. (1992a). Introduction. In R. J. Altenbaugh (Ed.), The teacher ’3 voice
(pp. 1-5). Washington, DC: Falmer Press.

Altenbaugh, R. J. (1992b). Professionals or workers: Introduction. In R. J. Altenbaugh
(Ed.), The teacher 's voice (pp. 122-125). Washington, DC: Falmer Press.

Altenbaugh, R. J. (1992c). The history of teaching: A social history of schooling. In R. J.
Altenbaugh (Ed.), The teacher ’s voice (pp. 191-194). Washington, DC: F almer
Press.

American Educational Research Association. (2000, July). AERA position statement
concerning high-stakes testing in pre-k-IZ education. Retrieved October 20,
2001 from http://www.aera.net/about/policy/stakeshtm.

American Federation of Teacher. (2001). Executive summary: Making standards matter.
Retrieved October 20, 2001 from http://www.aft.org.

Amerin, A. L. & Berliner, D. C. (2002). High-stakes testing, uncertainty,
and student learning. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(18). Retrieved
June10, 2002, from http://epaaasuedu/epaa/lenl 8

Anagnostopolous, D. (2003a). The new accountability, student failure, and
teachers' work in urban high schools. Educational Policy, 1 7, 291-316.

Anagnostopolous, D. (2003b). Testing and student engagement in urban
classrooms: A multi-layered perspective. Research in Teaching English, 38, 177-
212.

Anagnostopolous, D. (2005). Testing, tests and classroom texts. Journal of Curriculum
Studies, 37, 35-63.

Anagnostopolous, D. & Rutledge, S. A. (2007). Making sense of school sanctioning
policies in urban high schools: Charting the depth of school and classroom
change. Teacher ' College Record.

267

Angrosino, M. and Mays de Perez, K. (2000). Rethinking observation: From method to
context. In N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative
research(2“d ed.) (pp. 673-702). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Anyon, J. (1998). The social context of educational reform. In W. C. Ayres and L. Miller
(Eds.), A light in dark times: Maxine Greene and the unfinished conversation (pp.
219-228). New York: Teachers College Press.

Asp, E. (2000). Assessment in education: Where have we been? Where are we headed?
In R. Brandt (Ed.), Education in a new era (pp. 123-157). Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Ayers, W. (1994). A teacher ain’t nothin’ but a hero: Teachers and teaching in film. In P.
B. Joseph and G. E. Bumaford (Eds.). Images of Schoolteachers in twentieth-
century America: Paragons, polarities, complexities (pp. 147- 156). New York:
St. Martin’s Press.

Baker, E. L. & Linn, R. L. (2004). Validity issues for accountability sytems. In S. H.
Fuhnnan and R. F. Elmore (Eds.), Redesigning accountability systems for
education (pp. 47-72). New York: Teachers College Press.

Barnes, C. A. (2002). Standards reform in high-poverty schools. New York:
Teachers College Press.

Beijaard, D., Meijer, P, & Verloop, N. (2004). Reconsidering research on teachers’
professional identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 107-128.

Berlak, H. (2000). Cultural politics, the science of assessment and
democratic renewal of public education. In A. Filer (Ed.) Assessment: Social
practice and social product (189-207). New York: Routledge/Falmer.

Berliner, D. (2005, August 2). Our impoverished view of educational reform. Teachers
College Record. Retrieved August 19, 2005, from http://www.tcrecord.org ID
Number: 12106.

Berliner, D. (2006) Our impoverished view of educational research. Teachers College
Record, 108, 949-995.

Berliner, D. C. & Biddle, B. J. (1995). The manufactured crisis: Myths, frauds, and the
attack on America ’s public schools. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing.

Berman, L. M. (1998). Meanderings and mattering: Moving toward horizontal persons. In
W. C. Ayres and L. Miller (Eds.), A light in dark times: Maxine Greene and the
unfinished conversation (pp. 170-179). New York: Teachers College Press.

Bogdan, R. C. & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research for education: An

268

introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Braun, H. (2004). Reconsidering the impact of high-stakes testing. Education
Policy Analysis Archives, 12(1). Retrieved February 10, 2004 from
http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/vl2nl/

Britzman, D. (2000). “The question of belief”: Writing poststructural ethnography. In E.
St. Pierre and W. Pillow (Eds.), Working the ruins: Feminist poststructural thoery
and methods in education (pp. 27-40). New York: Routledge.

Britzman, D. P. (2003). Practice makes practice: A critical study of learning to teach.
Albany, NY: SUNY.

Brody, C. M., Witherall, C., Donald, K. & Lundblad, R. (1991). Story and voice in the
education of professionals. In C. Witherall & N. Noddings (Eds.), Stories lives
tell: Narrative and dialogue in education (pp. 257-278). New York: Teachers
College Press.

Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Bryk, A. S. & Schneider, B. L. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for
improvement. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Bulkley, K., Fairman, J. & Martinez, M. C. (2004). The district and test preparation. In
W. A. Firestone, R. Y. Schorr & L. F. Monfils (Eds.), The ambiguity of teaching
to the test: Standards, assessment & educational reform (pp. 113-142). Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Camilli G. & Monfils, L. F. (2004). Test scores and equity. In W. A. Firestone, R. Y.
Schorr & L. F. Monfils (Eds.), The ambiguity of teaching to the test: Standards,
assessment & educational reform (pp. 143-158). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.

Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (1988). Report card on school
reform: The teachers speak. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation.

Camoy, M. & Loeb, S. (2002). Does external accountability affect student
outcomes? A cross-state analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 4,
305-331.

Carr, W. (1993). Reconstructing the curriculum debate: An editorial introduction
[Electronic version]. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 1. Retrieved September 18,
2005 from http://www.triangle.co.uk/cus/content/pdfs/l/issuel_l .asp

Casey, K. (1993). I answer with my life: Life histories of women teachers working for
social change. New York: Routledge.

269

Casey, K. (1995-1996). The new narrative research in education. Review of Research in
Education, 21, 211-253.

Casey, K. & Apple, M. (1989). Gender and the conditions of teachers’ work: The
development of understanding in America. In S. Acker (Ed.), Teachers, gender
and careers (pp. 171-186). New York: Falmer Press.

Chaitin, J. (2003). Narratives and storytelling. Beyond Intractibility. Eds. G. Burgess and

H. Burgess. Conflict Research Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder.
Retrieved May 22, 2007 fiom
hug/WWW.mondinnactabilityrglessgy/narratives.

 

Cimbricz, S. (2002). State-mandated testing and teachers' beliefs and
practices. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(2). Retrieved March 9, 2002
from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n2.html

Clotfelter, C. T. & Ladd, H. F. (1996). Recognizing and rewarding success in public
schools. In H. F. Ladd (Ed. ) Holding schools accountable: Performance-based
reform in education (pp.23-63). Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.

Cochran-Smith, M. (2003). Sometimes it’s not about the money: Teaching and heart.
Journal of Teacher Education, 54, 371-375.

Cohen, D. K. (1988). Teaching practice: Plus ca change. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.),
Contributing to educational change: Perspectives on research and practice (pp.
27-84). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.

Cohen, D. K. (1991). Revolution in one classroom (or, then again, was it?). American
Educator, l6-23 & 44-48.

Cohen, D. K. & Ball, D. L. (1999). Instruction, capacity, and improvement (CPRE
Research Report No. RR-043). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvannia,
Consortium for Policy Research in Education.

Cohen, D. K. & Hill, H. C. (2001). Learning policy: When state education
reform works. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Cohen, J. (2006). Social, emotional, ethical, and academic education: Creating a climate
for learning, participation in democracy, and well-being. Harvard Educational
Review, 76, 201-238.

Connelly, F. M. & Clandinin, D. J. (2000). Narrative understandings of teacher
knowledge. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 15, 315-331.

Consortium for Policy Research in Education (2001, March). U. S. Department of

270

Education regional forum on turning around low-performing schools:
Implications for policy (N o. PB-O l -01 ).

Corbett, H. D. & Wilson, B. L. (1991). Testing, reform, and rebellion. Norwood, NJ:
Ablex Publishing.

Corcoran, T. & Christman, J. B. (2002). The limits and contradictions of systemic reform:
The Philadelphia story. Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in
Education and Research for Action.

Corwin, T. (2003, March). The No Child Left Behind Act: How are we now and where
are we going? Presented at the annual meeting of the Association of Supervision
and Curriculum Development, San Francisco, CA

Covington, M. V. (1992). Making the grade: A self-worth perspective on motivation and
school reform. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Craig, C. J. (1997). Telling stories: Accessing beginning teacher knowledge. Teaching
Education, 9, 61-68

Craig, C. (2004). The dragon in school backyards: The influence of mandated testing on
school contexts and educators’ narrative knowing. Teachers College Record, 106,
1229-1257.

Crapanzano, V. (1986). Hermes’ dilemma: The masking of subversion in ethnographic
description. In J. Clifford and G. Marcus (Eds.), Writing culture: The poetics and
politics of ethnography (pp. 51-76). Berkley, CA: University of California Press.

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Cuban, L. (1993). How teachers taught: Constancy and change in American classrooms
1880-1990 (2“d ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.

Cuban, L. (2007). Hugging the middle: Teaching in an era of testing and accountability,
1980-2005. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 15 (1), 1-27.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1998). Education for Democracy. In W. C. Ayres and L. Miller
(Eds.), A light in dark times: Maxine Greene and the unfinished conversation (pp.
78-91). New York: Teachers College Press.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2004). Standards, accountability, and school reform. Teachers
College Record, 106, 1047-1085.

Day, C. (1993). The importance of learning biography in supporting teacher

271

development: An empirical study. In C. Day, J. Calderhead, and P. Denicolo
(Eds) Research on teacher thinking: Understanding professional development
(pp. 221-232). Washington, DC: Falmer Press.

Delpit, L. (2003). Educators as “seed people” growing a new future. Educational
Researcher, 32(7), 14-21.

deMarrais, K. B. & LeCompte, M. D. (1999). The way schools work: A sociological
analysis of education (3rd ed.). NY: Longrnan.

Denzin, N. and Lincoln, Y. (2000). The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In
N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2"d ed.) (pp.
1-28). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Dewey, J. (1915/1990). The school and society; and, The child and the curriculum: A
centennial edition with a “lost essay Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Diamond, J. B. & Spillane, J. (2004). High-stakes accountability in urban elementary
schools: Challenging or reproducing inequality. Teachers College Record, 106,
1145-1176.

Eisner, E. W. (2002). The educational imagination: 0n the design and evaluation of
school programs (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.

Elliott, J. (2005). Using narrative in social research: Qualitative and quantitative
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Elmore, R. F. (2002). Bridging the gap between standards and achievement: The

imperative for professional development in education. Washington, DC: The
Albert Shanker Institute.

Elmore, R. F. (2004). Conclusion: The problem of stakes in performance-based
accountability systems. In S. H. Fuhrman and R. F. Elmore (Eds.) Redesigning
accountability systems for education (pp. 274-296). New York: Teachers College
Press.

Elmore, R. F., Abelman, C. H. & Fuhrman, S. H. (1996). The new accountability in state
education reform: From process to performance. In H. F. Ladd (Ed.) Holding
schools accountable: Performance-based reform in education (pp. 65-98).
Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.

Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. C. Wittrock
(Ed.), Handbook on research on teaching (3rd ed.) (pp. 119-161). New York:
Macmillian.

Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.

272

Fine, M. Weiss, L. ,Weseen, S. & Wong, L. (2000). For whom? Qualitative research
representations, and social responsibilities. In N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln (Eds. ),
Handbook of qualitative research, (2“‘1 ed. ) (pp. 107- 131). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.

Firestone, W. A., Fitz, J. & Braodfoot, P. (1999). Power, learning, and legitimation:
Assessment implementation across levels in the United States and the United
Kingdom. American Educational Research Journal, 36, 759-793.

Firestone, W. A., Mayrowetz, D. & Fainnan, J. (1998). Perforrnance-based assessment
and instructional change: The effects of testing in Maine and Maryland.
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 20, 95-113.

Firestone, W. A., Monfils, L. F., Hayes, M., Polovksy, T., Martinez, M. C. & Hicks, J. E.
(2004). The principal, test preparation, and educational reform. In W. A.
Firestone, R. Y. Schorr & L. F. Monfils (Eds.), The ambiguity of teaching to the
test: Standards, assessment & educational reform (pp. 91-112). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Firestone, W. A., Monfils, L. F ., Schorr, R. Y., Hicks, J. E., & Martinez, M. C. (2004).
Pressure and support. In W. A. Firestone, R. Y. Schorr & L. F. Monfils (Eds.),

The ambiguity of teaching to the test: Standards, assessment & educational
reform (pp. 63-90). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Firestone, W. A. & Schorr, R. Y. (2004). Introduction. In W. A. Firestone, R. Y. Schorr
& L. F. Monfils (Eds.), The ambiguity of teaching to the test: Standards,
assessment & educational reform (pp. 1-18). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.

Fischer, J. C. & Kiefer, A. (1994). Constructing and discovering images of your teaching.
In P. B. Joseph and G. E. Bumaford (Eds. ). Images of Schoolteachers in
twentieth-century America. Paragons, polarities, complexities (pp. 29- 53). New
York: St. Martin’s Press.

Florio-Ruane, S. (1991). Conversation and narrative in collaborative research: An
ethnography of the written literacy forum. In C. Witherall & N. Noddings (Eds.),
Stories lives tell: Narrative and dialogue in education (pp. 234-256). New York:
Teachers College Press.

Flyvbj erg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case study research. Qualitative
Journal, 12, 219-245.

Fontana, A. and Frey, J. (2000). The interview: From structured questions to negotiated
text. In N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd
ed.) (pp. 645-672). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

273

Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison (A. Sheridan, Trans).
New York: Pantheon Books.

Franzosi, R. (2004). From words to numbers: Narrative, data, and social science. New
York: Cambridge University Press.

Geertz, C. (1973). Thick description: Toward an interpretative theory of culture. In The
interpretation of cultures. (pp. 3-30). New York: Basic Books.

Geertz, C. (1988). Works and lives: The anthropologist as author. Stanford, CA: Stanford
University Press.

Gerstl-Pepin, C. I. (2006). The paradox of poverty narratives: Educators struggling with
children left behind. Educational Policy, 20, 143-162.

Gitlin, A., Bringhurst, K., Burns, M., Cooley, V., Myers, B., Price, K., Russell, R., &
Tiess, P. (1992). Teachers ’ voice for school change: An introducation to
educative research. New York: Teachers College Press.

Gladwell, M. (2000). The tipping point: How little things can make a big difference.
Boston: Little Brown.

Goodman, J. F. & Lesnick, H. (2001). The moral stake in education: Contested Premises
and practices. New York: Longrnan.

Green, N. & Manke, M. P. (1994). Good women and old stereotypes: Retired teachers
talk about teaching. In P. B. Joseph and G. E. Bumaford (Eds.). Images of
Schoolteachers in twentieth-century America: Paragons, polarities, complexities

(pp. 96-115). New York: St. Martin’s Press.

Greene, M. (1994). Epistemology and educational research: The influence of recent
approaches to knowledge. In L. Darling-Hammond (Ed.), Review of research in
education (pp. 423-464). Washington, DC: AERA.

Hamilton, L. S., Stecher, B. M. and Klein, S. P. (2002). Introduction. In L. S. Hamilton,
B. M. Stecher, and S. P. Klein (Eds.), Making sense of test-based accountability
in education. pp. l-12. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.

Hanson, F. A. (1993). Testing testing. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Hanson, F. A. (2000). How tests create what they are intended to measure. In A. Filer
(Ed.) Assessment: Social practice and social product (67-81). New York:
Routledge/F almer.

Harvey, J. (2003). The matrix reloaded: The internal contradictions of No Child Left

274

Behind and creating a nightmare. Educational Leadership, 61(3), 18-21.

Heilman, E. (2005). Towards an eutopian critical pedagogy honoring identity and
practice. In I. Gur Ze’v (Ed.). Critical pedagogy and critical theory today (114-
142). Haifia: Faculty of Education University of Haifa.

Herman, J. L. (2004). The effects of testing on instruction. In S. H. Fuhrman and R. F.
Elmore (Eds.). Redesigning accountability systems for education (pp. 141-166).
New York: Teachers College Press.

Hess, F. M. (2003). The case for being mean. Educational Leadership, 61 (3), 22-26.

Heubert, J. P. & Hauser, R. M. (Eds.) (1999). High Stakes: Testing for tracking,
promotion, and graduation. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Hill, H. C. (2001). Policy is not enough: Language and the interpretation of state
standards. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 289-318.

Hillocks, G., Jr. (2002). The testing trap: How state writing assessments control learning.
New York: Teachers College Press.

Hirsch, E. D. (1996). The schools we need and why we don 't have them. New York:
Anchor Books.

Hobson, D. (1994). Across the generations: Conversations with retired teachers. In P. B.
Joseph and G. E. Bumaford (Eds.). Images of Schoolteachers in twentieth-century
America: Paragons, polarities, complexities (pp. 78-95). New York: St. Martin’s
Press.

Holestein, J. and Gubrium J. (2002). Active interviewing. In D. Weinberg (Ed.),
Qualitative research methods (pp. 112-126). Malder, MA: Blackwell.

Hollingsworth, S. (1998). School responsibility and imagination: Lessons and letters. In
W. C. Ayres and L. Miller (Eds.), A light in dark times: Maxine Greene and the
unfinished conversation (pp. 71-77). New York: Teachers College Press.

Hunter, R. C. & Bartee, R. (2003). The achievement gap: Issues of competition, class,
and race. Education and Urban Society, 35, 151-160.

Hursh, D. & Martina, C. A. (2003). Noeliberalism and schooling in the U. 8.: How state
and federal goverrnnent education policies perpetuate inequality. Journal for
Critical Education Policy Studies, 1(2), Retrieved March 22, 2004 from
http:// i ceps.com/?pagelD=article&articleID=l 2.

lntemational Reading Association. (1999, May). High stakes assessment in reading: A

275

position statement of the International Reading Association. Retrieved October
20, 2001 from http://wwwreadingorg.

Jackson, P. W. (1990). Life in classrooms (Reissued). New York: Teachers College Press.

Jackson, P. W., Boostrom, R. E. & Hansen, D. T. (1993). The moral life of schools. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Jacobs, H. H. (2003, March). A New Essential Curriculum. Presented at the annual
meeting of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, San
Francisco, CA.

Jennings, J. & Rentner, D. S. (2006). Ten big effects of the No Child Left Behind Act on
public schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 88, 110-113.

Jones, K. & Whitford, B. L. (2000). The next generation of school accountability. In B.
L. Whitford & K. Jones (Eds.) Accountability, assessment, and teachers
commitment: Lessons fiom Kentucky ’s reform eflorts (233-246). Albany, NY:
State University of New York Press.

Joseph, P. B. (1994). “The ideal teacher”: Images of paragons in teacher education
textbooks before 1940. In P. B. Joseph and G. E. Bumaford (Eds.). Images of
Schoolteachers in twentieth-century America: Paragons, polarities, complexities
(pp. 258-282). New York: St. Martin’s Press.

Joseph, P. B. & Bumaford, G. A. (1994). Contemplating images of schoolteachers in
American culture. In P. B. Joseph and G. E. Bumaford (Eds.). Images of
Schoolteachers in twentieth-century America: Paragons, polarities, complexities
(pp. 3-23). New York: St. Martin’s Press.

J uzwik, M. M. (2006). Situating narrative-minded research: A commentary on Anna
Sfard and Anna Prusak’s “Telling identities.” Educational Researcher, 35(9), 13-
21.

Kainan, A. (2002). Analyzing teachers’ stories. International Journal of Qualitative
Methods, 1(3). Article 4, Retrieved May 22, 2007 from
http://www.ualberta.ca/~iiqu.

Kantor, K. (1994). From Our Miss Brooks to Mr. Moore: Playing their roles in television
situation comedies. In P. B. Joseph and G. E. Bumaford (Eds.). Images of
Schoolteachers in twentieth-century America: Paragons, polarities, complexities
(pp. 175- 189). New York: St. Martin’s Press.

Kauchak, D. & Eggen, P. (2005). Introduction to teaching: Becoming a professional (2nd
ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

276

Kelchtermans, G. (1993). Teachers and their career story: A biographical perspective on
professional development. In C. Day, J. Calderhead, and P. Denicolo (Eds.)
Research on teacher thinking: Understanding professional development (pp.
198-220). Washington, DC: Falmer Press.

Kennedy, M. M. (2004). Reform ideals and teachers’ practical intentions. Educational
Policy Analysis Archives, 12, Retrieved January 8, 2005 from
http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v l 2nl 3.

Kennedy, M. M. (1999). Approximations to indicators of student outcomes. Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21, 345-363.

Kirsch, G. (1999). Ethical dilemmas in feminist research. Albany, NY: SUNY.

Kohn, A. (2004). NCLB and the effort to privatize education. In D. Meier and G. Wood
(Eds.), Many children left behind: How the NCLB act is damaging our children
and our schools (pp.79-100). Boston: Beacon Press.

Kridel, C. (1998). Landscapes, biography, and the preservation of the present. In W. C.
Ayres and L. Miller (Eds.), A light in dark times: Maxine Greene and the
unfinished conversation (pp. 122-131). New York: Teachers College Press.

Lewis, A. C. (2002). A horse called NCLB. Phi Delta Kappan, 84(3), 179-180.

Lewis, C. S. (1952). Mere Christianity. New York: Harper San Francisco.

Lincoln, Y. (2002). Emerging criteria for quality in qualitative and interpretative
research. In N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The qualitative inquiry reader (pp.
327-345). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Linn, R. L. (2000). Assessments and accountability. Educational Researcher, 29(2), 4-16.

Linn, R. L. (2003). 2003 Presidential address: Accountability: Responsibility and
reasonable expectations. Educational Researcher, 32(7), 3-13.

Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press.

Mabry, L. & Margolis, J. (2006). NCLB: Local implementation and impact in southwest
Washington state. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 14(23), 1-35.

Macdonell, D. (1986). Theories of discourse: An introduction. New York: Basil
Blackwell.

Madaus, G. F. (1988). The influence of testing on the curriculum. In L. N. Tanner (Ed.),

277

Critical issues in curriculum: Eighty-seventh yearbook of the National Society for
the Study of Education (83-121). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Madaus, G. F. & Horn, C. (2000). Testing technology: The need for oversight. In A. Filer
(Ed.) Assessment: Social practice and social product (47-66). New York:
Routledge/Falmer.

Madaus, G. F. & Kellaghan, T. (1992). Curriculum evaluation and assessment. In P. W.
Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum: A project of the American
Educational Research Association (pp. 119-154). New York: Macmillian
Publishing.

Mathis, W. J. (2003). No child left behind: Costs and benefits. Phi Delta
Kappa International. Retrieved March 22, 2004 from
http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/k0305mat.htrn

Mathison, S. & Freeman, M. (2003). Constraining elementary teachers' work:
Dilemmas and paradoxes created by state mandated testing. Educational Policy
Analysis Archives, 1 1 (34). Retrieved September 29, 2003 from
http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/vl ln34.

Mathison, S. & Freeman, M. (2006). Teacher stress and high stakes testing: How using
one measure of academic success leads to multiple teacher stressors. In R.
Lambert and C. McCarthy (Eds.), Understanding teacher stress in an age of
accountability (pp. 43-63). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

Mayes, C. (2002). The teacher as an archetype of spirit. Journal of Curriculum Studies,
34, 699-718.

McCarty, C. & Lambert, R. ((2006). Helping teachers balance demands and resources in
an era of accountability. In R. Lambert and C. McCarty (Eds.), Understanding
teacher stress in an age of accountability (pp. 215-225). Greenwich, CT:
Information Age Publishing.

McDonnell, L. M. (1994). Assessment policy as persuasion and regulation. American
Journal of Education, 102, 394-421.

McDonnell, L. M. (1991). Ideas and values in implementation analysis: The case of
teacher policy. In A. Odden (Ed.), Educational policy implementation (pp. 241-
258). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

McDonnell, L. M. & Elmore, R. F. (1987). Getting the job done: Alternative policy
instruments. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9, 133-152.

McLaughlin, M. W. & Talbert, J. E. (2001). Professional communities and the work of
high school teaching. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

278

Mc Neil, L. M. (2000). Contradictions of school reform: Educational costs of
standardized testing. New York: Routledge.

Mehrens, W. A. (1998). Consequences of assessment: What is the evidence?
Education Policy Analysis Archives, 6(13). Retrieved February 3, 2004, from
http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/vl6n13.html.

Meier, D. (1995). The power of their ideas: Lessons for America from a small school in
Harlem. Boston: Beacon Press.

Meier, D. (2004). NCLB and democracy. In D. Meier and G. Wood (Eds.), Many
children left behind: How the NCLB act is damaging our children and our
schools (pp. 66-78). Boston: Beacon Press.

Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. San
Francisco: Jossey—Bass Publishers.

Metz, M. H. (1990). Real School: A universal drama amid disparate experience. In D.
Mitchell and M. E. Goertz (Eds.) Education politics for the new century: The
twentieth anniversary yearbook of the Politics of Education Association (pp. 75-
91). London: Falmer.

Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded
sourcebook (2nd ed..) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Miller, J. L. (1998). Autobiography and the necessary incompleteness of teachers’ stories.
In W. C. Ayres and L. Miller (Eds.), A light in dark times: Maxine Greene and the
unfinished conversation (pp. 145-154). New York: Teachers College Press.

Mintrop, H. (2004). Schools on probation. How accountability works (and doesn t work)
New York: Teachers College Press.

Mishler, E. G. (1986). Research interviewing: Context and narrative. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.

Monfils, L. F., Firestone, W. A., Hicks, J. E., Martinez, M. C., Schorr, R. Y. & Camilli,
G. (2004). Teaching to the test. In W. A. Firestone, R. Y. Schorr and L. F.
Monfils (Eds.), The ambiguity of teaching to the test: Standards, assessment &
educational reform (pp. 37-62). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Murray, M. (2003). Narrative psychology and narrative analysis. In P. M. Camic, J. E.
Rhodes & L. Yardley (Eds.) Qualitative research in psychology: Expanding
perspectives in methodology and design (pp. 95-112). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.

279

National Education Association. (2000, September). NEA ’s position on high-stakes
testing. Retrieved October 20, 2001 from
http://www.nea.org/issues/highstakes/neaposition.html.

National Govemors' Association. (1999). Focusing on results: Toward a education
accountability system. Washington, DC: National Govemors' Association.

Newmann, F. M., King, M. B. & Rigdon, M. (1997). Accountability and school
performance: Implications from restructuring schools. Harvard Educational
Review, 67(1), 41-69.

Newman, V. (2001). Cinema, women teachers, and the 19503 and 19603. Educational
Studies, 32, 416-438.

Nieto, S. (2003). Challenging current notions of “Highly qualified teachers” through
work in a teachers’ inquiry group. Journal of Teacher Education, 54, 386-398.

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110 (2002).

Noddings, N. (1998). Ethics and imagination. In W. C. Ayres and L. Miller
(Eds.), A light in dark times: Maxine Greene and the unfinished conversation (pp.
159-169). New York: Teachers College Press.

Oakes, J, Blasi, G, & Rogers, J. (2004). Accountability for adequate and equitable
opportunities to learn. In K. Sirotnik (Ed.), Holding accountability accountable:
What ought to matter in public education (pp.82-99). New York: Teachers
College Press.

O’Day, J. A. (2004). Complexity, accountability, and school improvement. In S. H.
Fuhrman & R. F. Elmore (Eds.), Redesigning accountability systems for
education (pp.15-43). New York: Teachers College Press.

Palmer, P. J. (1997). The heart of a teacher: Identity and integrity in teaching. Change,
29, 14-21.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (2"d ed.). Newbury
Park, CA: Sage.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.

Paris, S. G. (1998). Why leamer-centered assessment is better than high-stakes testing. In
N. M. Lambert and B. L. McCombs (Eds.), How students learn: Reforming
schools through learner-centered education (pp. 189-209). Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.

280

Pignatelli, F. (1998). Maxine Greene and the arousal of a passionate public. In W. C.
Ayres and L. Miller (Eds.), A light in dark times: Maxine Greene and the
unfinished conversation (pp. 262-264). New York: Teachers College Press.

Pomson, A. D. M. (2005). One classroom at a Time? Teacher isolation and community
viewed through the prism of the particular. Teachers College Record, 107, 783-
802.

Popham, W. J. (2000, November 19). Educational mismeasurement: How high-stakes
testing can harm our children (And what we might do about it). Paper presented at
“Getting a Handle on High-Stakes Testing and Accountability”. Retrieved
October 20, 2001 from http://www.nea.org/issues/high-stakes/popham.htrnl.

Popham, W. J. (2005). America ’s failing schools: How parents and teachers can cope
with No Child Left Behind. New York: Routledge.

Provenzo, E. F. Jr., McCloskey, G. N. (1996). Schoolteachers and schooling: Ethoses in
conflict. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.

Quantz, R. A. (1992a). Teachers and the workplace. In R. J. Altenbaugh (Ed.), The
teacher ’s voice (pp. 139-171). Washington, DC: F alrner Press.

Quantz, R. A. (1992b). Interpretive method in historical research: Etlrnohistory
reconsidered. . In R. J. Altenbaugh (Ed.), The teacher ’s voice (pp. 174-190).
Washington, DC: Falmer Press.

Ray, M. A. (1994). The richness of phenomenology: Philosophic, theoretic, and
methodological concerns. In J. M. Morse (Ed.). Issues in qualitative research
methods (pp. 117-133). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Riesmann, C. K. (1993). Narrative analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Roderick, M., Jacob, B. A. & Bryk, A. S. (2002). The impact of high-stakes testing in

Chicago on student achievement in promotional gate grades. Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24, 333-357.

Rothstein, R. (2004). Class and schools: Using social, economic and educational reform
to close the black-white achievement gap. Washington, DC: Economic Policy
Institute.

Rupp, A. A. & Lesaux, N. K. (2006). Meeting the expectations? An empirical
investigation of a stadards-based assessment of reading comprehension.

Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 28, 315-333.

Savolainen, R. (2004). Enthusiastic, realistic and critical: Discourses of intemet use in the

281

context of everyday life information seeking. Information Research, 10.
Retrieved September 18, 2005 from http://Infromation R.net/ir/10-
l/paperl98.htrnl

Scheurich, , J. (1995). A postmodernist critique of research interviewing. Qualitative
Studies in Education, 8, 239-252.

Schorr, R. Y. & Firestone, W. A. (2004). Conclusion. In W. A. Firestone, R. Y. Schorr &
L. F. Monfils (Eds.), The ambiguity of teaching to the test: Standards, assessment
& educational reform (pp. 159-168). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.

Schreiber, T. & Moring, C. (2001, May/June). Codification of knowledge using discourse
analysis. Paper presented at the meeting of the 1 1th Nordic Conference on
Information and Documentation, Reykjavik, Iceland.

Schwab, J. J. (1973). The Practical 3: Translation into curriculum. School Review, 79,
501-522.

Schwandt, T. A. (1998). Constructivist, interpretivist approaches to human inquiry. In N.
K. Denzin and Y. 8. Lincoln (Eds.), The landscape of qualitative research:
Theories and Issues (pp. 221-259). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Schwarz, G. E. (1998). Teaching as vocation: Enabling ethical practice. The Education
Forum, 63(1), 23-29.

Schwarz, G. E. (2001). Using teacher narrative research in teacher development. The
Teacher Educator, 3 7(1), 37-48.

Sfard, A. & Prusak, A. (2005). Telling identities: In search of an analytic tool for
investigating learning as a culturally shaped activity. Educational Researcher,
34(4), 14-22.

Schubert, W. H. (1991). Teacher lore: A basis for understanding praxis. In C. Witherall &
N. Noddings (Eds.), Stories lives tell: Narrative and dialogue in education (pp.
207-233). New York: Teachers College Press.

Shulman, L. S. (1983). Autonomy and obligation: The remote control of teaching. In L.
S. Shulman and G. Sykes (Eds.), Handbook of teaching and policy (pp. 484-504).
New York: Longrnan.

Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform.
Harvard Educational Review, 5 7, 1-22.

Smith, M. L. (1991). Put to the test: The effects of external testing on teachers.
Educational Researcher, 20(5), 8-11.

282

Stecher, B. M. & Hamilton, L. S. (2003). Putting theory to the test: Systems of
"Educational accountability" should be held accountable. RAND Review,
Retrieved March 23, 2004 from
http://www.rand.org/publications/randreview/issues/rr.04.02/theory.html

Stillar, G. F. (1998). Analyzing everyday texts: Discourse, rhetoric and social
perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory
procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Taylor, D. (1996). The healing power of stories: Creating yourself through the stories of
your life. New York: Doubleday.

Thompson, C. L., Sykes, G. & Skrla, L. (2004). Instructionally-eflective school districts:
An agenda-setting review of research. Unpublished manuscript.

Thompson, S. (2001). The authentic standards movement and its evil twin. Phi Delta
Kappan, 82(5), 358-362.

Thurlow, M. L. (2004). Biting the bullet: Including special-needs students in
accountability systems. In S. H. Fuhrman and R. F. Elmore (Eds.), Redesigning
accountability systems for education (pp. 115-137). New York: Teachers College
Press.

Toolan, M. (2001). Narrative: A critical linguistic introduction (2Ind ed.). New York:
Routledge.

Trier, J. D. (2001). The cinematic representation of the personal and professional lives of
teachers. Teacher Education Quarterly, 28, 127-142.

Tronto, J. (1993). Moral boundaries: A political argument for an ethic of care. New
York: Routledge.

Tyack, D. & Cuban, L. (1995). T 1nker1ng toward utopia. A century of publzc school
reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Tyler, R. W. (1950). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press.

Van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experiences: Human science for an action
sensitive pedagogy. State University of New York Press.

Van Manen, M. (2002). Researching the experience of pedagogy. Education of Canada,
42(3).

283

Von Zastrow, C. (2004). Academic atrophy: The condition of the liberal arts in
America’s public schools. Grantmakers in the Arts Readers, 15 (3). Retrieved
June 12, 2007 from http://www_;giarts.orgZusr_doc/Academic_Atrophy.pdf.

Webb, P. T. (2006). The stress of accountability: Teachers as policy brokers in a poverty
school. In R. Lambert and C. McCarty (Eds.), Understanding teacher stress in an
age of accountability (pp. 1-18). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

Weiss, C. H. (1995). The four I’s of school reform: How interests, ideology, information,
and institution affect teachers and principals. Harvard Educational Review, 65(4),
571-592.

' Weiss, L. and Fine, M. (2000). Speed bumps: A student-friendly guide to qualitative
research. New York: Teachers College Press

Wilson, S. (2003). California dreaming: Reforming mathematics education. New Haven,
CT: Yale University Press.

Wood, G. (2004). A view from the field: NCLB’s effects on classrooms and schools. In
D. Meier and G. Woods (Eds.), Many children left behind: How the NCLB act is
damaging our children and our schools (pp.33-51). Boston: Beacon Press.

Witherall, C. & Noddings, N. (1991). Prologue: An invitation to our readers. In C.
Witherall & N. Noddings (Eds.), Stories lives tell: Narrative and dialogue in
education (pp. 1-12). New York: Teachers College Press.

Yeh, S. S. (2006). High-stakes testing: Can rapid assessment reduce the pressure?
Teachers College Record, 108, 621-661.

Zancanella, D. (1992). The influence of state-mandated testing on teachers of literature.
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14, 283-295.

284

     

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

111111111111 lllllllllllllllll111111111

3 1293 02956 245