A single case study was used to examine two middle grades mathematics teachers' use of short-cycle formative assessment strategies. Data was collected using multiple sources to provide a description of this single case. Participant change in knowledge of short-cycle formative assessment strategies was collected and analyzed through participant pre- and post-interviews and targeted instructional support was provided through professional development sessions designed to meet diverse needs of participants. Participant change in use of short-cycle formative assessment strategies was collected and analyzed through classroom observations using Assess Today observation protocol and targeted instructional support was provided through post-observation conferences with written feedback. Findings from the study verified that changes in teachers' use of short-cycle formative assessment strategies were positively influenced by the targeted instructional support provided to each participant during the study. The study further indicated that an assessment of teacher's present knowledge and use of short-cycle formative assessment strategies should be considered before providing targeted instructional support to maximize the learning potential for each teacher. Future research is needed regarding the importance of building student self-efficacy through teacher use of short-cycle formative assessment, as well as the importance of involving students in the formative assessment process.

The purpose of this study was to analyze ways in which the roles of instructional support staff as perceived by principals and instructional support staff members in a large, suburban school district have been affected by the implementation of site-based decision making (SBDM). Research questions focused on changes which have occurred in the roles of instructional support staff and in the services provided to schools by support staff since the implementation of SBDM, the roles which support staff members believe they have in SBDM, the perceptions of principals regarding the roles of instructional support staff in SBDM, and a comparison of the views of instructional support staff and principals regarding the district's implementation of SBDM.

The purpose of this qualitative study was to investigate how teachers perceive the instructional support provided by district and school level administrators in implementation of the Common Core State Standards. The independent variables were staff development, small group development, direct individual assistance, technology, teacher age, and teacher years of experience. The dependent variable was teacher perception of the efficacy of the instructional support received. The phenomenological approach was specifically chosen for this study to give a voice to teachers who, for the majority, are often left unheard in the policy making process. By focusing on the similarities of the participants’ experiences, the stories collected in this study will help school and district level leadership in identifying how they can best support teachers in implementing the Common Core standards. The study took place in a metropolitan school district bolstering nearly 99,000 students. Schools were selected to participate using maximum variation sampling. This type of sampling ensures that findings reflect differences in perspective, which is ideal in qualitative study (Creswell, 2007). Schools were selected according to the following descriptors: Title I status, ethnicity of student population, English proficiency of student population, disabilities of student population, grade level of student population, and College and Career Readiness Performance Index (CCRPI) Score of the school. The participants represented elementary, middle, and high school settings. The data collected during this study were analyzed using the phenomenology research procedures of Moustakas (1994). The research resulted in a collection of significant statements that were clustered to define themes. The 11 themes were extracted from 28 teacher surveys, 5 teacher interviews, and 3 school-level administrator interviews. The findings of the study revealed that school level instructional support was perceived more favorable than district level instructional support in all areas: staff development, group development, and direct individual assistance. Small group development at both the district and school level was engaging, allowing teachers to discuss, plan, and create during the time spent together. Approximately half of the participants in the study indicated that they never received direct individual assistance from administrators neither at the district nor school level. Participants expressed positive perception regarding the technological training they received and the impact it had not only on their instruction, but their administrative skill as well.