Date of Award

2016

Document Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Department

Education

Abstract

The purpose of this quantitative inquiry was to determine whether a statistically significant amount of variance existed in the linear combination of collaboration, data use, differentiated instruction, engagement, and feedback and their ability to predict standardized assessment scores. Schools were separated into those of affluence and poverty based on a division using Title I criteria for free-and-reduced lunch rates. This study examined the existence of the linear combination and the impact on student achievement on ISTEP+ English language arts (ELA) and mathematics scores. The link between the five focal areas of research-based instruction and the institutionalization of such practices in the continuous school improvement plan was the impetus of the study. The study began with a single driving research question. Do engagement, feedback, differentiation, collaboration, and data use in schools of affluence and schools of poverty predict a significant amount of variance in school achievement? From this beginning spawned four ancillary questions where null hypotheses were generated. Do the five focal areas of research-based instruction explain a significant amount of variance in ELA standardized test performance for schools of poverty? Do the five focal areas of research-based instruction explain a significant amount of variance in mathematics standardized test performance for schools of poverty? Do the five focal areas of research-based instruction explain a significant amount of variance in ELA standardized test performance for schools of affluence? Do the five focal areas of research-based instruction explain a significant amount of variance in mathematics standardized test performance for schools of affluence? Based on the findings, this study determined a lack of significance in the amount of shared variance among the five focal areas of research based instruction. This demonstrated a lack of their ability to predict student achievement based on standardized assessment. Through the use of a perception survey instrument, using a Likert agreement scale, the principals who responded showed similarity in the degree of agreement in each focal area. This indicated that there was a lack of difference between schools of affluence and schools of poverty. However, one research question did reveal a statistically significant finding. Surprisingly schools of affluence exhibited a negative statistically significant finding through simultaneous multiple regression based on the five focal areas and their ability to predict mathematics scores. Through further testing it was determined that the focal area of differentiated instruction had an inverse relationship to mathematics scores in affluent schools. This means the greater the focus on differentiated instruction, the lower the mathematics score for the school would become. The overall idea for the study was that the five focal areas of research-based instruction are among the strongest best practice methods identified in learning today. When these are embedded into the continuous school improvement plan they should greatly impact student learning and translate to high achievement outcomes on standardized assessments. Through the identification of these practices time, resources, and emphasis would be dedicated to their expansion by facilitating continual rehearsal and professional development for teachers.

Download

Share

COinS