8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 1/42
Factors Influencing Greatness inEconomically-Challenged Minority Schools
Presented to the Whitlowe R. Green College of Education
Prairie View A & M University
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Presented by
Margaret Curette Patton
Dissertation Committee
William Allan Kritsonis, Chair
Camille Gibson, PhD., Member
David E. Herrington, PhD., Member
Douglas Hermond, PhD., Member
June 2008
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 2/42
Purpose of Study
The purpose of the research is to explore theuniversal distinguishing factors that exist among
high achieving economically challenged minority(ECM) schools compared to similar acceptableperforming schools in the state of Texas.
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 3/42
Problem Statement
0
1 0
2 0
3 0
4 0
5 0
6 0
7 0
8 0
9 0
1 0 0
M a th 2 0 0 6 M a th 2 0 0 7
Academic scores of minority
groups, namely African andHispanics, continue to fallwell below Caucasianstudents.
The gap between
economically-challengedpopulations of students andtheir more affluentcounterparts continue to exist.
Texas has not been able to
eliminate the gaps betweenminority students and other more affluent sub-groups.
0
1 0
2 0
3 0
4 0
5 0
6 0
7 0
8 0
9 0
1 0 0
M a th 2 0 0 6 M a th 2 0 0 7
11th Grade TAKS Scores5th Grade TAKS Scores
March 2006 March 2007 March 2006 March 2007
• African
American
•Hispanic
•White
•Econ.
Challenged
-Texas Education Agency 2007 State AEIS Report
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 4/42
Significance of the Study
The education system has the distinct opportunityto significantly improve the accessibility and
quality of education for its entire people and toenrich their future. The findings of this study canaccelerate this process.
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 5/42
Research Questions
1. What universal distinguishing characteristicspredict that economically-challenged minority(ECM) schools will be recognized or exemplaryin the state of Texas?
2. What practices associated with the transitionfrom elementary to middle schools arepredictive of student achievement in highperforming economically-challenged minority(ECM) feeder groups?
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 6/42
Limitations
• No high schools met the combined criteria for being partof the sample.
• The selected schools will be asked voluntarily to take partin the study through purposive sampling. Limitationsinclude small sample size and inherent bias among the
participants.
• The leadership team in the selected schools may haveexperienced some turnover over the past four years.
• Feeder groups are similar but not identical in size anddemographics due to the varying populations of the highachieving ECM schools.
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 7/42
Limitations continued
• A small number of years of data were used for the study(Post-TAKS years).
• The sample was selected based on the final accountabilityrating rather than specific indicators like attendance, drop-out rate, and subgroup test scores.
• The final sample of schools was selected from the sameeducational Region in Texas. The critical analysis revealedthat there were a sufficient number of high-performingfeeder groups in Region 4 to provide ample data to answer
the research questions. The other two regions that wereincluded in the selection process did not have as manyfeeder groups from which to choose.
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 8/42
Limitations cont.
• The application of all of the components of theGood to Great corporate model may not beeasily and fully replicated in the school system.
• The subjectivity of the researcher as themeasurement instrument.
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 9/42
Assumptions
• The responses given in interviews will beprovided freely and with the utmost honesty.
• Some students fall into both the minority andeconomically challenged groups.
• Although there are differences between specificminority groups of students, this study willgroup African American and Hispanic students
into one group that will be referred to as aminority group.
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 10/42
Definitions
Comparison schools: Schools that are similar indemographic data: percentage of economicallydisadvantaged and minority populations; schoolsize; and campus location, but different in
academic achievement scores. For example,“matched pairs” was the terminology used in theArizona Study – schools that are alike in mostways, yet different in the performance
measurement that is of interest (Waits, et al.,2006).
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 11/42
Definitions
Economically-challenged student: A student whois eligible for the National School LunchProgram/free/reduced-price school lunch: (a)eligible for free or reduced-price meals under theNational School Lunch and Child NutritionProgram; (b) from a family with annual income ator below the federal poverty line (e.g. annualincome for a family of three is less than$22,880); (c) eligible for Temporary Assistance
to Needy Families or other public assistance;and (d) eligible for benefits under the FoodStamp Act of 1977 (McMillion & Roska, 2007).
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 12/42
Definitions
Economically-challenged Minority School (ECM):a school with at least 50% low income, minority(African American or Hispanic) students (Jerald,
2001).
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 13/42
Definitions
Minority school status: A measure of the level of historically disadvantaged minority studentgroups being served in a school. Low minority
schools have less than 5% disadvantagedminority students. Medium minority schools have5 to 50% disadvantaged minority students. Highminority schools have over 50% disadvantagedminority students (Shettle, et al., 2005).
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 14/42
Conceptual FrameworkGood to Great ™ – Jim Collins
Input Principles
Stage 1: Disciplined People
Level 5 LeadershipFirst Who, Then What
Stage 2: Disciplined Thought
Confront the Brutal FactsThe Hedgehog Concept
Stage 3: Discipline Action
Culture of DisciplineTechnology Accelerators
Output Results
Delivers Superior Performance relative to itsmissionMakes a Distinctive Impact onthe communities it touchesAchieves Lasting Endurancebeyond any leader, idea or setback
Visit www.jimcollins.com
to take the Good to Great™ survey.
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 15/42
Conceptual FrameworkGood to Great ™ – Jim Collins
Disciplined People•Level 5 Leaders are self-effacing, quiet, reserved, and evenshy. These leaders are a blend of personal humility andprofessional will.
•The great companies made sure to hire the right people for
the right positions (First Who then What) before setting avision or creating the strategy of how to reach the company’s
goal.
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 16/42
Conceptual FrameworkGood to Great ™ – Jim Collins
Disciplined Thought
•Each good to great company maintained unwavering faiththat they would prevail in the end, no matter the difficulties,while always confronting the brutal facts of its current reality.
•The Hedgehog Concept reflects a deepunderstanding of those things thatindividuals are deeply passionate about,what they can be the best in the world
at, and what drives their economicengine.
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 17/42
Conceptual FrameworkGood to Great ™ – Jim Collins
Disciplined Action
In the culture of discipline, disciplined people with disciplinethought combined with an ethic of entrepreneurship yields
great performance.
Technology accelerators were found to have never been aprimary role in achieving excellence, but when carefully
selected assisted in transforming companies.
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 18/42
Making Literature Connections What does Good to Great ™ have to do with Economically-Challenged Minority Schools?
Collins’ (2001) findings - there was no single defining action,innovation, or miracle that elevated companies to greatness
Reeves (2007) also found that school improvement
in high performing ECM schools “was not the result of a short burst of energy by a few people who soonburned out, but rather the result of steady, sustainedefforts” (p. 87).Read the entire article at:http://www.newburghschools.org/newburgh/subpages/cni/articles/November_2007_How_Do_You_Sustain_Excellence.pdf
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 19/42
Making Literature Connections What does Good to Great ™ have to do with Economically-Challenged Minority Schools?
In the Beat the Odds Study (2006), there were noeasy answers or magic bullets, instead the answer came with the school selecting the most appropriate
programs and actions for their particular populationand sticking with it. “What performance requires ishard, focused, purposeful work. If diligence,persistence and commitment are lacking, ingenuity
and a good program are wasted. It is focus andhard work that matter most.”For more information visit the Beat the Odds Institute: http://www.beattheoddsinstitute.org/index.php
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 20/42
Making Literature Connections What does Good to Great ™ have to do with Economically-Challenged Minority Schools?
INPUT FACTORS
Disciplined People
Collaborative leadershipPurpose-driven Staff
Disciplined Thought
Address Student NeedClear visionCurriculum FocusData DrivenHigh Expectations/NoExcusesStreamlined Activities
Discipline Action
Assessment for
improvementDistributed AccountabilityLearning Communities
OUTPUT RESULTS
High levels of proficiency amongstudents
Continued gains in
achievement;
Effective andenduring practicesand policies arewidespread.
Output Results in2007 Texas Accountability Rating Terminology
Recognized Exemplary
TAKS (Met Standard)
Reading/ELA 75% 90%
Math 75% 90%
Writing 75% 90%
Science 75% 90%
Social Studies 75% 90%
SDAA II All Subjects 70% 90%
Completion Rate I 85.0% 95.0%
Annual Dropout Rate 0.7% 0.2%
The literature on high-performing ECM schools reveals…
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 21/42
More of What the Literature SaysGood to Great ™ – Education Sector
Disciplined People
Level 5 Leaders
“The research evidence consistently demonstrates that the
quality of leadership determines the motivation of teachersand the quality of teaching in the classroom.” (Harris, et. al.,2006, p. 121)
See handout for thorough literary synthesis on high performing ECM schools.
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 22/42
More of What the Literature SaysGood to Great ™ – Education Sector
Disciplined People
First Who Then What
“If you want to improve a school system, before you change the rules,look first to the ways that people think and interact together.” (Senge,2000, p. 19)
“Effective hiring goes beyond selecting teachers: Savvy principals willemploy secretaries, custodians, food service personnel, para-educators,and teacher aides who embrace the overall mission of the school.”(Harris, 2006, p. 10) Another principal suggested, “Hire wisely. Use an
interview team, and don’t second-guess your gut. Keep looking until youare satisfied.” (Harris, 2006, p.3)
See handout for thorough literary synthesis on high performing ECM schools.
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 23/42
More of What the Literature SaysGood to Great ™ – Education Sector
Disciplined Thought
Confronting the brutal facts “Focus on the needs of the individual child as they look at
achievement per classroom, per teacher, per student. Thisapproach unmasks poor performance and forces everyone atthe school to take responsibility for student performance.”(Waits, 2006, p. 6).
See handout for thorough literary synthesis on high performing ECM schools.
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 24/42
More of What the Literature SaysGood to Great ™ – Education Sector
Disciplined Thought
Hedgehog Concept
Trimble (2002) found that high performing, high poverty
schools have built-in criteria for making decisions. Theseprocedures are crucial when numerous issues attempt tocause distractions that could take the campus off trackfrom their goals.
See handout for thorough literary synthesis on high performing ECM schools.
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 25/42
More of What the Literature SaysGood to Great ™ – Education Sector
Disciplined Action
Culture of discipline
“In the ‘built to suit’ paradigm, high achieving schools wentbeyond the big picture that standards posed to focusing onthe individual performance of each child. In essence, whatwas present was a vital cycle of instruction, assessment, andintervention.” (Waits, 2006, p. 7)
See handout for thorough literary synthesis on high performing ECM schools.
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 26/42
More of What the Literature SaysGood to Great ™ – Education Sector
Disciplined Action
Technology accelerators
The Prichard Report (2005) surprisingly noted that the eighthigh-performing schools in their study did not perform well onthe use of technology. The findings further suggested thattechnology may not be a necessary component of attainingsuccess. Effective use of technology may enhance what
successful schools are already doing, but it is not a crucialingredient.
See handout for thorough literary synthesis on high performing ECM schools.
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 27/42
Research Procedure
Schools selected for the study met the following sampling
criteria…
1. Received an Exemplary or Recognized rating for at least two of the four years from 2004-2007 . Each middle school had to beassociated with an elementary school that received a rating of
Recognized or Exemplary within the same years.2. Consisted of at least a 50% economically disadvantaged
population;
3. Consisted of at least a 50% minority (African American andHispanic) population.
4. Considered a small, medium or large campus; and5. Located in or near one of the three largest urban areas in Texas –
Houston, San Antonio, or Dallas/Fort Worth.
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 28/42
Comparison Schools
The comparison schools…
– Received an Acceptable rating under theaccountability rating system for Texas public schoolsfrom 2004-2007.
– Are associated with an elementary school with anAcceptable rating from 2004-2007.
– Met criteria numbers 2-5 on the previous slide.
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 29/42
Why these groups?
2006 Accountability State Summary Report – Texas Education Agency
Exemplary, 7.1%
Recognized, 35.5%
Acceptable, 45.1%
Unacceptable, 3.6%
Not Rated, 8.7%
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 30/42
SampleSchool Total Econ Dis. Min. 2004 2005 2006 2007
High Performing District 1 ELEM1 653 81.3 96.2 E E E E
Sixth -1 1112 68.9 88.5 R R R R
MID2 1299 67.9 83.7 R A R R
MID1 938 68.3 93.1 R A R A
Comparison District 2 CELEM1 696 73.7 96.5 A A A A
CMID1/2 1090 61.7 98.8 A A A A
High Performing District 3 ELEM3 891 88.8 98 E E E E
Fifth-Sixth3 949 90.8 95.9 R A A R
MID3 971 86.5 96 R R R R
Comparison District 3 CELEM3 799 92.4 98.2 A A A A
Cfifth-Sixth3 780 87.3 97.6 A A A A
CMID3 971 79.9 96.4 A A A A
High Performing District 4 ELEM4 613 83 88.9 R R R E
MID4 841 92.2 95.1 R R R A
District 4 ELEM5 591 90.5 90.2 R A R A
MID5 878 79.2 85.3 R A R R
Comparison District 4 CELEM4/5 839 81.9 80.7 A A A A
CMID4/5 958 71.1 77.7 A A A A
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 31/42
Participants
Why Houston Area/Region IV?
• Over 50% of the schools located in Houston area
• No high performing elementary school feeding into highperforming middle schools
Region IV of Texas• 12 Campuses
• 3 Districts
• 60 Staff
– Five participants on each campus include:• Administrators
• Teachers/Department Heads
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 32/42
Permission
• Acquire District Permission
• Acquire Campus Permission – Principal Letter
– Principal Permission Form
– Email, Phone Call, Follow-up Visit
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 33/42
Confidentiality and Anonymity
• No staff, school, or district names used infindings
• Example Coding: DIST1ELEM1.1A
• DIST2MID1.2T (District 2, Middle School 1, 2nd Staff Interview –Teacher)
District 1Elementary 1 1st Staff Interview - Administrator
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 34/42
Instrumentation
• Researcher used as “instrument of choice” –(Lincoln & Guba, 1985) – Interest in processes at ECM schools
– Interest in deep understanding
• Objectivity – Journal (Gibson, 2002)
– Monitor effects of interview on researcher
• Transcribe data within a few hours of interview
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 35/42
Data Collection
Triangulation
• On-line responses to interviews (Survey Monkey)• Private one-on-one interviews• Review of news clippings, campus publications,
etc.
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 36/42
Sample Interview Questions
1. What do you see as the top five factors that contributed to or
caused the upward shift in performance during the years 2004-2007 (years since TAKS)?
2. Now let’s return to those five factors, and I’d like you to allocate atotal of 100 points to those factors, according to their overallimportance to school improvement (total across all five factorsequals 100 points).
3. Could you please elaborate on the top two or three factors? Canyou give me specific examples that illustrate the factor?
4. Did the school make a conscious decision to initiate a major
change or transition during this time frame?
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 37/42
Sample Coding System
• Coding matrix contains key themes from the Good to Great Model
• Responses will be color coded based on categories.
• Example categories…
– Coding Category 1 (red) – Leadership: Who are the leaders?
What are the characteristics of the leaders? Is leadershipdistributed to others?
– Coding Category 2 (blue) – Recruiting and Retaining HighlyQualified: What are the hiring practices? Is there collaboration
before hiring? What types of qualities are looked for in staff?Is there autonomy in hiring?
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 38/42
Data Analysis
APPENDIX E - CODING MATRIX – HIGH-PERFORMING SCHOOLS
ResponsesFreq. Significant Quotes
Disciplined People Category 1:
Leadership
Category 2:Recruiting andRetaining Staff
Discipline
dPeople
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 39/42
Displaying the Findings - Chart
APPENDIX F –
Checklist Matrix: Predictors of Recognized or Exemplary ECM Schools
Category Exemplary/RecognizedCampus
Acceptable Campus
Level 5Leadership
First WhoThen What
Disciplin
edPeop
le
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 40/42
Displaying the Findings - Narrative
Transform the data into consistent and easy tounderstand chunks which are:
•Descriptive
•Explanatory
•Comparative
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 41/42
Vision for Study
It is my hope that the findings of this study may:
• Motivate school leaders to transform mediocreECM schools into self-sustaining great schools;
• Encourage administrators of low-performingECM schools to implement strategies to movetoward greatness; and
• Create an avenue for children of all backgroundsto receive a high quality of education.
8/14/2019 Margaret Curette Patton, PhD Proposal Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Committee Member
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/margaret-curette-patton-phd-proposal-defense-dr-william-allan-kritsonis 42/42
References
Collins, J. (2001). Good to great: Why some companies make the leap…and other’s don’t. NewYork, NY: HarperCollins Publishers Inc.
Gibson, C. (2002). Being real: The student-teacher relationship and African American maledelinquency. New York: LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC.
Harris, S. (2006). Best practices of award winning secondary school principals. Thousands Oak, CA:Corwin Press and National Association of Secondary School Principals.
Kannapel, P., & Clements, S. (with Taylor, D., & Hibpshman, T.) (2005). Inside the black box of high-performing high-poverty schools. Lexington, KY: Prichard Committee for Academic Excellence.
Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.Reeves, D. (2007). How do you sustain excellence? Educational Leadership, 65 (3), 86-87.
Senge, P. (2000). Schools that learn: a fifth discipline fieldbook for educators, parents, and everyonewho cares about education. New York, NY: Doubleday.
Texas Education Agency. (2007). Texas assessment of knowledge & skills performance report..Austin, TX: Agency Division of Performance Reporting-Academic Excellence Indicator System.Retrieved September 23, 2007, from http://www.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/aeis/index.html.
Trimble, S. (2002). Common elements of high performing, high poverty middle schools. MiddleSchool Journal, 33(4), 1-13.
Waits, M. J., Campbell, H. E., Gau, R., Jacobs, E., Rex, T., & Hess, R. K. (2006). Why some schoolswith Latino children beat the odds…and others don’t. Tempe, AZ: Morrison Institute for PublicPolicy School of Public Affairs, College of Public Programs Arizona State University and Phoenix,AZ: Center for the Future of Arizona.