This chapter presents the methodology used to address the research questions of this study. The chapter includes the purpose, research questions, rationale for the research design, and research design. This description of this study also includes population and sample, instrumentation, data collection procedures and analysis, and limitations of the study.
Purpose Statement
This study had three main purposes as it sought to: (1) describe elementary teachers’ perceptions on their preparedness to implement the English Language Arts Common Core State Standards (ELA-CCSS); (2) determine how perceptions influenced changes in instructional practices; and (3) explore ELA-CCSS implementation challenges/barriers in supporting teacher development of ELA-CCSS implementation.
Research Questions
The research questions for this study were as follows:
1. What are teachers’ perceptions on their preparedness to implement the English Language Arts Common Core State Standards (ELA-CCSS)?
2. In what ways do teachers’ perceptions on implementation preparedness affect changes in instructional practice?
3. What are ways to support teachers during implementation of ELA-CCSS education reform at the school-site?
Research Design
This study was an exploratory, descriptive study. A descriptive study was appropriate to provide a description of teachers’ preparedness perceptions on implementation of the English Language Arts Common Core State Standards (ELA-CCSS), while determining how such perception influenced changes in instructional practices. Further, the
descriptive study also allowed for an exploration of implementation challenges/barriers for supporting teacher development of ELA-CCSS implementation. A descriptive study, according to Gay (1996), “involve collecting data in order to test hypothesis or to answer questions concerning the current status of the subject of the study. A descriptive study determines and reports the ways things are” (p.249). Further, Issac and Michael (1995), note that the purpose of descriptive research is to “describe systematically the facts and characteristics of a given population or area of interest, factually and accurately” (p.50). The study was descriptive because it determined and reported existing phenomena and measured what already existed. Additionally, the study was exploratory because no previous studies were found during the literature search on the same, or related topics. Lastly, research questions in such studies focus mainly on “what” questions” (Yin, 2014).
A sole researcher conducted this study. Instruments were developed by the researcher in order to gather data that addressed the joint purposes and research questions. The researcher collected, analyzed, and then shared data gathered from the teachers
implementing the English Language Arts Common Core State Standards (ELA-CCSS). With the understanding that the selection of research methods depends largely on the situation and the appropriateness of the measure, the use of mixed methods research was
selected because “the combination of both quantitative and qualitative methods provides a better understanding of the research problems and questions than either method by itself” (Plano Clark & Creswell, 2010, p.298). Quantitative data from the surveys
provided useful information “to describe trends about a large number of people” (p.299), and explanation of the relationships between preparedness and implementation variables as affecting change of instructional practices. The qualitative data, on the other hand, gathered via interviews, assisted in offering multiple perspectives on the study topic that afforded the researcher with a complex picture of the situation adding to a detailed understanding of the phenomenon (p.299).
Semi-structured interviews were selected because they enabled the interviewer to combine a pre-determined set of open questions that prompted discussion on the phenomena with the opportunity to explore particular responses further. Moreover, qualitative methods were well suited to address the focus of this study because qualitative research is conducted when a problem or issue needs to be explored in the context in which participants address a problem (Creswell, 2013). Given the missing literature on teachers’ perceptions as related to reform implementation preparedness in the context of ELA-CCSS, and ways to support teachers in implementing educational reform,
qualitative research allowed for the study of a group of teachers — variables that could not be measured, by enabling silent voices to be heard. Moreover, mixed methods research was appropriate to address the questions of this study given the different, but related questions that this study sought to answer (Plano Clark & Creswell, 2010, p. 298).
Population and Sample
The target population for this study was all kindergarten through sixth grade
elementary school teachers who were responsible for implementing the English Language Arts Common Core State Standards (ELA-CCSS) within their classrooms, at three of the Alianza Union School District (pseudonym) school sites. There were a total (n=88) teachers among the three school sites. The sample for this study was comprised of adults between the ages of 23 and 65, who were employed by the Alianza Union School
District.
Selection Criteria for the Sample
Setting and participant selection. Purposive sampling was used to identify and
select research sites (Plano Clark & Creswell, 2010; Yin, 2014) based on the purposes of this study. This study focused on three schools within a single district. Schools selected were chosen due to the fact that they were in their third year of ELA-CCSS
implementation — three years is enough time such that all teachers will be in some phase of implementation, beyond initial pilot (Senge, Cambron-McCabe, Smith, & Dulton, 2012). Finally, the data collection schools were selected because although the researcher was an assistant principal in the district, she did not have any supervisory connection to the teachers working within the selected school sites. It was an opportunity to truly enter as a learner and researcher — someone who could learn from the experts in their contexts and settings.
Overall, this study utilized purposeful and convenience-sampling methods to identify those individuals who had been implementing the ELA-CCSS into their teaching
practice. These types of sampling methods were determined to be the best means of obtaining relevant data to address the research questions. Convenience sampling was used because the participants were accessible as their location was relatively close to the researcher. Convenience sampling was also used because specific individuals and sites best benefitted the research problem and central phenomenon of the study (Creswell, 2013). In recognizing that purposive sampling “provides information that is useful, that helps us learn about the phenomenon, or that gives voice to individuals who have not been heard” (Plano Clark & Creswell, 2010, p.252), for this study, data from three public elementary schools was collected and analyzed because these sites best benefitted the research problem.
The three school sites selected for this study followed a traditional year school calendar, with classes beginning in mid-August and continuing until early June. Schools offered English language classes (ELC) formally designated as Structured English Immersion (SEI) classes and mainstream English only (EO) classes. With the exception of one school, bilingual classes were offered (designated as Bilingual Transference (BT)) at two of the three school sites. Base program at all three school sites included
implementation of class size reduction, implementation of Common Core State Standards in core areas (English Language Arts and Mathematics), English language development, and related professional development, bi-weekly grade level teacher collaboration and planning time, and continuous improvement strategies (e.g., formative assessment and action planning) to support implementation of the CCSS.
In 2013-2014, all three schools transitioned to Common Core standards-based instruction. The transition included implementing Common Core State Standards’ (CCSS) pacing guides, piloting the Engage New York (ENY) English Language Arts Curriculum; and implementing common CCSS language arts and mathematics pedagogy. Teachers at the three school sites were provided instructional materials (Everyday Math curriculum and Engage New York for Mathematics and English language arts). Key district initiatives consisted of CCSS English language arts and math entry points and CCSS writing. CCSS entry points included: Close Reading and Evidence-based question and response for English language arts, Opinion and Argument Writing, Language Objectives in Content Lessons, and the 8 CCSS Standards for Mathematical Practice and related pedagogy. In 2014-15, school sites furthered their transition to Common Core State Standards base instruction by using pacing guides in ELA and math; district-wide implementation of the Engage New York curriculum in ELA and math; emphasized application of entry points related to Close Reading and Evidence -based question and response in ELA and math; focus on flexibility and reversibility to support mathematical practices; writing based on the opinion genre for students in kindergarten through fifth grade, and argumentation writing for students in sixth grade.
It must be noted, that Common Core State Standards implementation and curricula adoption occurred primarily at the district level with minimal input from teachers leading to a top-down implementation process at all school sites. Furthermore, the district to which all three-school sites belonged, was recovering from a period of uncertainty and changes in governance during the course of this study. The District was working on
maintaining effective and supportive relationships between stakeholders by clearly delineating the distinct roles that each team had in creating a culture of trust, mutual accountability, and positivity focused on improving outcomes for students. The frequency of changes made it challenging for staff throughout the District to become comfortable with roles, workflow, and relationships- a task that was further undertaken by a new superintendent beginning June 2016.
Instrumentation
This study utilized two instruments, which were both developed by the researcher as no existing instruments that assessed the purposes of the study were found. The creation of instruments by the researcher is acceptable when “no instrument may exist for
measuring the variable of interest so the researchers need to develop their own
instruments” (Plano Clark & Creswell, 2010, p.189). The instruments included a survey and an interview protocol. They are described in the next section.
Survey
Plano Clark and Creswell (2010), maintain that surveys are used to identify trends in attitudes, opinions, behaviors, or characteristics of a large group of people and that surveys also help in identifying important beliefs and attitudes of individuals at one point in time. They also maintain that survey research is appropriate when a researcher: (1) studies the attitudes, opinions, or behaviors of a large group; (2) chooses a large number of participants using random selection; (3) gathers information and describes trends in the data; and (4) makes conclusions about the larger population — all of which, formed part of this study.
Phase 1. A survey was developed for teachers in this study that consisted of questions
that assessed individual teachers’ thoughts, opinions and feelings, thus aligning with the first characteristic outlined above by Plano Clark and Creswell (2010). The survey was designed to gather participants’ perceptions on preparedness and supports to implement the ELA-CCSS. The survey also acted as a screener for Phase 2 of the study (one-on-one interviews) by identifying novice, mid, and end-of-career teachers (implementers) by surveying teaching faculty at three school sites. The goal was to “select a large number of participants so that the results are more likely to resemble those of the population” (p.75). The researcher also analyzed survey data to describe the frequency of responses gathered from survey questions about teachers’ attitudes, opinions and behaviors. The survey for teachers developed for this study ultimately, consisted of the following parts: (1) Background Information; (2) Familiarity with the ELA-CCSS; (3) ELA-CCSS Preparedness; (4) ELA-CCSS Implementation; (5) Teacher change; and (6) Implementation Supports.
Part I. Background information. In this part of the survey, teachers were asked to