THE EFFECTS OF AN AFTERSCHOOL PROGRAM ON ELEMENTARY
STUDENTS' READING COMPREHENSION
Kathleen Crossman
B.S., Idaho State University, 1990
M.A., University of LaVerne, 2000
DISSERTATION
Submitted in partial fulfillment of
the requirement for the degree of
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
in
EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP
at
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, SACRAMENTO
SPRING
2013
Copyright © 2013
Kathleen Crossman
All rights reserved
ii
THE EFFECTS OF AN AFTERSCHOOL PROGRAM ON ELEMENTARY
STUDENTS' READING COMPREHENSION
A Dissertation
by
Kathleen Crossman
Approved by Dissertation Committee:
Dr. Frank Lilly, Chair
Dr. Daniel Melzer
Dr. Barbara Metzuk
SPRING 2013
iii
THE EFFECTS OF AN AFTERSCHOOL PROGRAM ON ELEMENTARY
STUDENTS' READING COMPREHENSION
Student: Kathleen Crossman
I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the University
format manual, and that this dissertation is suitable for shelving in the library and credit is
to be awarded for the dissertation.
, Graduate Coordinator
Caroline Sotello Viernes Turner, Ph.D.
iv
Date
DEDICATION
This is for my children, Amanda McWilliams, Bryan Curl, and John Curl, each of
whom I’m immensely proud. I love you!
Thank you, Mom, Gertrude Crossman, for your loving support of every
educational endeavor, and Rick Crossman, for showing me how much fun it is to play
with words.
Thank you also to dear friends who have supported and encouraged me
throughout this process- Kathy Blake, Tom Hagreen, Jill Feather, Paul Saunders, and Rob
Brown- you are the best! Thanks also to Bal Dhillon and Richard Tevis, my classmates
and collaborators, who over the past three years have become close friends.
Mostly, thank you Jesus, for opening a big, beautiful door.
v
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Thank you to my committee chair, Dr. Frank Lilly, for his knowledge and endless
patience and encouragement, and to committee members Dr. Dan Melzer, a brilliant
writer and educator, and Dr. Barbara Metzuk, my after school guru.
A mountain of gratitude is extended to the principal and after school staff at “Ross
Elementary School,” and to the district superintendent, data manager, and after school
leadership team.
vi
CURRICULUM VITAE
Experience
Curriculum Specialist, Sacramento County Office of Education
2003-Present

Worked with schools to strengthen instruction of curriculum
(led collaboration, trained staff, supported and coached teachers and
principals)

Developed and led professional development sessions for teachers and
administrators on using best instructional practices, meeting California
Common Core State Standards, supporting English language learners, and
Response to Intervention

Hired, trained, supervised, and scheduled AB 430 and AB75 instruction
(Tier II Principal Administrative Clear Credential), and AB 466/SB
472/Reading First instructors to provide training to over 22,000 teachers
and administrators annually statewide on implementation of adopted
instructional materials and reading/language arts curriculum frameworks

Created online professional development resources for teachers in
conjunction with Teachscape, including best practice videos, delivery of
focused lessons, and effective use of research-based practices
Curriculum Coach, Center Unified School District
2001-2003
 Provided curriculum support and coaching to all district elementary teachers for
reading/language arts and math

Developed, organized, and provided training to district elementary teachers and
administrators on state adopted reading/language arts and math programs

Trained district personnel on use of Edusoft online assessment tool and on
collaboration process in order to use assessment data to drive instruction
Principal: Summer School, Center Unified School District
2003
 Responsible for organization and day-to-day operations of summer school, grades
6-12

Managed student needs and discipline

Hired, supervised, scheduled, and supported teachers and staff

Organized school schedules and materials
vii
Teacher: Center Unified School District
 Primary Grades 1-3, BTSA Support Provider
1996-2001

Intermediate Grade 4, Master Teacher CSU Sacramento

High School Reading Intensive Intervention
Education
2013 Doctorate in Education Administration, California State University, Sacramento
(Graduating March 24, 2013)
2009 CLAD Certificate
2002
Clear Administrative Services Credential/Master of Arts, University of LaVerne
1998
Multiple Subject Teaching Credential, Project Pipeline
1990
Bachelor of Science, Idaho State University
Professional Experience
2009-2012
Served on team to validate California Distinguish School applications
2009-2012
Monitored Williams Act (textbook) compliance
2008-2012
Advisor, California State Board of Education, AB 430 Administrator
Training, Content Reviewer
2008 Instructional Materials Adoption Panel (IMAP) Member, California State Board
of Education, Reading/Language Arts
2008 Completed School Academic Intervention Team (SAIT) Lead training
viii
Abstract
of
THE EFFECTS OF AN AFTERSCHOOL PROGRAM ON ELEMENTARY
STUDENTS' READING COMPREHENSION
By
Kathleen Crossman
The Proficient level is the goal for student performance on the NAEP (National
Assessment of Educational Progress, 2012). With only 25% of California’s grade four
students performing at or above the Proficient level on the 2011 English language arts
section of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) achievement tests,
too many third-grade students cannot read at grade level. California’s Hispanic students
fared worse, with only 13% of fourth-grade students performing at or above the
Proficient level.
Might afterschool programs (ASP) be an opportunity to combat the achievement
gap and help ensure all students are reading by the end of third grade? This mixedmethods study used California Standards Test (CST) Comprehension scores, observation,
and case studies at a Northern California school, to explore the following questions:
1. Is there a significant difference, as measured by CST scores, in comprehension
achievement between third through fifth grade students in an afterschool program
and those not in an afterschool program?
ix
2. Is there a significant difference in comprehension achievement between Hispanic
students and non-Hispanic students attending Ross Elementary?
3. In what ways does the afterschool program bolster reading comprehension
success?
The quantitative findings for Questions 1 and 2 showed that students attending the
ASP did not have a significant difference on CST comprehension scores. Question 3, in a
qualitative study, provided an opportunity to view students in the afterschool program
through the lenses of Systems Theory (focusing on Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) Ecology of
Human Development Theory), Universal Design for Learning Theory, and the
Appreciative Inquiry Theory. The theories formulated from qualitative data, showed
illustration of support that could lead to increased student achievement via:
1. Instructional support
2. Environment of mutual trust
3. Positive expectations and environment
The history and role of afterschool programs (ASPs) are examined to better
understand ASPs, their purposes, and key funding sources.
This study concludes with policy and future research recommendations.
x
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Dedication .......................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgments..............................................................................................................vi
Curriculum Vitae .............................................................................................................. vii
List of Tables ................................................................................................................... xiv
List of Figures .................................................................................................................. xvi
Chapter
1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 1
Afterschool Programs: History and Role ......................................................... 5
Problem Statement .......................................................................................... 12
Purpose of the Study ....................................................................................... 13
Nature of the Study ......................................................................................... 14
Summary of Theoretical Frameworks ............................................................ 15
Operational Definitions ................................................................................... 18
Assumptions and Limitations ......................................................................... 20
Significance of the Study ................................................................................ 22
Remainder of the Study .................................................................................. 23
2. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ................................................................... 24
Overview of Afterschool Programs ................................................................ 24
Review of Related Literature Introduction ..................................................... 33
xi
Review of Theoretical Framework ................................................................. 34
Review of Studies Related to Afterschool Programs ...................................... 48
Review of Studies Related to Factors Affecting the Hispanic Learner .......... 63
The Achievement Gap .................................................................................... 67
Factors that Support the Hispanic Learner...................................................... 69
3. METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................... 80
Introduction ..................................................................................................... 80
Research Design.............................................................................................. 80
Research Questions ......................................................................................... 83
Setting and Sample ......................................................................................... 83
Instrumentation and Materials ........................................................................ 86
Data Collection and Analysis.......................................................................... 87
Protection of Participants ................................................................................ 89
4. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA ....................................................................................... 90
Descriptive Demographics .............................................................................. 91
Report of Quantitative Data ............................................................................ 92
Report of Qualitative Data .............................................................................. 96
Conclusion .....................................................................................................127
5. SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, AND CONCLUSIONS ...............................................130
Overview ........................................................................................................130
Research Questions ........................................................................................131
xii
Summary of the Research Findings ...............................................................131
Discussion ......................................................................................................134
Findings in the Context of Theoretical Frameworks .....................................137
Recommendations ..........................................................................................139
Limitations of the Study.................................................................................141
Leadership Applications ................................................................................145
Policy Implications ........................................................................................146
Areas for Future Research .............................................................................148
6. APPENDICES
Appendix A. Table A1: Resources for ASPs .................................................151
Appendix B. CST Questions ..........................................................................155
Appendix C. Data Tables ...............................................................................229
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................233
xiii
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
1.
Table 1 2009–2011 Achievement-Level Descriptions ............................................. 2
2.
Table 2 Brief History of After School Programs ...................................................... 7
3.
Table 3 Afterschool Funding ................................................................................... 27
4.
Table 4 Observation Checklist: Elements of Universal Design Theory and
Appreciative Inquiry Theory.................................................................................... 47
5.
Table 5 Best Practices in Reading Comprehension Instruction ............................... 61
6.
Table 6 Observational Tool: Best Practices in Reading Comprehension
Instruction ................................................................................................................ 62
7.
Table 7 Reading Achievement Score Gaps: Various Years, 2003–2009 ................ 69
8.
Table 8a Best Practices for English Learners – Comprehension Related ................ 72
9.
Table 8b Best Practices for English Learners – Comprehension Related ............... 73
10.
Table 9a Observation Checklist: Best Practices for English Learners –
Comprehension Related ........................................................................................... 73
11.
Table 9b Observation Checklist: Best Practices for English Learners –
Comprehension Related ........................................................................................... 74
12.
Table 10 Best Practices for English Learners .......................................................... 76
13.
Table 11 Observation Checklist for Best Practices for English Learners ................ 78
14.
Table 12 Enrollment by Ethnicity for 2011/2012 .................................................... 84
15.
Table 13 Group Statistics Question 1 ...................................................................... 93
xiv
16.
Table 14 Independent Samples Test, Question 1 ..................................................... 93
17.
Table 15 Group Statistics Question 2 ...................................................................... 95
18.
Table 16 Independent Samples Test, Question 2 ..................................................... 95
19.
Table 17 Table C1: Observation Checklist: Elements of Universal Design
Theory and Appreciative Inquiry Theory Pertaining to Teaching, Student
Engagement, and Assessment: Frequency ..............................................................229
20.
Table 18 Table C2: Best Practices in Reading Comprehension InstructionFrequency................................................................................................................230
21.
Table 19 Table C3a: Observation Sheet: Best Practices for English LearnersComprehension Related: Frequency .......................................................................230
21.
Table 20 Table C3b: Best Practices for English Learners- Comprehension
Related: Frequency .................................................................................................231
22.
Table 21 Table C4: Observation Checklist for Best Practices for English
Learners, Frequency................................................................................................231
23.
Table 22 Table C5 Elements of Universal Design Theory and Appreciative
Inquiry Theory, Comparison to Question Three Theories ......................................232
xv
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
1.
Page
Percentage of students scoring Proficient and Advanced on the NAEP,
2011 Reading Assessment (NCES, 2012) ................................................................ 3
2.
Bronfenbrenner’s layers of relationships for a student in an afterschool setting ..... 39
3.
Explanatory Sequential Design (Inspired by Creswell, Plano, & Clark, 2011) ....... 88
4.
Explanatory Sequential design ................................................................................127
5.
Themes from qualitative data..................................................................................129
xvi
1
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
Only 25% of California’s fourth-grade students, and 32% of the nation’s fourthgrade students, are performing at or above the Proficient level in English language arts,
according to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (U.S. Department of
Education [DOE], n.d.).
The NAEP assesses students across the nation and in select urban districts, at the
fourth, eighth, and 12th grades. The NAEP stays very consistent year to year, making a
useful tool for showing trends over time. In 2011, a sampling of over 200,000 fourthgraders and 150,000 eighth-graders were assessed on comprehension of literary and
informational text. A description of the NAEP expectations at grade four is provided:
The specific descriptions of what students at grade 4 should know and be able to
do at the Basic, Proficient, and Advanced reading achievement level (is) presented
below. NAEP achievement levels are cumulative; therefore, student performance
at the Proficient level includes the competencies associated with the Basic level,
and the Advanced level also includes the skills and knowledge associated with
both the Basic and the Proficient levels. The cut score indicating the lower end of
the score range for each level is noted in parentheses. (NAEP, 2012, para. 2)
2
Table 1
2009-2011 Achievement-Level Descriptions
Basic
(208)
Fourth-grade students performing at the Basic level should be able to locate
relevant information, make simple inferences, and use their understanding of the
text to identify details that support a given interpretation or conclusion. Students
should be able to interpret the meaning of a word as it is used in the text.
Proficient Fourth-grade students performing at the Proficient level should be able to
(238) integrate and interpret texts and apply their understanding of the text to draw
conclusions and make evaluations.
Advanced Fourth-grade students performing at the Advanced level should be able to make
(268) complex inferences and construct and support their inferential understanding of
the text. Students should be able to apply their understanding of a text to make and
support a judgment.
The NAEP assessment scores are useful tools as they are important predictors of
lifetime earnings (McKinsey, 2009). Lack of proficiency is a significant problem
because the achievement gap between students in the United States and students in higher
performing countries cost the United States an estimated $1.3 trillion to $2.3 trillion in
the Gross Domestic Product in the year 2008 (McKinsey, 2009). If this problem is not
addressed, the United States could continue to lose trillions of dollars each year in what
McKinsey (2009) refer to as output potential – the loss of money to the country because
workers are not as skilled and productive as they could be. The magnitude of this
problem stretches from a personal problem to a societal problem to a national fiscal issue.
The magnitude itself is what provides the justification for intervention.
The achievement gap is a way of viewing the problem that too many of
California’s students are failing to read proficiently by the end of third grade. The NAEP
3
organization, the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES; 2012), explained that
achievement gaps occur when one group of students outperforms another group and the
difference in average scores for the two groups is statistically significant. Two notable
achievement gaps, according to National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP),
various years, 1992–2011, are between Hispanic and White (Hispanic-White) and Black
and White (Black-White) students. Figure 1 represents the percentages of students, by
statistically significant race/ethnicity subgroups, who scored Proficient or above
(Advanced) on the 2011 NAEP.
Figure 1. Percentage of students scoring Proficient and Advanced on the NAEP, 2011
Reading Assessment (NCES, 2012).
4
The figure data suggest Hispanic students have the lowest rate of Above
Proficient, lower than any other significant student population. These findings are
important to consider along with the realization that California’s population of Hispanic
students is quickly increasing. According to the report Achievement Gaps: How Hispanic
and White Students in Public Schools Perform in Mathematics and Reading on the
National Assessment of Educational Progress, from 1990 to 2009 California’s Hispanic
student population increased at grade four from 6-22% (NCES, 2011a). Because of the
significant gap in achievement and because of the increasing Hispanic population, one
aspect of this dissertation focuses on the reading comprehension achievement of Hispanic
students.
A critical aspect of the achievement gap is the disparity in test scores in reading.
Failure to read by third grade is a societal problem, as well as a personal crisis for the
non-reader. The National Research Council found that the ability to read is “important
for social and economic advancement,” (p. 17) and unless a person is at least a
“moderately skilled reader” (p. 21) by the end of grade three, he or she is unlikely to
graduate from high school (Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 2002). The Annie E. Casey
Foundation (2010) confirmed the findings, noting that millions of American students will
not graduate because they cannot read proficiently by fourth grade. (Early fourth grade
data are sometimes used to show end of third grade reading achievement.) Further, less
than proficient low-income readers are “all too likely to become our nation’s lowest-
5
income, least-skilled, least–productive, and most costly citizens” (Annie E. Casey
Foundation, 2010, p. 7).
Students must be at least “moderately skilled readers” by the end of third grade,
but what are the best practices around teaching students to be more than “moderately
skilled?” Discussions about teaching students to read proficiently and the HispanicWhite achievement gap continue in Chapter 2.
Afterschool Programs: History and Role
Might afterschool programs be an opportunity to combat the achievement gap and
help ensure all students are reading by the end of third grade? Arne Duncan, current
United States Secretary of Education, argued in a policy brief, “Engaging students in
after school activities is a critically important strategic part in improving a school’s
performance, and in helping schools that have historically struggled to go to the next
level” (Duncan as cited in Stonehill, Donner, Morgan, & Lasagna, 2010, p. 2). The
history and role of afterschool programs (ASPs) will be examined to better understand
ASPs, their purposes, and key funding sources.
The Journal of Youth Development, Bridging Research and Practice –
Afterschool Programs in America: Origins, Growth, Popularity, and Politics, and the
Learning in Afterschool and Summer (LIAS) project provides some of the history of
ASPs presented in Table 2. Table 2 depicts the transformation of ASPs from supervised
childcare settings in the late 19th century, to modern-day safe, healthy, inviting
6
organizations that connect students to high-quality expanded learning opportunities,
support school day instruction, and meet a variety of student needs.
7
Table 2
Brief History of After School Programs
Year/Time
Frame
Event
Significance
Late 19th
century
Child labor laws enacted and changed the
way children spent time
Children moved out of the work force and
needed supervision. Formal after school
childcare began
Late 19th
century
Schools created higher expectations for
student achievement
Boys Clubs were created to meet this
demand
Early 20th
century
In response to current events
ASPs were created
During and
after World
War II
Factors such as women returning to the
work force, World War II, economic
necessity, and single parent homes
Fueled the need for additional ASPs
1996
Personal Responsibility and Work
Opportunity Reconciliation Act (National
Research Council and Institute of
Medicine, 2003)
Eliminated the cash assistance to families
with children (a welfare benefit); Provided
strong incentive for adults to participate in
the paid labor force, which created more
need for ASPs
1994 and
2002
Federal government significantly
increased the funding to ASPs by creating
the 21st Century Community Learning
Center funding. In 2002, control of these
funds was turned over to each state.
Allowed school-based community learning
centers (after school enrichment programs)
for before and after school care, and care
during the summer in some cases, to
receive funding from the federal
government. Created an ASP focus on
academic achievement, enrichment, and
family literacy.
1955-2004
Increase of women returning to the
workplace
Created more need for ASPs
(U.S. Department of Labor, 2005)
1990-2000
A Decade of Results, After-school
Enrichment Program on Subsequent
Student Achievement and Performance
(UCLA Center for the Study of
Evaluation)
A longitudinal study report and a synthesis
of research addressing the impact of
participating in LA’s BEST (after school
program) over ten years.
8
Table 2 (continued)
Year/Time
Frame
Event
Significance
2000
America’s After-School Choice: The
Prime Time for Juvenile Crime:
http://www.jfox.neu.edu/Documents/afters
chool2000.pdf
S. A. Newman, J.D. President, Fight
Crime: Invest in Kids
A report on the impact of after-school
programs.
J.A. Fox, Ph.D. The Lipman Family
Professor of Criminal Justice
Northeastern University
E. A. Flynn Chief of Police, Arlington
County, VA,
W. Christeson, M.H.S. Research Director,
Fight Crime: Invest in Kids
2002
$550 million After School Education and
Safety (ASES) Program created through
passage of California Proposition 49
ASPs utilize partnerships between schools
and local community resources to focus on
literacy, academic enrichment and safe
constructive alternatives for students in
kindergarten through ninth grade (K-9)
2004
Building Exemplary After School
Programs, Eight Keys to Success, Andrea
Fletcher, Ph.D.
http://www.greatsource.com/GreatSource/
pdf/Afterschool_Article.pdf
Closing the Achievement Gap, Report of
Superintendent Jack O’Connell’s (2008)
California P-16 Council, released. It
outlined 14 recommendations the
Superintendent, the California
Department of Education (CDE), and the
P-16 Council used to promote statewide
success by addressing the achievement
gap.
http://svefoundation.org/svefoundation/file
s/p16_ctag_report.pdf
2008
The Center for Collaborative Solutions
offers eight practices found in all
exemplary after school programs to
provide a starting point for creating new
partnerships and a guide for strengthening
existing programs.
One Guiding Principle especially
supported the work of ASPs:
“The Council believes that in order to
succeed, all programs that affect student
achievement must be considered. For
example, state bureaucracies, county and
district practices, and the elimination or
redesign of marginally effective practices
will be considered.”
9
Table 2 (continued)
Year/Time
Frame
Event
Significance
2010
RAND Corporation report commissioned
by The Wallace Foundation
Movement toward high-quality, wellmanaged and structured out-of-school-time
opportunities to develop critical academic,
(Bodilly et al., 2010).
social, and emotional skills is bolstered by
the RAND study.
2011
During the 2011 reorganization of the
California Department of Education, State
Superintendent Tom Torlakson created a
new After School Division. Michael Funk
is the Director. Funk is a practitioner and
a California ASP policy advocate.
Oversees the After School Education and
Safety (ASES) and the 21st Century
Community Learning Center (CCLC)
programs, focusing on academic
achievement, enrichment, literacy, and safe
constructive alternatives for students
before and after school and during the
summer
2011
State Superintendent Tom Torlakson
released his master plan, A Blueprint for
Great Schools.
http://www.cde.ca.gov/eo/in/bp/bpstrategy
6.asp
Mott Foundation www.mott.org
(From Iowa Department of Education,
http://educateiowa.gov/index.php?option=
com_content&task=view&id=800&Itemid
=1301)
2012


Making After-School Count
(Numerous Volumes), C. S., a
publication on the important issues of
after-school care.
Resource Guide for Planning and
Operating After-School Programs, a
description of resources to support
after-school programs for schoolaged children.
A Blueprint for Great Schools puts the
focus on effective teaching, student
support, and 21st century learning through
high quality extended learning
opportunities such as after school and
summer programs.
Opportunities abound for organizations to
provide a plethora of services to meet the
needs of students, parents, teachers, and
after school providers.
More resources are provided for ASPs in Table A1: Resources for ASPs.
10
Roles of Afterschool Programs (Based on Funding Expectations)
Funding expectations and roles of the ASP are examined for the two largest
funding sources:
1. The 21st Century Community Learning Centers (CCLCs) are funded through the
federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA, 2002) at over $1 billion
annually, through competitive five-year grants. The 21st Century Community
Learning Centers is a:
state-administered, federally funded program offering five-year grant funding to
establish or expand before-and after-school programs that provide disadvantaged
kindergarten through twelfth-grade students (particularly students who attend
schools in need of improvement) with academic enrichment opportunities and
supportive services to help the students meet state and local standards in core
content areas. (California Department of Education [CDE], 2012d, para. 1)
2. The After School Education and Safety (ASES) Program is funded by California state
funds through Proposition 49 (as cited in CDE, 2012d). ASES funds the program to be
studied in this dissertation, at Ross Elementary School. The California Department of
Education offers information about ASES, a component of the 2002 voter-approved
initiative, Proposition 49, which funds local afterschool education and enrichment
programs. Through ASES, partnerships between schools and local community resources
provide literacy, academic enrichment, and safe constructive alternatives for students in
kindergarten through ninth grade (K-9). Additional information about ASPs is in Chapter
2.
11
Supporting Comprehension After School
Research supports the theory that afterschool programs have an effect on student
achievement and on other factors, as well. The National Partnership for Quality
Afterschool Learning (Vaden-Kiernan et al., 2008) found that afterschool programs might
affect student reading achievement. “While some findings hold for low-income and
minority student subgroups, more research is needed to replicate and extend these limited
findings and examine their sustainability over time” (Vaden-Kiernan et al., 2008, p. 7).
The Afterschool Alliance (2011), a national advisory organization stated, “Fortunately for
[after school] advocates, a steady stream of [after school] evaluations are showing
important gains for children, not only in academic achievement but also in safety,
discipline, attendance and avoidance of risky behaviors” (para. 5).
Afterschool programs, as part of a greater system of expanded learning
opportunities (ELOs) for students (including before and after school programs and
summer learning programs), were discussed in a Learning Point Associates policy brief,
and recommendations were made to integrate high-quality ELOs in state, district, and
school reform initiatives. A pertinent recommendation found:
Educators, as well as afterschool and youth development leaders are starting to
understand that expanded learning does not mean an extended school day with
more of the same delivery of content and instructional methods. Rather, expanded
learning can provide all students with opportunities for academic enrichment and
time to enjoy sports and develop other interests with peers in a safe, supervised
environment, not necessarily within the school or with the school’s regular day
teachers. (Stonehill et al., 2010, p. 4)
12
The National Association of Elementary School Principals (2009) lists academic, social,
and emotional gains for youth and improved outcomes for parents, families, schools,
communities, and society as major benefits of integrated and high-quality afterschool
programs. As the above studies explain, ELOs have begun to expand regular day
instruction into ASPs. ASPs support regular day academic instruction but also provide
enrichment opportunities, sports, and more.
Research on teaching comprehension and teaching comprehension after school is
discussed in Chapter 2.
Problem Statement
The Proficient level is the goal for student performance on the NAEP (DOE, n.d.).
With only 25% of California’s grade 4 students performing at or above the Proficient
level on the 2011 English language arts section of the NAEP achievement tests, too many
third-grade students cannot read at grade level. California’s Hispanic students fared
worse, with only 13% of fourth-grade students performing at or above the Proficient
level. As evidenced here, the achievement gap between Hispanic and non-Hispanic
students is not narrowing. Too many third-grade Hispanic students cannot read at grade
level.
Student achievement is a significant issue, and lack of reading proficiency is a
serious problem with stern financial and social consequences (McKinsey, 2009; Snow et
al., 2002). Of further significance is that Hispanic students are achieving at the lowest
rate of Proficient or above-lower than any other significant student population (Hemphill
13
& Vanneman, 2011). The Education Trust-West, in Futures At Risk: The Story of Latino
Student Achievement In California (2010), elaborated on the proficiency rates of Hispanic
students:
By eighth grade, Latino proficiency rates in English Language Arts have dropped
to 40 percent. By eleventh grade, these rates drop even further, with only 30
percent of all Latino students reaching proficiency in English. Tellingly, only one
Latino eleventh-grader attains proficiency for every two white students who do
so. (p. 2)
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to compare the comprehension assessment results
of students attending an afterschool program to those of students not attending an
afterschool program and to compare the assessment results of Hispanic students to those
of non-Hispanic students at Ross Elementary School. CST scores, for students enrolled
in the afterschool program from 2010/2011 to 2011/2012 are compared. CST scores of
Hispanic students and non-Hispanic students in 2011/2012 are compared. In an effort to
contribute to the body of research, recommendations to improve the efforts of afterschool
programs in supporting student comprehension achievement are offered.
Recommendations for supporting comprehension instruction for Hispanic students are
also provided.
Need for Increased Understanding of Benefits of Afterschool Programs
Afterschool programs provide an opportunity to support struggling readers. Funds
are provided to afterschool programs with the understanding that the programs will
support classroom instruction in reading and mathematics. Is the instruction provided in
14
afterschool programs affecting student comprehension? This research measures the
achievement of students in an afterschool program compared to students not attending an
ASP. When considering ASP accountability, it is important to know whether our
students are benefitting academically from ASPs. Parents need to know whether an ASP
is a good use of their child’s time. Policymakers must know whether funds spent on
ASPs are improving student achievement. Most importantly, are students benefitting
from time spent in ASPs? Are afterschool programs helping narrow the achievement
gap?
Nature of the Study
This study explored the following questions:
1. Is there a significant difference, as measured by CST scores, in comprehension
achievement between third through fifth grade students in an afterschool program
and those not in an afterschool program? An Independent Samples t-Test was
performed. The Independent Samples t-Test compared two groups: those in the
afterschool program and those who were not, using CST Reading Comprehension
scores from 2011/2012. See Appendix A for a sampling of CST questions.
2. Is there a significant difference in comprehension achievement between Hispanic
students and non-Hispanic students attending Ross Elementary? An Independent
Samples t-Test was performed. The Independent Samples t-Test compared two
groups: Hispanic students and non-Hispanic students using CST Reading
Comprehension scores from 2010/2011 and 2011/2012.
15
3. In what ways does the afterschool program bolster reading comprehension
success?
The quantitative data are presented by ethnicity (Hispanic and non-Hispanic),
grade-levels, and afterschool program status (participates or does not participate), in the
form of SPSS (a computer application) output including charts and narratives. CST
Comprehension test scores were used to measure reading comprehension. The CDE, in
the California Standards Tests Technical Report Spring 2011 Administration document,
states, “validity evidence has been gathered and established for the following purposes:”
The tests that make up the STAR Program, along with other assessments, provide
results or score summaries that are used for different purposes. The four major
purposes are:
1. Communicating with parents and guardians
2. Informing decisions needed to support student achievement
3. Evaluating school programs
4. Providing data for state and federal accountability programs for schools. (CDE,
2012, p. 378)
The qualitative data are presented in the form of case studies and narrative. More
discussion of the research questions, purpose, and methodology takes place in Chapter 3.
Summary of Theoretical Frameworks
Systems Theory, Universal Design for Learning Theory, and the Appreciative
Inquiry Theory, framed this study. The connections between regular day school and after
school are difficult to quantify. Factors such as life experiences students bring with them
make it difficult to gauge growth due specifically to an afterschool program. However,
through the application of theories used in the fields of professional development,
16
educational psychology, psychology, and science, we may gain a greater understanding
of how afterschool programs influence student achievement.
Systems Theory
Systems theory (ST) offers a broad view of all the system components and the
ability to specifically attend to what each component does. ST is helpful in
understanding how systems that strengthen achievement during the school day, or in
other instructional programs, can be applied to afterschool programs. It is also an
important way to keep the students’ needs at the center of all decisions made within the
system.
Using ST through the lens of theorists such as von Bertalanfy, Banathy, Senge,
Pascoe, and Bronfenbrenner allows the observation of several key systems studied in this
dissertation. One system is Ross School, home to the ASP, followed in this study.
Another system is the ASP. Other systems include individual classrooms; the county,
state, and federal school systems; and, of course, the teachers and students, each one
affecting and being affected by the other systems in place.
Universal Design for Learning Theory
The Universal Design for Learning Theory (UDL) is an architectural design
theory originated by Ronald Mace (2010) from the University of North Carolina. UDL
ensures all visitors to buildings have appropriate access whether through wheelchair
ramps or sunken curbs, etc. A relatively new UDL theory presented by Rose and Gravel,
offers equal opportunities for every student to learn. The theory stresses that curriculum,
17
instruction, and assessment designed in alignment with UDL theory is flexible and
accessible, and that to best support every learner, the pedagogical strategy or method
should affect or modify the teaching, the student engagement, or the assessment. UDL is
used in this study in Chapter 2 to analyze best practices in teaching reading
comprehension and in Chapter 5 when presenting suggestions.
Appreciative Inquiry Theory
Appreciative Inquiry Theory (AI) was created in 1980 by David Cooperrider at
Case Western Reserve University as part of his doctoral work in organizational change
models. It was brought to the education field because it was a positive approach to
making change based on utilizing core strengths as a foundation for innovation and
growth (Cooperrider, Whitney, & Stravos, 2003). The word “appreciate” in Appreciative
Inquiry refers to “the act of recognizing the best in people or in the world around us,” by
focusing on our strengths and potentials (Cooperrider et al., 2003, p. 318). This can be
accomplished through the use of Cooperrider et al.’s cyclical, four-stage creation cycle,
used by stakeholders to create positive systems and discussed in Chapter 2.
The work of other AI theorists, Bernard, Yballe and O’Connor, and Watkins, are
discussed in this dissertation. An ASP assessment tool, designed to affect positive
change, is also discussed. A thorough discussion of Systems Theory, Universal Design
for Learning Theory, and the Appreciative Inquiry Theory, and their relevance to this
dissertation is continued in Chapters 2 and 5.
18
Operational Definitions
Achievement gap
Occurs when one group of students outperforms another group academically and
the difference in average scores for the two groups is statistically significant
(NECS, 2012).
Appreciative Inquiry Theory (AIT)
AIT emphasizes a positive approach to facilitate change in an organization.
California Standards Test (CST)
The CST is a fully standards-based, criterion-referenced test assessing the
California content standards in ELA, mathematics, science, and history-social
science. Students in grades 2-11 are tested during the regular school day using
the CST.
Comprehension/Comprehension strategies
Comprehension is the act of gaining meaning from reading. The Report of the
National Reading Panel discussed the fact that comprehension strategies were
developed and used beginning in the 1970s so readers could learn to extend and
manage their own comprehension (National Reading Panel, 2000).
Credentialed teachers
Teachers who have a clear credential and are employed in the district
19
English learners
“Those students whose primary language is other than English and who are
limited in the English language skills needed to effectively participate in our
classrooms” (O’Connell, 2010, p. iv).
Explicit instruction
Instructors present or explain a language element (a rule or form) to the students
and then provide opportunities for them to study or practice the element with
many examples;” or “instructors engage students in tasks containing many
examples of a particular form or rule and then direct students’ attention to the
language element so students arrive at the rule by themselves or with the teachers’
guidance” (Saunders & Goldenberg, 2010, p. 38)
Hispanic or Latino
Hispanic and Latino describe males and females identified as being Hispanic or
Latino. The U.S. Census Bureau (2012) defined Hispanic or Latino as a person of
Cuban, Mexican, Puerto Rican, South or Central American, or other Spanish
culture or origin.
Out of school time program (OST)
An afterschool program is an OST.
Paraprofessionals
The instructional staff of the afterschool program featured in this dissertation
were hired by the district as “paraprofessionals,” though they are referred to as
20
“instructional staff.” The requirements of a paraprofessional are defined by the
California Department of Education:
o
o
o
o
High school diploma or the equivalent, and
Two years of college (48 units), or
A.A. degree (or higher), or
Pass a local assessment of knowledge and skills in assisting in instruction.
(CDE, 2012c)
Systems Theory (ST)
For the purpose of this dissertation, a systems theory is a philosophy or
assumption about a particular system’s purpose, relationships, and productivity.
It is also a methodology, or a concrete application of a theory in an attempt to
facilitate design and/or systemic change.
Universal Design for Learning Theory (UDL)
UDL was originally used for designing and constructing buildings, homes, and
products to accommodate the widest spectrum of users. UDL applies this idea to
learning – that curriculum and instruction should be designed to accommodate all
types of learners.
Assumptions and Limitations
This section identifies facts assumed to be true but not actually verified by the
researcher. It also identifies potential weaknesses of the study and the bounds of the
study.

This study focused on the achievement of Hispanic learners, though recognized
the fact that other significant subgroups also deserve analysis.
21

This dissertation focused on the achievement gap in reading comprehension,
though recognized that significant achievement gaps may occur in other areas of
reading and in other subjects, such as mathematics.

Expanded learning opportunities include a variety of options for students
including school-based community learning centers for before- and after-school
care, centers for care during the summer, and tutoring programs specifically
focused on achievement in targeted areas of instruction. For the purposes of this
study, this dissertation focused on student achievement related to afterschool
programs.

The test to be used to determine student achievement was the CST, a component
of the regular school day.

Systems Theory, Appreciative Inquiry Theory, and the Universal Design for
Learning Theory were used to frame the study. The theories acted as a lens
through which student achievement on the CST was measured, and
recommendations for afterschool programs were made.

When measuring CST comprehension scores for Questions #1 and #2, the
researcher used a simple random sampling of students.

This study used a comparative design. An underlying assumption of comparative
design is that the groups for the study are already intact. In this research, groups
studied were students enrolled in the afterschool program and students not
enrolled in the afterschool program, and Hispanic students and non-Hispanic
22
students. During the regular school day, students may have different classroom
teachers, but all students come from the same school with the same
administration. It is assumed all regular school day teachers were teaching to the
same California English/language arts content standards and using the same
district-adopted English/language arts curriculum.

This study is limited to the instruction and learning at one elementary school, in
one afterschool program in Northern California. Given this, research findings
will be difficult to generalize to other populations.

This study is limited to the use of non-credentialed instructors in the ASP;
therefore, the instructional staff members have usually not completed a collegelevel course in reading instruction.
Significance of the Study
A great deal of research exists that addresses afterschool programs. However, a
great amount of the information available focuses on aspects of running afterschool
programs; the majority of the factors addressed were related to student safety, physical
education-related topics, nutrition, and enrichment activities. Many of the studies
focused on students at the middle school level. It was not until relatively recently,
approximately 2000, that studies began to focus on the value of afterschool programs
with regard to improving student achievement by supporting the school day through
alignment with the school day program. Even fewer studies focused on students at the
elementary level, and still fewer focused primarily on Hispanic students (Vaden-Kiernan
23
et al., 2008). This study addressed a serious and significant problem and will contribute
valuable information that can shape programs and policies for a variety of stakeholders
including students, teachers, program staff, parents, families, and the community.
Remainder of the Study
This dissertation includes five chapters. Chapter 1 introduced the study and
contains the Problem Statement, Nature of the Study, Theoretical Base, Operational
Definitions, Assumptions and Limitations, Study Significance, and an introduction to the
Remainder of the Study.
Chapter 2 provides an overview of ASPs and reviews recent peer-reviewed
literature and seminal works in the field of failure to read proficiently, achievement gap,
comprehension instruction, and literature discussing the provision of support for Hispanic
learners. Theories framing the discussion of the dissertation are explained.
Chapter 3 contains information about the participants, instruments used, and the
design and procedures for data collection and analysis. Also included are the study
methodology, and validity factors. In Chapter 4, the data is presented, interpreted, and
explained. Graphs and charts illustrate the data findings. Chapter 5 contains a summary
of the study’s findings. Limitations of the study and implications for future research are
also discussed. The document concludes with recommended actions for afterschool
programs.
24
Chapter 2
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Overview of Afterschool Programs
The information in this section provides a general overview of ASPs – how they
came into being, what they are, and their financial aspects. Also included is a sub-section
with information specifically about Ross School, providing background information and
informing suggestions as to how ASPs may support comprehension achievement.
In the mid-1990s, the federal government significantly increased funding to ASPs.
School-based community learning centers for before- and after-school care, and care
during the summer in some cases, could receive federal funding. The 21st Century
Community Learning Centers (CCLCs) are funded through the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act at over $1 billion annually and are a major funding source. The
U.S. Department of Education (DOE; 2012) explains the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act:
The purpose of the CCLCs is to provide opportunities for communities to
establish or expand activities in community learning centers that —
(1) Provide opportunities for academic enrichment, including providing tutorial
services to help students, particularly students who attend low-performing
schools, to meet State and local student academic achievement standards in core
academic subjects, such as reading and mathematics;
(2) Offer students a broad array of additional services, programs, and activities,
such as youth development activities, drug and violence prevention programs,
counseling programs, art, music, and recreation programs, technology education
programs, and character education programs, that are designed to reinforce and
complement the regular academic program of participating students; and
(3) Offer families of students served by community learning centers opportunities
for literacy and related educational development.
25
In A Blueprint for Reform: The Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act, which outlines the information discussed above, Arne Duncan (2010),
United States Secretary of Education said, “All programs (CCLCs) will focus on
improving student academic achievement in core academic subjects” (Duncan, 2010, p.
32). Other federal funds come from Title I, serving economically disadvantaged
students; Full Service Community Schools Funding, funding schools that offer a large
array of full services to the community; and the Federal Child Nutrition Program,
providing snacks and meals to low-income children and youth (National Association of
Elementary School Principals, 2009).
At the state level, California authorized Proposition 49, which guarantees $550
million annually to afterschool programs – a larger investment than all other states
combined. Annually, California administers $550 million in state funds, and $130
million in federal funds for afterschool programs (Torlakson, 2011). Briefly discussed in
Chapter 1, ASES is a non-competitive funding source. Funding, at $550 million, is
designed to maintain before and afterschool program funding for all elementary and
middle schools throughout California that submit quality applications. The afterschool
enrichment program is offered free to students, and daily attendance is expected and
required (Child Action, 2011). See Table 3 at the end of this section.
As legislated, the ASES program must be aligned with, and not be a repeat of, the
academic content of the regular school day. A safe physical and emotional environment,
26
as well as opportunities for relationship building, must be provided. ASPs funded by
ASES must consist of
An educational and literacy element (that) must provide tutoring and/or
homework assistance designed to help students meet state standards in one or
more of the following core academic subjects: reading/language arts,
mathematics, history and social studies, or science. (CDE, 2012d, para. 5)
“The educational enrichment element must offer an array of additional services,
programs, and activities that reinforce and complement the school’s academic program”
(CDE, 2012d, para. 6). ASES program leaders work closely with school site
administrators and staff to integrate each element with the school's curriculum,
instruction, and learning support activities.
Additionally, California has been funding a comprehensive community approach
through the Healthy Start Program since 1989, providing alignment of resources and
programs including before- and after-school care aimed at supporting families at the local
level. The community approach “connects children and families to academic, health,
social service and other resources that help remove barriers to learning and support
academic success” (Torlakson, 2011, p. 18).
The United Way has stepped in to support the efforts to teach reading in ASPs.
United Way’s STAR Readers project is working to ensure all children are reading
at grade level by fourth grade…. The project uses a three-pronged approach:
after-school tutoring to at-risk children from kindergarten through third grade,
tools and resources for parents… and summer reading programs for children.
(United Way, 2011b, para. 3)
Amounts funded vary between approximately $50,000 and $94,000 to six different
agencies that provide services to students (United Way, 2011b).
27
A variety of other funding options exist. Some funding is earmarked for
programs with a specific purpose, such as keeping kids off drugs and alcohol, preventing
obesity, or improving achievement in struggling schools. Others provide goods such as
meals, snacks, or technology. Partnerships are developing in some programs between
public entities and private organizations and businesses to fund and/or lead specific
afterschool efforts (National Association of Elementary School Principals, 2009). See
Table 3 for information about funding sources.
Table 3
Afterschool Funding
Name
Funding Source
Amount
Expectations
The 21st
Century
Com-munity
Learning
Centers
(CCLCs)
Federally Funded
through Elementary
and Secondary
Education Act
Over $1 billion annually in United
States, California administers $130
million in federal funds for 21st
Century program (Torlakson, 2011)
Offers academic
enrichment, youth
development, and
family support
Guarantees $550 million annually to
after school programs- a larger
investment than all other states
combined (Torlakson, 2011). The
funded amount is $7.50 per student,
per day.
Must be aligned with,
and not be a repeat of,
the academic content
of the regular school
day. A safe physical
and emotional
environment, as well
as opportunities for
relationship building,
must be provided.
ASPs must consist of
an educational
element, a literacy
element and an
enrichment element.
(One of two
programs California
Department of
Education oversees)
Proposition
49, 2002
(aka ASES)
After School
Education
and Safety
Program
California State
Funded
(One of two
programs California
Department of
Education oversees)
28
Table 3 (continued)
Name
Funding Source
Amount
Expectations
Title 1:
Improving
the
Academic
Achievemen
t of the Disadvantaged
Federally Funded
$160,000,000 shall be available under
section 1502 of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965
(ESEA) Proposed budget fiscal year
2013. A comprehensive literacy
development and education program
to advance literacy skills, including
pre-literacy skills, reading, and
writing, for students from birth
through grade 12.
http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/e
sea02/pg1.html
Serves economically
disadvantaged
students- funding is
available and a portion
MAY be used toward
after school programs
Full Service
Community
Schools
Funding
(FSCS)
Federally Funded
FSCS funded under the Fund for
Improvement of Education (FIE),
which is authorized under the
Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965.
Funds schools that
offer a large array of
full services to the
community- full
service would include
after school programs
amongst other services
Appropriation: $10,000,000;
Number of New Awards Anticipated:
10;
Average New Award:
$494,826
; Number of Continuation
Awards: 10
; Average Continuation
Award: $415,000
; Range of New
Awards: $483,560-$500,000
http://www2.ed.gov/programs/commu
nityschools/index.html
Federal
Child
Nutrition
Program
Federally Funded
The National School Lunch Program
offers cash reimbursement to help
schools serve snacks to children in
afterschool activities aimed at
promoting the health and well being of
children and youth in our
communities. A school must provide
snacks to children participating in
regularly scheduled activities in an
organized, structured and supervised
environment; include educational or
enrichment activities (e.g., mentoring
or tutoring programs).
http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/About/A
boutCNP.htm
Provides snacks,
meals, and/or milk to
low-income children
and youth. Publically
funded programs are
required to serve a
snack.
29
Table 3 (continued)
Name
Funding Source
Amount
Expectations
Child
Nutrition,
California
Department
of Education
California State
Funded
Provides after school snacks or dinner
meals to those qualified for free or
reduced priced meals
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/nu/cn/faq.as
p#general
This is optional
funding.
Healthy
Start
Program,
since 1989
California State
Funded
Planning grants of $50,000 are
awarded for up to a two-year period,
and operational grants provide
$400,000 for up to a five-year period.
Combined grants of up to $450,000
are awarded over a seven-year period.
Currently there is no new funding for
Healthy Start grants. (CDE, 2012c)
Provides alignment of
resources and
programs, including
before and after school
care, aimed at
supporting families at
the local level for
schools where more
than 50% are eligible
for free and reduced
priced meals. The
community approach
“connects children and
families to academic,
health, social service
and other resources
that help remove
barriers to learning
and support academic
success” (Torlakson,
2011, p. 18)
Tobacco
Free School
District
Funds
California State
Funded
Grades 6-12
Promote smoke-free
environments and
tobacco-free lifestyles
throughout the state.
Antibullying
California State
Funded
(CDE, 2012f)
(CDE, 2012h)
Provides key elements
of a bullying
prevention program
30
Table 3 (continued)
Name
Funding Source
Amount
Expectations
Indian
Education
California State
Funded
Approximately $10,000-$20,000 per
county
The American Indian
Early Childhood
Education (AIECE)
Program, California
Department of
Education began in the
1970s. It is designed to
develop and test
educational models
that increase
competence in
reading, language arts,
mathematics, and selfesteem for American
Indian children in prekindergarten through
grade four. Funds are
designated for schools
with at least 10
percent American
Indian students, and
they are allocated
through a competitive
process for three-year
cycles. There are nine
counties participating
in the program for
2008-2009
(CDE, 2009)
Ross School’s After School Education and Safety Program (ASES)
Ross ASES includes one lead and a second instructional staff member. The
instructional staff members are paraprofessionals. A description of a paraprofessional is
located in the Operational Definitions section. Ross ASES is funded only by ASES at
$7.50 per student, per day. The ASP is aligned with, and not a repeat of, the academic
content of the regular school day. Students are provided with a safe physical and
emotional environment and opportunities for relationship building.
31
A typical day at Ross ASES may contain the following elements:
4. Snack: Students receive a snack through the National School Lunch Program.
The program offers cash reimbursement to schools that serve snacks to children in
afterschool activities in an organized, structured, and supervised environment.
5. One hour of homework: Students work on homework assigned by the regular
school day teacher and seek help from the instructional staff as needed and as
time allows. Completing homework is an essential component of Ross ASES.
6. Exercise: Students engage in free play outside as weather allows or participate in
structured games. SPARK is a physical education program for preschool through
grade 12 students emphasizing non-competitive games and physical activities to
instill in students a love of healthy activity (more information about SPARK is
included later in this chapter). SPARK is included as physical exercise time, but
it is also considered a relationship-building tool as it teaches good sportsmanship
and teamwork skills.
7. Literacy activities: Ross ASES purchased the computerized literacy program
Accelerated Reader. Students use the computer to read and respond to selected
passages that are at each student’s independent reading level. Additionally,
teachers read books to students and question the students as they read. Ross
ASES instructional staff is participating in a program of English language arts
instruction through the County Office of Education. The instructional staff is
32
learning to incorporate instructional strategies used by the regular school day
teachers into ASP activities.
8. Enrichment activities: These activities could include drama, music, art, etc.
The actual schedule follows:
ASP Schedule:
2:37-2:50: Students check in
2:50-3:10: Snack
3:10-3:20: Bathroom
3:20-4:20: Homework
4:20-4:30: Bathroom
4:30-4:40: Raffle/Auction
4:40-5:30: SPARK (Tuesday and Thursday)/Computer Lab and/or
Educational Games (Monday and Wednesday)
5:30-5:40: Clean up
5:40: Students go home
Similar to the regular school day classrooms, the ASP has rules the students and staff
created for the safety and well being of students and staff members. The ASP rules
follow.
ASP Rules:
1. Respect the staff, yourself, and others.
2. Keep your hands, feet, and objects to yourself.
33
3. No talking during homework time.
4. Ask permission for anything and everything you need.
5. Stay grounded- 1 foot, and 4 legs of chair.
6. Use appropriate language.
Seating: Students are seated by a seating chart, according to temperament and needs.
Student Jobs (Students are “hired” by ASP staff after completing a job application.):
1. Bathroom monitors
2. SPARK helpers
3. Garbage helpers
4. Sweepers
5. Backpack helpers
6. Subs
Review of Related Literature Introduction
Efforts are underway at schools around the country to bring struggling readers to
proficiency. One opportunity to increase student proficiency may be during the time after
school – in a structured afterschool program. This dissertation focused on the
achievement of students at the elementary level. It addresses a serious and significant
academic area of need, specifically reading comprehension, and how an ASP may
support comprehension. This dissertation sought to provide valuable information that
could shape programs and policies for a variety of stakeholders including students,
teachers, program staff, parents, families, and the community, and will aim to answer
34
important questions. How are ASPs funded? Do expectations accompany the funding?
What does effective comprehension instruction look like? Is instruction different for
English learners?
Chapter 2 explains the theories providing the framework for this dissertation and
presents a review or the literature informing this study. The very small amount of
research related to addressing comprehension achievement of all students, and especially
Hispanic students, in an ASP is presented. The first section summarizes research
pertaining to afterschool programs. The next section reviews information about how
ASPs are funded, and highlights expectations that may come from the funding sources.
The third section provides a summary of reading research in comprehension and spells
out best practices in comprehension instruction. The information from the
comprehension instruction section and the afterschool sections inform suggestions (in
Chapter 5) as to how afterschool programs may support comprehension achievement.
The fourth section discusses factors affecting the Hispanic learner, including the
achievement gap, and offers best practices for supporting the Hispanic learner.
Review of Theoretical Framework
Systems Theory
According to von Bertalanfy (1968), Banathy (1992), and other foundational
authors in the field, systems theory claims that most things, people, and processes operate
within a system. Most systems interact and depend on other systems; a system is an
evolutionary process (not a product). If one can recognize the systems in place, then
35
systems theory can be used to benefit the way we interact with stakeholders, form
relationships, and create processes to improve efficiency and promote learning.
Systems theory originated as a tool for use in the natural sciences, consider the
human body as an open system using input of food and water and air, and creating output
of energy. As an interdisciplinary tool, systems theory is also used in the social sciences.
Open systems are open to input such as stimuli, information, and communication,
whereas closed systems maintain themselves without accepting input or providing output
(Bess & Dee, 2008). As an example of an open system, imagine a business that takes in
resources from suppliers around the globe, uses manpower and energy, and creates
widgets to sell to other countries. Conversely, North Korea might be considered a closed
system.
Several key systems are at work in this dissertation. One system is the school
housing the ASP followed in the study. Another system is the afterschool program and
all the students involved. Other systems include the classrooms teachers, and the county,
state, and federal school systems, each one affecting the ASP in the study and each being
affected by the other systems in place.
The systems theory allows an observer of, or a participant in, a system to view all
the system components and attend to what each component does. Systems theory also
enables the observer or participant to monitor input and its transformation to output. In
this case, an input could be teaching and an output might be student achievement.
Systems theory allows the opportunity to observe changes in the system and its
36
environment, as well (Pascoe, 2006; Senge, 1990). An example of a change could be
improvement of test scores after altering the teaching (the input).
Urie Bronfenbrenner (1979), in The Ecology of Human Development:
Experiments by Nature and Design, discussed ecological systems theory as it pertains to
education. His work emphasized the importance of ensuring student development and
relationships were considered when making systemic change and are the primary systems
theory used in this dissertation. Bronfenbrenner discussed the human development
process:
Human development is the process through which the growing person acquires a
more extended, differentiated and valid conception of the ecological environment,
and becomes motivated and able to engage in activities that reveal the properties
of, sustain, or restructure that environment at levels of similar or greater
complexity in form and content. (Bronfenbrenner, 1979, p. 27)
Bronfenbrenner discussed the term “the ecology of human development” as it
pertained to Systems Theory. He described it as the scientific study of a growing person
(student) and the relationship between the student and the changing properties of the
setting in which the student lived, as well as “the larger context in which the settings are
embedded” (1979, p. 21). Changes to the setting and relations between settings impact
the growing student, and the student impacts the environment. Layers of relationships
exist within, and impact, a student’s daily life. Bronfenbrenner imagined these layers as
“a nested arrangement of concentric structures” each within another, like nesting dolls.
The first layer, the microsystem, is the setting in which the student has “activities, roles
and interpersonal relationships” (p. 22) with significant people such as parents, friends,
37
and teachers. The student lives, works, plays, and develops within this layer. For a
student in an afterschool program, the school day classroom and the afterschool
classroom, as well as the relationships with the teachers and students would lie within the
microsystem.
Cross-relationships exist within microsystems and they create a second layer. The
student’s significant people formally or informally communicate with each other, for
instance when the student’s afterschool program paraprofessional speaks with parents, or
with the school day teacher. These cross-relationships lie within the mesosystem.
The third layer is the exosystem. It contains those settings affecting the student,
but in which the student is not directly involved. This group could include the student’s
parents’ employers, local school board, student’s healthcare providers, or central school
administrators. These people make decisions directly affecting the student.
The fourth layer is the macrosystem and includes important conditions determined
by the culture dominating the student’s life. For example, a student can go to the post
office and it will generally look like and function as a post office. However, a post office
in another country may not look or function as the student expects. Other examples
include churches, classrooms, and parks. The term “Church” was used in Figure 2, but it
symbolizes all places of worship.
As a student grows, biological changes occur, as do transitions within the layers
of settings. Students change schools, parents lose jobs and gain new ones, medical
conditions change, etc. Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) ecology of human development argues
38
that every life transition is both a biological one and an altered environmental condition
and can occur within any four of the system layers. It is important to consider the student
and how the “movement through ecological space (can be both a) product and a producer
of developmental change” (p. 26).
Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) ecological systems theory is a good fit with this
dissertation because it provides an opportunity to view the achievement of students in the
afterschool program compared to those who are not, and Hispanic students compared to
non-Hispanic students through the lenses of the microsystems, mesosystems, exosystems,
and macrosystem. Bronfenbrenner’s theory provides an opportunity to keep the student
development and relationships at the center during periods of systemic change. When
one considers movement through the ecological layers as areas of potential
developmental change, decisions may be made more deliberately and thoughtfully. It
was used to better understand the actions of stakeholders in the systems related to this
study (see Figure 2).
39
Figure 2. Bronfenbrenner’s layers of relationships for a student in an afterschool setting
One example of how Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) ecological systems theory can be
applied to this dissertation is by examining a system in place at the school participating in
this study, Ross School. The program in place is called Sports, Play, and Active
Recreation for Kids (SPARK). It is a physical education program for preschool through
grade 12 emphasizing non-competitive games and physical activities to instill in students
a love of healthy activity. The SPARK program was developed in response to concern
about a general lack of student physical fitness, a public health concern. It includes three
important features: an active curriculum, staff development, and follow-up support
(McKenzie, Sallis, & Rosengard, 2009).
40
Applying Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) first layer, the Microsystem, the student lives,
plays, and attends school and the ASP. Within that layer, the parents and teachers
communicate about the child, perhaps about his exercise habits, which forms the second
layer, the Mesosystem. The third layer is the Exosystem. Through research, the federal
government determines our society may not be as physically fit as possible so takes steps
to counteract that trend. Grants are funded, and programs such as SPARK are created.
The ASP purchases the program, perhaps in response to concern expressed by
constituents, medical practitioners, or teachers. The final layer, the Macrosystem is the
culture in which the student lives. The culture affects and influences the student in ways
perhaps unknown to the student. For example, through advertisements and television
shows, video games, and billboards, the student develops ideas about how he wants to eat
and exercise. The SPARK program is working within all layers of the student’s life to
change perceptions about diet and exercise and help the student develop healthy patterns
of behavior.
An important aspect of Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) ecological systems theory is that
it can be applied to many systems operating simultaneously. In the previous example, a
system is in place around the SPARK program at Ross School. At the same time, many
systems around the afterschool program are in place, and at least one pertains to student
academic achievement. Applying Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) first layer, the Microsystem,
the student lives, plays, and attends school and the ASP. Within that layer, the parents
and teachers communicate about the child, perhaps about his exercise habits, which forms
41
the second layer, the Mesosystem. The third layer is the Exosystem. Through research,
the federal government determines our society may not be as physically fit as possible so
takes steps to counteract that trend. Grants are funded, and programs such as CCLL and
ASES are created. The school board implements the program, perhaps in response to
concern expressed by community members, parents, or teachers. The final layer, the
Macrosystem is the culture in which the student lives. The culture affects and influences
the student in ways perhaps unknown to the student. For example, through television
shows, video games, and a variety of other social activities, a student develops ideas
about how he wants to spend his time, whether it is reading, playing video games, or
watching television. The ASES program is working within all layers of the student’s life
to increase opportunities to be exposed to text, to practice reading, and to complete
homework. At the same time, the student is affecting the system, as well as other
students and paraprofessionals within the system.
Universal Design for Learning Theory
UDL offers equal opportunities for every student to learn because curriculum
created in alignment with UDL theory is flexible and accessible. UDL theory is
applicable to all students in afterschool programs, but for the purposes of this study it is
especially applicable to recommendations for English learners and for students not
achieving at the Proficient level in reading comprehension.
When utilizing strategies to support all learners, it is helpful to consider the three
Key Principles of Universal Design for Learning: a) Represent – different ways to
42
represent essential core concepts, b) Engagement – how students participate in class, and
c) Expression – how students are asked to demonstrate what they have learned (Rose &
Gravel, 2010). The strategy or method, to be most effective, should affect or modify the
teaching, the student engagement, or the assessment. Later in this chapter, tables are
presented that consolidate information about reading comprehension. Which UDL Key
Principle is supported by the Best Practice is denoted in the tables.
CAST, a nonprofit research and development organization, works to expand
learning opportunities, through UDL, for all individuals, especially those with
disabilities. CAST states, “Individuals bring a huge variety of skills, needs, and interests
to learning. Neuroscience reveals that these differences are as varied and unique as our
DNA or fingerprints” (CAST, 2012, para. 3). The theory is applicable to all students in
afterschool programs, but for the purpose of this study, it is especially applicable to
recommendations for English learners and for students who do not comprehend at the
Proficient level.
Later in this chapter, a checklist is presented incorporating key elements of
Universal Design Theory; it is titled Elements of Universal Design Theory and
Appreciative Inquiry Theory Pertaining to Teaching, Student Engagement, and
Assessment. The checklist was used while visiting the Ross ASP to help the observer
determine which elements of UDT were used by the Ross ASP staff.
43
Appreciative Inquiry Theory
Cooperrider et al.’s AI theory (2003) centers on the four D's – Discover, Dream,
Design, and Destiny – a creation cycle; at the heart of the AI creation cycle is the positive
core or positive question. The positive question begins the 4-D cycle. The 4-D cycle
builds and keeps momentum moving around the positive question and provides a
framework for continual learning. It constantly cycles back to the beginning of the
process. Each “D” (stage) has a specific objective:
Discovery stage is an understanding of the "what is and what has been." The
stage forms an appreciation and value for the topic of study. The group generates
information about the topic and converses about understanding. The group begins to
discuss what is working well in the learning process. The Discovery stage starts learning
with a positive interaction. In this dissertation, the Discovery stage would be the
literature review in Chapter 2 and the collection of data.
The Dream stage identifies "what might be" and focuses learners on areas for
potential improvement and new learning outcomes. The Design stage helps determine
"what should be." Individuals are encouraged to create possibilities or suggest positive
changes to be implemented. The Destiny stage provides a vision of "what will be." It is
the final stage and is ongoing.
What makes AI useful as an educational theory is not simply the four D's, but the
value educators place on each student. This theory helps educators seek out and focus on
student strengths and accomplishments. The 4-D process is guided by the belief that all
44
students bring varied strengths to work, school, organizations, relationships, and teams.
Concepts and insights are personally meaningful because they are based on individuals’
experiences and are easily relatable to the students’ lives. AI is a theory based on mutual
trust and safety between regular-day teachers, after-school instructional staff, and
students. It is a student-centered approach emphasizing increased interpersonal and team
building skills and higher-order thinking skills. The student is taught to be responsible
for his or her own learning (Yballe & O'Connor, 2000).
Consider again the SPARK program, the physical education program for
preschool through grade 12 that emphasizes non-competitive games and physical
activities to instill in students a love of healthy activity. SPARK is an excellent example
of AI theory in place in Ross School’s ASP. The SPARK system encourages positive
youth development by appreciating and encouraging the efforts of all students. There are
no winners or losers in the sporting activities. The focus is simply the joy of healthy
activity – encouraging what is best for each student.
AI is a theory and practice for approaching change from a holistic framework.
Based on the belief that human systems are made and imagined by those who live and
work within them, AI leads systems to move toward the generative and creative images
residing in their most positive core – their values, visions, achievements, and best
practices (Watkins & Mohr, 2001). AI allows stakeholders to create positive systems to
meet student needs. “Appreciative Inquiry builds momentum and success because it
believes in people. It really is an invitation to a positive revolution. Its goal is to discover
45
in all human beings the exceptional and the essential. Its goal is to create organizations
that are in full voice” (Cooperrider, 2001, p. 12).
One very important benefit of fostering a positive environment in the ASP setting
is that, according to Bernard (1993), it helps foster resiliency in students who may be
experiencing overwhelming adversity. “Families, schools, and communities that have
protected children growing up in adversity are characterized by 1. Caring and support, 2.
Positive expectations, and 3. Ongoing opportunities for participation” (p. 44). Bernard
stressed that teacher behavior and attitudes play an important role in fostering resiliency,
especially for students who may not have a supportive home life. It is important for
students to know teachers feel schoolwork is important, and the instructional staff
members expect students to do the work. Teachers who “play to the strengths of each
child exert a powerful motivating influence” (Bernard, p. 46).
Appreciative Inquiry Theory permeates the work of the California Afterschool
Network (CAN). The CAN along with the CDE developed an After-School Program
Quality Self-Assessment Tool (QSAT) containing 11 Program Quality Elements (CAN,
2009). The tool was created to help ASPs discuss and consider program quality and
continuous program improvement. Section 6, Youth Development, is a positive,
motivating tool that “employs research based on “youths’ assets and promises, rather than
risk prevention and repairing deficits” (pp. 12-13). The Youth Development model is not
a separate model to be implemented, rather a philosophy to be incorporated into existing
systems.
46
The model is broken into three parts:
1. Supportive Environment: Includes ideals such as “Youth have the opportunity to
try new skills with support from staff” (p. 12).
2. Interaction: “Youth and staff share leadership of most activities: adults provide
guidance and facilitation while youth have the opportunity to lead activities and to
work independently or as part of a small group” (p. 13).
3. Engagement: “Youth have multiple opportunities to provide input into the
structure and content of the program” (p. 13).
Consideration of AI theory helped ensure recommendations in this study are
positive and appropriate for all members of the system. AI plays an important role in
Chapter 5. Key elements of AI and UDL are incorporated into the checklist in Table 4.
The checklist was used while observing the Ross ASP to help determine which elements
of UDL and AI the Ross ASP staff used.
47
Table 4
Observation Checklist: Elements of Universal Design Theory and Appreciative Inquiry
Theory Pertaining to Teaching, Student Engagement, and Assessment
Element
Element
Number
1
Represent: Are students provided with
a variety of different ways to represent
essential core concepts?
2
Engagement: Are students invited and
encouraged to participate in class?
3
Expression: Are students able to
demonstrate what they have learned in
a variety of ways?
4
Discovery stage: Does the staff work
to develop an understanding of the
"what is and what has been" that
forms an appreciation and value for
the topic of study?
5
Is the student group encouraged to
generate information about the topic
and converse about their
understanding?
6
Is the student group encouraged to
discuss what is working well in the
learning process?
7
Is learning started with a positive
interaction?
8
The Dream stage: Are learners
encouraged to focus on areas for
potential improvement and new
learning outcomes? (Think and
discuss)
9
The Design stage: Are students
encouraged to create possibilities or to
suggest positive changes to be
implemented? (Do/create)
Frequency and notes
48
Table 4 (continued)
Element
Number
Element
10
The Destiny stage: Are students
provided a voice in "what will be" in
their ongoing learning? Can they help
to guide the path their learning is
taking? (Current and future)
11
Do staff members seek out and focus
on student strengths and
accomplishments?
12
Is an environment of mutual trust and
safety between regular day teachers,
after school instructional staff, and
students apparent?
13
Are team building skills taught and
encouraged?
14
Are higher order thinking skills taught
and encouraged?
15
Are students taught to be responsible
for their own learning?
16
Are non-competitive games and
physical activities encouraged?
17
Is it apparent that staff members are
caring and supportive of students?
18
Do staff members convey positive
expectations for students?
19
Are ongoing opportunities for
participation provided?
20
Is it apparent that staff members feel
schoolwork is important, and that they
expect students to do their work?
Frequency and notes
Review of Studies Related to Afterschool Programs
The studies reviewed in this section pertain to ASPs. Some studies reviewed
involved Hispanic learners, some involved reading comprehension, some aimed to
49
determine growth over a one-year time period. This dissertation is not a replica of any
study. The review of studies related to afterschool programs follows.
English Learner Intervention Program Study
Cirino, Vaughn, Linan-Thompson, Cardenas-Hagan, and Fletcher (2009),
conducted a study examining English and Spanish performances one year after
interventions. The interventions were provided in Spanish or English on separate groups
of English learners in an elementary school, and the researchers wanted to learn whether
the effects were still measureable one year later. The researchers touted the study as “A
positive step in demonstrating the effectiveness of intervention with ELLs in either
language over time” (p. 777). The researchers used explicit instruction in core reading
competencies, controlled for task difficulty through systematic scaffolding, taught
students individually or in small groups, modeled, taught students when and where to
apply strategies, provided ongoing and systematic feedback, and used ongoing progress
monitoring (Foorman & Torgesen, 2001; Lyon, Fletcher, Fuchs, & Chhabra, 2006;
Swanson, Harris, & Graham, 2003; Swanson, Hoskyn, & Lee, 1999; Vaughn, Gersten, &
Chard, 2000). The pedagogical strategies were applied to the list of Best Practices for
Hispanic Learners and used with recommendations in Chapter 5. Like this proposed
dissertation, one aspect of this study examines the comprehension achievement of the
Hispanic learner and compares growth over a one-year period.
50
Adolescent Afterschool Program Study
The Committee on Community-Level Programs for Youth (CCLPY) is a project
of the National Research Council (NRC) and the Institute of Medicine (IOM) (Eccles &
Gootman, 2002). The CCLPY completed a two-year study in which a 15-member team
evaluated and integrated an afterschool program for adolescents around health science.
Sponsors of this study include the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and
Evaluation in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Office of
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention in the U.S. Department of Justice. The
committee aimed to identify gaps and central questions in order to design a research
agenda to promote the healthy development of youth. Target ages were 10 to 18 years.
The research polling showed:

A great community enthusiasm for improving the supply, quality, and access to
after-school programs

A need for before and after-school care in their communities

After-school programs were ‘critical to helping students with difficulties’

A safe place with concerned adults to help with school work is desired by students
(pp. 20-21)
Studies also indicated:
Voluntary participation in after school activities is associated with “positive
identity, increased initiative, and positive relationships with diverse peers and
adults, better school achievement, reduced rates of dropping out of school,
reduced delinquency, and more positive outcomes in adulthood.” (p. 30)
51
The two-year study, similar to this study, focused on students enrolled in an ASP;
however, this dissertation focused on primary grade students rather than adolescents and
was a one-year study.
Afterschool, Math, and Reading Study, Matched Pair Study
The Evaluation of the Centralized, Structured, After School Tutorial, in the
Journal of Educational Research (Shelly, 1984), sought to determine whether the inner
city afterschool reading and math tutoring program was positively impacting student
achievement. Students enrolled in the EXTRA program in a major Southern city were
compared with students not in the program by placement in a matched pairs study design.
The students enrolled in EXTRA showed success in math, as evidenced by the
Comprehensive Test of Basic Skills, but not in reading.
The study size was small; the control and experimental groups could be reviewed,
gender differences were noted, and the study was evaluated over time. In general,
females outperformed males in reading, while males outperformed females in math. The
most noteworthy data showed that while the female matched pairs EXTRA students did
not outperform the control group students in the short-run, in the long run (19 months, on
average), 80% of the EXTRA students outperformed the control group students.
Researchers felt that structured, professional help in a group setting may offer hope to
inner city school programs.
Like the Journal of Educational Research study, reading achievement in an
afterschool program was a focus in this study. Independent Samples t-Test were used,
52
which compared CST scores for students enrolled in an ASP and those not enrolled.
Unlike the Journal of Educational Research study, no matched pairs will be used.
Afterschool, Literacy Tutorial Using Master Degree Candidates Study
Saddler and Staulters (2008), in research published in Intervention in School and
Clinic, presented a successful afterschool reading project using university graduate
students as tutors for struggling readers. The project provided tutoring for fourth grade
students and opportunities to work in the classroom for students in a university master’s
degree program in special education and literacy. The students, considered low-ability
and at-risk, improved in reading ability on measurable objectives throughout the course
of the year. Test results after one academic year showed that many students significantly
improved their word attack skills, comprehension, and social studies knowledge
compared with students of similar abilities who were not in the program. On average, the
students improved at least one grade level in reading ability, according to the results from
the (end-of-year-test).
The Saddler and Staulters study (2008) is similar to the study proposed in this
dissertation in that it focused on literacy. However, their study used graduate students
and purposefully tutored to increase literacy. The Saddler and Staulters study is included
here as an opportunity to describe a typical afterschool program. In a typical ASP, during
the course of the approximately three hours students are in attendance, students complete
homework, participate in recreational activities, and also participate in extension
activities that may include reading comprehension support. Where the Saddler and
53
Staulters study (2008) purposefully tutored to increase literacy, as its only function, this
study is examining the effect ASPs have on students’ comprehension in attendance.
ASPs, depending on funding sources, have many functions including providing a safe
place after school, promoting health and fitness, and more. Literacy may be just one
component.
Review of Studies Related to Comprehension Instruction
Before studying the effects of an afterschool program, it is important to know the
basics of comprehension instruction. This review begins with a study of foundational
research that set the bar for other reading research; after that, more current information
will be discussed. In 2000, the United States Department of Education and the National
Institute of Child Health and Human Development were charged by Congress to assess
the effectiveness of various approaches to reading instruction. The National Reading
Panel (NRP) was formed. It evaluated research that met the following requirements:

Published in English in a refereed journal

Focused on children’s reading development in the age/grade range from preschool
to grade 12

Used an experimental or quasi-experimental design with a control group or a
multiple-baseline method.
After the review, the panel created Teaching Children to Read: An Evidence-
based Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and Its Implications
for Reading Instruction. This is an important study because a bank of scientifically based
54
reading research was created to inform the teaching practice. In its study and report, the
NRP (2000) focused on three areas of comprehension instruction. The first area was
vocabulary instruction, next was text comprehension instruction, and the third was
teacher preparation and comprehension strategies instruction. Because the NRP results
were not conclusive about how to teach vocabulary as part of comprehension instruction,
that will not be addressed here. NRP results for teacher preparation and comprehension
strategies instruction showed
There is a need for greater emphasis in teacher education on the teaching of
reading comprehension. Such instruction should begin at the pre-service level,
and it should be extensive, especially with respect to teaching teachers how to
teach comprehension strategies. (p. 4-125)
Of the three areas the NRP studied (vocabulary instruction, text comprehension
instruction, and teacher preparation and comprehension strategies instruction) this
dissertation addressed comprehension instruction and comprehension strategies
instruction.
The NRP (2000) explained that text comprehension instruction teaches,
motivates, and encourages the reader to use comprehension strategies (pp. 4-6).
Strategies are procedures that help a reader actively process the text when encountering
barriers as he or she reads or writes. Some strategies are helpful when used alone, but
many are more effective when used as part of a multiple-strategy method. The NRP
concluded that seven strategies appeared to have a firm scientific basis for improving
comprehension in normal readers and that “there is ample extant research supporting the
efficacy of cognitive strategy training during reading as a means to enhance students’
55
comprehension” (Baumann & And, 1992, p. 162). The two goals of strategy instruction
are to teach students to think metacognitively about reading – that is, to monitor their
reading and take steps to improve it – and to have a toolbox of strategies that have been
explicitly taught so students know what to do when they realize they are having trouble
reading a passage (Honig, Diamond, & Gutlohn, 2000). Armed with strategies, students
can monitor their reading and take steps to improve it when needed.
The strategies are:
1. Comprehension monitoring – readers learn to monitor and become aware of their
understanding of the text;
2. Cooperative learning – students learn reading strategies together;
3. Use of graphic and semantic organizers (including story maps) – readers make
and use graphic representations of the text;
4. Question answering – readers answer questions about the text and receive
immediate feedback from the teacher;
5. Question generation – readers ask themselves questions about the text;
6. Story structure – students use the structure of the text to help them recall content
of the text so they may answer questions about what they have read; and
7. Summarization – readers integrate ideas and generalize from the text.
The seven strategies should be included in comprehension instruction and are
most effective when multiple strategies are used in combination with each other to recall
text, generate and answer questions, and summarize the text (NRP, 2000, pp. 4-39-4-46).
56
Other foundational research based on the body of research validated by the NRP also
suggested modeling and emphasizing comprehension strategies. Some of the suggested
strategies are the same, and some researchers have advised teachers to include other
strategies. For example, Louisa Moats, in an article written for the American Federation
of Teachers, recommended teachers “(emphasize) key strategies including questioning,
predicting, summarizing, clarifying, and associating the unknown with what is known”
(Moats, 1999, p. 32).
In the area of teacher preparation and comprehension strategies instruction, the
NPR (2000) suggested teachers be trained in the use of some general guidelines for
explicitly teaching the strategies. These include modeling the thinking process by
thinking out loud about strategy use, encouraging questions and discussions, and keeping
students engaged (p. 4-125). More detailed steps to directly teach reading comprehension
strategies are found in Improving Reading Comprehension – Research-based Principles
and Practices by Carlisle and Rice (2002). The list is important, as the NRP report did
not specifically list steps to directly teach the strategies. Carlisle and Rice recommended
beginning with an explanation of the lesson, naming the strategy and explaining the steps
in the strategy. Discussion of when and why the strategy is used completes Step 1. Step
2 involves teacher modeling of the strategy, emphasizing the reasoning behind the
strategy use. In Step 3, the teacher uses guided practice to demonstrate the reasoning for
using the strategy. The students independently practice the strategy in Step 4. Finally, in
57
Step 5, students apply the strategy use to other contexts. Carlisle and Rice’s (2002)
explanation is incorporated into the recommendations for afterschool programs.
Another foundational piece of research is “What Reading Does for the Mind” by
Cunningham and Stanovich (1998). Through their own longitudinal studies and a
synthesis of research related to amount of text read, the authors determined the
importance of students reading a large amount of text and how the volume of text read
contributes to increased vocabulary and comprehension.
Early success at reading acquisition is one of the keys that unlocks a lifetime of
reading habits. The subsequent exercise of this habit serves to further develop
reading comprehension ability in an interlocking positive feedback logic. (p. 14)
The authors used the term “The Matthew Effect” to describe how once a student can read,
the amount of text read can greatly improve his or her vocabulary and comprehension.
The authors recommended ensuring all students are reading early or at grade level and
that students read a large amount of text so they build vocabulary and comprehension.
The National Reading Panel Report (2000) left some unanswered questions. For
example, more research is needed to discover the best ways to train teachers to use the
comprehension strategies with students, as well as which teacher characteristics affect
strategy use for comprehension instruction. To improve validity, research designs for
future studies should use random assignment to groups, use the same training materials,
and track time spent on dependent variables. Additionally, researchers should analyze
the affects of fidelity to treatment and the performance of both students and teachers
58
during the instruction. What are the long-term effects of strategy use? Can the results of
this research be generalized to other tasks and materials (NRP, 2000, pp. 4-6, 4-7)?
More current researchers also discussed the benefits of teaching and using
comprehension strategies, but many focused on “close reading.” Close reading is
described by Katz and Carlise (2009) as “the (development) of students’ use of
morphological-analysis and context-analysis strategies during reading” (p. 327). In close
reading, students and teachers thoroughly discuss a piece of text, but teachers are not
answering questions or lecturing about the text, rather they are taking students back into
the text to examine the text structures and features to learn more about the important text
components. Students answer questions about the text by finding evidence within the
text itself. Catherine Gewertz (2012) described close reading as a strategy that:
moves students toward independence by developing their abilities to build
vocabulary and access a text's structure; grasp a text's meaning and build
arguments from it based on evidence in the text itself; and eventually build the
confidence to grapple with tough reading on their own. (p. 1)
In 2010, researchers worked together with the Institute of Education Sciences to
create Improving Reading Comprehension in Kindergarten Through 3rd Grade, a
practice guide issued by the United States Department of Education (Shanahan et al.).
The authors of the peer-reviewed work combined their expertise with the findings of
rigorous research and developed recommendations for addressing reading
comprehension:
Strong evidence means positive findings are demonstrated in multiple welldesigned, well-executed studies, leaving little or no doubt that the positive effects
are caused by the recommended practice. Moderate evidence means well-
59
designed studies show positive impacts, but some questions remain about whether
the findings can be generalized or whether the studies definitively show the
practice is effective. Minimal evidence means data may suggest a relationship
between the recommended practice and positive outcomes, but research has not
demonstrated that the practice is the cause of positive outcomes. (Shanahan et al.,
2010, p. 44)
The authors of the IES guide made five recommendations for teaching
comprehension. The authors determined the strong and moderate findings were
demonstrated in multiple well-designed, well-executed studies that left little or no doubt
that teaching students how to use the reading comprehension strategies – Questioning,
Visualizing, Monitoring, Clarifying, Fix-up, Inference, or Re-telling – supported the
students’ comprehension achievement. The reading comprehension strategies may be
taught individually or in combination. It is recommended that teachers teach reading
comprehension strategies by using a gradual release of responsibility.
The researchers found two categories with a moderate response, meaning the
studies were well designed and showed positive impacts, but some questions remained
about whether the findings could be generalized or whether the studies definitively
showed the practice was effective. Based on results, teaching students to identify and use
the text’s organizational structure to comprehend, learn, and remember content may or
may not be the best practice.
Establishing an engaging and motivating context in which to teach reading
comprehension also received a moderate response.
The researchers found minimal evidence to support the recommendation to guide
students through focused, high-quality discussion on the meaning of text; to
structure the discussion to complement the text, the instructional purpose, and the
60
readers’ ability and grade level; to develop discussion questions requiring students
to think deeply about text; to ask follow-up questions to encourage and facilitate
discussion; and to have students lead structured small-group discussions. Despite
this, the panel believes these types of discussions are critical tools for helping
students understand what they read. For these reasons, and drawing on the
panelists’ own experiences in working with and observing the learning of young
children, the panel believes this to be an important recommendation. (Shanahan
et al., 2010, p. 25)
The researchers found minimal evidence to support the following
recommendations:

Select texts purposefully to support comprehension.

Help students discover the purpose and benefits of reading.

Create opportunities for students to see themselves as successful readers.

Give students reading choices.

Give students the opportunity to learn by collaborating with their peers.
After examining the foundational research and the more current studies, a list of
best practices is emerging (see Table 5). A checklist (see Table 6) is used as an
observational tool for use by the researcher at Ross Elementary School.
61
Table 5
Best Practices in Reading Comprehension Instruction
1
Use of comprehension strategies during reading: The NRP concluded that
seven strategies appeared to have a firm scientific basis for improving
comprehension in normal readers, and that “there is ample extant research
supporting the efficacy of cognitive strategy training during reading as a
means to enhance students’ comprehension” (Baumann, 1992, p. 162).
2
Explicit teaching of the comprehension strategies. This explicit teaching
includes modeling the thinking process by thinking out loud about strategy
use, encouraging questions and discussions, and keeping students engaged
(NRP, 2000, p. 4-125).
3
Guide students through focused, high-quality discussion on the meaning of
texts. Structure the discussion to complement the text, the instructional
purpose, and the readers’ ability and grade level. Develop discussion
questions requiring students to think deeply about text, to ask follow-up
questions to encourage and facilitate discussion, and have students lead
structured small-group discussions (Shanahan et al., 2010, p. 44).
4
Independent Reading: “One of the strongest predictors of reading
comprehension is the amount of time students read” (Cunningham &
Stanovich, 1998).
62
Table 6
Observational Tool: Best Practices in Reading Comprehension Instruction
Best Practice
1
Use of comprehension strategies during reading:
The NRP concluded that seven strategies
appeared to have a firm scientific basis for
improving comprehension in normal readers,
and that “there is ample extant research
supporting the efficacy of cognitive strategy
training during reading as a means to enhance
students’ comprehension” (Baumann, 1992, p.
162).
2
Explicit teaching of the comprehension
strategies. This explicit teaching includes
modeling the thinking process by thinking out
loud about strategy use, encouraging questions
and discussions, and keeping students engaged
(NRP, 2000, p. 4-125).
Notes
Date
63
Table 6 (continued)
Best Practice
3
Notes
Date
Guide students through focused, high-quality
discussion on the meaning of texts. Structure the
discussion to complement the text, the
instructional purpose, and the readers’ ability
and grade level. Develop discussion questions
that require students to think deeply about text,
to ask follow-up questions to encourage and
facilitate discussion, and have students lead
structured small-group discussions (Shanahan et
al., 2010, p. 44).
4
Independent Reading: “One of the strongest
predictors of reading comprehension is the
amount of time students read” (Cunningham and
Stanovich, 1998).
Review of Studies Related to Factors Affecting the Hispanic Learner
The next section of literature reviewed discusses factors affecting the reading
comprehension achievement of Hispanic students. The Multicultural Education
Consensus Panel, with the University of Washington, stated:
64
An important goal of the schools should be to forge a common nation and destiny
from the tremendous ethnic, cultural, and language diversity. To forge a common
destiny, educators must respect and build upon the cultural strengths and
characteristics that students from diverse groups bring to school. At the same
time, educators must help all students acquire the knowledge, skills, and values
needed to become participating citizens of the commonwealth. Cultural, ethnic,
and language diversity provide the nation and the schools with rich opportunities
to incorporate diverse perspectives, issues, and characteristics into the nation and
the schools in order to strengthen both. (Banks & Banks, 2001, p. 5).
To build background on “respect(ing) and build(ing) upon the cultural strengths
and characteristics that students from diverse groups bring to school,” while “help(ing)
all students acquire the knowledge, skills, and values needed to become participating
citizens of the commonwealth,” two types of literature were evaluated in this section (&
Banks & Banks, 2001, p. 5). There was an examination of research to inform teaching to
a child’s cultural strengths and characteristics followed by an examination of research to
help all students acquire the knowledge, skills, and values needed to build proficient
comprehension. The examination of research builds upon the findings reported earlier in
this chapter related to teaching reading comprehension.
Over a four-year period, the Multicultural Education Consensus Panel reviewed
research related to diversity in education. After completing the meta-analysis, a
publication was created to feature the 12 “essential principles” serving as best practices
for supporting diversity in education. The principles fall into five organizational
categories: Teacher Learning; Student Learning; Intergroup Relations; School
Governance, Organization, and Equity; and Assessment. Principles from the Student
Learning and Assessment categories pertain directly to teaching and supporting reading
65
comprehension (italicized), though each of the principles can be used in developing
recommendations for afterschool programs. The 12 principles are:
Teacher Learning
Principle 1: Professional development programs should help teachers understand
the complex characteristics of ethnic groups within U.S. society and the ways in
which race, ethnicity, language, and social class interact to influence student
behavior.
Student Learning
Principle 2: Schools should ensure that all students have equitable opportunities
to learn and to meet high standards
Principle 3: The curriculum should help students understand that knowledge is
socially constructed and reflects researchers’ personal experiences as well as the
social, political, and economic contexts in which they live and work
Principle 4: Schools should provide all students with opportunities to participate
in extra- and co-curricular activities that develop knowledge, skills, and attitudes
that increase academic achievement and foster positive interracial relationships
Intergroup Relations
Principle 5: Schools should create or make salient superordinate crosscutting
group memberships in order to improve intergroup relations.
Principle 6: Students should learn about stereotyping and other related biases that
have negative effects on racial and ethnic relations.
Principle 7: Students should learn about the values shared by virtually all cultural
groups (e.g., justice, equality, freedom, peace, compassion, and charity).
Principle 8: Teachers should help students acquire the social skills needed to
interact effectively with students from other racial, ethnic, cultural, and language
groups.
Principle 9: Schools should provide opportunities for students from different
racial, ethnic, cultural, and language groups to interact socially under conditions
designed to reduce fear and anxiety.
66
School Governance, Organization, and Equity
Principle 10: A school’s organizational strategies should ensure that decisionmaking is widely shared and that members of the school community learn
collaborative skills and dispositions in order to create a caring environment for
students.
Principle 11: Leaders should develop strategies that ensure that all public schools,
regardless of their locations, are funded equitably.
Assessment
Principle 12: Teachers should use multiple culturally sensitive techniques to
assess complex cognitive and social skills (CME, 2001).
Most are easily comprehendible, but Principles 5 and 12 require further
clarification. A brief description is provided:
Intergroup Relations
Principle 5: Schools should create or make salient superordinate crosscutting
group memberships in order to improve intergroup relations. A superordinate
group is a group of people that all have at least one thing in common. In a school,
it could be that all members of the group are in chorus together, or all have the
same teacher. Intergroup relationships, relationships between individual members
of the group, improve when teachers help students focus on what all members of
the group have in common (CME, 2001)
Assessment
Principle 12: Teachers should use multiple culturally sensitive techniques to
assess complex cognitive and social skills.
Evaluating the progress of students from diverse racial, ethnic, and socialclass groups is complicated by differences in language, learning styles, and
cultures. Hence, the use of a single method of assessment will likely further
disadvantage students from particular social classes and ethnic groups.
Teachers should adopt a range of formative and summative assessment
strategies that give students an opportunity to demonstrate mastery. These
strategies should include observations, oral examinations, performances, and
teacher-made as well as standardized measures and assessments (CME, 2001).
67
Chapter 5 of this study offers specific strategies related to Principle 12 to allow students
to demonstrate mastery of acquired skills. These may be used as part of a range of
formative and summative assessment strategies.
The Achievement Gap
Next, research to help “all students” acquire the knowledge, skills, and values
needed to build proficient comprehension is examined. First, the term “all students” must
be clarified. After that, California’s student achievement is compared to other groups of
students both within and outside the state. California State Superintendent of Public
Instruction, Tom Torlakson (2011), in A Blueprint of Great Schools, stated:
California has a vibrant, diverse student population that represents families who
have had roots in the Golden State for centuries and others who have more
recently arrived from virtually every nation on the globe. With high rates of
immigration, California also has the highest proportion of English learners in the
country. Approximately 24 percent of California’s students are English learners
(ELs) who are not yet proficient in English, and 12 percent are former English
learners (R-FEP) who need educational supports to improve their English
proficiency as they progress through school. Many immigrant families come from
poor countries with few educational or economic resources. Most students in
California schools (53 percent) come from low-income families. (p. 6)
The United States Census Bureau, in its 2013 report, listed the white population in
California at 39.7% and the California Hispanic population at 38.1%. Given
Superintendent Torlakson’s statement and the Census Bureau findings, this dissertation
investigated the comprehension achievement of Hispanic students (U.S. Census Bureau,
2013).
Considering this focus, a concern requiring immediate attention is the
achievement gap between Hispanic and non-Hispanic students. “Achievement Gaps-
68
How Hispanic and White Students in Public Schools Perform in Mathematics and
Reading on the National Assessment of Educational Progress: Statistical Analysis
Report,” an analysis from the National Assessment of Educational Progress, focused on
reading and math scores in grades four and eight between 1990 and 2009 (Hemphill &
Vanneman, 2011). The 2011 report indicated the achievement gap between White and
Hispanic students has not narrowed except for in one area. The one area in which the
achievement gap narrowed was between Hispanic and White students eligible for the
National School Lunch Program (NSLP). Again, other than the one area, the
achievement gap between White and Hispanic students has not narrowed. In fact, in
2009, California was one of only six states with an achievement gap in grade four that
was higher than the national average achievement gap (Hemphill & Vanneman, 2011).
One aspect of the achievement gap important to consider is the socio-economic
gap between Hispanic and White students. Consider the guidelines of the NSLP,
“Children from households with incomes at or below 130 percent of the Federal poverty
level are eligible for free school meals. Children from households with incomes no
greater than 185 percent of the poverty level are eligible for reduced price meals”
(Harper, O’Connell, & Hirschman, 2008, p. ES-1). Table 7 shows the California
Hispanic-White reading achievement gap at grade four and that same gap compounded
by NSLP eligible. The scores are getting higher for each group, and the gap has slightly
narrowed.
69
Table 7
Reading Achievement score Gaps: Various years, 2003–2009
Year
2003
2005
2007
2009
NSLP Eligible,
White
NSLP Eligible,
Hispanic
NSLP NOT
Eligible, White
NSLP NOT
Eligible,
Hispanic
Gap between
NSLP Eligible
Hispanic and
NOT Eligible
White
212
214
215
215
195,
Gap = 17
232
197,
Gap = 17
233
199,
Gap = 16
235
200,
Gap = 15
235
213,
Gap = 19
217,
Gap = 16
217,
Gap = 18
217,
Gap = 18
Gap = 37
Gap = 36
Gap = 36
Gap = 35
Factors that Support the Hispanic Learner
In this section, this dissertation examines research regarding helping all students
acquire the knowledge, skills, and values needed to build proficient comprehension, with
an emphasis on the achievement of the Hispanic student. Two foundational documents
synthesize the scientific literature on issues of learning to read in English when English is
not the first language. The seminal reports are Developing Literacy in Second-Language
Learners – Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and
Youth (August & Shanahan, 2006), and the CDE (Ong, 2010) publication, Improving
Education for English Learners: Research Based Approaches. Both works feature the
research of nationally recognized scholars commissioned to synthesize scientific research
70
on improving educational outcomes for English learners, and each provides a
comprehensive picture of what is known about teaching English learners to read. Both
publications are discussed with an eye toward teaching reading comprehension, since that
is the focus of this dissertation. Developing Literacy in Second-Language Learners –
Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth is
examined first.
In Developing Literacy in Second-Language Learners – Report of the National
Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth, August and Shanahan (2006)
found there was much less research on reading comprehension of language-minority
learners as compared with native speakers, and the factors influencing comprehension
achievement are much less definitive. Research determined (much from the Netherlands)
that “the reading comprehension performance of language-minority students falls well
below that of their native-speaking peers” (2006, p. 62). This difference is caused by a
lack of oral language and relevant prior knowledge that make understanding the text very
difficult. Researchers in a large number of studies found that variables at two levels,
“individual (e.g. background knowledge, motivation) and contextual (e.g. story structure,
home literacy, demographics) influence the second-language reading comprehension of
language-minority students” (p. 63). Additionally, researchers found that students with a
higher second-language proficiency are better able to apply their first-language reading
abilities to the tasks in second-language reading. That is, “second language reading is a
function of both second-language proficiency and first-language reading ability” (p. 63).
71
To summarize, researchers found “differences in the reading comprehension
abilities of English-language learners can be attributed not only to oral language
proficiency but to individual factors…,contextual factors…, and to differences in
instructional and other educational experiences” (August & Shanahan, 2006, p. 65).
Researchers also found instructional approaches that help students acquire the
knowledge, skills, and values needed to build proficiency. The Best Practices relating to
comprehension are listed in Table 5, along with a brief explanation. A column has been
added to denote which Key Principal of UDL the approach supports: 1) Represent –
different ways to represent essential core concepts, 2) Engagement – how students
participate in class, 3) Expression – how students are asked to demonstrate what they
have learned (Rose & Gravel, 2010).
Together, Tables 8a and 8b serve as a summary of best practices for addressing
the reading comprehension instruction for English learners. Both Tables 9a and 9b serve
as checklists for use by the researcher while observing the ASP.
72
Table 8a
Best Practices for English Learners – Comprehension Related
Approach
1 Identifying and clarifying difficult words
and passages
2 Consolidating text knowledge through
summarization
3 Providing students with extra practice in
reading words, sentences, and stories
4 Including instructional routines that give
attention to vocabulary, checking
comprehension, presenting ideas,
paraphrasing remarks, providing
redundancy, and using physical gestures
and visual cues
5 Providing substantial direct teacher
intervention in developing students’
English proficiency so they may take full
advantage of interventions
6 Teaching students to use comprehension
strategies- combined with concerted efforts
to build students’ facility in English
Source: August and Shanahan (2006, pp. 354-355)
Explanation
This is used to provide
additional support and
practice for students learning
a second language
This is used to provide
additional support and
practice for students learning
a second language
This is used to provide
additional support and
practice for students learning
a second language
These are used to provide
additional support and
practice for students learning
a second language
UDL
3
Students are less able to take
advantage of interventions if
they don’t have requisite
levels of English proficiency
Strategies are unlikely to
help if students don’t have
skills to understand the text
1
1
1
1
2
73
Table 8b
Best Practices for English Learners – Comprehension Related
Approach
7 Use of explicit instruction in
core reading competencies,
controlled for task difficulty
through systematic scaffolding
8 Provide ongoing and
systematic feedback, and use
ongoing progress monitoring
Explanation
This is used to provide additional support
and practice for students learning a
second language
UDL
1
The feedback is used to provide
additional support for students learning a
second language. The ongoing progress
monitoring is used to inform students,
teachers, and parents of progress, and to
address any gaps in learning.
2, 3
Sources: (Foorman & Torgesen, 2001; Lyon, Fletcher, Fuchs, & Chhabra, 2006; Swanson, Hoskyn, & Lee,
1999; Swanson, Harris, & Graham, 2003; Vaughn, Gersten, & Chard, 2000)
Table 9a
Observation Checklist: Best Practices for English Learners – Comprehension Related
1
2
3
4
5
6
Approach
Identifying and clarifying difficult words and
passages
Consolidating text knowledge through
summarization
Providing students with extra practice in reading
words, sentences, and stories
Including instructional routines that give attention to
vocabulary, checking comprehension, presenting
ideas, paraphrasing remarks, providing redundancy,
and using physical gestures and visual cues
Providing substantial direct teacher intervention in
developing students’ English proficiency so they
may take full advantage of interventions
Teaching students to use comprehension strategiescombined with concerted efforts to build students’
facility in English
(August and Shanahan, 2006, pp. 354-355)
Notes
Date(s)
74
Table 9b
Observation Checklist Best Practices for English Learners – Comprehension Related
Approach
7 Use of explicit instruction in core reading
competencies, controlled for task difficulty through
systematic scaffolding
8 Provide ongoing and systematic feedback, and use
ongoing progress monitoring
Notes
Date(s)
Sources: (Foorman & Torgesen, 2001; Lyon, Fletcher, Fuchs, & Chhabra, 2006; Swanson, Hoskyn, & Lee,
1999; Swanson, Harris, & Graham, 2003; Vaughn, Gersten, & Chard, 2000)
The CDE publication, Improving Education for English Learners: Research
Based Approaches (Ong, 2010), specified:
English Language Development (ELD) instruction is specifically designed to
advance English learners’ knowledge and use of English in increasingly
sophisticated ways… to a level of proficiency (e.g. advanced) that maximizes
their capacity to engage successfully in academic studies taught in English. (p.
23)
To that end, the publication focused on six meta-analyses and relevant individual studies.
The authors referred to the studies as a “relatively small body of research” (p. 26) and so
elected to be inclusive. They reviewed and interpreted studies addressing a wide body of
populations, and then interpreted the studies’ relevancy to K-12 ELD instruction. The
authors placed their findings into three categories: Guidelines Based on Relatively Strong
Supporting Evidence from English Learner Research, Guidelines Based on Hypothesis
Emerging from Recent English Learner Research, and Guidelines Applicable to ELD but
Grounded in Non-English Learner Resources. The authors strove to use studies high in
the following three areas:
75
1. Conducted on a K-12 population (K-12 English learners in the U.S.)
2. Used relevant outcomes (meaningful measures of English language
proficiency or development)
3. Were reliable (replicated over several independent studies).
After examining the research, the authors stated:
It should surprise no one to learn that no such research base exists. We must
therefore carefully weigh the existing evidence and make judgments about its
applicability to designing the best possible programs for English learners in
California (and the U.S.). (pp. 28-29)
The research-based best practices described in Table 10 are designed to maximize
English learners’ capacity to successfully engage in academic studies taught in English.
They should be considered, along with the best practices for teaching reading
comprehension listed earlier in this chapter, when teaching comprehension in an
afterschool setting. Table 11 was used by the researcher when observing the Ross
Elementary ASP.
Ong (2010) explained that Guideline 5 (related to Table 10) pertains specifically
to comprehension because “Exposure to a second language in meaning-based school
programs (e.g. content-based second-language instruction) designed to promote secondlanguage learning can lead to development of comprehension skills” (p. 38). The authors
also noted that in the study related to Guideline 5, the lessons where teachers used
explicit instruction were more than twice as effective as those lessons where the teacher
did not use explicit instruction.
76
Another key finding supporting the research in Developing Literacy in SecondLanguage Learners – Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority
Children and Youth is that, “oral English proficiency and the skills that allow accurate
and effortless recognition of printed words are essential factors in comprehension
development” (August & Shanahan, 2010, p. 215). The authors also found that a
student’s cognitive ability and memory and prior instructional experiences, as well as
contextual factors like language spoken at home and socioeconomic status affect English
reading comprehension.
Table 10
Best Practices for English Learners
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Guidelines Based on Relatively Strong Supporting Evidence from UDL
English Learner Research
Providing ELD instruction is better than not providing it.
1
ELD instruction should include interactive activities among
2
students, but they must be carefully planned and carried out.
Guidelines Based on Hypothesis Emerging from Recent English
Learner Research
A separate block of time should be devoted daily to ELD
1
instruction.
ELD instruction should emphasize listening and speaking
1, 2
although it can incorporate reading and writing.
ELD instruction should explicitly teach elements of English (e.g.,
1
vocabulary, syntax, grammar, functions, and conventions).
ELD instruction should integrate meaning and communication to
1
support explicit teaching of language.
ELD instruction should provide students with corrective feedback 1, 2
on form.
Use of English during ELD should be maximized; the primary
2
language should be used strategically.
77
Table 10 (continued)
Number
9
10
11
12
13
14
Guidelines Based on Relatively Strong Supporting Evidence from UDL
English Learner Research
Teachers should attend to communication and language-learning
1, 2
strategies and incorporate them into ELD instruction.
ELD instruction should emphasize academic language as well as
1, 2
conversational language.
ELD instruction should continue at least until students reach level
1
4 (early advanced) and possibly through level 5 (advanced).
Guidelines Applicable to ELD but Grounded in Non-English
Learner Resources
ELD instruction should be planned and delivered with specific
1
language objectives in mind.
English learners should be carefully grouped by language
1
proficiency for ELD instruction; for other portions of the school
day they should be in mixed classrooms and not in classrooms
segregated by language proficiency.
The likelihood of establishing and/or sustaining an effective ELD
1
instructional program increases when schools and districts make
it a priority.
Sources: (Foorman & Torgesen, 2001; Lyon, Fletcher, Fuchs, & Chhabra, 2006; Swanson, Hoskyn, & Lee,
1999; Swanson, Harris, & Graham, 2003; Vaughn, Gersten, & Chard, 2000)
78
Table 11
Observation Checklist for Best Practices for English Learners
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Guidelines Based on Relatively Strong
Supporting Evidence from English
Learner Research, and
Providing ELD instruction is better than
not providing it.
ELD instruction should include interactive
activities among students, but they must
be carefully planned and carried out.
Guidelines Based on Hypothesis
Emerging from Recent English Learner
Research
A separate block of time should be
devoted daily to ELD instruction.
ELD instruction should emphasize
listening and speaking although it can
incorporate reading and writing.
ELD instruction should explicitly teach
elements of English (e.g., vocabulary,
syntax, grammar, functions, and
conventions).
ELD instruction should integrate meaning
and communication to support explicit
teaching of language.
ELD instruction should provide students
with corrective feedback on form.
Use of English during ELD should be
maximized; the primary language should
be used strategically.
Teachers should attend to communication
and language-learning strategies and
incorporate them into ELD instruction.
ELD instruction should emphasize
academic language as well as
conversational language.
ELD instruction should continue at least
until students reach level 4 (early
advanced) and possibly through level 5
(advanced).
Notes
Date(s)
79
Table 11 (continued)
12
13
14
Guidelines Applicable to ELD but
Grounded in Non-English Learner
Resources
ELD instruction should be planned and
delivered with specific language
objectives in mind.
English learners should be carefully
grouped by language proficiency for ELD
instruction; for other portions of the
school day they should be in mixed
classrooms and not in classrooms
segregated by language proficiency.
The likelihood of establishing and/or
sustaining an effective ELD instructional
program increases when schools and
districts make it a priority.
Sources: (Foorman & Torgesen, 2001; Lyon, Fletcher, Fuchs, & Chhabra, 2006; Swanson, Hoskyn, & Lee,
1999; Swanson, Harris, & Graham, 2003; Vaughn, Gersten, & Chard, 2000)
80
Chapter 3
METHODOLOGY
Introduction
This dissertation used a mixed-methods approach. Creswell (2009) explained that
a mixed-methods design utilizes both quantitative and qualitative data, which allows for a
deeper understanding of complex educational research. The quantitative component uses
a comparative design, while the qualitative component includes an ethnographic
approach. Merriam-Webster (ethnography, n.d.) defines ethnography as a descriptive
study of a particular human society. Due to factors such as its complex history, and use
with multiple disciplines, “ethnography’ plays a complex and shifting role in the dynamic
tapestry that the social sciences have become in the twenty-first century” (Hammersley &
Atkinson, 2007, p. 2). A qualitative approach, in this case ethnography, will allow a
richer view of the participants in this study and their history, voices, or perspectives (Hall
& Ryan, 2011). The following topics are discussed in this chapter: Research Design,
Research Questions, Setting and Sample, Instrumentation and Materials, Data Collection
and Analysis, and Protection of Participants.
Research Design
A mixed-methods approach was used for this dissertation. A quantitative
comparative analysis was appropriate for this study because CST data was used to
determine whether there is a significant difference in student comprehension scores
between students who attend an after school program and those who do not. Additionally,
81
CST data was used to determine whether there is a significant difference in student
comprehension scores between Hispanic students and non-Hispanic students at the same
school.
Qualitative, ethnographic data, over a period of 10 observations, was used.
Ethnography usually involves the researcher participating, overtly or covertly, in
people’s daily lives for an extended period of time, watching what happens,
listening to what is said, and/or asking questions through informal and formal
interviews, collecting documents and artifacts – in fact, gathering whatever data
are available to throw light on the issues that are the emerging focus of inquiry.
(Hamersley & Atkinson, 2007, p. 3)
The discussion continues, as the Hammersley and Atkinson features of ethnographic
analysis are applied to this study. The features are listed below, along with a brief
application of each feature to this study:
1. A field study: students and staff at the Ross Elementary School ASP were
observed over one full ASP session (four hours), and nine one-hour sessions.
2. Data gathered from multiple sources: Data in this study were gathered from
discussions with staff and students. Student and staff observation was the
primary source.
3. “Data collection (observation) is ‘unobstructed’ meaning there was no fixed
and/or detailed research design specified at the start” of the study
(Hammersley & Atkinson, 2007, p. 3). The process of analyzing the data
allowed for the creation of categories of what people said or did. Checklists
of research-based instructional methods were used to guide observation, but
82
information about what people said or did, unrelated to the checklists was also
noted and analyzed for relevance to the study.
4. In general, small-scale studies allow for in-depth analysis. To facilitate indepth study, the focus of the observation was a single ASP, and three students;
Amanda, Bryan, and John (fictitious names) were selected as ethnographic
case studies.
5. Data analysis involved “interpretation of the meanings, functions, and
consequences of human actions and institutional practices, and how these are
implicated in (other) contexts. What are produced, for the most part, are
verbal descriptions, explanations, and theories” (Hammersley & Atkinson,
2007, p. 3). ASP data were analyzed and descriptions and explanations were
produced and related to instructional best practices and learning theories.
Several observational checklists were used to collect data during the series
of 10 observations of the Ross Elementary ASP. The checklists used were:
1. Observation Checklists: Elements of Universal Design Theory and
Appreciative Inquiry Theory Pertaining to Teaching, Student Engagement,
and Assessment (see Table 4).
2. Best Practices for English Learners – Comprehension Related (see Tables
8a and 8b).
3. Best Practices for English Learners (see Table 10).
4. Best Practices in Reading Comprehension Instruction (see Table 5).
83
Research Questions
The following questions guided the study:
1. Is there a significant difference, as measured by scores, in comprehension
achievement between third- through fifth-grade students in an afterschool
program and not in an afterschool program? An Independent Samples t-Test was
performed. The Independent Samples t-Test compared two groups: those in the
afterschool program and those who were not in it, using CST Reading
Comprehension scores from 2011/2012 (see Appendix B).
2. Is there a significant difference in comprehension achievement between Hispanic
students and non-Hispanic students attending Ross Elementary? An Independent
Samples t-Test was performed. The Independent Samples t-Test compared two
groups: Hispanic students and non-Hispanic students using CST Reading
Comprehension scores from 2010/2011 and 2011/2012.
3. In what ways does the afterschool program bolster reading comprehension
success?
Setting and Sample
Ross School Setting
Ross Elementary School is a suburban K-5 school in Northern California, with
approximately 400 students. Enrollment information appears in Table 12. The California
Department of Education, Educational Demographics Unit (2012) provides demographic
and CST performance data information about the Ross School student population.
84
Table 12
Enrollment by Ethnicity for 2011/2012
Hispanic
or Latino
of Any
Race
58
African
American
, Not
Hispanic
40
American
Indian or
Alaska
Native, Not
Hispanic
1
White, not
Hispanic
243
Asian, Not
Hispanic
Pacific
Islander,
Not
Hispanic
Filipino, Not
Hispanic
Total
11
Two or
More Races,
Not
Hispanic
13
6
Not
Reported
10
383
1
English learners at Ross make up 25% of the population, and 61% of the students
are considered economically disadvantaged. The 2012 Growth API was 806, and the
2011-12 growth from the prior year was 37. The school, and all of the school’s
significant populations, met the school-wide growth target set forth by the state, though
the percentage of students in the school who scored Proficient or Above on the English
Language Arts portion of the CST was below the State or the District. Ross School’s
2011 Base API State Ranking was 3, and the 2011 Base API Similar Schools Ranking
was 1, showing there is room for growth (CDE, 2012h).
The study samples – all third- through fifth-grade students in the afterschool
program, randomly selected students not in the ASP (same grades), 20 Hispanic students
in in grades two through five, and 30 randomly selected non-Hispanic students in grades
two through five – came from the population of Ross School students, which was all
students in second through fifth grades.
85
ASP Setting and Facilities

One portable classroom housed the grades two through five ASP.

The school multi-purpose room and computer lab were available, as needed, for
homework and computer access.

Outdoor equipment and fields were available, as needed.
For Question 1, 2011/2012 CST comprehension scores for all third- through fifth-
grade students in the afterschool program were compared to the same number of
randomly selected students (same grade) not attending the afterschool program. These
samples were compared to determine whether there is a difference in achievement
between the two groups.
For Question 2, 2010/2011, and 2011/2012 CST comprehension scores for 20
Hispanic students and 30 randomly selected non-Hispanic students in grades two through
five were compared to determine whether there was a significant difference in
comprehension achievement, as measured by CST scores, between Hispanic students and
non-Hispanic students. A Paired Samples t-Test was used to examine the CST Reading
Comprehension scores from 2010/2011 and 2011/2012.
Question 3 asked in what ways does the afterschool program bolster reading
comprehension success? Question 3 is discussed using qualitative data.
Instrumentation and Materials
CST scores were used to determine whether there was a significant difference in
student comprehension between students who attend an after school program and those
86
who do not. The California Department of Education website, STAR CST Blueprints:
Information for the California Standards Test (CDE, 2012f), includes Reading
Comprehension as one of the three strands (or main areas) of the Reading standards. The
Reading standards are a subset of the English/Language Arts Standards. The CST
Reading strands include:
1. Word Analysis, Fluency, and Systematic Vocabulary Development
2. Reading Comprehension
3. Literary Response and Analysis reading/language arts
CST data were used to determine whether there was a significant difference in
student comprehension scores between Hispanic students and non-Hispanic students at
the same school.
Archival records of CST data were used. The district provided aggregated CST
Comprehension Data for 2010/2011 and 2011/2012, Grades 2-5. Each record was
identified by a unique number to ensure that each CST score represented a distinct
student, and that scores could be matched to student characteristics, such as grade,
ethnicity, or program status. No names or identifiers were attached, and no identifiers
were used in reporting the information. The reading comprehension raw scores were used
to measure reading comprehension achievement. The test scores were destroyed once the
study was complete.
CST scores were used to determine whether there was a significant difference in
student comprehension between students who attended an after school program and those
87
who did not. CST data was used to determine whether there was a significant difference
in student comprehension scores between Hispanic students and non-Hispanic students at
the same school.
Data Collection and Analysis
The methodology for quantitative data analysis included two Independent Sample
t-Tests (Questions 1 and 2) to evaluate significance for between-group comparisons. For
Question 1, an Independent Samples t-Test was conducted to evaluate the hypothesis that
students perform better on the CST (Comprehension) when they are enrolled in an
afterschool program as opposed to when they are not enrolled. For Question 2, an
Independent Samples t-Test was conducted to evaluate the hypothesis that Hispanic
students perform as well as non-Hispanic students on the CST (Comprehension) at Ross
Elementary School. Question 3 uses qualitative data to explore how the after school
program bolsters reading comprehension success.
A series of 10 observations were conducted to determine in what ways the
afterschool program bolstered reading comprehension success. When appropriate, the
data were presented by ethnicity, grade level, and afterschool program status (participates
or does not participate) in the form of SPSS output including charts and narratives. An
Explanatory Sequential design was used to collect and analyze the data. This two-phase
mixed-methods design offered the opportunity to collect and analyze data sequentially.
First, the quantitative data were collected and compared, then based on those results, the
88
qualitative data were analyzed, which helped interpret the quantitative data (Creswell &
Plano Clark, 2011, p. 72) (see Figure 3).
QUANTITATIVE
Data Collection
and Analysis
Followed up
with
QUALITATIVE
Data Collection
and Analysis
Interpretation
Figure 3. Explanatory Sequential Design (Inspired by Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011).
Structure of Qualitative Analysis: Grounded Theory Method
The grounded theory method of data analysis, as discussed by Merriam (2009) in
Qualitative Research A Guide to Design and Implementation, allowed the use of
categories, properties (concepts), and hypothesis (themes) to form links between and
among the categories and properties of the data (p. 199). The researcher analyzed the
observation notes until categories emerged and formed. The researcher then looked for
the properties of the categories, the “concepts that define a category” (p. 200).
“Comparisons (were) constantly made within and between levels of conceptualization
until a theory (was) formulated” (p. 200). The theory that (was) formed (was) referred to
89
as “substantive theory” because the theory applied “to a specific aspect of practice”
(Merriam, 2009, p. 200).
Protection of Participants
The researcher retrieved the archival records using only ID numbers, not student
names. ID numbers must be used to complete the Paired Samples t-Test, which matched
individual student CST scores (Comprehension) for a two-year testing period/one year of
time (using 2010/2011 – Year 1 and 2011/2012 – Year 2). No names or ID numbers
were used in reporting the information, and the numbers were not shared. The test
information was protected while being used and destroyed once the study was completed.
90
Chapter 4
ANALYSIS OF DATA
This study used a mixed-methods design with both quantitative and qualitative
research methods. The quantitative research compared the CST comprehension
assessment results of students attending an ASP to students not attending an ASP and
compared the assessment results of Hispanic students to those of non-Hispanic students at
Ross Elementary School. The qualitative research focused on how the ASP bolstered
reading comprehension success.
The quantitative research addressed Questions 1 and 2:
1. Is there a significant difference, as measured by scores, in comprehension
achievement between third- through fifth-grade students in an afterschool
program and not in an afterschool program? An Independent Samples t-Test was
performed. The Independent Samples t-Test compared two groups: those in the
afterschool program and those who were not in it, using CST Reading
Comprehension scores from 2011/2012 (see Appendix B).
2. Is there a significant difference in comprehension achievement between Hispanic
students and non-Hispanic students attending Ross Elementary? An Independent
Samples t-Test was performed. The Independent Samples t-Test compared two
groups: Hispanic students and non-Hispanic students using CST Reading
Comprehension scores from 2010/2011 and 2011/2012.
91
3. In what ways does the afterschool program bolster reading comprehension
success?
Qualitative data were collected through a series of 10 observations of the
afterschool program and highlights strategies used in the program that correlate with the
best practices and theories discussed in this dissertation.
Descriptive Demographics
The research took place at an ASP housed on the site of Ross Elementary School,
a Kindergarten-grade five school, located in a suburban northern California city of less
than 75,000 people.
Comparing Ross Students to Other Populations Using CST
The use of CST data allowed the researcher to compare Ross student achievement
to the achievement of students at the district, county, and state levels. Using CST
reading/language arts data for two consecutive school years, Ross student scores were
compared to other students’ scores. In the second year, Ross Elementary increased the
percentage of students at Proficient and Advanced levels in the second and fourth grades.
However, a greater percentage of students achieved Proficient and Advanced at the
district, county, and state levels during both testing years, than did the students at Ross
Elementary. For Ross Elementary students, this meant a decline in the percentage of
students at Proficient and Advanced in third and fifth grades. Of particular significance,
only 38% of third-grade Ross Elementary students scored at Proficient and Advanced
92
levels, compared to 48% in California and 60% at the district level. The goal is helping
students reach Proficient or Advanced levels.
Report of Quantitative Data
Quantitative Data Addressing Research Question 1
Quantitative data were used to consider Question 1. The district provided CST
Comprehension Data for 2011/2012, grades three through five. CST scores were broken
down by strand (see Chapter 3 for description of strands), and the reading comprehension
raw scores were used to measure reading comprehension achievement.
CST data served as the dependent variable for Question 1. The independent
(grouping) variable for Question 1 was afterschool program status (attended the ASP or
did not). Because the researcher wanted to determine the difference between the means
of two independent groups, an independent samples t-Test was conducted determining
whether there was a significant difference in the means of the 2011/2012 CST reading
comprehension scores for students enrolled in the ASP and those not enrolled. Data for
27 students enrolled in the ASP and 27 randomly selected students not enrolled in the
ASP were used (54 students total, third through fifth grades). There was no significant
difference in scores for those attending the ASP (M= 8.96, SD 3.67) and those not
attending (M=9.74, SD=3.92); t (52) = -.752, p= .46 (two-tailed). The mean difference
for students who attended the ASP (M= 8.96) compared to those who did not (M=9.74)
was obtained by subtracting the mean score of those who attended the ASP (8.96) from
the mean score of those who did not attend the ASP (9.74). The difference in the means
93
was .78 (mean difference = .78, 95% confidence interval: -2.85 to 1.30). See Tables 13
and 14. The 95% confidence interval for the difference in means shows there is a 95%
chance the difference in the mean scores (.78) will be between -2.85 and 1.30. In this
instance, the difference in means (.78) did not lie within the 95% confidence interval of2.85 and 1.30. To sum up, there is not a significant difference, as measured by CST
scores, in comprehension achievement between third- through fifth-grade students in an
after school program and not in an after school program.
Table 13
Group Statistics Question 1
Variable
N
Mean
Std. Deviation
Enrolled in ASP
Not Enrolled in ASP
27
8.9630
3.674041
Std. Error
Mean
0.707069
27
9.7407
3.918326
0.754082
Table 14
Independent Samples Test, Question 1
Equal
variances
assumed
Equal
variances
not
assumed
Lavines
Sig.
t
df
Sig (2
tailed)
Mean
Diff.
Std
Error
Diff
F=
.174
.678
.752
52
.455
-.77778
1.03372
.752
51.786
.455
-.77778
1.03372
95%
Confidence
Interval of
the
Difference
Lower:
-2.85210
95%
Confidence
Interval of
the
Difference
Upper:
1.29654
-2.85230
1.29675
94
Findings, question 1. Question 1 was designed to evaluate the hypothesis that
students perform better on the CST (Comprehension) when they are enrolled in an
afterschool program, as opposed to when they are not enrolled. Analysis showed there
was not a significant difference in comprehension achievement between students in an
afterschool program and those not in an afterschool program. Based on research from
The Afterschool Alliance (2011), showing that ASPs help students make important
academic gains, the researcher expected students in this ASP would perform higher than
their scores indicated. Why would the findings to this question not be significant in this
study? The study design may have impacted the findings. More about the limitations of
the study design is discussed in the Limitations section in Chapter 5.
Quantitative Data Addressing Research Question 2
The CST data served as the dependent variable for Question 2. The independent
(grouping) variable for Question 2 was ethnicity (Hispanic or non-Hispanic). An
independent samples t-Test was conducted to determine whether there was a significant
difference in the 2010/2011 and 2011/2012 CST reading comprehension scores between
Hispanic and non-Hispanic students in grades two through five. Data for 20 Hispanic
students and 30 randomly selected non-Hispanic students were used. There was no
significant difference in scores between Hispanic students (M=9.00, SD=4.07) and nonHispanic students (M= 10, SD 3.53), t (48) = .922, p= .361 (two-tailed). The difference
in the mean scores was 1.0 (mean difference = 1.0, 95% confidence interval: -1.18 to 3.18). The 95% confidence interval for the difference in means was fairly small,
95
indicating there was a 95% chance the difference in means lies between -1.18 and -3.18.
In this instance, the difference in means (1.0) did not lie within the 95% confidence
interval of -1.18 and -3.18. See Tables 15 and 16 for Means table information. The data
found there is not a significant difference in comprehension achievement between
Hispanic students and non-Hispanic students attending Ross Elementary.
Table 15
Group Statistics Question 2
Variable
N
Mean
Std. Deviation
Std. Error Mean
NonHispanic
30
10.0
3.55509
.64605
Hispanic
20
9.0
4.07818
.91191
Table 16
Independent Samples Test, Question 2
Lavines
Equal
variances
assumed
Equal
variances
not
assumed
F=
105.8
Sig.
.309
t
df
Sig (2
tailed)
Mean
Diff.
Std
Error
Diff
.922
48
.361
1.0
1.0
.895
36.744
.37699
1.0
1.116
95%
Confidence
Interval of
the
Difference
Lower:
1.18141
95%
Confidence
Interval of
the
Difference
Upper:
3.18141
1.26377
3.26377
Findings, question 2. Only 13% of California’s fourth-grade Hispanic students
perform at or above the Proficient level on the English-language arts section of the three
96
achievement tests compared to 25% of California’s grade four students (NCES, 2011b).
Given those important statistics, the researcher was interested to know how Ross
School’s Hispanic students performed compared to non-Hispanic students. The
researcher hypothesized the Hispanic students at Ross School would perform as well as
non-Hispanic students. Analysis showed there was not a significant difference in
comprehension achievement between Hispanic students and non-Hispanic students.
Ross’ Hispanic students performed about as well as the non-Hispanic students; this
finding is contrary to the National Center for Education Statistics (2012) findings
suggesting Hispanic students have the lowest rate of Proficient or above – lower than any
other significant student population. Further research is needed to determine which
factors contributed to the achievement of Hispanic students at Ross School.
Report of Qualitative Data
Qualitative Data Addressing Research Question 3
Qualitative methodology guided the data collection and analysis of Question 3: In
what ways does the afterschool program bolster reading comprehension success?
Qualitative data included observation notes from one four-hour observation and nine onehour observations of an ASP and case study reports from interviews and observation of
three students from the ASP population.
Introducing the Students and the Key Relationships
Student population. Ross Elementary School has 383 students and 62% of the
students are eligible for free or reduced-price lunches (CDE, 2012h). The numerically
97
significant subgroup student populations include white, socioeconomically
disadvantaged, and English learners, with Hispanic English learners making up 24% of
the student population. In the 2011/2012 school year, the school met API Growth targets
school-wide in all student groups and subgroups.
Key relationships. The key people, groups, and organizations involved with the
ASP are the students; federal, state, and county educational programs; the district; the
Ross School staff (principal, teachers, custodian); and the ASP staff. Each relationship is
explained in this section.
State of California/State programs and United States Department of
Education/Federal programs. The federal and state government systems provide
funding for ASPs, as discussed in Chapter 2, in Table 3. The California Department of
Education, After School Division, acts as the overseer of funds to the California ASPs.
The system monitors funding received from both the federal government and the state,
ensuring the funds are being used efficiently and appropriately.
County programs and services. The county Regional Technical Assistance
Centers assess the ASPs, provide coaching and mentoring, professional development, and
resources as needed.
District and Ross ASP. The lead staff member of the ASP had to take a leave of
absence from the program shortly before the observations in this study began. Since the
assistant staff member was fairly new, the district provided an after-school program
coordinator who acted as the lead staff member. The district realized the assistant staff
98
member needed the support of experienced afterschool leadership and provided that
support.
Ross School staff and ASP staff. The ASP program is run by the district and is
housed at Ross Elementary School. The school principal is involved with the ASP
because she is responsible for ensuring student-related programs on campus run
efficiently. The school’s custodial staff is responsible for maintaining the ASP facilities.
Ross Elementary School and the ASP have a partnership. The principal and the
lead ASP staff meet to discuss schedules related to facility use and custodial services.
They also discuss the academic calendar, as the ASP cares for students for longer periods
of time on minimum days requiring schedule synchronization. Meetings to discuss
facility use occur in advance of class time as well as on an as-needed basis. The principal
and lead staff discuss multipurpose room and computer lab use, and the custodian
discusses bathroom cleanliness expectations with both the lead staff and the students.
Additionally, the lead ASP staff member and the Ross school principal discuss specific
students and their behavior. The ASP and the school appear to work closely to create for
students a smooth transition between the school day and the ASP. The principal and ASP
district administration have also met to discuss articulation between the day program and
the ASP.
It is evident, through observation, that Ross Elementary staff members and the
ASP staff members support the importance of schoolwork and expect students to
complete their work, whether during the school day or during the ASP time. Teachers
99
discuss student academic needs with the ASP staff. An ASP staff member stated, “I am
holding one student’s homework because the student is doing the work, but it is ‘getting
lost’ between the ASP and class in the morning.” The classroom teacher informed the
ASP staff member the student often lost recess due to not turning in homework. The
ASP teacher knew the homework was being completed and learned the student’s work
was often left at one home or another when transitioning from parent to parent. The ASP
staff member devised a system to alleviate the problem. The ASP staff member keeps the
completed homework, and the next school day, the student picks it up before school and
takes it to class.
ASP staff and students. The ASP staff provides many opportunities for students
to participate in class with the rest of the ASP group. For example, students are expected
to participate in 60 minutes of homework completion time each day. Also, during the
SPARK physical activity time, students who choose not to participate in the exercise and
activities are still expected to stand on the sideline and cheer – no sitting – everyone
participates.
Staff members assist students with homework during the homework time on
Monday through Thursday, as needed. Staff members may also work with students
academically at other times throughout the week, and they invite students to demonstrate
what they have learned in a variety of ways. During an observation, students read a story
with the teacher and were then invited to reenact the story (to show comprehension),
chasing each other around the playground as the story indicated.
100
The staff members asked students what they wanted to do for a holiday party.
The students said they wanted to make gingerbread houses. The students were invited to
create a gingerbread house with graham crackers, frosting, and candy to represent the
gingerbread house from the story previously read (another comprehension activity). As
the students were building the gingerbread houses, the ASP staff member asked, “What
other stories have we read that involve a candy house?” This led to a conversation where
students and staff compared and contrasted “The Gingerbread Man” with “Hansel and
Gretel.”
Staff members seek out and focus on student strengths and accomplishments,
whether related academically or in other areas. Comments heard throughout the
observations supported this. “Your pencil was sharpened before homework time. I’m
glad you are organized and ready to do your best.” A student said, “After this, can our
group go next, since in our part we run after them?” Staff: “Good idea, your group
should go next.” A staff member began homework time by asking students about skills
they have in math. She praised students for math skills and based some subsequent
questions on how the students rated their own skills.
ASP staff, Ross school staff, and students. The ASP staff, Ross School staff, and
students of Ross ASP worked together to ensure students who needed intervention
received the necessary help. The trust between regular-day teachers, afterschool
instructional staff, and students is apparent. Regular-day teachers selected students to
attend an afterschool intervention program. The ASP staff was entrusted with sending
101
students to the intervention period and guaranteeing their on-time arrival. Students were
trusted to get to and from the intervention safely.
Another example of the ASP staff, Ross School staff, and students working
together to support the students is when the school-day teachers provided a list of weekly
homework activities for students to complete and for the ASP staff to check. The ASP
staff was trusted to verify homework completion; the school-day staff used this
information from the ASP. The principal also used this information to provide reading
awards to students. The process was completed each week.
Staff members worked with students, teaching them to be responsible for their
own learning. One day, a student did not use the bathroom at an appropriate time, so he
needed to go during homework time. The student was told he could go but would not
earn his money for the day, he had to choose. He was reminded to make better decisions
and to use the bathroom when given the opportunity, before and after homework time.
During another observation, an ASP staff member reminded students, “We don’t
cheat. We want to work fairly like everyone else!” An ASP staff member told this
researcher, "We are always looking for ways to help students with skills and also to help
them be consistent with behavior.” The ASP rules support the staff members’ quest to
teach students responsibility for their own learning and also help keep students and staff
members safe.
Staff members and students appeared to have fun together. The staff encouraged
students to play non-competitive games and to participate in physical activities. Clubs
102
such as Spanish, basketball, computer, cooking, dog club, health club, soccer, and
knitting were offered. Clubs met on Monday and Wednesday, while computers and
SPARK met on Tuesday and Thursday. During SPARK, a staff member asked students
to “mingle” (walk around and high five other students and share their favorite colors),
freeze, and then thumb war three times. Another time, students were asked to line up in
groups of five and the person with the lightest colored shoes was expected to stick his/her
foot out in front of the others. These are non-competitive ways staff members
encouraged each small group to determine who was “it” for the next activity.
ASP staff members sent the message that schoolwork was important, and that
they expected students to do their work. Homework time was kept sacred, and for an
hour (Monday-Thursday), students could only work on homework. When homework
was done, they could read. Staff members demanded a quiet study environment so
students could do homework. Students sharpening pencils and using the bathroom during
homework lost money they could have earned for being consistent workers. During
homework time it was not unusual to hear, “Work quietly on your homework!” Some
students especially appreciated a quiet study environment during homework time. When
asked what he would change about the ASP, if he had the chance, John (who is a casestudy student) said, “I wish people would be quiet during homework time.”
Case studies. To understand more about the individual students who attended the
ASP, and how the ASP enriched their lives, case studies were conducted. Themes were
discovered while meeting with the students.
103
Case study #1. Amanda was selected as a participant in the study for several
reasons; this was her second year in the ASP, so she had more experience with the
program than a first-year student. Since her diminutive stature and nature intrigued the
researcher, it was important to see how her needs were met. Would she stand up for
herself, or get lost in the crowd? Would the staff recognize she was an English learner
and ensure she was not lost in the group? Her third-grade status, and the fact she was
female, contrasted with the other two case-study participants and provided balance.
Amanda’s teacher described her as “quiet and hardworking, a direction follower,
and that Amanda always trie(d) to get her homework done on time.” In fact, during every
observation Amanda worked diligently to complete her homework. While other students
may have been off task, Amanda worked steadily. On one occasion during the ASP
observation period, Amanda was selected as a student who was paying attention, so she
began the fun activity first. She was consistently one who followed directions.
Amanda was being raised by a single working mom (hearsay). Her mother did
not appear to speak English fluently. When Amanda’s mom came to pick her up, the two
communicated exclusively in Spanish. During school, Amanda communicated very well
in English, but at home she spoke Spanish. Amanda was the only child, her family
consisting of her and her mom.
While trying to get to know Amanda, she stated her favorite things to do at ASP
time were to play and to have free time. However, when asked why she did her
homework she said, “I do homework so I can do fun stuff at home.” The ASP met a
104
socialization need for Amanda. Her favorite things to do involved playing with others,
yet the ASP also met the important need of ensuring Amanda completed her homework
so she might play at home.
One day during ASP, she said she had received a certificate for Accelerated
Reader (AR) during her regular school day. As she explained, it is, “For a good reader,”
and, “You better read 30 minutes every day.” She was given a free book from the school
principal and seemed very proud of herself. The AR program is one the school operates
so students can practice reading. Once students complete a book goal, they take a test on
the computer. As students read and pass comprehension tests, they move up in AR
levels. The ASP supports the school-day AR program by providing AR books at various
levels for students to read. Amanda said all her friends tried to read as much as possible
so they could move ahead in AR and earn a free book. The incentive offered by the
principal seemed to be a very big motivator for Amanda and her friends. This incentive
is a good example of AI theory because of its positive nature.
On a Monday, when asked what she did over the weekend, Amanda stated she,
“celebrated (her) mama’s birthday. She had two cakes!” Amanda said her mama reads
to her in Spanish and she does not have a favorite book – she likes all of them. Nobody
read to her that particular weekend, however.
Amanda worked quietly with the girl she usually sat with. She copied from the
other girl quite a bit because Amanda tended to be shy, and at first it appeared she did not
like to ask for help. During one observation, she raised her hand for help and said she did
105
not understand what to do. She read the question and she and the staff member discussed
it. Amanda had the correct answer. She appeared to really want to correctly complete
her work, and she wanted confirmation her work was correct.
One day, Amanda only had spelling homework and was done quite early. She
had to write one sentence two times. She said her spelling list matched what she learned
in class during phonics time. When asked to read a word, she read it correctly but could
not say whether the vowel was long or short. The word was: flute. She looked at her
partner, who is not an English learner, to answer for her. On the second word, she
answered the long/short vowel question correctly. The word was “life.”
Another time, Amanda asked for help in math. She did the math with help, but
when she wrote the answer she first checked her friend's paper to verify the accuracy of
her own response. Amanda was copying her neighbor’s work, and the neighbor caught
her and told her to stop copying. Amanda stated she was not copying, and the other girl
said she was lying. They were teasing each other, but Amanda did copy a lot of the other
girl's work. She did not seem to have a lot of confidence about her academic abilities.
Amanda appeared to look to her best friend in her regular-day class to verify or validate
her schoolwork.
At the beginning of this case study, some questions were asked before the
observations, “How were Amanda’s needs met? Was she able to stand up for herself, or
did she get lost in the crowd? Would the staff recognize she was an English learner and
ensure she got the support she needed?” Amanda received help whenever she raised her
106
hand. Sometimes it was because she did not understand how to do something, but often it
was to verify her work. She also depended on her friend, who appeared to be a very
capable student, to verify or validate her work. Amanda called out answers during group
discussion and was recognized by the teacher.
One important finding that came from observing Amanda involved a staff
member reading a story to students. Whenever staff members read a story to the
students, they always placed Amanda in the front, near the teacher. This strategy
supported building students’ facility in English and also built comprehension. By
listening to the story in English, and practicing speaking English, not only did the activity
support comprehension, but it supported second language learners who were learning
English (August & Shanahan, 2006). The ASP staff understood that as an English
learner, Amanda needed to see the pictures and clearly hear the teacher’s voice. In
considering how the Hispanic student CST scores were not statistically different than the
non-Hispanic students’ scores, it is possible strategies such as this one are part of the
Ross School academic culture. Though, as an English-learner, and as a student who is
learning to be a proficient reader, Amanda needed to see the text and discuss how the text
fit together to make phrases, sentences, and paragraphs of meaning. Ideally, for reading
comprehension practice, each student would have a copy of the book to be able to read
closely with the class. This is an important concept for both English learners, and
students who speak English as a first language.
107
Most important, this researcher believes, is the support Amanda received in the
form of homework time and help. First, the time allowed her to complete the homework,
so she could spend quality time at home with her mama. Second, the support offered by
the ASP staff is in English, and since her mama cannot speak English, this help is very
valuable to Amanda.
After talking with and observing Amanda, it was clear how the staff, whether
knowingly or not, used AI to support Amanda as an English learner. An important
component of AI is the value educators place on each student. Using AI, educators seek
out and focus on student strengths and accomplishments in a positive manner. It was
clear the help the staff gave to Amanda during homework time was helping her
confidence. In fact, the book award Amanda received was a big confidence booster.
One very important benefit of fostering a positive environment in the ASP setting
is, according to Bernard (1993), it helps foster resiliency in students who may be
experiencing overwhelming adversity at home. To be certain, there is no indication
Amanda was experiencing any adversity at home. However, she was learning to speak
English and lived in a home where English was not spoken; that could present a big
challenge. Bernard stressed teacher behavior and attitudes play an important role in
fostering resiliency, especially for students who may not have a supportive home life
(like Amanda learning English).
Through reading with students, homework help, book prize awards, and
accommodations such as seating placement during read-aloud stories, the Ross staff made
108
it clear to students that schoolwork is important and that the instructional staff members
expect students to do the work. Two clear themes emerged from Amanda’s case study:
positive systems are in place to meet student needs and teachers expect students to do
their work. When asked if she thought the ASP teachers supported or helped her with
schoolwork, her reply provided evidence that ASP staff members have high expectations
for her, “My teachers think I can do hard things and easy things.”
Case study #2. Bryan was selected as a participant in the study for several
reasons: this was his second year in the ASP, so he had more experience with the
program than a first-year student. His height, confident attitude, and gregarious
personality led the researcher to believe Bryan would have a lot to say about the ASP and
his experiences with the program. How would the support Bryan received differ from the
kind of support a shyer Amanda received? His outgoing personality contrasted with the
other two case-study participants (both quiet), providing balance.
Bryan was a tall, fifth-grade, African American student. He was a class leader
and had influence over other students – if he was talking, others talk; if he was
demanding quiet, others listened and complied. Bryan’s teacher described him as, “wellmannered, who uses words like, ‘yes ma’am, and no thank you,’ yet can sometimes
challenge staff to see what he can get away with.” The staff member also said, “Bryan
consistently completes his homework, if not during the ASP, then at home.”
Bryan, in his matter-of-fact way, said PE and math were his best subjects and that
he did his homework because, “We need to do our homework.” Bryan kept the
109
researcher informed about the schedule and daily routines. He knew how things ran at
the ASP. On a Friday, he said, “This is free choice day - it's called Fun Friday, and the
whole day we get to choose what we want to do.” He colored and drew with two friends.
Students could play soccer, basketball, hula-hoop, imagination games, walk around,
and/or visit friends. At one point, the teacher helped Bryan get up off of the ground:
Bryan called out, “Can someone help me up?” and the teacher smiled, extended a hand,
and helped him up. After the free play, students were given the choice to either watch a
movie or go to the computer lab. Bryan opted to go to the lab and played educational
math games where students try to earn money based on service at a restaurant. The tips
earned can be applied to “purchases” in a store for the virtual employee. The game is not
a reading game, though students must read to understand virtual food orders and virtual
money exchanges and payments.
One Monday, Bryan completed his homework within 15 minutes. He was in the
same regular-day class as a student with spelling and math homework, but Bryan said he
did it all in class. He said he read a book over the weekend but could not remember the
name of it; it was from the mystery genre and he read for at least 45 minutes each day.
Over the weekend, he went to a bounce house for fun. At the time of the study, Bryan
lived with his Grandma. When Grandma picked him up from the ASP one day, she
mentioned they were working on Bryan becoming a polite young man.
110
Bryan was not in the homework room every day. The ASP staff member said he
was at Intervention, a school-run program helping at-risk students with math on an asneeded basis. He participated in intervention during two of the observation sessions.
One day, Bryan shared the book he was reading. He recalled the researcher had
asked him about it and wanted her to see it. That day, he completed his homework early
and began reading where he left off in the book, Pyrates.
Once he completed Pyrates, Bryan did not have another book in progress.
Instead, he worked on a story about his friends he was writing during the regular school
day. He spent several days, after his homework was completed, intensely writing about
his friends.
Regular school-day teachers provided a list of weekly homework activities for
students to complete and teachers to check off. The ASP uses an auction to give prizes to
students who complete their homework. They can earn toys, candy, chips, and other
items. Bryan said he thought the prizes were good, but he did his homework to get it
over with, not specifically for the prizes.
Reflecting on the questions asked before the observations at the beginning of this
case study, Bryan’s confident attitude and gregarious personality led the researcher to
believe Bryan would have a lot to say about the ASP and his experiences with the
program. However, that was only partially true. Bryan was able to give a lot of
information about the daily routines of the ASP, but he was not too forthcoming about his
experiences in school or with the ASP. One day during observation, Bryan had his
111
sweatshirt zipped up over his head and he had a book under the sweatshirt he claimed to
be reading (in the dark?).
A valuable observation emerging from Bryan’s case was his participation in class.
Bryan was an enthusiastic, high-energy student, full of fun, and needed a variety of
learning tasks to remain engaged. The ASP set up academic learning opportunities from
which Bryan could choose. He might have read his Pirates book, written about his
friends, or play an educational computer game, for example. There was a difference
between the types of support Bryan received compared to what Amanda received.
Amanda’s interactions with staff tended to involve asking questions and having questions
answered. Interactions between Bryan and the staff members tended to revolve around
directing his attention back to the academic task.
As mentioned earlier by his grandmother, “Bryan is working on becoming a polite
young man!” Although he could sometimes “challenge staff to see what he could get
away with,” based on the observed interactions, it appeared everyone, including the
researcher, was charmed by him.
Case study #3. John was selected as a participant in the study for several reasons:
like Amanda and Bryan, John was also a second-year student in the ASP. His high
academic expectations for himself made him an ideal subject for the case study. It would
be interesting to see how his needs were met. Would he seek the help he needed to
succeed? John’s very shy nature provided balance with Bryan, the other male in the
study.
112
John was a fifth-grade Asian student. A staff member said John, “has come a
long way since last year when he would often cry.” The staff member also said,
“Completing his homework (was) very important to John.” John agreed that homework
was important. Later, when asked what he would change about the ASP, if he had the
chance, John said, “I wish people would be quiet during homework time.” During the
transition between ASP staff members, homework time could get noisy, but the ASP
administrators and staff members were working on reinforcing routines and keeping the
students engaged in academics throughout the hour.
John mentioned some of his favorite things to do during ASP, “I like to draw and
chat with my friends a little bit.” He was not a socially motivated student. Unlike Bryan,
who had a whole class of friends, John was a sweet boy, very concerned about his
academics and had a small, close group of friends. He was always willing to answer the
researcher’s questions, but his answers tended to be short and pointed, one-sentence
responses.
One Monday, John reported he did “a little bit” of reading over the weekend. He
read Diary of a Wimpy Kid for an hour. For fun, he played video games and hung out
with his friends. He played VGA (a video game) for "like two hours."
Depending on the book, he said sometimes he would rather read than play video
games. His favorite book was Percy Jackson and the Lightning Thief, and he felt he was
a “very good” reader. When asked what a “very good reader” was, he said, “Someone
who reads a lot and understands what he reads.”
113
During one observation, homework time started at 3:20 p.m., but rather than
ending in an hour, the end time was moved up to 4:05 p.m. that day. When the teacher
said to clean up, John pouted and started to cry because he did not get his homework
done. After the bathroom break, he was able to complete homework during the computer
lab time. During the time he was tearful, the other students tended to ignore his behavior.
The staff members did not appear to notice he was upset, though they did make an
exception and allow students to complete homework during computer time, which
usually is not allowed.
During another observation of homework time, John became immediately
frustrated. He started homework time without a pencil, but he was not allowed to get out
of his seat to get one. He followed protocol and waited until his teacher walked around to
him, giving out pencils to those who forgot to bring their own. He was frustrated about
forgetting the pencil. Then, he needed to throw something away but could not get up to
throw it away; he had to wait to be called on to throw away his paper. He then was
redirected to start his homework. Homework time started at 3:20 p.m., and finally, after
getting a pencil and throwing away a paper, at 3:40 p.m. he started homework. Though
he was frustrated, he did not cry. He said he understood the rules were there to keep
people working on homework; the researcher believed because he knew the reason he
could not get out of his seat, he was more inclined to follow the rules and not get so
frustrated that he cried. John seemed to thrive on a consistent routine with clear systems;
114
he seemed more willing to accept frustrating experiences because he understood the
purpose behind the rule.
The ASP system had rules making it run smoothly. The rules during homework
time were in place to maximize learning by increasing time on task. John understood the
reason for the rule. The reason students must wait to be called on to leave their seats
during homework time is so people do not wander around the room and distract others
who are trying to concentrate. In fact, John is one of those students who prefer quiet
during homework time.
Reflecting on the questions asked before the observations at the beginning of this
case study, John’s and his parents’ high academic expectations for himself made him an
ideal subject for the case study. It was interesting to see how his needs were met. John
was not observed raising his hand to ask for help. He generally had a clear understanding
of what he needed to do and seemed to feel confident about his academic abilities.
During an observation, he had an assignment to write a poem. He proudly said poems do
not have to rhyme, leading this researcher to believe that was new learning for John.
Most of the time, when he raised his hand for teacher help, it was a procedural
question; either he needed to use the restroom, get a pencil, or throw away a paper.
Where some other students would not have raised their hand for permission, John was
very consistent about following the rules; he understood and appreciated the consistency
of systems.
115
One day, John was puzzling about what to write when this researcher asked him
what he was working on. He said for homework he was told to write a topic sentence
with the phrase, “My family’s most valuable possession.” He shared, “I can’t think of
anything valuable that our family has.” Then he smiled, got a sparkle in his eye, and
wrote, “My family’s most valuable possession could be me!” This researcher believes he
is correct.
Qualitative Analysis: Grounded Theory Method
Merriam’s work, as discussed in Chapter 3, allowed the use of incidents (or
codes), categories, properties (concepts), and hypotheses (themes) to form links between
and among the categories and properties of data. The researcher examined observation
notes until categories formed and emerged. The researcher then looked for the properties
of the categories. Comparisons were made between levels of conceptualization until
theories were formed. The first step of this process was analyzing the frequency of
observed incidents to find categories, because the more frequently an incident is
observed, the stronger the code.
The observational data were analyzed and tallied for frequency of observed
incidences. See the following five tables in Appendix C:
1. Table C1: Observation Checklist: Elements of Universal Design Theory and
Appreciative Inquiry Theory Pertaining to Teaching, Student Engagement, and
Assessment: Frequency
2. Table C2: Best Practices in Reading Comprehension Instruction-Frequency
116
3. Table C3a: Observation Sheet: Best Practices for English LearnersComprehension Related: Frequency
4. Table C3b: Best Practices for English Learners- Comprehension Related:
Frequency
5. Table C4: Observation Checklist for Best Practices for English Learners,
Frequency
Categories of Data
After tallying the frequency of observed instances on the Observational
Checklists, the next step was to list the categories of data appearing most often. The
more often an instance is observed, the stronger the code. These six categories emerged:
1. Students are provided with a variety of different ways to represent essential core
concepts.
2. An environment of mutual trust and safety between regular-day teachers,
afterschool instructional staff, and students is apparent.
3. Students are taught to use comprehension strategies combined with concerted
efforts to build students’ facility in English.
4. Independent Reading: One of the strongest predictors of reading comprehension is
the amount of time students read (Cunningham & Stanovich, 1998)
5. Students are taught to be responsible for their own learning.
6. Staff members convey positive expectations for students.
117
Properties of categories. Next, the researcher looked for the properties of the
categories and compared the properties until a theory could be formed. The categories
are listed below, along with properties from the data describing the categories.
1. Students are provided with a variety of different ways to represent essential
core concepts. Essential core concepts, such as math and reading/language arts lessons
from the school day, are supported during homework time. When Amanda asked for help
with a math word problem, the staff member helped her represent the problem in two
ways (draw a picture and use division), so Amanda could decide which way worked best
for her. The two examples provided Amanda with enough support that she was able to
successfully solve the homework problem.
Manipulative materials, such as coins, were provided as concrete examples. A
staff member asked students if they wanted to use coins to represent money problems
during homework and the students responded enthusiastically to the idea. During the
school day, the third-grade students were completing a math chapter on counting money.
Having the manipulative money allowed them to depict the math problems in a concrete
way, empowering them to answer the problems more independently.
Building on the manipulative money concept, a staff member asked students to
use a pencil and paper to draw as many combinations of coins they could think of to total
$1.00. The students had already completed their homework, but the staff member wanted
the students to practice counting money until the end of homework time. It was
important to her that the students stay engaged in academic endeavors until the
118
homework hour ended. Having the students draw the money was much more difficult
than counting the money manipulative materials. Some of the third-grade students did
not grasp the concept that day, but the staff member indicated they would continue to
practice the activity. Some of the fourth- and fifth-grade students tried the activity and
some helped the younger students. One third-grade student helped an older student.
Stemming from another math homework question, a staff member showed
students how to represent a question in an alternate format that might be more
understandable. She showed how to change a 27 x 2 = question to a 27 + 27 = question.
The staff member also asked whether 27 -3 + 5 written horizontally is the same if it is
written vertically (she wrote the problems on paper so students could actually see the
difference between a vertical and a horizontal problem).
Another strategy a staff member provided for solving addition problems was to
“look for the groups that make 10.” She gave an example of 27 + 13 =. “There are three
10s and the 7 and 3 make another 10, so 30 + 10 = 40.” The strategy was used by some
of the fourth-grade students, but the third-grade students needed more practice with the
concept.
In homework time, students were shown how to measure objects using paperclips,
shoes, hands, and a yardstick, rather than just a ruler. The staff member pulled these
objects together at the last minute when she saw some questions in the math homework
depicted these items in the examples. The staff member took the initiative to quickly
119
grab the items she had available so the students could use concrete objects to verify the
examples in the homework.
The computer lab was available for students to practice math and writing skills
through the use of computer games and word processing. Students got 40 minutes of lab
time, two days per week. One site students could visit was http//www.coolmath.com.
Additionally, posted on the front whiteboard in the computer lab was a list of other
student-friendly sites that may be used to access information needed for completing
homework.
A student mentioned the staff members give the students word search puzzles of
word lists they are studying during the school day. Puzzles for lists, such as High
Frequency Words and spelling words, may be provided to students for additional practice
memorizing the words. Staff members provided students with a variety of different ways
to represent essential core concepts from the school-day math and reading/language arts
lessons. The different ways to represent essential core concepts from the school day are
primarily used during homework time.
2. An environment of mutual trust and safety between regular-day teachers,
afterschool instructional staff, and students is apparent. An environment of mutual trust
and safety between regular-day teachers, afterschool instructional staff, and students was
apparent in many ways throughout the ASP portion of the day and even before the ASP
began each day. Regular-day teachers selected students to attend an afterschool
120
intervention program. The ASP staff was trusted to send students to the intervention on
time. Students were trusted to get to and from the intervention safely.
The ASP staff wanted to trust the students and provide them with opportunities to
do new and exciting things. When discussing how to complete the activity for the
holiday party the next day, a staff member said,
We are trying to determine whether you are ready to handle the work tomorrow or
if you can help the younger students work on their gingerbread houses and color
the game pieces/candies. Can you handle the complicated work and behavior
expectations? Decide what you will do, create a game or build a gingerbread
house. Decide whether you will be able to handle yourself.
Another example of mutual trust is the school-day teachers provided a list of
weekly homework activities for students to complete and ASP staff to check off. The
ASP staff was trusted to verify homework completion. The school-day staff used this
information from the ASP as part of the award system in which the principal provided
reading awards to students. The school custodian was also involved with creating an
environment of mutual trust and safety. He worked with the students in achieving goals
related to school-site health and safety. He set bathroom cleanliness expectations and
discussed with both the ASP lead staff and the students whether students met the
expectations.
3. Students were taught to use comprehension strategies combined with concerted
efforts to build students’ facility in English. Listed below are the comprehension
strategies used and discussed as the ASP staff member read stories to the students. The
comprehension strategy “predict” was practiced as the teacher read to the students. The
121
students predicted what would happen to the characters of the story. The comprehension
strategy “visualize” was practiced as the teacher read to the students. The students and
teacher created pictures in their minds as they visualized scenes from the story. The
comprehension strategy “to clarify” was practiced as the teacher read to the students.
4. Efforts to build students’ facility in English occurred primarily during
homework time. When the students had homework related to writing, they sometimes
asked the teachers for assistance in spelling words for their writing. The staff members
helped students read and write unknown words almost daily. Sometimes they
encouraged students to consider prefixes, suffixes, and other word parts to determine the
spelling. Once, the teacher asked a student to sound out the word and spell individual
sounds.
Other efforts to build students’ facility in English were related to understanding
and memorization of math vocabulary. The students practiced the following
mathematical words: symbols, solve, addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division.
Accelerated Reader books were provided to reinforce/practice the reading at each
student’s fluency level completed during the school day. Students could practice using
the books the ASP had, and when they got to class the next day, they could log into the
system to test; this process was primarily done during homework-time.
5. Independent Reading: One of the strongest predictors of reading
comprehension is the amount of time students read (Cunningham & Stanovich, 1998).
Students were observed reading silently to themselves 11 times. Each day of the
122
observation, students were able to read after homework was complete. Many students
finished homework with time to read. On one occasion, a girl was independently reading
when the group returned to the ASP room after homework time.
6. Students are taught to be responsible for their own learning. The ASP has
implemented rules and guidelines to teach the students to be responsible for their own
learning, and materials are provided to give the students options. The staff and students
discuss this topic frequently. Activity choices available after homework is completed
include: silent reading, word search puzzles, AR practice, or writing something
(examples: story, letter). Guidelines and rules stated students were only allowed to use
calculators in math to check their work – not to complete their work. Another rule stated
to earn “money” to use at the class store, a student must not use the bathroom during the
homework hour. Time was provided to use the bathroom both before and after
homework. One day, a student did not use the bathroom at an appropriate time, so he
needed to go during homework. The student was told he could go but would not earn his
money for the day; he had to choose. He was reminded to make better decisions and to
use the bathroom when he had the opportunity before homework. The ASP provided new
AR books to the older students (higher level). They appeared to be excited to read the
new materials.
ASP staff members also teach students to be responsible for their own learning
through conversations reinforcing the message. Here is one example: an ASP staff
123
member said, “We don’t cheat. We want to work fairly like everyone else!” In another
example it was stated:
We are trying to determine whether you are ready to handle the work tomorrow or
if you can help the younger students work on their gingerbread houses and color
the game pieces/candies. Can you handle the complicated work and behavior
expectations? Decide what you will do, create a game or build a gingerbread
house. Decide whether you will be able to handle yourself.
The ASP staff member, when asked about teaching kids to be responsible for their own
learning, said, “We are always looking for ways to help students with skills and also to
help them be consistent with behavior.”
7. Staff members convey positive expectations for students and create a positive
environment. The researcher observed adults around the campus community discussing
student behavior with the children. The school principal, the custodian, and the ASP staff
members all took the time to discuss behavior expectations with students. The school
principal dropped in at the ASP to observe the students and staff. A student was
behaving inappropriately, so the principal and student immediately stepped aside and
discussed the student’s behavior. The principal reinforced the concept that behavior
expectations are consistent from school day to afterschool time.
Daily reminders and feedback kept the students in the loop about how they were
meeting behavior expectations. The reminders were general as well as specific. Students
received daily reminders from the ASP staff members that they were to work on
homework without talking. Specific feedback from the custodian included information
124
about how clean the students left the bathroom that day and how much he appreciated it
because there was an evening event scheduled at the school that night.
The researcher tallied positive comments for one hour (during homework):
Comments such as “OK,” “all right,” “that’s right,” “good job,” and “You’ve already
read all those? Good job with that!” totaled 16 tallies in one hour. ASP staff members
and the school staff convey positive expectations. When asked about whether her
teachers expect her to do her work and follow the rules, an English learner named
Amanda, who is in the case study, said proudly: “My teacher (ASP staff member) thinks I
can do hard things and easy things.”
Emerging Themes
Referring to Merriam’s Qualitative Research, A Guide to Design and
Implementation (2009), and using grounded theory, the next step toward creating
substantive theory is to make comparisons within and between the levels of properties
and categories until a theory can be formulated. “Hypotheses are the suggested links
between categories and properties” (p. 200). The resulting hypothesis or theory is
referred to as substantive theory.
Comparing the six data categories and each of the properties in the categories,
three themes, or “aspects of practice” (p. 200), emerge.
The three themes are:
1. Instructional support
2. Environment of mutual trust
125
3. Positive expectations and environment
Theme 1. When comparing categories, three categories emerged as one theme
because they shared similar properties. These categories were:
1. Students were provided with a variety of different ways to represent essential
core concepts.
2. Students were taught to use comprehension strategies combined with concerted
efforts to build students’ facility in English.
3. Independent Reading: One of the strongest predictors of reading comprehension
is the amount of time students read (Cunningham & Stanovich, 1998).
These three categories emerged as one theme because in comparison it became
obvious they shared similar properties. The focus on each of these categories is
instructional support, whether teaching students alternate methods of working a problem,
reinforcing a reading strategy, or providing materials, instructional support was provided
on many levels. Additionally, all three categories of support occurred during homework
time, as well as at other instructional times.
Theme 2. The second theme, environment of mutual trust, emerged from the
following two categories:
1. Students were taught to be responsible for their own learning.
2. An environment of mutual trust and safety between regular-day teachers,
afterschool instructional staff, and students was apparent.
126
Both categories merged to become a theme because each category was grounded
in behavior management – the notion of trusting others to do the right thing. An ASP
staff member described how these two categories merged when she said, “We are always
looking for ways to help students with skills and to also help them be consistent with
behavior.”
Theme 3. The final theme, positive expectations and environment, emerged from
the following categories:
1. Staff members conveyed positive expectations for students.
The researcher observed adults around the campus community discussing student
behavior with the children. The school principal, the custodian, and the ASP staff
members all took the time to discuss behavior expectations with students. Daily
reminders and feedback kept the students in the loop about how they were meeting
behavior expectations.
2. The researcher tallied positive comments for one hour and tallied 16 times when
students were recognized by a positive comment from a staff member.
Summary of Research Question 3
Research Question 3 asked in what ways the afterschool program bolsters reading
comprehension success. The theories formulated from qualitative data showed
illustrations of support that could lead to increased achievement through:
1. Instructional support
2. Environment of mutual trust
127
3. Positive expectations and environment
Conclusion
Study Design
The study used quantitative and qualitative data to answer the research questions.
An Explanatory Sequential design was used to collect and analyze the data; this twophase mixed-method design offered the opportunity to collect and analyze data
sequentially. First, the quantitative data were collected and compared and then, based on
those results, the qualitative data were analyzed, helping to interpret the quantitative data
(Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011) (see Figure 4).
QUANTITATIVE
Data Collection
and Analysis
Follow up with
QUALITATIVE
Data Collection
and Analysis
Interpretation
Figure 4. Explanatory Sequential design.
Quantitative study. Quantitative data from CST Comprehension tests were used
to answer Research Questions 1 and 2. There was no significant difference in CST
comprehension scores in third- through fifth-grade students attending an afterschool
128
program and those not attending an afterschool program. There was not a significant
difference in comprehension achievement between Hispanic students and non-Hispanic
students in grades two through five attending Ross Elementary, an important finding
given the large achievement gap in reading/language arts between Hispanic and nonHispanic students in California.
Qualitative study. The theories formulated from qualitative data showed
illustrations of support that could lead to increased achievement through:
1. Instructional support
2. Environment of mutual trust
3. Positive expectations and environment
Figure 5 depicts the three main themes that emerged from the qualitative data.
The student is depicted at the beginning of the figure. The use of instructional support,
an environment of mutual trust, and positive expectations and environment could lead to
increased achievement.
129
STUDENTS
Positive
Instructional Expectations
and
Support
Environment
Environment
of Mutual
Trust
SUPPORTED
STUDENT LEARNING
Figure 5. Themes from qualitative data.
Chapter 5 includes a review of the findings, discussion and conclusions, findings
in the context of the study’s theoretical frameworks, recommendations, policy and
leadership implications, and suggestions for further research.
130
Chapter 5
SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, AND CONCLUSIONS
Overview
Might afterschool programs provide an opportunity to combat the achievement
gap and to help ensure all students are reading by the end of third grade? Arne Duncan,
current United States Secretary of Education, argued:
Engaging students in after school activities is a critically important strategic part
in improving a school’s performance, and in helping schools that have historically
struggled to go to the next level. (as cited in Learning Point Associates, 2010, p.
1)
This study compared the reading comprehension of third through fifth-grade students
attending an ASP to those not attending an ASP and compared the reading
comprehension of second- through fifth-grade Hispanic students to those of non-Hispanic
students at Ross Elementary School. CST scores were used as a quantitative measure of
comprehension. Additionally, a qualitative study was conducted to determine in what
ways the afterschool program bolstered reading comprehension success.
Chapter 5 provides a summary of the studies and their findings and a discussion
of the research findings as they relate to the information presented in the literature
review. In an effort to contribute to the body of research, recommendations to improve
the efforts of afterschool programs in supporting student comprehension achievement are
offered. The recommendations are based on findings from the study and come from the
greater literature. Recommendations are also provided for supporting comprehension
instruction for Hispanic students. Additionally, leadership and policy implications and
131
areas for future research are presented in this chapter.
Research Questions
These questions guided the study:
1. Is there a significant difference, as measured by scores, in comprehension
achievement between third- through fifth-grade students in an afterschool
program and not in an afterschool program? An Independent Samples t-Test was
performed. The Independent Samples t-Test compared two groups: those in the
afterschool program and those who were not in it, using CST Reading
Comprehension scores from 2011/2012 (see Appendix B, Sampling of CST
Questions).
2. Is there a significant difference in comprehension achievement between Hispanic
students and non-Hispanic students attending Ross Elementary? An Independent
Samples t-Test was performed. The Independent Samples t-Test compared two
groups: Hispanic students and non-Hispanic students using CST Reading
Comprehension scores from 2010/2011 and 2011/2012.
3. In what ways does the afterschool program bolster reading comprehension
success?
Summary of the Research Findings
Research Question 1
Question 1 quantitatively compared the 2011/2012 CST Comprehension data of
27 third- through fifth-grade students who attended an afterschool program to 27 who did
132
not attend. An Independent Samples t-Test was performed comparing two groups: those
in the afterschool program and those not involved in the program (grades 3-5), using CST
Reading Comprehension scores from 2011/2012. See Appendix B for a sampling of CST
questions. No statistically significant differences were found in the mean CST scores for
students who attended an afterschool program and those who did not.
Research Question 2
Quantitative analysis was used to compare CST Comprehension data of 20
Hispanic students during 2010/2011 and 2011/2012 to 30 non-Hispanic students. An
Independent Samples t-Test was performed comparing two groups: Hispanic students and
non-Hispanic students (grades 2-5), using CST Reading Comprehension scores from
2010/2011 and 2011/2012. The researcher hoped there would not be a significant
difference between the scores and was pleased to discover there was not. The study
found no statistically significant differences in the mean CST scores between Hispanic
students and non-Hispanic students, an important finding given the large achievement
gap in reading/language arts between Hispanic and non-Hispanic students in California.
Research Question 3
Qualitative methodology guided the data collection and analysis of Question 3: In
what ways does the afterschool program bolster reading comprehension success? The
data included observation notes from 10 observations of an ASP and case-study reports
from observation of three students from the ASP population. The qualitative data
collected from the ASP observations is described in themes:
133
1. Instructional support
2. Environment of mutual trust
3. Positive expectations and environment
Instructional support. Instructional support involves how the staff presents the
new learning, or content, to be practiced. New learning and practice opportunities should
be carefully explained and presented in a variety of ways. English learners and
struggling readers must be provided with extra support. Additionally, students are
provided with a variety of ways to demonstrate their new learning. Support for this
theme is provided by the research of Rose and Gravel (2010). When utilizing strategies
to support all learners, it is helpful to consider the three Key Principles of Universal
Design for Learning: a) Represent – different ways to represent essential core concepts,
b) Engagement – how students participate in class, and c) Expression – how students are
asked to demonstrate what they have learned. Engagement is discussed in the next
theme.
Environment of mutual trust. Students and teachers interact with each other’s
safety and best interest in mind. ASP staff supports what is taught during the school day.
Students complete homework at school, freeing them to socialize during SPARK time
and at home with family.
Support for this theme is provided by the Appreciative Inquiry research of Yballe
and O'Connor, (2000). AI is a theory based on mutual trust and safety between regularday teachers, afterschool instructional staff, and students. It is a student-centered
134
approach emphasizing increased interpersonal and team building skills and higher-order
thinking skills. The student is taught to be responsible for his or her own learning.
Positive expectations and environment. Administrators, teachers, and ASP staff
have systems in place to maximize student learning. Students are held accountable for
understanding and using the systems. Students and staff are positively appreciated for
contributions. A study supporting this finding was conducted by Bernard (1993),
“Families, schools, and communities that have protected children growing up in adversity
are characterized by 1. Caring and support, 2. Positive expectations, 3. Ongoing
opportunities for participation” (p. 44). Bernard stressed that teacher behavior and
attitudes play an important role in fostering resiliency, especially for students who may
not have a supportive home life. It is important for students to know teachers feel
schoolwork is important and that students are valued. Teachers who “play to the
strengths of each child exert a powerful motivating influence” (p. 44). The staff members
at Ross showed behaviors and attitudes of caring and expectation.
Discussion
Themes pertaining to the improvement of reading comprehension success in the
ASP were represented and discussed in Figure 5. The themes are:
1. Instructional support
2. Environment of mutual trust
3. Positive expectations and environment
135
Based on the research from Chapter 2, further discussion of more specific ways to
bolster reading comprehension is needed. Table 5 listed information discussed in the
literature review in Chapter 2 pertaining to best practices for teaching reading
comprehension. Table C2 was used to tally the frequency of observed instructional
practices from the table. Using the Frequency table, one may draw conclusions about
which research-based practices on the table were most often used by the ASP.
Of the four research-based Best Practices from the observation checklist, three
were observed more than one time. Explicit teaching of the comprehension strategies,
including modeling the thinking process by thinking out loud about strategy use,
encouraging questions and discussions, and keeping students engaged, was observed
once. Use of comprehension strategies during reading was observed three times.
Techniques such as guiding students through focused, high-quality discussion on the
meaning of texts; structuring the discussion to complement the text, the instructional
purpose, and the reader’s ability and grade level; developing discussion questions
requiring students to think deeply about text, to ask follow-up questions encouraging and
facilitating discussion; and having students lead structured small-group discussions were
observed nine times. Independent reading was observed 11 times. Best practices, such
as those just listed, are the types of instructional support that bolster reading
comprehension. Later in this chapter, specific recommendations are provided about how
an ASP can implement these practices.
136
Factors that Bolster Success for English learners
Table 11 listed information discussed in the literature review in Chapter 2
pertaining to best practices for teaching English learners. Table C4 was used to tally the
frequency that the instructional practices on the table were observed. Using the
Frequency tables, one may draw conclusions about which research-based practices on the
tables were most often used by the ASP.
Of the 14 research-based best practices from the observation checklists, five were
observed more than one time. The first practice, or recommendation, suggests providing
ELD instruction is better than not providing it, going hand-in-hand with the next practice;
ELD instruction should emphasize academic language as well as conversational language
– these were observed four times. The next practice states ELD instruction should
emphasize listening and speaking, although it can incorporate reading and writing. The
observer noted three times when the listening and speaking practice was emphasized.
The next two practices, ELD instruction should explicitly teach elements of English (e.g.,
vocabulary, syntax, grammar, functions, and conventions) and ELD instruction should
integrate meaning and communication to support explicit teaching of language, were each
observed five times. These best practices are the types of instructional support that
bolster achievement for English learners. Later in this chapter, specific recommendations
are provided about how an ASP can implement these practices.
137
Findings in the Context of Theoretical Frameworks
The theories formulated from qualitative data, in response to Question 3, showed
illustration of support that could lead to increased student achievement via:
1. Instructional support
2. Environment of mutual trust
3. Positive expectations and environment
How do UDL and AI connect to the theories formulated from the qualitative data
and how were the UDL and AI theories observed in the ASP? Next, UDL and AI are tied
to the theories formulated from qualitative data and, when applicable, linked to the ASP.
Table C5 lists information discussed in the literature review in Chapter 2 about UDL and
AI and compares them to the findings generated by answering Question 3. The table
contains a column of acronyms representing the three themes that showed illustration of
support that could lead to increased student achievement:
1. Instructional support (IS)
2. Environment of mutual trust (EMT)
3. Positive expectations and environment (for students) (PES)
Table C1 was used to tally the frequency that instructional practices on the table
were observed. Using the Frequency tables, one may draw conclusions about which
elements of the UDL and AI theories were most often used by the ASP. Of the 20
elements of UDL and AI from the observation checklists, all but two were observed one
or more times. Two elements of the theories were not observed. A lack of noted
138
observation does not mean the elements were not used by the staff at the ASP; it simply
means these elements were not noted during the 10 visits. The following two elements of
the theories were not observed:

Is the student group encouraged to discuss what is working well in the learning
process? This could take the form of a whole-group debrief session after
homework time. Students could share whether they are meeting instructional
goals, such as completing homework. Students could also share interesting or
unique homework assignments.

The dream stage: Are learners encouraged to focus on areas for potential
improvement and new learning outcomes (think and discuss)? This could be a
group discussion or a reflective writing assignment where students discuss how
they want to grow as learners. The ASP staff could guide the discussion by
suggesting how the ASP may help students achieve their learning goals.
Of the 20 elements of UDL and AI from the observation checklists, four were
observed 10 or more times. The four observed 10 or more times were:

Do staff members convey positive expectations for students? This was observed
19 times, through actions such as discussing behavior expectations and creating
and enforcing homework rules.

Represent: Are students provided with a variety of different ways to represent
essential core concepts? This was observed 10 times through activities like
encouraging students to read a story using the loud speaker on the playground.
139

Is an environment of mutual trust and safety between regular-day teachers,
afterschool instructional staff, and students apparent? This was observed 10 times
and involves setting specific rules and ensuring they were followed.

Are students taught to be responsible for their own learning? This was observed
10 times. The ASP encourages responsibility when having eligible students
attend an intervention program; students are responsible for getting themselves
safely there and back and to be sure they bring and keep track of all materials they
need.
After considering best practices for teaching comprehension, and teaching
comprehension to English learners, what are specific strategies the ASP may use to
bolster comprehension? In the next section, recommendations for teaching
comprehension are offered.
Recommendations
Recommendations have been examined using the AI framework to ensure the
recommendations are positive and appropriate for all members of the system.
Specific Strategies and Best Practices for Teaching Comprehension After School
(From Study Findings and the Greater Literature)

To emphasize reading comprehension instruction, consider adding an interactive
comprehension bulletin board to the homework and reading area. Students and
teachers can post word lists, high frequency word spellings, visual reminders of
confusing concepts, and more. The strategies and visual reminders, such as
140
pictures, could be posted to remind the teacher to model the strategies and the
students to use the strategies while reading. Signs and pictures for
Comprehension Monitoring, Question Generating, Sum Up and other strategies
matching the regular-day comprehension strategy instruction could be hung with
eye-catching reminder pictures (NRP, 2000, pp. 4-39 to 4-46).

Order class sets of books so when the teacher reads a story, everyone gets a copy.

Closely read with students, ask in-depth, challenging questions about why the
author used specific terms and phrases. As a group, closely and carefully
examine specific parts of the story, wondering about and discussing the author’s
words. Make it a rule to ask students to point to answers in texts. Hold students
responsible for proving it (Gewertz, 2012, p. 2).

Offer a variety of both literary and informational text.

When teaching from an informational text, point out how the text is organized or
structured (list, sequence, cause and effect, etc.). Also note text features such as
graphs, charts, headings, subheadings, pictures, captions, italics, bold, etc. Point
out how each is useful in understanding the text. Learning to use the structures
and features is as important as learning about the content of the selections.

Encourage students to read a large amount of text – have an ASP contest for most
minutes read. ASP staff might consider holding a contest at the district level,
including all ASP students competing in Accelerated Reader. The volume of text
141
read contributes to increased vocabulary and comprehension (Cunningham &
Stanovich, 1998).
Specific Strategies and Best Practices for Teaching Comprehension After School,
English learners

When possible, work with English learners individually or in small groups; model
and teach students when and where to apply comprehension strategies such as
visualize, predict, and sum up (Foorman & Torgesen, 2001; Lyon et al., 2006;
Swanson et al., 1999, 2003; Vaughn et al., 2000).

Provide students with extra practice in reading words, sentences, and stories
(August & Shanahan, 2006, pp. 354-355)

Identify and clarify difficult words and passages (August & Shanahan, 2006, pp.
354-355).
Limitations of the Study
As the study progressed, limitations related to time, gender, grade level, and
testing methodology became apparent. Through the limitations listed here, many
recommendations for future study were recognized.

The researcher should have interviewed stakeholders, including administrators,
staff, parents, and students. The interviews would have provided information
about how the ASP was meeting individual student needs. Stakeholders might
have provided more background on which students are not read to at home, so
staff could support those students more closely. Parents could provide more
142
insight into exactly how the ASP meets the needs of the students. Does it provide
opportunities for laughter and play while allowing students to complete their
homework? Is that enough? Is that too much? What do parents want?

The student enrollment numbers at this ASP are fairly low, so the numbers in the
study are small. The researcher could have studied a larger facility including
more Hispanic learners, and more students in general, in the ASP.

The validity of standardized timed tests to measure reading comprehension has
been questioned. Since the researcher was seeking to measure students’
knowledge level, an assessment better able to measure increased learning may
have been more appropriate than the CST. More about this is presented later in
this chapter.

Time was a factor; time must be allowed for pre-tests, testing at intervals to show
growth differences, and a post-test. A minimum of one year was needed for a
longer-term study. Additional time would be needed to train staff on instructional
strategies for comprehension.

Students were not matched. They should have been matched for gender,
grade/age, ability level, and English language learner status.

The staff at this ASP, at the time of the observations, had not completed training
on teaching strategies or methods for increasing student comprehension. It would
have been beneficial to measure three types of afterschool programs, one in which
the staff had been trained on teaching strategies for increasing reading
143
comprehension, one site where the staff had not been trained, and a random blind
site where the researcher did not know whether the staff had been trained. That
might have allowed the researcher to determine whether ASP staff training played
a role in student success.
Use of the CST
CST data were used in this study for two important reasons. Validity evidence
has been gathered and established for the following purposes:
The tests that make up the STAR Program, along with other assessments, provide results
or score summaries used for different purposes. The four major purposes are:
1. Communicating with parents and guardians
2. Informing decisions needed to support student achievement
3. Evaluating school programs
4. Providing data for state and federal accountability programs for schools. (CDE,
2012b, p. 378).
Additionally, the use of CST data allowed the researcher to compare Ross student
achievement to the achievement of students at the district, county, and state levels.
However, the validity of standardized timed tests to measure reading comprehension has
been questioned. For example, U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan stated:
NCLB has frustrated teachers and principals alike by placing too much emphasis
on a single standardized test on a single day. By contrast, our waiver plan will let
States make accountability decisions based on student growth and gain and
progress, as well as other measures of school performance. States will consider so
much more than a single test score measured against an arbitrary proficiency level.
They will be able to look at how schools are serving their students and
144
communities in areas like school climate, access to rigorous coursework, school
attendance, and providing a well-rounded education. (DOE, 2011, para. 45-46)
Others have spoken out against high-stakes standardized testing and on April 23,
2012, Time Out for Testing (n.d.), “the world’s largest federation of unions, representing
thirty million education employees in about four hundred organizations in one hundred
and seventy countries and territories, across the globe,” placed a Resolution on HighStakes Testing on their website (para. 1). Presented here is one of the group’s criticisms
of standardized testing and a resolution:
The overreliance on high-stakes standardized testing in state and federal
accountability systems is undermining educational quality and equity in U.S.
public schools by hampering educators' efforts to focus on the broad range of
learning experiences that promote the innovation, creativity, problem solving,
collaboration, communication, critical thinking and deep subject-matter
knowledge that will allow students to thrive in a democracy and an increasingly
global society and economy. (And) …calls on the governor, state legislature and
state education boards and administrators to reexamine public school
accountability systems in this state, and to develop a system based on multiple
forms of assessment which does not require extensive standardized testing, more
accurately reflects the broad range of student learning, and is used to support
students and improve schools. (Time Out for Testing, 2012, para. 5, 10)
Based on the findings of this dissertation, for Questions 1 and 2, the ASP did not
have a significant difference on CST comprehension scores. Given the information
presented above, from the Resolution on High-Stakes Testing, perhaps the CST results
reflected a disconnect between the curriculum and the assessment. The ASP provided
reading comprehension instruction using elements of UD, AI, and Systems Theory; the
CST, on the other hand, may not have assessed what the ASP curriculum taught or may
have assessed it in limited ways. Since the researcher was seeking to measure students’
145
knowledge levels, a device that better measured increased incremental learning may have
been more appropriate than the CST, which is administered annually. Another criterionreferenced test would be appropriate. Criterion-referenced tests “show the extent to
which a student possesses a particular skill or attitude” (Walker, 1979, pp. 208, 212).
Administering a comprehension pre-test at the beginning of the year would have set a
baseline by which new knowledge could have been measured using criterion-referenced
tests. Comprehension testing at six- to eight-week intervals throughout the school year
would have allowed teachers to regularly measure students’ comprehension levels and
also allow teachers to adjust instruction and practice opportunities for students struggling
with comprehension.
Leadership Applications
A leader at any level may use the information from Appreciative Inquiry Theory
as a tool to facilitate change. A principal or district afterschool administrator and the
afterschool team members using Appreciative Inquiry to facilitate the decision-making
process might take these steps: Discovery stage – An understanding of the “what is and
what has been.” The leader and the ASP group generate information about homework
time and the possibilities the daily homework hour can offer students. In the Discovery
stage, the leader starts the discussion with a positive interaction about what is working
well during the homework hour. Data from other ASPs, in the form of pictures and
notes, may be presented. Additionally, the lead staff member may share research
146
discussing how homework-time can be most productive. This data and research are
thoroughly discussed.
Next, in the Dream stage, the team uses the data from the Discovery stage. The
leader guides the staff members to identify “what might be.” The team focuses on what
the end result should be. Ideas from team members are brought forward and every idea is
respectfully considered by the leader and the team.
Next, in the Design stage, the leader and the team determine “what should be.”
Individuals are encouraged to brainstorm specific steps toward achieving the goal.
Finally, the Destiny stage provides a vision of “what will be.” This stage is
ongoing and requires the leader and team to keep the goal in mind as the plan is carried
out. When adjustments need to be made, the group meets and can move back to the
Dream stage, or a different stage, as needed.
As the team carries out the plan, it is important the leader remember AI is based
on mutual trust and safety between afterschool instructional staff, leaders, and students,
and to consistently provide feedback in a positive way (Yballe & O'Connor, 2000).
Policy Implications
Policy Related to Theory
Appreciative Inquiry Theory permeates the work of the California Afterschool
Network (CAN) and the California Department of Education (CDE) (Brackenridge &
Klein-Williams, 2009). The CAN and the CDE developed an After-School Program
Quality Self-Assessment Tool (QSAT) containing 11 Program Quality Elements. The
147
tool was created to help ASPs discuss and consider program quality and “continuous
program improvement” (Brackenridge & Klein-Williams, 2009, p. 1). Section 6, Youth
Development is a positive, motivating tool that “employs research based on ‘youths’
assets and promises, rather than risk prevention and repairing deficits.” The Youth
Development model is not a separate model to be implemented, rather a philosophy to be
incorporated into existing systems. The model is broken into three parts:
1. Supportive Environment: Includes ideals such as, “Youth have the opportunity
to try new skills with support from staff” (p. 12).
2. Interaction: “Youth and staff share leadership of most activities: adults provide
guidance and facilitation while youth have the opportunity to lead activities and
to work independently or as part of a small group” (p. 13).
3. Engagement: “Youth have multiple opportunities to provide input into the
structure and content of the program.” (CDE, 2009, p. 13)
This is an excellent, positive tool that could be a valuable reflection piece for
many ASPs.
Policy Related to Reading Comprehension
The CDE Before and After School Department provides many resources to help
ASPs and school districts create and maintain quality programs. The resources are useful
for program self-reflection, creating grant applications, ensuring program safety, and
much more. One of the goals of the 21st Century Community Learning Centers Program
(Education Code sections 8484.7 - 8484.9) is “improved academic achievement” (CDE,
148
2012a, para. 3) (more information about the 21st Century Community Learning Centers
Program is provided in Chapter 2). Within the focus of improved academic achievement,
perhaps a more narrow focus of improving comprehension system-wide in the ASPs is
appropriate? Perhaps specific policy from the CDE would help facilitate the change.
ASPs need logistical guidance about making reading instruction and support a priority.
Information about best practices for teaching and supporting reading after school and
strategic guidance about how to facilitate reading instruction and practice are needed.
ASPs also need reading materials designed to facilitate the teaching of reading after
school, including teacher resources and class sets of student books.
Resources on supporting reading instruction are available for interested ASPs.
For example, the Sacramento County Office of Education offers four modules in a series
designed to teach ASP staff members to support reading instruction. But to create a
statewide systems-change, where reading is a priority of all ASPs, strategic guidance
from the CDE in the form of policy would be helpful. Additionally, referring back to the
previous section, “Policy Related to Theory,” perhaps the QSAT might be modified to
include a section for ASPs to reflect on how they are supporting the teaching of reading.
Areas for Future Research
More research needs to done on the efficacy of using before and afterschool
programs as an extended school-day model or as a whole-child model where a variety of
non–typical needs are met, including all the students’ medical and nutritional needs.
149
A large-scale, long-term study involving many schools over multiple states is
needed to determine exactly what benefits students are receiving from an ASP. What
purpose does the ASP serve? Is the typical ASP working to improve academics, provide
a safe haven, meet students’ needs for exercise, or provide enrichment and/or
remediation?
Staffing can be a challenge for ASPs. Valuable research would look into who
provides ASP care and what credentials, if any, most staff members have? What is the
average time in the field or at a typical site? How can staff longevity be improved? How
are staff members trained to teach reading? Further research is needed to determine
which factors contributed to the achievement of Hispanic students at Ross School.
150
APPENDICES
151
APPENDIX A
Table A1: Resources for ASPs
Year/Time
Frame
Event
2012
Harvard Family Research Project
www.gse.harvard.edu/hfrp/projects/afterschool.html, Harvard Family Research
Project (HFRP) information to improve
evaluation work and promote greater
conversation and knowledge-sharing
about evaluation among practitioners,
policymakers, funders, researchers, and
evaluators in the after-school field.
Documenting Progress and
Demonstrating Results: Evaluating Local
Out-of-School Time Programs, (Harvard
Family Research Project and The Finance
Project), a technical assistance resource
and model of planning based on results
accountability and performance measures.
National Institute for Out-of-School Time
(NOIST)www.wellesley.edu/WCW/CRW/SAC
Wellesley College provides information
about programs serving children and
youth.
The National Governors Association www.nga.org
The National Governors Association,
Center for Best Practices provides
information on schools and after-school
programs.
National School-Age Care Alliance
(NSACA) - www.nsaca.org
Represents public, private, and
community-based providers of afterschool programs, promotes national
standards of quality school-age care for
children and youth, and grants
accreditation to programs meeting the
standards.
Significance
152
Table A1 (continued)
Year/Time
Frame
2012
Event
North Central Regional Educational
Laboratory - www.ncrel.org/after
Internet resources and examples of afterschool programs compiled by one of the
U.S. Department of Education-funded
regional education laboratories.
Partnership for Family Involvement in
Education (PFIE) – www.pfie.ed.gov
Federal Department of Education
administered, offers resources, and
funding for after-school programs.
U.S. Department of Education
www.ed.gov
Information about after school programs

21st Century Community Learning
Centers, Providing Quality Afterschool Learning Opportunities for
America’s Families
www.ed.gov/21stcclc/
 Bringing Education to After-school
Programs helps after-school
providers understand how to integrate
academic content into programs to
enhance learning.
 Keeping Schools Open as
Community Learning Centers:
Extended Learning in a Safe, DrugFree Environment Before and Afterschool help begin neighborhood
schools remain open for children and
families.
 Safe and Smart: Making AfterSchool Hours Work for Kids
highlights research evidence on the
value of after-school programs
Safety in Numbers: Collecting and Using
Crime, Violence, and Discipline Incident
Data to Make a Difference in Schools
information on the use of incident data to
develop prevention and intervention plans
to create safe learning environments.
http://nces.ed.gov
Significance
153
Table A1 (continued)
Year/Time
Frame
2012
Event
Significance
Sacramento READS! Offers opportunities
to close the achievement gap through:
School Readiness- too many children
showing up for school not ready for what
school has to offer. School Attendancetoo many children are missing too much
school and too much instructional time.
Summer Learning Loss- too many
children are losing too much academic
ground during the summer;
Opportunities for ASPs in California to
strengthen academic components of the
program:
United Way has launched regional
collaborative groups including:
Education: Improving high school
graduation rates. Each collaborative
creates a project that will help measurably
reach the overall goal in the next seven to
10 years. One United Way project is
STAR Readers: Ensuring students are
reading at grade level by fourth grade.
Example organizations working with
STAR Readers are Boys and Girls Clubs,
and Sacramento Chinese Community
Service Center;
A series of four professional development
modules are available for administrators,
teachers, after school program staff,
coaches, and paraprofessionals through
Sacramento County Office of Education
After School English Language Arts
Institute. The series addresses the English
Language Arts needs of after school
students with an emphasis on researchbased instructional strategies to close the
achievement gap. Modules include:
Enriching Reading Opportunities in After
School; Expanding Vocabulary and
Comprehension Every Day After School;
Academic Language in After School
Programs: Words Matter!; and
Supporting Academic Writing in After
School Programs. Note: The after school
instructional staff at Ross Elementary was
in the process of completing this series at
the time of the study;
Johnson, K., Sacramento Reads!,
http://www.sacramentoreads.com/sacrame
nto-reads/our-program/;
United Way California Capital Region
(2011)
http://www.yourlocalunitedway.org/certifi
ed-partner/sacramento-chinesecommunity-service-center-inc,
http://www.yourlocalunitedway.org/certifi
ed-partner/boys-girls-clubs-greatersacramento
Sacramento County Office of Education,
http://scoecatalog.net/index.lasso?fa=index
154
Table A1 (continued)
Year/Time
Frame
Event
Significance
Supporting English Language Learners
Through the After School Programs
(SELLASP) Project is a four module
training series for supporting English
learners. It’s a joint project by the San
Diego County Office of Education in
collaboration with Ventura County Office
of Education and Sacramento County
Office of Education, and is funded by the
California Department of Education. The
modules include: Understanding ELs,
Diversity; ELA and Language
Development/Arts; STEM (Science,
Technology, Engineering, Math) Access
for English Learners; and Parents and
Communities of English Learners;
Connecting High-Quality Expanded
Learning Opportunities, and the Common
Core State Standards to Advance Student
Success, this brief by the Council of
Chief State School Officers explores
ways to strengthen expanded learning
opportunities by building connections to
the Common Core State Standards
Initiative to ensure the success of all
learners.
Understanding ELs, Diversity; ELA and
Language Development/Arts; STEM
(Science, Technology, Engineering, Math)
Access for English Learners; and Parents
and Communities of English Learners.
http://y4y.ed.gov/Exchange/Gallery/Uploa
dedFiles/Supporting_English_Learners_in
_Afterschool.pdf;
Connecting High-Quality Expanded
Learning Opportunities and the Common
Core State Standards to Advance Student
Success,
http://www.statewideafterschoolnetworks.
net/connecting-high-quality-expandedlearning-opportunities-and-common-corestate-standards-advance-stud
155
APPENDIX B
CST Questions
All questions pulled from the following source: California Department of Education.
Standardized Testing and Reporting. Retrieved from
http://starsamplequestions.org/starRTQ/search.jsp September 13, 2012 (Grades 2-4) and
March 7, 2013 (Grade 5).
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
APPENDIX C
Data Tables
Table C1
Observation Checklist: Elements of Universal Design Theory and Appreciative Inquiry
Theory Pertaining to Teaching, Student Engagement, and Assessment: Frequency
Element
Number
Element
Frequency a
1
Represent: Are students provided with a variety of different ways to
represent essential core concepts?
Engagement: Are students invited and encouraged to participate in class?
Expression: Are students able to demonstrate what they have learned in a
variety of ways?
Discovery stage: Does the staff work to develop an understanding of the
"what is and what has been" that forms an appreciation and value for the
topic of study?
Is the student group encouraged to generate information about the topic and
converse about their understanding?
Is the student group encouraged to discuss what is working well in the
learning process?
X = 10
Is learning started with a positive interaction?
The Dream stage: Are learners encouraged to focus on areas for potential
improvement and new learning outcomes? (Think and discuss)
The Design stage: Are students encouraged to create possibilities or to
suggest positive changes to be implemented? (Do/create)
The Destiny stage: Are students provided a voice in "what will be" in their
ongoing learning? Can they help to guide the path their learning is taking?
(Current and future)
Do staff members seek out and focus on student strengths and
accomplishments?
Is an environment of mutual trust and safety between regular day teachers,
after school instructional staff, and students apparent?
Are team building skills taught and encouraged?
Are higher order thinking skills taught and encouraged?
Are students taught to be responsible for their own learning?
Are non-competitive games and physical activities encouraged?
Is it apparent that staff members are caring and supportive of students?
Do staff members convey positive expectations for students?
Are ongoing opportunities for participation provided?
Is it apparent that staff members feel schoolwork is important, and that they
expect students to do their work?
III = 3
0
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
III = 3
IV = 4
III = 3
III = 3
V=5
VI = 6
IV = 4
X = 10
IV = 4
III = 3
X = 10
IX = 9
IV = 4
XIV = 19
1II = 2
1VII = 7
230
Table C2
Best Practices in Reading Comprehension Instruction-Frequency
1
2
3
4
Best Practices
Use of comprehension strategies during reading
Explicit teaching of the comprehension strategies, including modeling
the thinking process by thinking out loud about strategy use,
encouraging questions and discussions, and keeping students engaged
Guide students through focused, high-quality discussion on the
meaning of texts. Structure the discussion to complement the text, the
instructional purpose, and the readers’ ability and grade level. Develop
discussion questions that require students to think deeply about text, to
ask follow-up questions to encourage and facilitate discussion, and
have students lead structured small-group discussions
Independent Reading: “One of the strongest predictors of reading
comprehension is the amount of time students read” (Cunningham and
Stanovich, 1998)
Frequency
III = 3
I=1
IX = 9
XI = 11
Table C3a
Observation Sheet: Best Practices for English Learners- Comprehension Related:
Frequency
1
2
3
4
5
6
Approach
Frequency
Identifying and clarifying difficult words and passages
IIII = 4
Consolidating text knowledge through summarization
Providing students with extra practice in reading words, sentences, and IX = 9
stories
Including instructional routines that give attention to vocabulary,
I=1
checking comprehension, presenting ideas, paraphrasing remarks,
providing redundancy, and using physical gestures and visual cues
Providing substantial direct teacher intervention in developing
II = 2
students’ English proficiency so they may take full advantage of
interventions
Teaching students to use comprehension strategies- combined with
XI = 11
concerted efforts to build students’ facility in English
(August & Shanahan, 2006, pp. 354-355)
231
Table C3b
Best Practices for English Learners- Comprehension Related: Frequency
Approach
Frequency
Use of explicit instruction in core reading competencies,
III = 3
controlled for task difficulty through systematic scaffolding
8
Provide ongoing and systematic feedback, and use ongoing
progress monitoring
(Foorman & Torgesen, 2001; Lyon, Fletcher, Fuchs, & Chhabra, 2006; Swanson, Hoskyn, & Lee, 1999;
Swanson, Harris, & Graham, 2003; Vaughn, Gersten, & Chard, 2000)
7
Table C4
Observation Checklist for Best Practices for English Learners, Frequency
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Guidelines Based on Relatively Strong Supporting Evidence from English
Learner Research, and
Providing ELD instruction is better than not providing it.
ELD instruction should include interactive activities among students, but they
must be carefully planned and carried out.
Guidelines Based on Hypothesis Emerging from Recent English Learner
Research
A separate block of time should be devoted daily to ELD instruction.
ELD instruction should emphasize listening and speaking although it can
incorporate reading and writing.
ELD instruction should explicitly teach elements of English (e.g., vocabulary,
syntax, grammar, functions, and conventions).
ELD instruction should integrate meaning and communication to support
explicit teaching of language.
ELD instruction should provide students with corrective feedback on form.
Use of English during ELD should be maximized; the primary language
should be used strategically.
Teachers should attend to communication and language-learning strategies
and incorporate them into ELD instruction.
ELD instruction should emphasize academic language as well as
conversational language.
ELD instruction should continue at least until students reach level 4 (early
advanced) and possibly through level 5 (advanced).
Guidelines Applicable to ELD but Grounded in Non-English Learner
Resources
ELD instruction should be planned and delivered with specific language
objectives in mind.
English learners should be carefully grouped by language proficiency for ELD
instruction; for other portions of the school day they should be in mixed
classrooms and not in classrooms segregated by language proficiency.
The likelihood of establishing and/or sustaining an effective ELD
instructional program increases when schools and districts make it a priority.
Frequency
1V = 4
N/A
III = 3
V=5
V=5
Entirely in English
N/A: Staff not
trained in this
IIII = 4
N/A
N/A
ASP is entirely
non-segregated by
language
proficiency
N/A
(Foorman & Torgesen, 2001; Lyon, Fletcher, Fuchs, & Chhabra, 2006; Swanson, Hoskyn, & Lee, 1999;
Swanson, Harris, & Graham, 2003; Vaughn, Gersten, & Chard, 2000)
232
Table C5
Elements of Universal Design Theory and Appreciative Inquiry Theory, Comparison to
Question Three Theories
Element
Number
Element of UDL or AI
Compares to
1
Represent: Are students provided with a variety of different ways to represent
essential core concepts?
Engagement: Are students invited and encouraged to participate in class?
Expression: Are students able to demonstrate what they have learned in a
variety of ways?
Discovery stage: Does the staff work to develop an understanding of the
"what is and what has been" that forms an appreciation and value for the topic
of study?
Is the student group encouraged to generate information about the topic and
converse about their understanding?
Is the student group encouraged to discuss what is working well in the
learning process?
IS, UDL
Is learning started with a positive interaction?
The Dream stage: Are learners encouraged to focus on areas for potential
improvement and new learning outcomes? (Think and discuss)
The Design stage: Are students encouraged to create possibilities or to
suggest positive changes to be implemented? (Do/create)
The Destiny stage: Are students provided a voice in "what will be" in their
ongoing learning? Can they help to guide the path their learning is taking?
(Current and future)
Do staff members seek out and focus on student strengths and
accomplishments?
Is an environment of mutual trust and safety between regular day teachers,
after school instructional staff, and students apparent?
Are team building skills taught and encouraged?
Are higher order thinking skills taught and encouraged?
Are students taught to be responsible for their own learning?
Are non-competitive games and physical activities encouraged?
Is it apparent that staff members are caring and supportive of students?
Do staff members convey positive expectations for students?
Are ongoing opportunities for participation provided?
Is it apparent that staff members feel schoolwork is important, and that they
expect students to do their work?
PES, IS
IS, EMT,
PES
IS, EMT,
PES
EMT, PES
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
EMT, PES
IS, EMT,
PES
IS, PES
IS, EMT,
PES
IS, EMT,
PES
PES
EMT
EMT, PES
IS, EMT
EMT, PES
EMT, PES
EMT, PES
PES
EMT, PES
IS, EMT,
PES
Key to Table C5 Elements of Universal Design Theory and Appreciative Inquiry Theory,
Comparison to Question 3 Theories, Comprehension may be bolstered through:
1. Instructional support (IS)
2. Environment of mutual trust (EMT)
3. Positive expectations and environment (PES)
233
REFERENCES
Afterschool Alliance. (2011, May). Evaluations backgrounder: A summary of formal
evaluations of afterschool programs' impact on academics, behavior, safety and
family life. Retrieved from http://americaspromise.org/Resources/PartnerResources/a/A-Summary-of-Formal-Evaluations-of-Afterschool-Programs.aspx
Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2010). Learning to read: Early warning! Why reading by
the end of third grade matters-A kids count special report. Baltimore, MD:
Author.
August, D. & Shanahan, T. (Editors). (2006) Developing literacy in second-language
learners – Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children
and Youth. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, Associates.
Banathy, B. (1992). A systems view of education: Concepts and principles for effective
action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Education Technology Publications.
Banathy, B. (1998). Evolution guided by design: A systems perspective. Systems
Research, 15, 1-11.
Banathy, B. (2000). Guided evolution of society: A systems view. New York: Plenum
Press.
Banathy, B. H. (1995). Developing a systems view of education. Educational
Technology, 35(3), 53-57.
Banathy, B. H. (1996). Designing social systems in a changing world. New York:
Plenum.
234
Banks, J. A., & Banks, C. A. M. (Eds.). (2001). Multicultural education: Issues and
perspectives (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Banks, J. A., Cookson, P., Gay, G., Hawley, W. D., Irvine, J. J., Nieto, S., Schofield, J.
W., & Stephan, W. G. (2001). Diversity within unity: Essential principles for
teaching and learning in a multicultural society. Center for Multicultural
Education. Seattle, WA: University of Washington.
Baumann, J. F., & And, O. (1992). Effect of think-aloud instruction on elementary
students' comprehension monitoring abilities. Journal of Reading Behavior, 24(2),
143-172.
Bernard, B. (1993). Fostering resiliency in kids. Educational Leadership, 51(3), 44.
Bess, J., & Dee, J. (2008). Understanding college and university organization. Sterling,
VA: Stylus.
Bochner, S. (1993). Culture shock. In W. Lonner & R. Malpass (Eds.), Psychology and
culture (pp. 245-252). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Bodilly, S. J., McCombs, J., Orr, N., Scherer, E., Constant, L., Gershwin, D. (2010).
Hours of opportunity, Volume 1: Lessons from five cities on building systems to
improve after-school, summer school, and other out-of-school-time programs.
Monograph. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
235
Brackenridge, K., & Klein-Williams, M. (2009). California after school program auality
self-assessment tool. Collaborative project of the California Afterschool Network
and the California Department of Education (CDE). Retrieved from
http://www.afterschoolnetwork.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/qsatool_0.pdf
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature
and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
California Department of Education (CDE). (2002). Paraprofessional requirements for
Title I programs. Retrieved from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/nclb/sr/tq/paraprofessionals.asp
California Department of Education (CDE). (2009). American Indian early childhood
education (AIECE). Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/ai/ec/
California Department of Education (CDE). (2010). DataQuest. Retrieved from
http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/
California Department of Education (CDE). (2012a). 21st century community learning
centers: Program description. Retrieved from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/ba/cp/programdesc.asp
California Department of Education (CDE). (2012b). California standards tests technical
report spring 2011 administration (p. 378). Sacramento: Assessment
Development and Administration Division.
California Department of Education (CDE). (2012c). Healthy Start – CalEdFacts.
Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/pf/hs/cefhealthystart.asp
236
California Department of Education (CDE). (2012d). Paraprofessional requirements for
the Title I programs. Retrieved from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/nclb/sr/tq/paraprofessionals.asp
California Department of Education (CDE). (2012e). Program description: After school
education and safety program. Retrieved from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/ba/as/pgmdescription.asp
California Department of Education (CDE). (2012f). Prevention of bullying: A
community responsibility. Retrieved from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/ss/se/prevbully.asp
California Department of Education (CDE). (2012g). STAR CST blueprints: Information
for the California Standards Test. Retrieved from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sr/blueprints.asp
California Department of Education (CDE). (2012h, November). Tobacco free school
district certification. Retrieved from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/he/at/tobaccofreecert.asp
California Department of Education (CDE). (n.d.). Child nutrition information: CNIPS
frequently asked questions for SNP. Retrieved from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/nu/cn/faq.asp#general
The California Afterschool Network. (2009). After-school program quality selfassessment tool. Retrieved from
http://www.afterschoolnetwork.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/qsatool_0.pdf
237
Carlisle, J. F., & Rice, M. S. (2002). Improving reading comprehension-Research-based
principles and practices. Baltimore, MD: York Press.
CAST. (2012). About UDL. Retrieved from http://www.cast.org/udl/
Child Action, Inc. (2011). After-school enrichment programs for elementary and middle
school students. Retrieved from Child Action Inc. website:
http://www.childaction.org/families/publications/docs/afterschool_enrichment.pdf
Cirino, P. T., Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, S., Cardenas-Hagan, E., Fletcher, J. M., &
Francis, D. J. (2009). One-year follow-up of Spanish and English interventions
for English language learners at risk for reading problems. American Educational
Research Journal, 46(3), 744-781.
Cooperrider, D. L. (2001). Why appreciative inquiry? In S. A. Hammond & C. Royal
(Eds.), Lessons from the field: Applying appreciative inquiry (p. 12). Bend, OR:
Thin Book Publishing.
Cooperrider, D. L.. Whitney, D. K., & Stavros, J. M. (2003). Appreciative inquiry
handbook: The first in a series of Ai workbooks for leaders of change. San
Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Council of Chief State School Officers. (2011). Connecting high-quality expanded
learning opportunities and the common core state standards to advance student
success. Washington, DC. Retrieved from www.ccsso.org
Creswell, J. (2009). Research design, qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Sage Publications, Inc. Thousand Oaks; CA.
238
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods
research. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. p. 72
Cunningham, A. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (1998). What reading does for the mind.
American Educator, 22(1-2), 8-15.
Duncan, A., (2010). A blueprint for reform: The reauthorization of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Eccles, J., & Gootman, J. A. (2002). Community programs to promote youth
development. Washington, DC: National Research Council.
The Education Trust-West. (2010). Futures at risk: The story of Latino student
achievement in California, 2010. Research Report. Oakland, CA: Author.
Ethnography. (n.d.). Merriam-Webster online dictionary. Retrieved from
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ethnography
Fletcher, A. (2004). Building exemplary afterschool programs: Eight keys to success.
Center for Collaborative Solutions. Retrieved from
http://www.greatsource.com/GreatSource/pdf/Afterschool_Article.pdf
Foorman, B. R., & Torgesen, J. K. (2001). Critical elements of classroom and small
group instruction promote reading success in all students. Learning Disabilities
Research & Practice, 16(4), 203-212.
Gewertz, C. (2012). Common core's focus on 'close reading' stirs worries. Education
Week, 31(20), 6.
239
Hall, J. N., & Ryan, K. E., (2011). Educational accountability: A qualitative driven mixed
methods approach. Qualitative Inquiry, 17, 105-115.
Hammersley, M. & Atkinson, P. (2007). Ethnography: Principles in practice. New York:
Routledge.
Harper, E., O’Connell, R., & Hirschman, J. (2008, December). Direct certification in the
National School Lunch Program: State implementation progress. Report CN-08-DC.
Alexandria, VA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, Office of
Research and Analysis.
Hemphill, F. C., & Vanneman, A. (2011). Achievement gaps: How Hispanic and White
students in public schools perform in mathematics and reading on the national
assessment of educational progress (NCES 2011-459). Washington, DC: National
Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department
of Education.
Honig, B., Diamond, L., & Gutlohn, L. (2000). Teaching reading sourcebook for
kindergarten through eighth grade. Arena Press, Novato; CA and CORE,
Emeryville; CA.
Johnson, K. (2012, November 14). Sacramento reads! Retrieved from
http://www.sacramentoreads.com/sacramento-reads/our-program/
Katz, L. A., & Carlisle, J. F. (2009). Teaching students with reading difficulties to be
close readers: A feasibility study. Language, Speech & Hearing Services In
Schools, 40(3), 325-340. doi: 10.1044/0161-1461(2009/07-0096)
240
Learning Point Associates. (2010). Integrating expanded learning and school reform
initiatives: Challenges and strategies. New York: Author.
Lyon, G. R., Fletcher, J. M., Fuchs, L., & Chhabra, V. (2006). Learning disabilities. In E.
Mash & R. Barkley (Eds.), Treatment of childhood disorders (3rd ed., pp. 51259D). New York: Guilford.
Mace, R. (2010). Center for Universal Design. Retrieved from
http://www.ncsu.edu/project/design-projects/udi/center-for-universal-design/ronmace/
McKenzie, L., Sallis, J., & Rosengard, P. (2009). Beyond the stucco tower: Design,
development, and dissemination of the SPARK physical education programs.
Quest, American Academy of Kinesiology and Physical Education, 2009(61), 114127.
McKinsey. (2009, April). Impact of the achievement gap in America’s schools: Summary
of findings (pp. 18, 20). Retrieved from
http://www.mckinsey.com/clientservice/Social_Sector/our_practices/Education/K
nowledge_Highlights/Economic_impact.aspx
Moats, L. C. (1999). Teaching reading is rocket science: What expert teachers of reading
should know and be able to do. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child
Health and Human Development (NICHD) Early Interventions Project.
241
National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). (2012). The NAEP reading
achievement levels by grade. Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/reading/achieve.asp#2009ald
National Association of Elementary School Principals. (2009). Collaborating to build a
new day for learning: A guide for principals, afterschool, and community leaders.
Alexandria VA: New Day for Learning.
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2011a). Achievement gaps: How
Hispanic and White students in public schools perform in mathematics and
reading on the National Assessment of Educational Progress: Statistical analysis
report. Washington, DC: Author.
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2011b). The nation’s report card:
Reading 2011 state snapshot report. Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/stt2011/2012454CA4.pdf
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2012). The NAEP reading achievement
level by grade. Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/reading/achieve.asp#2009_grade4
National Reading Panel (NRP). (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based
assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for
reading instruction. Report, NIH 00-4769. Washington, DC: National Institute of
Health.
242
Newman, S. A., Fox, J. A., Flynn, E. A., & Christenson, W. (2000). America’s afterschool choice: The prime time for juvenile crime, or youth enrichment and
achievement. Fight Crime: Invest in Kids. Retrieved from
http://www.jfox.neu.edu/Documents/afterschool2000.pdf
O’Connell, J. (2008). Closing the Achievement gap: Report of Superintendent Jack
O’Connell’s California P-16 council. Retrieved from
http://svefoundation.org/svefoundation/files/p16_ctag_report.pdf
O’Connell, J. (2010). Message from the State Superintendent of Public Instruction. In
Improving education: Research-based approaches (pp. iv-v). Sacramento, CA:
California Department of Education.
Ong, F. (Ed.) (2010). Improving education for English learners: Research-based
approaches. Published by CDE Press.
Pascoe, D. (2006). What is systems theory? Techtrends: Linking Research & Practice To
Improve Learning, 50(2), 22-23.
Rose, D. H., & Gravel, J. W. (2010). Universal design for learning. In E. Baker, P.
Peterson, & B. McGaw (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education (3rd ed.).
Oxford: Elsevier.
Sacramento County Office of Education (SCOE). (n.d.). Catalog of events. Retrieved
from http://scoecatalog.net/index.lasso?fa=index
Saddler, B., & Staulters, M. (2008). Beyond tutoring: After-school literacy instruction.
Intervention in School and Clinic, 43(4), 203-209.
243
San Diego County Office of Education. (2012). Supporting English language learners
through the after school programs (SELLASP) project. Published by the
California Department of Education. Retrieved from
http://y4y.ed.gov/Exchange/Gallery/UploadedFiles/Supporting_English_Learners
_in_Afterschool.pdf
Saunders, W., & Goldenberg, C. (2010). Research to guide English language
development instruction. In Improving education: Research-based approaches
(pp. 21-82). Sacramento: California Department of Education.
Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization
(2nd ed.). New York: Currency Doubleday.
Shanahan, T., Callison, K., Carriere, C., Duke, N. K., Pearson, P. D., Schatschneider, C.,
& Torgesen, J. (2010). Improving reading comprehension in kindergarten
through 3rd grade: A practice guide (NCEE 2010-4038). Washington, DC:
National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of
Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from
whatworks.ed.gov/publications/practiceguides
Shelly, J. (1984). Evaluation of the centralized, structured, after school tutorial. Journal
of Educational Research, 77(4), 213-218.
Snow, C., Burns, S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (2002). Preventing reading difficulties in young
children. Committee on the Prevention of Reading Difficulties in Young
Children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
244
Stonehill, R., Donner, J., Morgan, E., & Lasagna, M. (2010). Integrating expanded
learning and school reform initiatives: Challenges and strategies. A policy brief
from Learning Point Associates and The Collaborative for Building After-School
Systems, Learning Point Associates. Retrieved from
http://www.learningpt.org/pdfs/SchoolReformInitiatives.pdf
Swanson, H. L., Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (2003). Handbook of learning disabilities.
New York: Guildford.
Swanson, H. L., Hoskyn, M., & Lee, C. (1999). Interventions for students with learning
disabilities: A meta-analysis of treatment outcomes. New York: Guilford.
Time Out For Testing. (2012). Resolution on high-stakes testing. Retrieved from
http://timeoutfromtesting.org/nationalresolution/National
Torlakson, T. (2011). A blueprint for great schools: Transition advisory team report.
Sacramento: California Department of Education.
U.S. Census Bureau (2012). Hispanic origin. Retrieved from
http://www.census.gov/population/hispanic
U.S. Census Bureau. (2013). State and county quickfacts. Retrieved from
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06000.html
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). (2012). About school meals. Food and Nutrition
Services. Retrieved from http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/About/AboutCNP.htm
245
U.S. Department of Education (DOE). (2004b, September). Title I – Improving the
academic achievement of the disadvantaged. Retrieved from
http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pg1.html
U.S. Department of Education (DOE). (2008). 21st century community learning centers.
Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/programs/21stcclc/funding.html
U.S. Department of Education (DOE). (2011). The new consensus on middle-grades
reform. (Remarks of U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan to the Association
for Middle Level Education (AMLE) Annual Conference.) Retrieved from
http://www.ed.gov/news/speeches/new-consensus-middle-grades-reform
U.S. Department of Education (DOE). (n.d.). The nation’s reading report card, 2011
state snapshot report, CA grade 4 public schools. Institute of Education Sciences,
National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/stt2011/2012454CA4.pdf
U.S. Department of Labor. (2005). Women in the labor force: A databook. Retrieved
from http://www.bls.gov/cps/wlf-databook2005.htm
United Way California Capital Region. (2011a). Boys and girls clubs of greater
Sacramento. Retrieved from http://www.yourlocalunitedway.org/certifiedpartner/boys-girls-clubs-greater-sacramento
United Way California Capital Region. (n.d.). Sacramento Chinese Community Service
Center, Inc. Retrieved from http://www.yourlocalunitedway.org/certifiedpartner/sacramento-chinese-community-service-center-inc
246
United Way. (2011b, November 22) United Way grants more than $1.1 million. News
Release. Retrieved from http://www.yourlocalunitedway.org/news-release/unitedway-grants-more-11-million
Vaden-Kiernan, M., Hughes Jones, D., Rudo, Z., Fitzgerald, R., Hartry, A., Chambers,
B., Smith, D., …Moss, M. A. (2009). The national partnership for quality of
afterschool learning randomized controlled trial studies of promising afterschool
programs: Summary of findings. After school research brief. Issue No. 3, 1-12.
Austin, TX: SEDL Afterschool Research Consortium. Retrieved from
EBSCOhost.
Vaughn, S., Gersten, R., & Chard, D. J. (2000). The underlying message in LD
intervention research: Findings from research syntheses. Exceptional Children,
67(1), 99-114.
von Bertalanfy, L. (1968). General system theory. New York: George Braziller.
Walker, C. B. (1979). CSE criterion-referenced test handbook. Center for the Study of
Evaluation, National Institute of Education. University of California, Los
Angeles, CA. Retrieved from
http://www.cse.ucla.edu/products/guidebooks/cse_criterion.pdf
Watkins, J. M., & Mohr, B. J. (2001). Appreciative inquiry: Change at the speed of
imagination (pp. xxxi-xxxii). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Yballe, L., & O’Connor, D. (2000) Appreciative Pedagogy Constructing Positive Models
for Learning. Journal of Management Education August 2000.
247