CLASIFICACIÓN DE LOS ACTOS ADMINISTRATIVOS

The fourth major theme derived from the study’s teacher interview protocol data focused on teachers’ Pride and Efficacy. The responses that pertained to teachers’ pride spoke to their feelings of satisfaction or accomplishment from the results of their work. The data that reflected teachers’ efficacy spoke more to teachers’ feelings about their ability to accomplish the work required of Priority Schools. All 14 of the participating teacher informants provided responses that supported this theme. Similar to the previously described themes, the response data

supporting the theme of Pride and Efficacy were found to be more prevalent among the teacher responses to some of the interview protocol questions than others.

Participating teacher informants provided several theme-related responses to Question 1. Most of these responses pertained to a positive impact experienced by teachers as a result of working through the sanctions of the State’s educational accountability policy. Data that fell into this category included teachers’ perception of the policy sanctions having a motivating effect. This motivation was described to impact both individual teachers, as well as the entire staff of the school (Participant 3, March 23, 2018; Participant 8, March 24, 2018; Participant 11, May 17, 2018). These Pride and Efficacy responses also suggested that while teachers were hurt when learning that their school was labeled as a Priority School, they took this label personally,

which may have supported their motivation. Additionally, theme-related responses from this question revealed that teachers’ perspectives had been changed while working in a Priority School, as they had grown professionally (Participant 7, March 24, 2018) and felt a sense of accomplishment while working through the process (Participant 8, March 24, 2018). This sense of accomplishment was likely due to the fact that student achievement gaps had closed in the school during the Priority School process (Participant 13, June 5, 2018). Other teachers spoke to the pride they took in their work and in their schools prior to being labeled as a Priority School. One of these responses suggested that teachers had believed that the policy would not affect them before their school was labeled as a Priority School (Participant 8, March 24, 2018). A participant also told how the labeling of the school as a Priority School took teachers by surprise (Participant 4, March 23, 2018). In contrast, the only remaining theme-supporting response spoke to how the policy had prompted no emotional change within a teacher (Participant 3, March 23, 2018).

The presence of response data supporting the theme of Pride and Efficacy Question 2 was close to non-existent. Only one theme-related response was unearthed from this question. Similar to some of the responses supporting this theme from Question 1, this response spoke to a motivational change that had taken place within a teacher, as a result of working in a Priority School. This response pertained to how the policy inspired the teacher to motivate others to engage in the process of ongoing improvement that was required of Priority Schools (Participant 7, March 24, 2018).

The volume of theme-related responses to Question 2b was the same as those of Question 2. Only one Pride and Efficacy response was unearthed from this question. Since this question was only asked of teachers who worked in a school that had improved its way out of Priority

School status, this response spoke to a confidence that had been regained by teachers after Priority School status had ended (Participant 11, May 17, 2018). No other theme-related responses from Question 2b occurred.

Question 3 led to a slightly larger number of responses that related to the theme of teachers’ Pride and Efficacy than Question 2 and Question 2b. Teachers provided a variety of theme-related responses to Question 3. All but one of these responses pertained to an assessment of the effort teachers were giving while working in a Priority School. These responses described the level of effort given by teachers in their Priority School as high level and sufficient

(Participant 3, March 23, 2018; Participant 6, March 24, 2018; Participant 7, March 24, 2018). These participants reported that teachers were working hard while their school was a Priority School. The other theme-related response from this question supported the theme of Pride and

Efficacy pertained to the self-accountability and high expectations held by a teacher (Participant

2, March 23, 2018).

As was the case for the Pride and Efficacy responses to Question 2 and Question 2b, Question 4 produced only one theme-related code. This code suggested that in order for the school to improve its performance enough to eliminate its label of a Priority School, teachers have to believe in the work that is being asked of them. No other responses supporting the theme of Pride and Efficacy were found among teachers’ responses to Question 4.

Like Question 1, Question 5 produced several responses from teachers that supported the theme of Pride and Efficacy. Most of this response data pertained to the impact of improved student academic performance on teachers. These responses implied a positive impact that teachers felt when this took place. The impact felt by teachers when students’ performance improved included teachers wanting more improvement, to work harder for their students and to

try new instructional practices for better outcomes. One response suggested that improvements in students’ academic performance prompted hope within teachers (Participant 10, May 17, 2018). Furthermore, a teacher spoke to the high value that Priority School teachers placed on improved student academic performance (Participant 12, May 17, 2018). This respondent also eluded to a belief that the work performance of teachers was related to the academic achievement outcomes produced by students in their school (Participant 12, May 17, 2018). A different perspective was provided through a teacher’s report that the Priority School label provided motivation to prove that the school was better than the label suggested (Participant 8, March 24, 2018). Finally, one teacher addressed Pride and Efficacy by speaking to how teachers had been acknowledged when students had made improvements in their academic performance

(Participant 10, May 17, 2018).

Question 6 did not produce the volume of theme-related responses that Question 5 did. Only two responses to this question reflected the theme of Pride and Efficacy. One response spoke to a teacher’s self-accountability for results (Participant 2, March 23, 2018). The other theme-related response pertained to teachers believing that a little academic growth would propel future growth (Participant 11, May 17, 2018).

Teachers’ provided only one more theme-related responses to Question 7 than to Question 6 of the interview protocol. Two teachers’ responses to this question pertained to an inability to recall a time when students’ performance declined during Priority School status (Participant 11, May 17, 2018; Participant 12, May 17, 2018). Additionally, a participant’s responses reflected feeling surprised by a decline in students’ performance (Participant 5, March 22, 2018). The remaining Pride and Efficacy response suggested that a positive impact was felt

by a teacher when encouragement from support staff members from outside of the school district was received (Participant 10, May 17, 2018).

Only four theme-related responses were found among teachers’ responses to Question 8. Teachers’ responses pertained to the pride and confidence teachers had in their schools before Priority School status (Participant 2, March 23, 2018; Participant 8, March 24, 2018; Participant 10, March 24, 2018). The other theme-related response to this question pertained to the impact of staff negativity during Priority School status, and how it prompted a teacher to be more positive at work to counteract that negativity (Participant 7, March 24, 2018).

Two teachers provided responses to Question 9 that supported the theme of Pride and

Efficacy. These responses pointed to teachers’ positive reactions during Priority School status.

The teachers reported positive attitudes and eagerness to show that they were capable and motivation to persevere through the Priority School process (Participant 3, March 23, 2018; Participant 7, March 24, 2018).

The final question of the interview protocol, Question 9b, was only asked of teachers who worked in the school that had eliminated its status as a Priority School. Teachers’ responses to this question also reflected the theme of Pride and Efficacy. Most of these responses suggested teachers’ positive feelings since working out of the sanctions imposed onto the school after it was labeled as a Priority School. These included feelings of hope (Participant 5, March 22, 2018) and a desire that the result of the Priority School experience would prompt increased positivity among the other teachers of the school (Participant 4, March 23, 2018). One other response spoke to the high value that teachers placed on the recognition they received when the school’s Priority School label had been eliminated (Participant 3, March 23, 2018).

The responses supporting the theme of teachers’ Pride and Efficacy did not appear as often as those of the major themes previously described in this section. However, it still had enough supporting responses to be considered among the six major themes identified across the study’s interview protocol data. A fifth theme, Consistent and Unified Staff, had nearly the same amount of theme-related responses as Pride and Efficacy, and is described in the next section.