This study was conducted to see if teachers perceive a significant difference in school culture and leadership in Title I and non-Title I schools. Specifically, this researcher considered the possibility that teachers working in Title I schools have lower perceptions of their school’s culture and leadership than teachers working in non-Title I schools. A quantitative study was used to find the perceived differences between school culture and leadership in Title I and non-Title I schools. A quasi-experimental design was selected because preexisting data were collected on teachers in an upper East Tennessee region. The data were collected from the TELL Tennessee survey conducted in 2011 by the Tennessee Department of Education. The TDOE contracted with the New Teacher Center (NTC) to conduct the state’s survey. The NTC is a national organization that has administered surveys in several states and is dedicated to developing and supporting a quality teaching force. The TDOE compiled 8 constructs or focus indicator areas for the survey, and 5 of the 8 indicators were used to determine school culture and leadership. School culture indicators were compiled from the focus questions of facilities and resources and community support. Leadership indicators were compiled from focus questions of student conduct, school leadership, and instructional practices and support. The population included teachers who taught in public schools, Pre Kindergarten through 12th grade during the 2010 through 2011 school year. This study showed no significant difference in regard to teacher perceptions of leadership in Title I and non-Title I schools in an upper East Tennessee region. However the study did find a significant difference in regard to teacher perceptions of school culture in Title I and non-Title I schools in the area of facilities and resources. An examination of the group means indicates that Title I schools (M = .845, SD = .120) had a significantly more positive perception of facilities and resources than teachers in non-Title I schools (M = .786, SD = .149).

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between leadership responsibilities of Title I principals and student achievement. This study involved the analysis of the results of a 92 item survey sent to successful Title I principals. The 92 items were grouped into 21 leadership responsibilities, first and second order change. The first research question was an examination of the relationship between the 21 leadership responsibilities of Title I principals and student achievement. The overall indication is that a substantial relationship exists between the 21 Leadership responsibilities and combination reading and math averages. Fourteen leadership responsibilities were positively correlated to the overall achievement ranging from Input with r s = .169 to Focus with r s = .018. This indicates principals of successful Title I schools are proactive with their leadership which increases student overall achievement. The second research question was an examination of the most influential 21 leadership responsibilities of Title I schools student achievement in math and reading. The indication of influence of the 21 Leadership responsibilities and math was that a strong correlation does not exist. There are seven positively correlated leadership responsibilities ranging from r s = .103 to r s = .014 indicating student achievement is more affected by the educational conduct within the classroom compared to leadership of the principal (outside the classroom). There was a strong relationship between the leadership responsibilities and reading, with all 21 Leadership responsibilities being positively correlated. This indicates student achievement is dependent on the leadership of the principal to create a school or campus wide effort. The third research question was an examination of the relationship between the 21 leadership responsibilities and student achievement based on school size and demographics. The overall indication is that a relationship exists between student achievement and size of the school (r s = .187), math and population (r s = .234) and a particularly small correlation between reading and population (r s = .045). This finding suggests that the size of the school does matter with regard to overall (math and reading combined) and math student achievement of Title I schools.

The purpose of this quantitative/qualitative evaluation study was to analyze the impact of the Success for All (SFA) program on reading achievement, attendance, and academic self-efficacy. Robert Slavin (1996) and his colleagues at Johns Hopkins University developed the Success for All program, which incorporates a comprehensive school restructuring approach. This program focuses on improving achievement of at-risk children and aims to have every child reading on or above grade level by grade three (Slavin, 1996). Two urban, schoolwide Title I elementary schools were compared using a non-equivalent matched group, evaluation design. Stanford 9 reading comprehension scores and attendance data were analyzed through an Analysis of Variance. Results yielded positive effects for group membership (SFA, non-SFA) in reading achievement and reading self-efficacy with mean scores of 58.6 NCEs vs 33.6 NCEs and 86.6 vs 68.7 respectively. Focus group results showed strong parental and staff support for the program. Implications are presented along with suggested future avenues of research such as the SFA program's impact over time and the investigation of the program's impact on other measures of achievement. / Ed. D.

In a suburban school district in the northeastern United States, 10% to 15% of students at an elementary school received Title I reading services resulting in a low performing school designation. The purpose of this intrinsic case study was to complete a process-based evaluation identifying key instructional components of a high performing Title I reading program. Using data-based decision making theory as the conceptual framework, the goal of this study was to examine key instructional components of a highly effective Title I reading program in a school consistently scoring in the 90th percentile or higher on the state reading test. Data collection occurred by observing 5 Title I reading classrooms to identify curricular and instructional components used in the delivery of Title I services, followed by in-depth interviews conducted with the 5 classroom teachers in Grades 1 through 4. The school's principal and the district's federal program coordinator were interviewed to gain perspectives about program outcomes. Archival data were reviewed to determine program strength through standardized student achievement scores. The responsive interviewing model was used for data analysis followed by the inductive and interpretive approach to identify categories and 6 themes: assessment, cooperative learning, staffing of a state-certified reading specialist, availability of leveled readers, management of student grouping and differentiated instruction, and delivery of curriculum aligned with Common Core Standards. Findings identified curriculum changes necessary for a successful Title I reading program. The resulting project was a presentation for district officials to adopt an effective reading program model. This study contributes to positive social change through implementation of course design leading to local student retention and higher reading achievement scores.

The purpose of this study was to compare school climate in a sampling of four Title I and four Non-Title I elementary schools in one school division in Virginia with varied accreditation statuses. The Organizational Climate Descriptive Questionnaire-Revised Elementary (OCDQ-RE), created by Hoy (1990) was utilized to measure school climate. The OCDQ-RE questionnaire were handed out during a regularly scheduled faculty meeting at each of the eight schools selected for the study. Of the 255 surveys that were distributed collectively, 165 participant surveys were collected for a return rate of 65%. In measuring school climate, the mean and standard deviation were computed for each of the six subtests of school climate: Supportive Principal Behavior, Directive Principal Behavior, Restrictive Principal Behavior, Collegial Teacher Behavior, Intimate Teacher Behavior, and Disengaged Teacher Behavior. These subtests were combined to determine teacher openness, principal openness and overall school climate. Descriptive and inferential statistics did not reveal significant differences in principal openness, teacher openness or overall school climate in schools of varying Title I and accreditation status. However, descriptive and inferential statistics revealed differences in component subtests of the OCDQ-RE. Specifically, a comparison of the standardized mean scores for each subset based on Title I status and accreditation status revealed some variations. Using inferential statistics, significant differences were found among school climate in the areas of supportive principal behavior, restrictive principal behavior and intimate teacher behavior. / Ed. D.

This study examined the influence of social workers placed at the elementary school level, who work with low-socioeconomic families. The intent of the study was to examine the role of the social worker, at identified Title I elementary schools, on parent involvement. Research Question 1 asked, “What influence do the family specialists have in family involvement as reported by parents and family specialists at the identified Title I elementary schools in the North East ISD, in San Antonio, Texas?” The results of this study strongly support that the family specialist on the campus did have a positive influence on parents getting involved at their child’s school. Research Question 2 asked, “What selected variables influence parental involvement as reported by parents and family specialists, who are participants of the Parent Academy at the selected Title I elementary schools in the North East ISD, in San Antonio, Texas?” The results of this study strongly supported that the variables of open communication between home and school and the school being inviting to parents are positive factors in getting parents involved. Research Question 3 asked, “What influence do community agencies have in assisting with the needs of families, as reported on the end-of-year summary sheets by the family specialists at the selected Title I elementary schools in the North East ISD, in San Antonio, Texas?” The results of this study showed that data procedures were inconsistent among the family specialists in the North East ISD. Data concerning the use of social service agencies was incomplete. No standard procedures are in place for tracking services provided to families. Research Question 4 asked, “What influence do parents have on determining the classes set forth for the Parent Academy, as reported by the parents and family specialists who are participants of the Parent Academy at the selected Title I elementary campuses in the North East ISD in San Antonio, Texas?” The results of this study strongly suggested that both parents and family specialists feel the parents have a voice in choosing the classes provided for them by the family specialists.

This study examined the influence of social workers placed at the elementary school level, who work with low-socioeconomic families. The intent of the study was to examine the role of the social worker, at identified Title I elementary schools, on parent involvement. Research Question 1 asked, "What influence do the family specialists have in family involvement as reported by parents and family specialists at the identified Title I elementary schools in the North East ISD, in San Antonio, Texas?" The results of this study strongly support that the family specialist on the campus did have a positive influence on parents getting involved at their child's school. Research Question 2 asked, "What selected variables influence parental involvement as reported by parents and family specialists, who are participants of the Parent Academy at the selected Title I elementary schools in the North East ISD, in San Antonio, Texas?" The results of this study strongly supported that the variables of open communication between home and school and the school being inviting to parents are positive factors in getting parents involved. Research Question 3 asked, "What influence do community agencies have in assisting with the needs of families, as reported on the end-of-year summary sheets by the family specialists at the selected Title I elementary schools in the North East ISD, in San Antonio, Texas?" The results of this study showed that data procedures were inconsistent among the family specialists in the North East ISD. Data concerning the use of social service agencies was incomplete. No standard procedures are in place for tracking services provided to families. Research Question 4 asked, "What influence do parents have on determining the classes set forth for the Parent Academy, as reported by the parents and family specialists who are participants of the Parent Academy at the selected Title I elementary campuses in the North East ISD in San Antonio, Texas?" The results of this study strongly suggested that both parents and family specialists feel the parents have a voice in choosing the classes provided for them by the family specialists.

The purpose of this study was to (1) examine the academic and demographic characteristics of 6th-grade instrumental music students attending selected public schools of contrasting socioeconomic backgrounds, (2) examine the retention patterns of students who were required to enroll in 6th-grade instrumental music compared to those who elected to do so, and (3) construct a predictive model of student retention in middle school instrumental music programs. Individual student data (N = 1052) were gathered from beginning instrumental 6th-grade programs at selected schools in a large, urban school district in Texas. Data included students’ 5th and 6th standardized test results, 7th-grade class schedules, and demographic information. Data were analyzed according to the 6th-grade campus the students attended (Title I/non-Title I) and the type of school (elementary school with required music programs or middle school with elective music programs) to identify demographic and academic factors associated with 6th-and 7th-grade music participation. I examined students’ schedules for retention patterns associated with individual school scheduling and academic remedial policies. I used logistic regression to develop predictive models of retention based on the following factors: gender, ethnicity, special education, at-risk, gifted, 5th and 6th-grade standardized test results, 5th-grade campus and pre-AP enrollment. Only the 6th-grade standardized tests, either math or reading, predicted retention in instrumental music in all of the school settings. Ethnicity, at-risk, and 5th-grade standardized tests did not predict retention in any school setting. Each school setting was unique in the factors that predicted instrumental music retention. For example, in the Title I setting, giftedness and 6th-grade reading test results predicted retention whereas in the non-Title I setting, gender, pre-AP enrollment and 6th-grade math results predicted retention. I also observed that 6th-grade required music programs were, by default, more inclusive than elective programs, and that the diversity in the student population of the 6th-grade required programs was maintained during the 7th-grade when music became elective. Results from this study suggest that offering only one elective choice per year may exclude access to music education for low academic achievers and reduce enrollment in music ensembles. / text

Studies have documented challenges in meeting No Child Left Behind (NCLB) expectations as well as gender differences that contribute to the achievement gaps between boys and girls. In response to increased NCLB accountability and achievement gaps between boys and girls, several experts have promoted single-sex education as a possible strategy to improving student achievement. The purpose of this study was to examine data that were gathered from an economically disadvantaged Title I federally-assisted upper elementary school with respect to the implementation of single-gender classrooms. This study was guided by the following two research questions: First, what were the perspectives from teachers, students, and parents with the initial year of implementation of single-gender classrooms? Second, what school level data could be analyzed and summarized with respect to student behaviors during the initial year of implementation? Unlike previous studies, which focused on private or parochial schools at the secondary school level, this study focused on an economically disadvantaged school within an upper elementary setting. In addition, limited previous research has examined the perspectives of teachers, students, and parents. As research continues to show an ever-increasing achievement gap between students in poverty and those who are not, many educators seek alternative ways to educate students in economically disadvantaged schools. While single-gender classrooms are by no means a cure-all for the adversity faced by disadvantaged students in public schools, an analysis of the aforementioned research data indicated salient benefits for such students in that they can provide a learning environment where affective and cognitive learning outcomes could be realized. The results from this study revealed that teachers and parents considered single-gender classrooms provide a positive learning environment for students. Teachers, students, and parents emphasized that single-gender classrooms allowed students to be more productive, removed the largest distractions for male and female students, and allowed them to concentrate on their schoolwork. In addition, the data revealed that single-gender classrooms had a positive impact on girls as viewed by teachers, female students, and parents of female students in terms of feeling comfortable enough to ask questions when they did not understand something.

The purpose of the study was to determine if there is a difference in mathematics mean scale score growth on the MCT2 mathematics assessment between students taught by national board certified teachers (NBCTs) and those taught by non-NBCTs in a low socioeconomic, high minority, Title I school. For this study, a causal-comparative research design and a statistical analysis procedure of ANCOVA were used to answer two research questions: First, is there a statistically significant difference in mathematics mean scale score growth on the MCT2 mathematics assessment between fourth grade African American and Caucasian students taught by NBCTs and those taught by non-NBCTs, while controlling socioeconomic status and 3rd grade MCT2 mathematics scale scores? Second, is there a statistically significant difference in mathematics mean scale score growth on the MCT2 mathematics assessment between fourth grade students by socioeconomic status based on eligibility for free/reduced or full pay lunch taught by NBCTs and those taught by non-NBCTs, while controlling race and 3rd grade MCT2 mathematics scale scores? The results of the analysis for research question one indicated that there was not a statistically significant difference in mathematics mean score growth on the MCT2 mathematics assessment between students by race taught by NBCTs and those taught by non-NBCT. African American and Caucasian students taught by NBCTs had a comparable mathematics mean scale score growth with African American and Caucasian students taught by non-NBCTs. The results of the analysis for research question two indicated that there was a statistically significant difference in mathematics mean score growth on the MCT2 mathematics assessment between students by socioeconomic status based on eligibility for full pay lunch taught by NBCTs and those students taught by non-NBCTs. Students identified as full pay lunch taught by NBCTs had a higher mathematics mean scale score growth than those students identified as full pay lunch taught by non-NBCTs. Students identified as free/reduced lunch status taught by non-NBCTs had comparable mean scale score growth with those students identified as free/reduced lunch status taught by NBCTs, but not statistically significant.