ArticlePDF Available

Hope as Strategy: AERA Action Research SIG Dissertation of the Year 2020, Executive Summary

Authors:
  • Urban Discovery Schools

Abstract

Students may be situated within complex systems that are nested within each other. This complexity may also envelop institutional structures that lead to the socioeconomic reification of student post-secondary opportunities by obscuring positive goals. Building on previous cycles of action research, this multi-strand mixed-methods action research study examined the effectiveness of an innovation designed to address student, teacher, and parental understandings of college and career readiness. This innovation was developed and implemented using a participatory action research model and included a student program administered during an advisory period and evening parent education programs. Findings included the importance of parent involvement, the influence of positive goals, relational implications of goal setting and pathway knowledge on agentic thinking, and that teacher implementation of the innovation may have influenced student hope levels.
Running head: HOPE AS STRATEGY
Hope as Strategy:
The Effectiveness of an Innovation of the Mind.
An Executive Summary of the AERA
Action Research SIG Dissertation of the Year of 2020
By
Shawn Thomas Loescher
AMERICAN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION
Annual Meeting, San Francisco,
April 2020
HOPE AS STRATEGY ii
© 2020 Shawn Thomas Loescher
All rights reserved.
HOPE AS STRATEGY iii
ABSTRACT
Students may be situated within complex systems that are nested within each other. This
complexity may also envelop institutional structures that lead to the socio-economic reification
of student post-secondary opportunities by obscuring positive goals. Building on previous cycles
of action research, this multi-strand mixed-methods action research study examined the
effectiveness of an innovation designed to address student, teacher, and parental understandings
of college and career readiness. This innovation was developed and implemented using a
participatory action research model and included a student program administered during an
advisory period and evening parent education programs. Findings included the importance of
parent involvement, the influence of positive goals, relational implications of goal setting and
pathway knowledge on agentic thinking, and that teacher implementation of the innovation may
have influenced student hope levels.
HOPE AS STRATEGY 1
INTRODUCTION
This is an action research dissertation. I speak in the first person because it accurately
reflects my positionality to my researchI exist within it and it exists within me. Specifically,
this is a participatory action research (PAR; Herr & Anderson, 2015; Gaventa & Cornwall, 2008)
dissertation. By this I mean, I involved the participants of the study and I was positioned as an
agent of change within my research context and community. PAR is philosophically aligned with
critical inquiry (Crotty, 1988) and is an inductive process of creating social knowledge for
emancipatory change (Bradbury, 2015; Brinton & Mallona, 2008).
The purpose of my study was to examine the introduction of a school site innovation to
advance student opportunity and achievement. The topic of my study was to explore possible
misalignments of policy, organizational intentions, expectations, and school site practice in
preparing students for post-secondary environments. The context of my study was a newly
formed urban, small inner-city high school in the Southwest of the United States. My situated
context was that of the Chief Executive Officer of the school system and Principal of the school.
The problem of practice. The problem of practice was that systems complexity may lead
to socio-economic reification of our students’ educational and post-secondary opportunities
through institutional structures that spanned ecological systems. This complexity obscured
setting relevant positive goals for high school graduation, college attainment, and career success.
Graduation requirements for the school system were based upon state agency policy documents
(CSBA BP 6146, 2015, see Appendix A). However, these requirements did not meet the post-
secondary needs of the 21st century (Stephens, Warren, Harner, & Owen, 2015; OECD, 2013).
As a newly formed high school, there were no formal college and career planning documents,
professional development, student services, or parent training programs in place.
HOPE AS STRATEGY 2
The Innovation. An innovation is the introduction of a process, practice, technology, or
idea that is new to an individual, entity, or organization (Christensen, Anthony, & Roth, 2004;
Rogers, 2003; Drucker, 1998). Therefore, an innovation does not need to be a material thing. In
this way, we can have an innovation of the mindan intentionally designed disruption to the
way we think. My innovation was designed with the intention of this type of disruption.
My study examined the innovation of the I am College and Career Ready Student
Support Program (iCCR). The iCCR was developed with a PAR approach to (a) articulate an
iCCR graduation profile, (b) set positive goals and expectations for all students, (c) develop and
implement the iCCR curriculum, (d) provided parent workshops on iCCR, and (e) provide
ongoing professional development for advisory teachers. The iCCR was developed and
implemented over a 16-week period. The participants of this innovation were Students (n = 65),
parents (n = 35), staff (n = 9), and community advisory/board members (n = 3).
The research questions. My study sought to answer four research questions. They were:
RQ1. How, and to what extent, will the implementation of the iCCR parent/community
development plans increase parent/community understanding of what students need to
accomplish in order to be college and career ready?
RQ2. How, and to what extent, will the implementation of iCCR support the school site
in setting positive goals for students?
RQ3. How, and to what extent, will the implementation of the iCCR student pathway and
agency plan increase students’ understanding of what they need to accomplish to be
college and career ready?
RQ4. How, and to what extent, will the implementation level of iCCR support student
levels of hope for their future?
HOPE AS STRATEGY 3
THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES AND RESEARCH GUIDING THIS STUDY
Action research finds direction to address a problem of practice through a theoretical
framework, a review of the literature, and empirical knowledge obtained in previous cycles
(Mertler, 2014). The positionality of the researcher, as being within the context, coupled with the
theoretical frameworks and literature, are used to guide the selection and application of an
innovation. The use of theory in practice may be advanced through action research (Ivankova,
2015; Mills, 2011). Here I review my system and ground level change theory, provide an
overview of my literature review and my previous cycles of action research guiding this study.
Systems theory. To frame this research, I utilized Ecological Systems Theory (EST;
Bronfenbrenner, 1977; 1994). EST has evolved as a theory of human development and has been
used in several fields of research (Scalco, Trucco, Coffman, & Colder, 2015). There are two
defining properties of EST, those of proximal process and environmental systems
(Bronfenbrenner, 1994). Proximal process relates to how humans develop over time in relation to
more complex interactions with other people, objects, and symbols within the environment. The
five environmental systems are the microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, macrosystem, and
chronosystem (see Appendix A). EST has implications for school practice (Tynan et al., 2014;
Wicks & Warren, 2014). EST suggests that students’ lives are complex and are influenced
through the interactions of the environmental systems and proximal processes.
Ground level change theory. There is a growing body of research on the importance of
hope in education (McCoy & Bowen, 2015; Lopez, 2013; Webb, 2013; Bullough & Hall-
Kenyon, 2012). Hope was operationalized as a theory by Snyder (HT; 2002). HT has been
categorized as a branch of positive psychology (Sheehan & Rall, 2011; Valle, Huebner, & Suldo,
2006). HT has three operational elements: goal formation, pathway thinking, and agency
HOPE AS STRATEGY 4
thinking; which interact with social contexts (see Appendix B). Pathway and agency interact
with each other and undergo modifications over time as goals are renegotiated in an ongoing
basis. HT has been situated within EST (Gerard & Booth, 2015) as the elements of positive goals
setting, pathway and agency thinking may support transcending the EST environmental systems.
I have developed a theoretical model whereby HT is utilized as a change theory to navigate
through EST (see Appendix C) to advance student opportunity and achievement.
Literature review. To consider what students might need to be prepared for in a
globalized economy, I conducted a review of the literature. I found that students will be entering
a society with the following attributes: (a) a lower level of economic freedom (Miller, Kim,
DeMint, Roberts, Riley, & Whiting, 2016); (b) a comparatively lower level of peace and safety
(Institute for Economics and Peace, 2015); (c) a higher rate of being imprisoned than those in
other countries (Kaeble, Glaze, Tsoutis, & Minton, 2015); and (d) lower levels of educational
expectations, attainment rates, and performance indicators when compared to students in other
industrialized countries (Stephens Warren, Harner, & Owen, 2015; OECD, 2013; OECD, 2012).
Previous cycles of action research. My previous cycles of action research included
document analysis, exploratory interviews, systems revisions and actions, and a round of critical
inquiry. These cycles led to the development of initial qualitative findings, an action taken to
clarify pathways, and the development of a grounded theory. In developing my current problem
of practice, I used a cyclical and reflective approach. Previous cycles included interviews of
students, teachers, administrators, parents, and board members. I reviewed all previous findings
for transferability (Mills, 2011). The development of the innovation of the iCCR was conducted
using my theoretical model, guided by my review of the literature, and informed by three
previous cycles of action research (Ivanovna, 2015; Mertler, 2014).
HOPE AS STRATEGY 5
METHOD
I chose PAR as an appropriate methodology for change and organizational development
(Bradbury, 2015; Kemmis, 2008). Action research is often conducted using mixed methods
(Creswell, 2015; Mertler, 2014). To answer my research questions, I used a multi-strand mixed-
methods design (Creswell, 2015; Ivankova, 2015; Plano-Clark & Creswell, 2014). Study
participants (n = 112) were students (n = 65), parents (n = 35), staff (n = 9), and community
advisers/board members (n = 3).
Quantitative data collection used existing student records, an instrument on college and
career readiness knowledge (see Appendix E and F), my in-school Student Hope Scale (SHS, see
Appendix G), and an existing school system instrument (see Appendix H). Qualitative data
collection occurred before, during, and after the innovation. Qualitative data was gathered
through Levels of Use (LoU; Hall & Hord, 2015, see Appendix I and J) interviews, advisory
teacher interviews (see Appendix K), student interviews (see Appendix L), semi-structured
parent interviews(see Appendix M), a research journal, and additional artifact data.
Qualitative data was analyzed for themes and assertions using a Constructivist Grounded
Theory (Charmaz, 2017; Saldaña, 2016; Charmaz, 2014). Charmaz (2017) has argued that a
Constructivist Grounded Theory approach may advance critical inquiry. As a means of
immersing myself in the data, I conducted all transcriptions and subjected the data to member
checks to increase the validity of my findings. Quantitative data analysis used descriptive
statistics, pre/post t-tests and one-way ANOVA. As a concurrent mixed-methods study, I used a
process of triangulation (Creswell, 2015) and crystallization (Richardson & St. Pierre, 2011;
Ellingson, 2009). The research questions were answered by aligning data sources to each
research question (see Appendix N).
HOPE AS STRATEGY 6
RESULTS
Qualitative data underwent a rigorous transcription (see Appendix O) and memoing
process. Student interviews (n = 8), advisory teacher interviews (n = 4), and parent interview
participants (n = 6) included open gerund coding, code analysis, theoretical framework alignment
(see Appendix P), and the development of axial codes Assertions were developed through
memoing and axial code alignment. An overview of the descriptions of the participants and
assertions aligned to axial codes can are available in the Appendix of this document for students
(see Appendix Q), advisory teachers (see Appendix R), and parents (see Appendix S). Full
qualitative findings included a thick description with supporting quotes (Saldaña, 2016).
Quantitative analysis included reliability testing, reviewing the initial gathering of data to
support the development of iCCR, and the measures of effectiveness of iCCR on parents (n = 10)
and students (n = 49) participants. In examining reliability, I subjected my instruments to criteria
established by Nunally (1978) with the three cut off standards of early stages of research (α =
.70), basic research (α = .80), and applied research (α = .90). Overall reliability of the SHS was
that of .85. The school system survey had an overall reliability of .87.
Both parents and students took pre and post-innovation tests (see Appendix T). The
parent test was on college and career readiness and had an average post-innovation increase of
26.6 percentage points. The student test was on college readiness and our graduation profile and
resulted in a post-innovation average increase of 10.0 percentage points.
Students were administered two attitudinal measure pre and post-innovation tests.
Analysis was conducted on the SHS and the school system survey. The results from the SHS
indicated that students maintained higher goal setting, agency thinking slightly declined, and
pathway knowledge had increased (see Appendix U). School systems survey resulted in higher
HOPE AS STRATEGY 7
scores on the sub-construct to student perceptions of self and that of school/community supports
(see Appendix V). Using the data generated from the LoU (Hall & Hord, 2015) I measured how
implementation levels might have impacted student hope levels as measured on the SHS.
Utilizing a one-way ANOVA, I found statistical significance at the 95% confidence level that
advisory teacher implementation of iCCR impacted student hope levels (see Appendix W).
Through my process of triangulation, I answered each of my research questions. For RQ1
on parent and community development plans, I found that the innovation had increased parent
and community knowledge of college and career readiness. However, there needed to be a
broader outreach to parents for full implementation of iCCR. For RQ2 on student goal setting, I
found that students increased their positive goal setting. However, this positive increase may
have been offset by the process of reassessing what goals were being set as students increased
their knowledge of college readiness and our graduation profile.
In answering RQ3 on pathway and agency plan development, I found that students
increased their pathway knowledge, but this may have decreased their agency thinking. This may
have occurred as a natural process of learning about pathways and having students reorient
themselves with pathway information. Finally, in answering RQ4 on advisory teacher
implementation levels, I found that the level of implementation of iCCR by the advisory teachers
had impacts to student hope levels as measured by the SHS.
DISCUSSION
Crystallization comes from a tradition which includes the post-modernist dispositions of
Derrida and Deleuze (Richardson & St. Pierre, 2011). I use this term, crystallization, to move
beyond what Richardson and St. Pierre (2011) have argued is the two-dimensional process of
triangulation (see Appendix X). Crystallization involves a three-dimensional process that allows
HOPE AS STRATEGY 8
for knowledge to be constructed, deconstructed, and reconstructed to form options for multiple
truths and realities (Richardson & St. Pierre, 2011). I found this method consistent with the
action research tradition of being reflexive (Ivankova, 2015) and cyclical (Mertler, 2014).
Crystallization on RQ1. My first research question was focused on if iCCR would
support increased parent and community understanding of what students needed to do to be
college and career ready. This study was based upon a theoretical framework of HT (Snyder,
2002) as a navigational change strategy situated within EST (Bronfenbrenner, 1994; 1977).
Within this framework, the iCCR process started with engaging the school community in the
actions of developing workshops for parents. There was evidence that iCCR did increase parent
participants understanding of what students need to accomplish in order to be college and career
ready. However, there are questions as to the extent that this will be effective over time or can be
diffused over a larger segment of the parent population to close opportunity gaps.
Crystallization on RQ2. My second research question explored how and to what extent
the innovation would support setting positive goals for students. My triangulated findings
presented evidence that this did occur. For example, quantitative data indicated that goal
formation slightly increased on the SHS with qualitative statements of support. However, these
findings should be balanced with those of the second teacher assertion (see Appendix R) which
stated that there was a feeling that students had a false sense of hope in the future and that they
do not fully trust teachers about the need for college.
Crystallization on RQ3. My third research question asked how pathway and agency
thinking might be influenced by iCCR. My triangulated finding stated that while students
increased their pathway knowledge, they may have had a decrease in agency thinking. Snyder
(2002) suggested that while pathway and agency were individual sub-constructs of hope, they
HOPE AS STRATEGY 9
fluidly interacted with each other. Therefore, it might be expected that as pathway knowledge
increases one might have their agency thinking challenged or affirmed depending upon where
you found yourself situated within that pathway.
Crystallization on RQ4. My final research question examined how the level of teacher
implementation of iCCR might support students’ levels of hope. I found that there was
triangulated data that the implementation level may support student hope levels. There was a
statistically significant effect on student hope levels as measured by the SHS when compared to
the advisory teachers’ levels of use. However, this finding assumes that the introduction of iCCR
was a factor. We do not know if this finding would have been the same in the absence of iCCR.
The emergence of my grounded theory. Through a rigorous process inclusive of
triangulation and crystallization, I constructed the following grounded theory:
Teachers, parents, schools, and school systems have influence over a student’s
level of hope and dispositions to seek out a more ideal future state of beingwith
agentic thinking and pathway knowledge being primarily influenced through
interactions in environments of higher proximal process and goal setting being
primarily manifested in environments of lower proximal process.
Limitations and implications. I identified three primary limitations related to research
conducted in a non-clinical setting. Those were experimenter effect, novelty effect, and
transferability (Plano-Clark & Creswell, 2015). Implications for practice included the
modification and expansion of iCCR, the importance of the use of theoretical alignments for
practitioners, and the use of PAR as a communications structure for change. Implications for
future research included the need for increased cultural studies in school settings and the need for
more research on how the change strategy of HT and the system theory of EST interact.
HOPE AS STRATEGY 10
Forward. Upon reflection, I have found the thought of completing a cycle of action
research with a summary or conclusion as being paradoxically inconsistent with the tradition.
Therefore, I concluded my writing process for this cycle with what I believe to be the most
appropriate mechanism, a forward. I sought to reflect upon my three-and-a-half-year action
research journey that I celebrated with this publication. This reflection was grounded in the
importance of action research for educational and community development. Within my cycles of
action research, PAR became my praxis in pursuit of a more ideal future state.
To me, education is not simply a transfer of knowledge, the establishment of behavioral
norms, or examination of cultural artifacts. Education is an extension of creating the type of
world we ought to want to live in. This positions schools and teachers as emancipatory
practitioners of a pedagogy rooted in the philosophical traditions of idealism. However, we face
mounting evidence of continued institutional oppression that diminishes our children’s economic
freedom (Miller et al., 2016), including property rights (Miller & Kim, 2016), ability to live in
peace (Institute for Economics and Peace, 2015), and access to the types of quality education
(Stephens et al., 2015; OECD, 2013) necessary to prepare them as they compete in a neoliberal
globalized marketplace. In the face of this evidence, we ought to be compelled to innovate.
The multiple cycles of action research that are embodied within this dissertation have
been part of me finding the courage to speak more readily and articulately of a different way
forward. In this dissertation I have argued that, with a PAR approach, we must engage in a
pedagogy of liberation, hope, and even defiance of the mainstay factors that may have
institutionalized caste systems of poverty and oppression. For our students, they deserve nothing
less than the full and equal opportunity of that dream that we have called America. Rather than a
dream achievable for a privileged few, let us seek out liberty and justice for all.
HOPE AS STRATEGY 11
References
(Complete Listing from Full Study)
Adelabu, D. H. (2008). Future time perspective, hope, and ethnic identity among African
American adolescents. Urban Education, 43(3), 347-360. doi:
10.1177/0042085907311806
Ajzen, I., & Madden, T. J. (1986). Prediction of goal-directed behavior: Attitudes, intentions, and
perceived behavioral control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22(5), 453-
474.
Alfeld, C., & Bhattacharya, S. (2012). Mature programs of study: A structure for the transition to
college and career? International Journal of Educational Reform, 21(2), 119-137.
Allua S., & Thompson C. B. (2009). Inferential statistics. Air Medical Journal, 28(4), 168-171.
doi:10.1016/j.amj.2009.04.013
American Community Survey 3-year Estimates (2012). Information retrieved on June 30, 2014
from www.factfinder2.census.gov
American Management Association. (2010). AMA 2010 critical skills survey. Executive
Summary. Retrieved on October 25, 2010 from www.p21.org
Anyon, J. (2009). Critical social theory, educational research, and intellectual agency. In J.
Anyon & G. Dimitriadis (Eds.), Theory and educational research: Toward critical social
explanation (pp 1-23). New York, NY: Routledge, Taylor and Francis.
Anyon, J. (2014). Radical possibilities: Public policy, urban education, and a new social
movement (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Taylor and Francis.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W. H. Freeman.
Bateson, G., Jackson, D. D., Haley, J., & Weakland, J. (1956). Toward a theory of schizophrenia.
Behavioral Science, 1(4), 251-264. Retrieved from
http://login.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1301282
530?accountid=4485
Baudrillard, J. (2010). America. London, UK: Verso.
Bernardo, A. B. I. (2010). Extending hope theory: Internal and external locus of trait hope.
Personality and Individual Differences, 49(8), 944-949. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.07.036
Boxer, P., Rowell Huesmann, L., Dubow, E. F., Landau, S. F., Gvirsman, S. D., Shikaki, K., &
Ginges, J. (2013). Exposure to violence across the social ecosystem and the development
of aggression: A test of ecological theory in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Child
development, 84(1), 163-177. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01848.x
HOPE AS STRATEGY 12
Bradbury, H. (2015). Introduction: How to situate and define action research. In Bradbury, H.
The SAGE handbook of action research (3ed) (pp. 1-9). London, UK: SAGE
Publications, Ltd. doi: 10.4135/9781473921290
Bradbury, H., Mirvis, P., Neilsen, E., & Pasmore, W. (2008). Action research at work: creating
the future following the path from Lewin. In Reason, P. & Bradbury, H. The SAGE
handbook of action research (pp. 77-92). London, UK: SAGE Publications, Ltd. doi:
10.4135/9781848607934.n11
Brendtro, L. K. (2006). The vision of Urie Bronfenbrenner: Adults who are crazy about kids.
Reclaiming Children and Youth, 15(3), 162-166.
Brinkmann, S., & Kvale, S. (2015). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research
interviewing (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Ltd.
Brinton, M., & Mallona, A. (2008). Towards transformational liberation: participatory and action
research and praxis. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds), The SAGE handbook of action
research (pp. 106-120). London, UK: SAGE Publications, Ltd. doi:
10.4135/9781848607934.n13
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American
Psychologist, 32(7), 513-531.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1994). Ecological models of human development. Readings on the
Development of Children, 2, 37-43.
Bullough Jr., R. V., & Hall-Kenyon, K. M. (2012). On Teacher Hope, Sense of Calling, and
Commitment to Teaching. Teacher Education Quarterly, 39(2), 7-27.
Burdette, H. L., & Whitaker, R. C. (2005). A national study of neighborhood safety, outdoor play,
television viewing, and obesity in preschool children. Pediatrics, 116(3), 657-662.
Burns, M. K., Warmbold-Brann, K., & Zaslofsky, A. F. (2015). Ecological Systems Theory in
School Psychology Review. School Psychology Review, 44(3), 249-261.
CA EDC § 51225.3 (2015). California Department of Education. Information retrieved on
February 1, 2016 from http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/
California Department of Education, 2016. State graduation requirements. Retrieved from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/gs/hs/hsgrmin.asp
Camillus, J. (2008). Strategy as a wicked problem. Harvard Business Review, 86(5), 98.
HOPE AS STRATEGY 13
Carlson, D. & Planty, M. (2012). The ineffectiveness of high school graduation credit
requirement reforms: A story of implementation and enforcement? Education Policy,
26(4), 592-626. doi: 10.1177/0895904811417582
Carter, P. L., & Welner, K. G. (2013). Closing the opportunity gap: What America must do to
give every child an even chance. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Charmaz, C. (2014). Constructing Grounded Theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Publications, Ltd.
Charmaz, K. C. (2017). The power of Constructivist Grounded Theory for critical inquiry.
Qualitative Inquiry, 23(1), 34-45. doi: 10.1177/1077800416657105
Christensen, C. M., Anthony, S. D., & Roth, E. A. (2004). Seeing what’s next: Using the theories
of innovation to predict industry change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Chun, H., Devall, E., & Sandau-Beckler, P. (2013). Psychological model of alcohol use in
Mexican American adolescents. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 34(3), 119-134. doi:
10.1007/s10935-013-0306-3
Creswell, J. W. (2015). Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative
and qualitative research (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research
process. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Ltd.
CSBA, 2016. California School Board Association. Retrieved on February 1, 2016 from
www.csba.org/About/AboutCSBA.aspx
CSBA BP 6146, 2015. California School Board Association. Retrieved on February 1, 2016 from
www.gamutonline.net
Daggett, W. (2012). The Daggett system for effective instruction: Alignment for student
achievement. Rexford, NY: International Center for Leadership in Education, Inc.
Dataquest. (2015). California Department of Education. Information retrieved on November 28,
2015 from http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/
Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia.
Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Denzin, N. K. (2017). Critical Qualitative Inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry, 23(1), 8-16. doi:
10.1177/1077800416681864
HOPE AS STRATEGY 14
Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. (2011) Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research.
In Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (Ed.). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (pp. 1-
20). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications, Ltd.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York, NY: Macmillan.
DiMartino, J., & Clarke, J. H. (2008). Personalizing the high school experience for each student.
Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
DiMartino, J., Wolk, D., & Curtis, P. (2010). The personalized high school: Making learning
count for adolescents. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Drucker, P. F. (1998). The discipline of innovation. Harvard Business Review, 76(6), 149-157.
Duncan-Andrade, J. M. R. (2009). Note to educators: Hope required when growing roses in
concrete. Harvard Educational Review, 79(2), 181-194.
Ellingson, L. (2009). Engaging crystallization in qualitative research an introduction. Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Ltd.
Fisher, M. J., Marshall, A. P., (2008). Understanding descriptive statistics. Australian Critical
Care, 22 (2), 93-97. doi:10.1016/j.aucc.2008.11.003
Fraenkel, J. R. & Wallen, N. E. (2005). How to design and evaluate research in education with
PowerWeb. Hightstown, NJ: McGraw Hill Publishing Co.
Freire, P. (1970). Cultural action and conscientization. Harvard Education Review 40(3), 452-
477.
Freire, P. (2014). Pedagogy of hope: Reliving pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY:
Bloomsbury Publishing.
Freire, P. (2011). Pedagogy of the oppressed (30th anniversary edition). New York, NY:
Continuum.
Friedman, V. J., & Rogers, T. (2008). Action science: Linking causal theory and meaning making
in action research. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds), The SAGE handbook of action
research (pp. 252-265). London, UK: SAGE Publications, Ltd. doi:
10.4135/9781848607934.n25
Gardner, D. P. (1983). A nation at risk. Washington, D.C.: The National Commission on
Excellence in Education, US Department of Education.
Gaventa, J., & Cornwall, A. (2008). Power and knowledge. In Reason, P. & Bradbury, H. The
SAGE Handbook of Action Research (pp. 172-189). London, UK: SAGE Publications,
Ltd. doi: 10.4135/9781848607934.n17
HOPE AS STRATEGY 15
Gerard, J. M., & Booth, M. Z. (2015). Family and school influences on adolescents' adjustment:
The moderating role of youth hopefulness and aspirations for the future. Journal of
Adolescence, 44, 1-16. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2015.06.003
Glickman, C. D., Gordon, S. P., & Goss-Gordon, J. M. (2018). SuperVision and instructional
leadership: A developmental approach (10th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.
Gormley Jr, W. T., Gayer, T., Phillips, D., & Dawson, B. (2005). The effects of universal pre-K
on cognitive development. Developmental Psychology, 41(6), 872. doi: 10.1037/0012-
1649.41.6.872
Gray, D. E. (2013). Doing research in the real world. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications,
Ltd.
Graves, R. (1959). Collected poems 1959. London, UK: Cassell.
Gutek, G. L. (2004). Philosophical and ideological voices in education. New York, NY: Pearson.
Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (2015). Implementing change: Patterns, principles, and potholes (4th
ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Hattie, J. (2013). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to
achievement. New York, NY: Routledge.
Herr, K., & Anderson, G. L. (2015). The action research dissertation: A guide for students and
faculty (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Ltd.
Institute for Economics and Peace (2015). Global peace index 2015: Measuring peace, its causes
and its economic value. Retrieved on March 1, 2017 from
http://economicsandpeace.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Global-Peace-Index-Report-
2015_0.pdf
Ivankova, N. V. (2015). Mixed methods applications in action research: From methods to
community action. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Ltd.
Jordan, M. E., Kleinsasser, R. C., & Roe, M. F. (2014). Wicked Problems: Inescapable
Wickedity. Journal of Education for Teaching, 40(4), 415-430. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2014.929381
Kaeble, D., Glaze, L. E., Tsoutis, A., & Minton, T. (2015). Correctional populations in the United
States, 2014. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved on January 5,
2018 from http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cpus14.pdf
HOPE AS STRATEGY 16
Kanno, Y., & Kangas, S. E. (2014). “I’m Not Going to Be, Like, for the AP” English Language
Learners’ Limited Access to Advanced College-Preparatory Courses in High School.
American Educational Research Journal, 51(5), 848-878.
Kochhar, R. (2014). A global middle class is more promise than reality: from 2001 to 2011,
nearly 700 million step out of poverty, but most only barely. Washington, D.C.: Pew
Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2015/08/Global-Middle-
Class-Report_8-12-15-final.pd
Koro-Ljungberg, M., Yendol-Hoppey, D., Smith, J., & Hayes, S. (2009). (E)pistemological
awareness, instantiation of methods, and uninformed methodological ambiguity in
qualitative research projects. Educational Researcher, 38(9), 687-699. doi: I0.3102/00
13189X0935 1980
Kemmis, K. (2008). Critical theory and participatory action research. In Reason, P. & Bradbury,
H. The SAGE handbook of action research (pp. 121-138). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE
Publications, Ltd. doi: 10.4135/9781848607934.n14
Kuhn, T. S. (20120. The structure of scientific revolutions (4th ed.). Chicago, IL: The University
of Chicago Press.
Lance, C. E., Butts, M. M., & Michaels, L. C. (2006). The sources of four commonly reported
cutoff criteria what did they really say? Organizational Research Methods, 9(2), 202-220.
doi: 10.1177/1094428105284919
Lee, C. D. (2010). Soaring above the clouds, delving the ocean’s depths: Understanding the
ecologies of human learning and the challenge for education science. Educational
Researcher, 39(9), 643-655. doi: 10.3102/0013189X10392139
Lee, M., & Brown, S. D. (2002). The disposal of fear: Childhood, trauma, and complexity. In J.
Law &A. Mol (Eds), Complexities: Social studies of knowledge practices (pp. 258-279).
London, UK: Duke University Press.
Leithwood, K. A., & Hallinger, P. (Eds.). (2012). Second international handbook of educational
leadership and administration (Vol. 8). Springer Science & Business Media.
Levin, K., Cashore, B., Bernstein, S., & Auld, G. (2012). Overcoming the tragedy of super
wicked problems: Constraining our future selves to ameliorate global climate change.
Policy Sciences, 45(2), 123-152. doi: 10.1007/s11077-012-9151-0
Liao, M., & Hong, J. S. (2011). Child labor in the People’s Republic of China: An ecological
systems analysis. International Social Work, 54(4), 565-579.
doi:10.1177/0020872810382804
Liou, D. D., Martinez, A. N., & Rotheram-Fuller, E. (2016). “Don’t give up on me”: Critical
mentoring pedagogy for the classroom building students’ community cultural wealth.
HOPE AS STRATEGY 17
International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 29(1), 104-129. doi:
10.1080/09518398.2015.1017849
Lipsky, M. (1980) Street-level bureaucracy. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
Lopez, S. J. (2013). Making hope happen in the classroom. The Phi Delta Kappan, 95(2), 19-22.
Lopez, S. J. (2010). Making Ripples: How principals and teachers can spread hope throughout
our schools. The Phi Delta Kappan, 92(2), 40–44. doi: 10.1177/003172171009200210
Lopez, S. J., & Calderon, V. (2011). Gallup Student Poll: Measuring and promoting, what is right
with students, in S. I. Donaldson, M. Csikszentmihalyi, & J. Nakamura Applied positive
psychology: Improving everyday life, schools, work, health, and society, pp. 117-134.
New York, NY: Routledge.
MacEwan, A. (2015). Early childhood education, economic development, and the need for
universal programs: With a focus on New England. Economics, Management and
Financial Markets, 10(1), 11.
Main, K. (2009). “Mind the gap”: Cultural revitalization and educational change. School
Effectiveness and School Improvement, 20(4), 457-478.
Marshall G., & Jonker L. (2010). An introduction to inferential statistics. A review and practical
guide. Radiography, 17, e1-e6. doi:10.1016/j.radi.2009.12.006
Marques, S. C., Lopez, S. J., Fontaine, A. M., Coimbra, S., & Mitchell, J. (2015). How much
hope is enough? Levels of hope and students' psychological and school functioning.
Psychology in the Schools, 52(4), 325-334. doi: 10.1002/pits.21833
Maslow, A. H. (1999). Towards a psychology of being (3rd ed.). New York, NY: John Wiley &
Sons, Inc.
McCoy, H., & Bowen, E. A. (2015). Hope in the social environment: Factors affecting future
aspirations and school self-efficacy for youth in urban environments. Child and
Adolescent Social Work Journal, 32(2), 131-141. doi: 10.1007/s10560-014-0343-7
Meadows, D. H., & Wright, D. (2008). Thinking in systems: A primer. River Junction, VT:
Chelsea Green Publishing.
Mertens. (2015). Mixed methods and wicked problems. Journal of Mixed Methods Research,
9(1), 3-6. doi: 10.1177/1558689814562944
Mertler, C. A. (2014). Action research: Improving schools and empowering educators (4th ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Ltd.
Merton, R. K. (1948). The self-fulfilling prophecy. The Antioch Review, 8(2), 193-210.
HOPE AS STRATEGY 18
Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from person’s
responses and performances a scientific inquiry into scoring meaning. American
Psychologist, 50(9), 741-749.
Meyer, J., Francisco, R., & Soysal, Y. (1992). World expansion of mass education. Sociology of
Education, 65(2), 128-149.
Miller T., & Kim, A. (2016). Economic freedom in America. A supplement to the 2016 index of
economic freedom. Washington D.C.: The Heritage Foundation.
Miller T., Kim, A., DeMint, J., Roberts, J. M., Riley, B., & Whiting, T. (2016). 2016 Index of
economic freedom: Promoting economic opportunity and prosperity. Washington D.C.:
The Heritage Foundation.
Mills, G. E. (2011). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher (4th ed.). Boston, MA:
Pearson.
Musu-Gillette, L., de Brey, C., McFarland, J., Hussar, W., Sonnenberg, W., & Wilkinson-Flicker,
S. (2017). Status and trends in the education of racial and ethnic groups 2017. NCES
2017-051. National Center for Education Statistics.
National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects, (1978). The Belmont Report:
Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research-the
National Commission for the protection of human subjects of biomedical and behavioral
research. US Government Printing Office: Washington, D.C.
NASSP. (November 2015). Retrieved on January 5, 2018 from https://www.nassp.org/who-we-
are/board-of-directors/position-statements/competency-based-education
NASSP. (May 2014). Retrieved on January 5, 2018 from https://www.nassp.org/who-we-
are/board-of-directors/position-statements/raising-the-compulsory-school-attendance-age
Northouse, P. G. (2018). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Publications, Ltd.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
OECD (2012). Education at a glance 2012. OECD indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Retrieved on March 1, 2017 from https://www.oecd.org/edu/EAG%202012_e-
book_EN_200912.pdf
OECD (2013). PISA 2012 results in Focus: What 15-year-olds know and what they can do with
what they know. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved on March 1, 2017 from
https://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/pisa-2012-results-overview.pdf
HOPE AS STRATEGY 19
Oliver, D. G., Serovich, J. M., & Mason, T. L. (2005). Constraints and opportunities with
interview transcription: Towards reflection in qualitative research. Social forces, 84(2),
1273-1289. doi: 10.1353/sof.2006.0023
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Collins, K. M., & Frels, R. K. (2013). Foreword: Using Bronfenbrenner’s
ecological systems theory to frame quantitative, qualitative, and mixed research.
International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 7(1), 2-8.
Paat, Y. F. (2013). Working with Immigrant Children and Their Families: An Application of
Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Systems Theory. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social
Environment, 23(8), 954-966. doi: 10.1080/10911359.2013.800007
Palmer, P. J. (2010). The courage to teach: Exploring the inner landscape of a teacher's life.
New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Pascale, R. T., Sternin, J., & Sternin, M. (2010). The power of positive deviance: How unlikely
innovators solve the world's toughest problems. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
Plano Clark, V., & Creswell, J. (2015). Understanding research: A consumer's guide. New York,
NY: Merrill.
PowerSchool (2016). The basic user guide: PowerSchool Student Information Systems.
Retrieved on January 13, 2018 from
http://www.bssd.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_82120/File/EdTech/ps10x_the_basics_use
r_guide.pdf
Ravitz, J. (2010). Beyond changing culture in small high schools: Reform models and changing
instruction with project-based learning. Peabody Journal of Education, 85(3), 290-312.
Reardon, S., Grewal, E., Kalogrides, D., & Greenberg, E. (2012). Brown fades: The end of court‐
ordered School Desegregation and the resegregation of American public schools. Journal
of Policy Analysis and Management, 31(4), 876-904. doi: 10.1002/pam.21649
Reardon, S. F., & Owens, A. (2014). 60 years after Brown: Trends and consequences of school
segregation. Annual Review of Sociology, 40, 199-218. doi: 10.1146/annurev-soc-
071913-043152
Reason, P. & Bradbury, H. (2008). Introduction. In Reason, P. & Bradbury, H. The SAGE
handbook of action research (pp. 1-10). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Ltd.
doi: 10.4135/9781848607934
Regional Planning Association (2005). The Southern California Mega-region: A case study of
global gateway regions, America’s Third Century Strategy. New York, NY: Regional
Planning Association. Retrieved on January 5, 2018 from
http://www.america2050.org/2005/09/the-southern-california-mega-r.html
HOPE AS STRATEGY 20
Richardson, L., & St. Pierre, E. A. (2011) Writing: A method of inquiry. In Denzin, N., &
Lincoln, Y. (Ed.). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (pp. 959-978). Los
Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications, Ltd.
Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy
Sciences, 4(2), 155-169.
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Romme, A. G. (2004). Action Research, emancipation and Design Thinking. Journal of
Community & Applied Social Psychology, 14, 495-499. doi: 10.1002/casp.794
Rosiek, J., & Kinslow, K. (2015). Resegregation as curriculum: The meaning of the new racial
segregation in U. S. Public Schools. London, UK: Routledge.
Rossman, G. B. & Rallis, S. (2016, 3rd Ed) Learning in the Field: An Introduction to Qualitative
Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Ltd.
Saldaña, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE Publications, Ltd.
Scalco, M. D., Trucco, E. M., Coffman, D. L., & Colder, C. R. (2015). Selection and
socialization effects in early adolescent alcohol use: A propensity score analysis. Journal
of Abnormal Child Psychology, 43(6), 1131-1143. doi: 10.1007/s10802-014-9969-3
Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (1985). Optimism, coping, and health: Assessment and
implications of generalized outcome expectancies. Health Psychology, 4, 219-247.
Seligman, M. E. (2011). Learned optimism: How to change your mind and your life. New York,
NY: Vintage Books.
Sheehan, K., & Rall, K. (2011). Rediscovering hope: Building school cultures of hope for
children of poverty. Phi Delta Kappan, 93(3), 44-47.
Sirin, S. R. (2005). Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review of
research. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 417-453.
Sijtsma, A., Koller, M., Sauer, P. J., & Corpeleijn, E. (2015). Television, sleep, outdoor play and
BMI in young children: the GECKO Drenthe cohort. European Journal of Pediatrics,
174(5), 631-639. doi: 10.1007/s00431-014-2443-y
Smith, M. L., & Glass, G. V. (1987). Research and evaluation in education and the social
sciences. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Snyder, C. R. (2002). Hope theory: Rainbows in the mind. Psychological Inquiry, 13(4), 249–
275. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org./stable/1448867
HOPE AS STRATEGY 21
Snyder, C. R., Hoza, B., Pelham, W. E., Rapoff, M., Ware, L., Danovsky, M., & Stahl, K. J.
(1997). The development and validation of the Children’s Hope Scale. Journal of
Pediatric Psychology, 22(3), 399-421.
Snyder, C. R., Rand K. L., & Sigmon (2005). Hope Theory: A member of the positive
psychology family. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez Handbook of Positive Psychology (pp.
257-276). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Spillane, J. P., Reiser, B. J., & Reimer, T. (2002). Policy implementation and cognition:
Reframing and refocusing implementation research. Review of educational research,
72(3), 387-431.
Stark, P. & Noel, A. M. (2015). Trends in high school dropout and completion rates in the United
States: 1972-2012. National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education
Sciences, U.S. Department of Education: Washington, DC.
Stephens, M., Warren, L. K., Harner, A. L., & Owen, E. (2015). Comparative Indicators of
Education in the United States and Other G-20 Countries: 2015. NCES 2016-100.
Washington D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics.
Stone, D. (2012). Policy paradox: The art of political decision making (3rd ed.). New York, NY:
W. W. Norton & Company.
Trask-Tate, A. J., Cunningham, M., & Francois, S. (2014). The role of racial Socialization in
promoting the academic expectations of African American adolescents: Realities in a
post-Brown era. The Journal of Negro Education, 83(3), 281-299.
Tynan, J. J., Somers, C. L., Gleason, J. H., Markman, B. S., & Yoon, J. (2015). Goal oriented and
risk-taking behavior: The roles of multiple systems for Caucasian and Arab-American
adolescents. School Psychology International, 36(1), 54-76. doi:
10.1177/0143034314559870
Tudge, J. R., Mokrova, I., Hatfield, B. E., & Karnik, R. B. (2009). Uses and misuses of
Bronfenbrenner's bioecological theory of human development. Journal of Family Theory
& Review, 1(4), 198-210.
UC ’a-g’ Guide. (2015). Retrieved on October 30, 2015 from http://www.ucop.edu/agguide/a-g-
requirements/index.html
UDA (2018). Employee Handbook for the 2018-2019 School Year. Retrieved on August 20, 2018
from district records. Public Record.
UDA (2017a). Mid-Cycle Progress Report for the Accrediting Commission for Schools, Western
Association of Schools and Colleges. Retrieved on January 5, 2018 from district records.
Public Record.
HOPE AS STRATEGY 22
UDA (2017b). Posting for the principal/director of IDEATE High Academy. Retrieved on
January 5, 2018 from district records. Public Record.
UDA (2016). A Charter School Proposal and Petition (Revised February 2016). Retrieved on
January 5, 2018 from district records. Public Record.
UDA SIS (2018). Student information systems (SIS) records. Retrieved from PowerSchool with
the permission of the research site on January 5, 2018.
U.S. Census (2018a). QuickFacts: San Diego County, California; California. Retrieved on
January 7, 2018 from
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/sandiegocountycalifornia,CA/PST045216
U.S. Census (2018b). QuickFacts: San Diego city, California; San Diego County, California;
California. Retrieved on January 7, 2018 from
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/sandiegocitycalifornia,sandiegocountycalifo
rnia,CA/PST045216
Valle, M. F., Huebner, E. S., & Suldo, S. M. (2006). An analysis of hope as a psychological
strength. Journal of School Psychology, 44(5), 393-406. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2006.03.005
Wagner, T. (2010). The global achievement gap: Why even our best schools don’t teach the new
survival skills our children need and what we can do about it. New York, NY: Perseus
Books Group.
Webb, D. (2013). Pedagogies of hope. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 32(4), 397-414. doi:
10.1007/s11217-012-9336-1
Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. New York, NY:
Cambridge University Press.
Wicks, R. H., & Warren, R. (2014). Modeling political consumerism among young consumers:
An ecological systems approach. American Behavioral Scientist, 58(6), 738-754.
doi:10.1177/0002764213515991
Yosso, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community
cultural wealth. Race Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 69-91. doi:
10.1080/1361332052000341006
Zhao, Y. (2012). World class learners: Educating creative and entrepreneurial students.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
HOPE AS STRATEGY 23
APPENDIX A
TABLE OF SUBJECT AREA REQUIREMENTS
Table 2
Subject Area to Credits Comparison of IHA and UC ‘a-g’
Subject Area
School System
University System
Social Sciences
4
4
English
8
8
Mathematics
8+
6 (8*)
Science
4
4 (6*)
Foreign Language
4
4 (6*)
College Prep Electives
8-12
2
Notes: + = area where university requirements are exceeded; * = areas where university requirements has a
higher preferred amount of course credits and this preference is not met by school system.
HOPE AS STRATEGY 24
APPENDIX B
FIGURE OF NESTED DIAGRAM OF THE FIVE EST ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS
Chronosystem
Macrosystem
Exosystem
Mesosystem
Microsystem
The
Individual
HOPE AS STRATEGY 25
APPENDIX C
FIGURE OF THE INTERACTIONS OF GOAL, PATHWAY, AND AGENCY IN HT
Goals
Positive Goals
Maintenance Goals
Negative Goals
Agency
Personal Motivation
External Supports
Interactions with Pathway
Pathway
Knowing Options
Planning Time
Defining Tasks
HOPE AS STRATEGY 26
APPENDIX D
TABLE OF MY THEORETICAL EST AND HT MODEL
Proximal
Process
Environmental
System
Goal
Formation
Pathway/Agency
Thinking
Lowest
Chronosystem
K-12 Education
High School Graduation
Graduating Knowing What Is
Next, Belief in a Better Future
Low
Macrosystem
Community
Influence
College and/or Career
Knowing the Difference,
Commitment to Positive Goal
Attainment
Medium
Exosystem
District Systems
District Graduation
Requirements, School
Expectations
Course of Study,
Graduation Rates
High
Mesosystem
School
Unit Accrual,
Grade Point Average
Course Choice,
Commitment to School Work
Highest
Microsystem
Classes
High Scores for
Assignments
Skills to Complete
Assignments, Motivation to Do
Well
HOPE AS STRATEGY 27
APPENDIX E
SCHOOL COMMUNITY SURVEY ON
COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS KNOWLEDGE
Q1: How many years of each of the following subject do you need to take to meet the minimum
University of California (for example, schools such as UC San Diego and UC Berkeley) and/or
California State University (for example, schools such as San Diego State University or
California State University San Marcos) systems entrance requirements? (select one box for each
subject)
Subjects
1
Year
2
Years
3
Years
4
Years
History/Social Sciences
English
Mathematics
Laboratory Science
Language other than English
Visual & Performing Arts
College Prep Elective(s)
Q2: What three subjects does the University of California system say they would prefer students
to take an extra year of? (select three)
History/Social Sciences English Mathematics
Laboratory Science Foreign Language Visual & Performing Arts
College Prep Elective(s)
Q3: The University of California system must approve courses before they will count for their
entrance requirements in which of the following subject areas? (select all that are true)
History/Social Sciences English Mathematics
Laboratory Science Foreign Language Visual & Performing Arts
College Prep Elective(s)
Q4: What is the minimum grade point average California State University system (for example,
schools such as San Diego State University or California State University San Marcos) accepts
as passing? (select one)
A B C D
HOPE AS STRATEGY 28
Q5: What is the minimum grade point average for University of California (for example, schools
such as UC San Diego and UC Berkeley) system accepts as passing? (select one):
A B C D
Q6: The SAT and ACT are commonly administered tests that are required by: (select all that are
true)
The University of California The California State University System
Community Colleges in California All Private Colleges
All Out of State Universities
Q7: What students may qualify for scholarships? (select one)
Students that qualify for free or reduced-price lunch
Students that come from a particular racial or ethnic background
Students who are the first in their family to attend college
Students whose parents belong to a particular occupation
It depends on the scholarship
Q8: What students may qualify for federal financial aid? (select one)
Students that qualify for free or reduced-price lunch
Students that come from a particular racial or ethnic background
Students who are the first in their family to attend college
Students whose parents belong to a particular occupation
Nearly all students qualify for some form of federal financial aid
Q9: Articulation is a program where students can:(select one)
Receive free college credit while taking a course in high school
Speak to college counselors about college
Can attend a college class for free without receiving credit
Talk with college students about what college is like
Make visits to colleges
Q10: An Advanced Placement (AP) exam can lead to free college credit if the student scores at
what level(s): (select all that are true)
1 2 3 4 5
HOPE AS STRATEGY 29
Q11: In California, how many years of each of these subjects do you typically need to take to
graduate from high school? (select one box for each subject)
Subject
1
Year
2
Years
3
Years
4
Years
History/Social Sciences
English
Mathematics
Science
Visual & Performing Arts, Foreign Language, or
Career Technical Education
Q12: An internship for a high school student is defined as being:(select one)
An industry/career-based experience of more than 30 hours where students learn about all
aspects of the industry/career
The opportunity to observe the workplace of one or more people for less than 30 hours
An offer of employment based upon a period of unpaid work in order to learn a job
A chance for a student to learn a job so that an employer can reduce their overhead cost
An opportunity for a student to earn core curriculum course credit by demonstrating their
knowledge in a workplace setting
Q13: Students that take career readiness and/or technical education courses are:(select one)
Less likely to graduate from high school
Less likely to go to college
Less likely to complete college
More likely to go into the military
More likely to graduate high school and complete college
Q14: The level of reading required for today’s workforce is:(select one)
Considered much lower than it was 20 years ago
Considered slightly lower than it was 20 years ago
Considered about the same as it was 20 years ago
Considered slightly higher than it was 20 years ago
Considered much higher than it was 20 years ago
HOPE AS STRATEGY 30
Q15: For the career and job market, a certification is:(select one)
An industry recognized competency issued by an industry approved organization or
accredited university
A document issued by a high school to indicate mastery of a subject
An award given by a high school to demonstrate academic achievement
A certificate given by an employer to indicate the successful completion of an internship
or job shadow
None of these are certifications
Background and Demographic information
Gender identification: (select one)
Female Male Other Decline to State
Age group (select one):
18-25 26-35 36-45 46-55
56-65 66+ Decline to State
Racial/Ethnic: (select one)
African American/Black
American Indian or Alaska Native
Asian
Filipino
Hispanic or Latina/o
Pacific Islander or Hawaiian
White
Two or more races/ethnicities
Decline to State
What is the primary language spoken at your home:
English Spanish Other: ____________
HOPE AS STRATEGY 31
Please select your highest educational attainment level:(select one)
Less than high school graduate
High school graduate or equivalent
Some college or associate’s degree
Bachelor’s degree
Graduate or professional degree
Decline to State
What was your total household income before taxes during the past 12 months? (select one)
Less than $25,000 $25,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999 $50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999 $100,000 to $149,999
$150,000 to $199,999 $200,000 or more
Decline to State
Tell us about involvement with this school. (select one)
Official Advisor or Board Member
Faculty/Staff Member
Parent/Guardian
How many years have you worked at or with high schools in a paid position? (select one)
I have not worked at or with high schools in a paid position
Less than 1 year
1-4 years
5-10 years
11-15 years
15+ years
HOPE AS STRATEGY 32
APPENDIX F
iCCR STUDENT SURVEY
GRADUATE PROFILE AND COLLEGE READINESS
Sub-Construct 1: Graduate Profile
Q1: How many years of each of the following subject do you need to take to meet the minimum
graduation requirements? (select one box for each subject)
Subjects
1
Year
2
Years
3
Years
4
Years
History/Social Sciences
English
Mathematics
Laboratory Science
Language other than English
Visual & Performing Arts
College Prep Elective(s)
Q2: For the career and job market, a certification is:(select one)
An industry recognized competency issued by an industry approved organization or
accredited university
A document issued by a high school to indicate mastery of a subject
An award given by a high school to demonstrate academic achievement
A certificate given by an employer to indicate the successful completion of an internship
or job shadow
None of these are certifications
Q3: What is the minimum passing grade for the CSU system (for example, schools such as San
Diego State University or California State University San Marcos), UC system (for example,
schools such as UC San Diego and UC Berkeley), and our school? (select one)
A B C D
HOPE AS STRATEGY 33
Sub-Construct 2: College Readiness
Q4: What three subjects does the UC system say they would prefer students to take an extra year
of? (select three)
Social Sciences English Mathematics
Science Foreign Language College Prep Electives
Q5: The UC system must approve courses before they will count for their entrance requirements
in which of the following subject areas? (select all that are true)
Social Sciences English Mathematics
Science Foreign Language College Prep Electives
Q5: What is the minimum grade point average for the UC system (for example, schools such as
UC San Diego and UC Berkeley) system accepts as passing? (select one):
A B C D
Q6: The SAT and ACT are commonly administered tests that are required by: (select all that are
true):
The University of California The California State University System
Community Colleges in California All Private Colleges
All Out of State Universities
Q7: What students may qualify for federal financial aid? (select one)
Students that need money for school
Students that have special needs
Students who are the first in their family to attend college
Students who academically do well in school
Nearly all students qualify for some form of federal financial aid
Q8: Articulation is a program where students can:(select one)
Receive free college credit while taking a course in high school
Speak to college counselors about college
Can attend a college class for free without receiving credit
Talk with college students about what college is like
Make visits to colleges
HOPE AS STRATEGY 34
Background and Demographic information
Gender identification: (select one)
Female Male Other Would prefer not to respond
Age group (select one):
14 15 16 17
Racial/Ethnic: (select one)
African American/Black
American Indian or Alaska Native
Asian
Filipino
Hispanic or Latina/o
Pacific Islander or Hawaiian
White
Two or more races/ethnicities
Decline to State
What kind of grades did you get on your last report card: (select one)
Straight A’s
A’s and B’s
A’s, B’s, and C’s
Mostly B’s and C’s
I am all over the place on grades
I have some work to do
I consider myself one of the best students in this school: (select one)
Strongly Agree
Agree
Slightly Agree
Slightly Disagree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
HOPE AS STRATEGY 35
APPENDIX G
IN-SCHOOL STUDENT HOPE SCALE
Part 1 of 4
Goals are about where you want to be in the future. The following six questions are about goals
for school, graduation, and your life. There are no right or wrong answers, select the one that
best matches your beliefs.
1. I plan to graduate from high school.
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Slightly
Agree
Slightly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
2. I have defined for myself what it means to be successful in life.
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Slightly
Agree
Slightly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
3. I plan to get good grades.
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Slightly
Agree
Slightly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
4. I plan to take an advanced placement course during high school.
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Slightly
Agree
Slightly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
5. I plan to go to college after I graduate high school.
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Slightly
Agree
Slightly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
6. I have an adult at school that talks to me about my future
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Slightly
Agree
Slightly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
HOPE AS STRATEGY 36
Part 2 of 4
Motivation is about our feelings, supports, and finding a reason to reach our goals. The following
six questions are about motivation. There are no right or wrong answers, select the one that best
matches your beliefs.
1. With hard work, I can achieve my goals.
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Slightly
Agree
Slightly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
2. Achieving my future goals is more important than having fun.
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Slightly
Agree
Slightly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
3. I can think of several ways to achieve my goals
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Slightly
Agree
Slightly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
4. I think I can do well in school.
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Slightly
Agree
Slightly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
5. Adults at school talk about what it takes to be a success in life.
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Slightly
Agree
Slightly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
6. Adults at school tell me that they know I can achieve my goals.
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Slightly
Agree
Slightly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
HOPE AS STRATEGY 37
Part 3 of 4
Plans are about knowing the steps we need to take to achieve your goals. The following six
questions are about where you may be in developing your plans. There are no right or wrong
answers, select the one that best matches your beliefs.
1. I know what I need to do to get good grades on my class assignments.
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Slightly
Agree
Slightly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
2. I know what I need to do to get good grades on my report cards.
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Slightly
Agree
Slightly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
3. I know what courses I need to take to graduate from high school.
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Slightly
Agree
Slightly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
4. I know what the University of California (UC ‘a-g’) requirements are.
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Slightly
Agree
Slightly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
5. I have worked with an adult at school on a plan to be a success in life.
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Slightly
Agree
Slightly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
6. Adults at school talk to me about how to achieve my goals.
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Slightly
Agree
Slightly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
HOPE AS STRATEGY 38
Part 4 of 4
Knowing some things about you will help us in our study. The following five questions will help
us to get know more about you.
1. Gender identification
Female
Male
Other
Would prefer
not to respond
2. What is your age
14
15
16
17
3. Race/Ethnicity
African
American or
Black
American
Indian or
Alaska
Native
Asian
Filipino
Hispanic of
Latina/o
Pacific
Islander or
Hawaiian
White
Two or
more races/
ethnicities
Would
prefer
not to
respond
4. What kind of grades did you get on your last report card
Straight
A’s
A’s
and B’s
A’s, B’s,
and C’s
Mostly B’s
and C’s
I am all
over the
place
on grades
I have some
work to do
5. I consider myself one of the best students in this class
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Slightly
Agree
Slightly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
HOPE AS STRATEGY 39
APPENDIX H
SCHOOL SYSTEM STUDENT SURVEY INSTRUMENT
Sub-construct Student Perceptions of Self
When I am at school, I feel . . .
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
1. I belong.
2. I am safe.
3. There are expectations for student
behavior.
4. I am a good student.
5. I can be a better student.
6. I learn important things that will
help me when I grow up.
7. I understand what is expected to
get good grades.
Sub-construct of School/Community Supports
When I am at school, I feel . . .
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
1. My teacher(s) care(s) about me.
2. My teacher(s) think(s) I will be
successful.
3. My teachers(s) listens to my ideas
4. My principal cares about me.
5. My teacher(s) believe(s) I can learn.
6. My teacher(s) and principal have
high expectations for me.
7. My family believes I can do well in
school.
HOPE AS STRATEGY 40
APPENDIX I
PERMISSION TO USE THE LEVELS OF USE BRANCHING INTERVIEW MAP
HOPE AS STRATEGY 41
APPENDIX J
LEVELS OF USE BRANCHING INTERVIEW MAP
HALL, GENE E.; HORD, SHIRLEY M., IMPLEMENTING CHANGE: PATTERNS,
PRINCIPLES, AND POTHOLES, 4th, ©2015.
Reprinted by permission of Pearson Education, Inc., New York, NY.
HOPE AS STRATEGY 42
APPENDIX K
ADVISORY TEACHER INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
1. Tell me about how you feel the implementation of iCCR has influenced students.
2. To what extent do you believe that students now understand our graduation requirements?
Please explain.
3. Do you believe that all students can meet or exceed our graduation requirements? Please
explain why or why not.
4. To what extent do you believe that students now understand UC “a-g” requirements?
Please explain.
5. Do you believe that all students understand how to use the iCCR?
6. Do you believe that the implementation of iCCR has supported students in setting future
goals? Please explain.
7. Do you believe that the implementation of iCCR has supported students understanding
the steps they need to take to meet our expectations? Please explain.
8. What next steps do you think we should take to increase student expectations around
college and career readiness?
HOPE AS STRATEGY 43
APPENDIX L
STUDENT INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
1. Now that you have completed the iCCR, do you feel you better understand what you need
to do to graduate? Please explain.
2. Who have you talked to about graduating from high school?
3. What do you think your teachers think about you and what you can achieve in academic
classes?
4. Who do you go to when you feel you cannot reach your goals?
5. Do you know if your parents have taken the iCCR parent workshops? If so, do you talk
about the iCCR at home? Do you talk about the future?
6. In what ways do you think the iCCR could be improved?
HOPE AS STRATEGY 44
APPENDIX M
SEMI-STRUCTURED PARENT FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
1. How might our new understandings guide our work and responsibility in student goal
formation?
2. How might our new understandings guide our work and responsibility in pathway
development and formation?
3. How might our new understandings guide our work and responsibility in developing
agency thinking and replenishment?
HOPE AS STRATEGY 45
APPENDIX N
TABLE OF SOURCES FOR TRIANGULATED DATA
AND ANALYSES ALIGNED WITH THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS
Sources and Analysis
Research Questions
SIS
CCR
GCR
SHS
SSS
LoU
TI
SI
PI
1. How, and to what extent, will the
implementation of the iCCR
parent/community development plans
increase parent/community understanding
of what students need to accomplish in
order to be college and career ready?
GTA
DSA
-
-
-
-
-
-
GTA
2. How, and to what extent, will the
implementation of iCCR support the
school site in setting positive goals for
students?
DSA
GTA
DSA
DSA
DSA
DSA
-
GTA
GTA
-
3: How, and to what extent, will the
implementation of the iCCR student
pathway and agency plan increase
students’ understanding of what they
need to accomplish to be college and
career ready?
GTA
DSA
DSA
DSA
-
-
GTA
GTA
-
4. How, and to what extent, will the
implementation level of iCCR support
student levels of hope for their future?
DSA
GTA
DSA
-
DSA
-
OWA
GTA
GTA
-
Notes. Sources of Triangulated Data: SIS = Student Information Systems Data; CCR = School Community Survey
on College and Career Readiness; GCR = The iCCR Student Survey on Graduation and College Readiness; SHS =
In-School Student Hope Survey; SSS = School system student survey; LoU = Level of Use; TI = Teacher
Interviews; SI = Student Interviews; and PI = Parent Interviews. Triangulated Data Analysis: DSA = Descriptive
Statistical Analysis, GTA = Grounded Theory Analysis; OWA = One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA).
HOPE AS STRATEGY 46
APPENDIX O
QUALITATIVE SOURCES WORD COUNTS
Description of Qualitative Sources
Data Source
Word Count
Student Interviews
20,697
Teacher Interviews
14,552
Parent Interviews
25,573
Weekly Reflections
14,856
Researcher Journal Notes
5,218
School System Charter Renewal
39,051
Additional Artifact Data (Policies, Site Documents)
13,698
Total Word Count
144,040
Notes. Additional Artifact Data = Student Parent Handbook 2017-2018, Employee Handbook 2017-2018, and
school system policies on file regarding graduation requirements, math placement, student discipline, and
community/school relations.
Interview Memos and Word Counts
Data Source
Word Count
Student Interview Memos
21,175
Teacher Interviews Memos
16,032
Parent Interview Memos
24,981
Total Word Count
62,188
HOPE AS STRATEGY 47
APPENDIX P
SAMPLE OF QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS CONDUCTED
Summary of Theoretical Framework Analysis of all Open Gerund Code
Goal
Formation
Pathway
Thinking
Agency
Thinking
Proximal Process
Environmental System
P
M
N
P
M
N
P
M
N
Lowest
Chronosystem
157
17
12
22
6
-
3
2
3
Low
Macrosystem
17
6
6
10
13
6
27
27
24
Medium
Exosystem
28
5
2
20
16
7
29
7
19
High
Mesosystem
65
22
10
95
49
22
180
33
40
Highest
Microsystem
30
11
8
82
44
25
121
57
59
Notes. P = Positive, M = Maintenance, N = Negative.
Figure. Zoomed-out word cloud of open gerund codes from student interviews.
HOPE AS STRATEGY 48
APPENDIX Q
STUDENT INTERVIEWS CHARECTERISTICS AND ASSERTIONS
Characteristics of Student Interview Participants
Student
Age
Grade
Gender
Identification
Race/
Ethnicity
FRPL
Home
Language
GPA
Jenny
14
9
F
White
Y
English
1.33
Opal
15
9
F
Filipino
N
English
3.33
Juan
14
9
M
Hispanic
N
Spanish
3.40
Michael
14
9
M
Hispanic
N
Spanish
3.73
Tobi
15
10
M
White
N
English
2.61
Ron
16
10
M
White
N
English
4.00
Ginger
15
10
F
White
N
English
3.33
Keith
15
10
M
Hispanic
Y
English
2.00
Notes. FRPL = Free or Reduced-Price Meals, GPA = end of year cumulative Grade Point Average, F = identifies a
female, M = identifies as male, Y = yes, N = no. Student names are pseudonyms.
Student Assertion to Axial Code Alignment
Assertion
Axial Codes
Student assertion 1. Students
feel like most teachers believe
that they can be successful in
high school and should go on to
college.
becoming responsible, believing in self, caring for others,
communicating needs, imagining the future, knowing
yourself, reflecting, and setting goals
Student assertion 2. Students
thought that the iCCR was
meaningful and improved their
understanding of college and
career readiness.
being accountable, caring for others, communicating needs,
creating community, developing strategies, facing
challenges, learning a pathway, replenishing agency, and
setting goals
Student assertion 3. Students
felt that the information from
iCCR should be presented earlier
and that their new knowledge
left some students feeling off
track.
avoiding conflict, communicating needs, facing challenges,
imagining the future, knowing yourself, reflecting, seeking
alternatives, and sharing goals.
HOPE AS STRATEGY 49
APPENDIX R
ADVISORY TEACHER INTERVIEWS CHARECTERISTICS AND ASSERTIONS
Characteristics of Teacher Interview Participants
Advisory
Teacher
Years
Teaching
Education
Level
Gender
Identification
Race/
Ethnicity
UC
‘a-g’
GCA
Lance
10-15
Masters Plus
M
White
N
N
Nellie
1-5
Masters Plus
F
White
N
N
Megan
1-5
Bachelors
F
White
N
N
Jessie
10-15
Masters Plus
F
White
N
N
Notes. UC ‘a-g’ = Attended a University of California or California State University systems or other university that
had ‘a-g’ requirements, GCA = Graduated from a high school within California. Advisory teacher names are
pseudonyms.
Teacher Assertion to Axial Code Alignment
Assertion
Axial Codes
Teacher assertion 1. The iCCR program
provided new information for students that
facilitated discussions about goal setting,
pathway development, and engaging in
agency thinking.
creating community, developing strategies,
identifying student needs, knowing yourself,
learning a pathway, learning about failure,
replenish agency, setting goals, and using an
advisory strategy.
Teacher assertion 2. There was a feeling
that students have a false sense of hope in
the future and that they do not fully trust
teachers about the need for college.
addressing social issues, creating community,
having the system fail students, imagining the
future, identifying student needs, lacking trust,
and seeking to make a difference
Teacher assertion 3. The information in the
iCCR program should be presented to
students and parents earlier in their
academic career.
addressing social issues, becoming responsible,
developing professional practice, developing
systems, imagining the future, and setting goals.
HOPE AS STRATEGY 50
APPENDIX S
PARENT INTERVIEWS CHARECTERISTICS AND ASSERTIONS
Characteristics of Parent Workshop Interview Participants
Parent
Age
Education Level
Gender
Race/
Ethnicity
UC
‘a-g’
GCA
Jesus
45-50
Associate’s/Technical
M
Hispanic/Latino
N
N
Maria
45-50
Bachelors
F
Hispanic/Latina
N
N
Alan
45-50
Masters
M
Filipino
Y
Y
Ella
55-60
Masters
F
White
N
N
Liz
50-55
Masters
F
White
N
N
Ann
45-50
Bachelors
F
African American
Y
N
Notes. UC ‘a-g’ = Attended a University of California or California State University systems or other university that
had ‘a-g’ requirements, GCA = Graduated from a high school within California. Parent names are pseudonyms.
Parent Assertion to Axial Code Alignment
Assertion
Axial Codes
Parent assertion 1. College and career
readiness for students today is more
complex and different than the parents’
background and experiences.
developing skills, exploring the future, knowing
yourself, learning a pathway, learning from
failure, and seeking constancy
Parent assertion 2. The implementation of
the iCCR parent workshops increased
parental knowledge of what needs to be
done to position their students for college
and career readiness.
becoming responsible, being future oriented,
developing skills, growing up, having
expectations, and setting goals
Parent assertion 3. More parents need to be
involved in their students’ academic and
personal lives.
addressing social issues, being privilege,
building community, communicating,
developing systems, knowing your family, and
wanting more for children
HOPE AS STRATEGY 51
APPENDIX T
PARENT AND STUDENT CHARECTERISTICS AND PRE AND
POST INNOVATION SURVEY RRESPONSES
iCCR Parent Workshop Participant Characteristics (n = 10)
Characteristic
Frequency
Valid Percentage
Gender Identification
Female
6
60
Male
4
40
Age Grouping
36-45
1
10
46-55
8
80
56-65
1
0
Racial/Ethnic
African American/Black
2
20
Filipino
1
10
Hispanic or Latina/o
2
20
White
5
50
Primary Home Language
English
8
80
Spanish
2
20
Educational Attainment Level
Some College or Associate’s Degree
1
10
Bachelor’s Degree
4
40
Graduate of Professional Degree
5
50
School Involvement
Advisor or Board Member
1
10
Parent/Guardian
9
90
Years Working with High School
I have not worked at a high school
10
100
iCCR Parent Workshop Pre and Post Exams by Points and Percentages
Pre
Post
Difference
Construct
Average
Points
%
Average
Points
%
Average
Points
%
College Readiness
16.3
60.4
22.2
82.2
5.9
21.8
Career Readiness
3.7
41.1
7.4
82.2
3.7
41.1
Full Exam
20
55.6
29.6
82.2
19.6
26.6
Note: % = Percentage; Pre = Pre-Innovation; and Post = Post-Innovation
HOPE AS STRATEGY 52
iCCR Student Participant Characteristics
Characteristic
Frequency
Valid Percentage
Gender Identification
Decline to State
3
6.1
Female
19
38.8
Male
27
55.1
Age Grouping
14
10
20.4
15
29
59.2
16
10
20.4
Grade Level
9
29
59.2
65+
20
40.8
Racial/Ethnic
African American/Black
3
6.1
Asian
2
4.1
Hispanic or Latina/o
20
40.8
White
10
20.4
Two or more races/ethnicities
13
26.5
Decline to state
1
2.0
What kind of grades did you get on your last report card
Straight A’s
8
16.3
A’s and B’s
7
14.3
A’s, B’s, and C’s
1
2.0
I am all over the place on grades
23
46.9
I have some work to do
6
12.2
I consider myself one of the best students in advisory class
Strongly Agree
7
14.3
Agree
12
24.5
Slightly Agree
9
18.4
Slightly Disagree
5
10.2
Disagree
5
10.2
Strongly Disagree
5
10.2
iCCR Student Participant Pre and Post Exams by Points and Percentage
Pre
Post
Difference
Construct
Average
Points
%
Average
Points
%
Average
Points
%
College Readiness
6.5
46.5
7.9
56.7
1.4
10.2
Graduate Profile
3.3
36.7
4.2
46.5
0.9
9.8
Full Exam
9.8
42.7
12.1
52.7
2.3
10.0
Note: % = Percentage; Pre = Pre-Innovation; and Post = Post-Innovation.
HOPE AS STRATEGY 53
APPENDIX U
STUDENT RESULTS ON THE STUDENT HOPE SCALE
Pre and Post-Innovation SHS Report of Sub-Construct Goal by Percentage
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Slightly
Agree
Slightly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Item
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Q1: Graduate
57.1
67.3
38.8
26.5
41.0
6.1
-
-
-
-
-
-
Q2: Define Life
Success
26.5
30.6
34.7
32.7
22.4
26.5
8.2
8.2
8.2
-
-
2.0
Q3: Get Good
Grades
51.0
49.0
36.7
34.7
6.1
14.3
4.1
-
2.0
2.0
-
-
Q4: Take AP
Test/Course
30.6
22.4
16.3
22.4
30.6
30.6
12.2
16.3
6.1
8.2
4.1
-
Q5: Go to College
53.1
49.0
20.4
24.5
20.4
20.4
6.1
6.1
-
-
-
-
Q6: Talks About
Future
26.5
30.6
24.5
26.5
18.4
22.4
6.1
2.0
22.4
14.3
2.0
4.1
Note: Items were reported on a 6-point Likert scale where strongly agree = 6, agree = 5, slightly disagree = 3,
disagree = 2, and strongly disagree = 1. This report represents percentages from respondents. Pre = Pre-Innovation
and Post = Post-Innovation.
Pre and Post-Innovation SHS Frequency Report of Sub-Construct Agency Thinking
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Slightly
Agree
Slightly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Item
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Q1: Achieve My
Goals
53.1
49.0
32.7
44.9
8.2
4.1
-
2.0
4.1
-
-
-
Q2: Focus on
Future
16.3
22.4
36.7
28.6
32.7
28.6
8.2
4.1
8.2
6.1
-
10.2
Q3: Ways to
Achieve
28.6
32.7
28.6
40.8
24.5
18.4
4.1
-
-
8.2
-
-
Q4: Doing Well in
School
12.2
10.2
16.3
16.3
24.5
28.6
12.2
18.4
14.3
16.3
12.2
10.2
Q5: Talks about
Life Success with
Teacher
24.5
24.5
36.7
24.5
24.5
22.4
6.1
16.3
6.1
12.3
2.0
-
Q6: Hears from
Teacher that they
can be a success
26.5
24.5
34.7
36.7
28.6
16.3
6.1
8.2
4.1
10.2
-
4.1
Note: Items were reported on a 6-point Likert scale where strongly agree = 6, agree = 5, slightly disagree = 3,
disagree = 2, and strongly disagree = 1. This report represents percentages from respondents. Pre = Pre-Innovation
and Post = Post-Innovation.
HOPE AS STRATEGY 54
Pre and Post-Innovation SHS Report of Sub-Construct Pathway
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Slightly
Agree
Slightly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Item
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Q1: Knows How to Get
Good Grades
36.7
30.6
38.8
51.0
18.4
14.3
4.1
2.0
-
2.0
2.0
-
Q2: Knows About Report
Card
36.7
30.6
46.9
51.0
10.2
14.3
4.1
4.1
-
-
2.0
-
Q3: Knows What Courses
to Take
30.6
32.7
18.4
30.6
20.4
26.5
18.4
4.1
8.2
2.0
4.1
4.1
Q4: Knows UC ‘a-g’
8.2
18.4
12.2
28.6
22.4
28.6
28.6
8.2
20.4
10.2
8.2
6.1
Q5: Worked with Teacher
on Life Plan
4.1
10.2
14.3
32.7
20.4
26.5
18.4
14.3
32.7
12.2
10.2
4.1
Q6: Talks with Teacher
About Goals
16.3
22.4
22.4
28.6
38.8
18.4
10.2
18.4
8.2
8.2
4.1
4.1
Note: Items were reported on a 6-point Likert scale where strongly agree = 6, agree = 5, slightly disagree = 3,
disagree = 2, and strongly disagree = 1. This report represents percentages from respondents. Pre = Pre-Innovation
and Post = Post-Innovation.
Pre and Post-Innovation SHS Descriptive Table of Central Tendency
M
Mdn
SD
Sub-Construct
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Goals
4.88
4.94
5.00
5.00
.75
.65
Agency
4.55
4.50
4.50
4.50
.71
.78
Pathway
4.17
4.56
4.33
4.67
.89
.86
Note. Items were reported on a 6-point Likert scale where strongly agree = 6, agree = 5, slightly disagree = 3,
disagree = 2, and strongly disagree = 1. M = Mean, Mdn = Median, SD = Standard Deviation, Pre = Pre-Innovation,
and Post = Post-Innovation.
HOPE AS STRATEGY 55
APPENDIX V
STUDENT RESULTS ON THE SCHOOL SYSTEM SURVEY
Pre and Post-Innovation Frequency Report of Student Perceptions of Self
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Item
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Q1: I belong
16.3
22.4
49.0
46.9
30.6
24.5
4.1
6.1
Q2: I am safe
14.3
18.4
44.9
49.0
28.6
28.6
12.2
4.1
Q3: Expectations for student behavior
20.4
30.6
55.1
59.2
20.4
10.2
4.1
-
Q4: I am a good student
27.1
20.4
39.6
46.9
22.9
24.5
10.4
8.2
Q5: I can be a better student
61.2
57.1
32.7
36.7
4.1
4.1
2.0
2.0
Q6: Learning important things
6.3
20.4
56.3
46.9
25.0
24.5
12.5
8.2
Q7: Getting good grades
41.7
32.7
39.6
55.1
16.7
12.2
2.1
-
Note. Items were reported on a 4-point Likert scale where strongly agree = 4, agree = 3, disagree = 2, and strongly
disagree = 1. Pre = Pre-Innovation and Post = Post-Innovation.
Pre and Post-Innovation Frequency Report of School/Community Support
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Item
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Q1: My teacher cares about me
32.7
38.8
53.1
49.0
10.2
8.2
4.1
4.1
Q2: My teacher thinks I will be successful
32.7
38.8
51.0
44.9
8.2
12.2
8.2
4.1
Q3: My teacher listens to my ideas
20.8
24.5
52.1
49.0
22.9
24.5
4.2
2.0
Q4: My principal cares about me
32.7
32.7
51.0
51.0
10.2
12.2
6.1
4.1
Q5: My teacher believes I can learn
38.8
30.6
51.0
51.0
6.1
16.3
4.1
2.0
Q6: Teachers/Principal expectations
27.1
36.7
58.3
44.9
10.4
14.3
4.2
4.1
Q7: My family believes in me
54.2
49.0
35.4
42.9
6.3
4.1
4.2
4.1
Note. Items were reported on a 4-point Likert scale where strongly agree = 4, agree = 3, disagree = 2, and strongly
disagree = 1. Pre = Pre-Innovation and Post = Post-Innovation.
Post-Innovation School Survey Descriptive Statistics
M
Mdn
SD
Sub-Construct
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Student Perceptions of Self
2.92
3.02
3.00
3.00
.51
.52
School/Community Supports
3.13
3.16
3.14
3.14
.60
.60
Note. Items were reported on a 4-point Likert scale where strongly agree = 4, agree = 3, disagree = 2, and strongly
disagree = 1. M = Mean; Mdn = median; SD = Standard Deviation; Pre = Pre-Innovation; and Post = Post-
Innovation.
HOPE AS STRATEGY 56
APPENDIX W
LEVELS OF USE PARTICIPANTS, RATINGS, AND ANOVA
Summary of Levels of Use Interview Participants
Advisory Teacher
Years Teaching
Education Level
Gender
Race/
Ethnicity
UC
‘a-g’
GCA
Betty
10-15
Masters Plus
F
White
N
N
Lance
10-15
Masters Plus
M
White
N
N
Nellie
1-5
Masters Plus
F
White
N
Y
Megan
1-5
Bachelors
F
White
N
N
Jessie
10-15
Masters Plus
F
White
Y
N
Notes. UC ‘a-g’ = Attended a University of California or California State University systems or other university that
had ‘a-g’ requirements, GCA = Graduated from a high school within California.
Advisory Teachers Levels of Use Rating
Teacher
Sample Evidence of Level of Use
Level
of Use
Jessie
“I feel like I was relying on the schedule that we all discussed, and
then went off from it on my own for there . . .”
Renewal
Megan
“I mean it went from not doing any of that, to doing most of that. I
feel like I’m coordinating with Nellie . . .”
Integration
Lance
“I might go to another teacher for guidance or see what formats they
are using so that I can copy or create my own . . .”
Refinement
Nellie
“Yes, we’re working with the document that we had that we agreed
on, and then we also coordinated . . .”
Refinement
Betty
“I try to keep up with what we are doing and follow the weekly
schedule. However, I don’t know about internships . . .”
Mechanical
Use
Notes. Levels of Use from lowest to highest are Nonusers: Nonuse, Orientation, Preparation; Users: Mechanical
use, Routine, Refinement, Integration, and Renewal.
ANOVA of Levels of Use on Student Hope Levels
Source of Variation
SS
df
MS
F
P-value
F crit
Between Groups
1142.256
3
380.752
2.814
.050*
2.812
Within Groups
6087.744
45
135.283
Total
7230.000
48
Note. Method of at p ≤ α with α = 0.05; *notes that p ≤ 0.05. SS = Sum of Squares; df = degrees of freedom; MS =
Means Squared; F = F distribution; P-value = probability value; F crit = F critical value.
HOPE AS STRATEGY 57
APPENDIX X
REPRESENTATION OF MY TRIANGUALTION/CRYSTALLIZATION PROCESS
Triangulation Crystallization
Qualitative
Quantitative
Research
Questions
Interviews
Contextual
Observations
Survey
Data Artifacts
Dimensional
Writing
Reflexive
Contemplation
Fractalization
Understanding
Sources of Data
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
This study uses a mixed methods approach to examine a new type of curriculum configuration that supports students’ transitions to college: career technical programs of study (POS). Interview and survey data were collected from a college and its feeder high schools in each of three well-established (“mature”) sites in geographically varied communities in the United States to investigate how POS are structured, what the key the “ingredients” are, and what students experience as they move through the POS. Interview findings suggest that the key elements of POS include dedicated staff to create secondary–postsecondary connections, active multistakeholder advisory committees, and flexibility and compromise in developing dual-credit options for students. Survey data show that high school students feel positively about their experiences in POS; however, career guidance is lacking. Student records indicate that even when POS were in place to support their transition, less than one-fifth of students remained in the same POS in college that they began in high school. Results are discussed in relation to the 2006 Perkins IV legislation.
Article
Constructivist grounded theory is useful for pursuing critical qualitative inquiry. This article introduces critical inquiry and shows its connections with pragmatism, the philosophical foundation of constructivist grounded theory. Pragmatism provides a theoretical frame for thinking about critical qualitative inquiry; constructivist grounded theory is a method of conducting it. Constructivist grounded theory broadens critical inquiry as it fosters defining emergent critical questions throughout the research process. This method also encourages interrogating the taken-for-granted methodological individualism pervading much of qualitative inquiry because it facilitates developing a deeply reflexive stance called methodological self-consciousness. In turn, this methodological self-consciousness supports researchers in interrogating their data, nascent analyses, and actions while they proceed with their projects. The article mentions several strategies for putting constructivist grounded theory into practice and concludes with ideas about where this practice could take us.
Article
What are the key issues confronting the call for a new critical inquiry? How to create a new family of terms for a new critical inquiry, terms slip and slide, fall over one another: critical embodied, transformative, dialogic, reflexive, participatory, emancipatory, narratives of resistance, plateaus, planes of composition, Deleuze, Guattari, assemblages, affect, nomadic inquiry, rhizomatic, love, loss, praxis writing as a way of being in the world. Writing framed around acts of activism and resistance. How do we move forward?