Impact of Student Success Initiative on High School Dropout Rate: A Longitudinal Case Study

Impact of Student Success Initiative on High School Dropout Rate: A Longitudinal Case Study

Katie York[DS1]

Sam Houston State University

'''Abstract '''

'''Impact of Student Success Initiative on High School Dropout Rate: A Longitudinal Case Study'''

Introduction[DS2]

In 2002, George W. Bush signed No Child Left Behind (NCLB) into law as a measure intended to address the disparity between poor and/or minority students’ achievements and that of their peers (Joftus & Maddox-Dolan, 2003). Whereas the intent was to hold schools accountable for the academic achievements of all students, the result has been increasing concern for the myriad negative consequences of high-stakes testing (Nichols & Berliner, 2005[DS3] ). One of the most troubling consequences has been excessive test preparation, which too often leads to student boredom and burnout (Blazer, 2011). On the surface, test preparation seems innocuous; indeed, it makes sense that students identified as at risk of failing the test are provided intervening remediation. Problems result, however, when students at risk of test failure are given such remediation in lieu of pursuing other educational interests or to such degree that students believe they have no value outside of achieving satisfactory scores (Amrein & Berliner, 2002).

Adding to the pressures of NCLB are the requirements of Texas’s Student Success Initiative (SSI). Enacted while George W. Bush was governor, SSI requires additional accelerated instruction for fifth and eighth grade students who do not meet the passing standards on annual assessments in reading and mathematics (Texas Education Agency, 2013). Imagine now a student who has been previously identified as at risk of test failure and is currently enrolled in a remediation course fails the first administration of the eighth grade State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR) in reading. Under SSI provisions, the student must now be enrolled in additional accelerated instruction until he passes a subsequent administration or risk being retained. On top of the pressures of test-taking and test-failure, this student must now address the possibility of being retained. It is no wonder why so many of these academically at-risk students feel disengaged from school and ultimately drop out (Bridgeland, DiJulio, & Morison, 2006).

Rather than continue to see the type of student hypothesized above as data on a page, this study seeks to delve into the world of academically at-risk students in accelerated instructional programs to understand their experiences. Rather than relying on survey data or large and anonymous samples, individual students within the case will speak for themselves to share the reality and consequences of high-stakes testing. These students will be followed through the end of their high school careers to identify the repercussions, if any, high-stakes testing in middle schools under SSI has on the high-school graduation rates of academically at-risk students.

Statement of the Problem

The purpose of this qualitative study will be to understand the nature of NCLB’s high-stakes testing as seen through the eyes of academically at-risk eighth graders currently receiving accelerated instruction under SSI. In addition, these students will be followed throughout high school to see the lasting impact SSI requirements have and whether or not academic pressures lead to students dropping out of high school. Throughout the course of the case study, insight gained from interviews will shed light onto the intrapersonal effects of government mandates.

Research Question(s[DS4] ) 

'''Review of Related Literature'''[DS5]

Since the inception of NCLB, high-stakes testing has been the subject of over 1000 studies found in EBSCO and ERIC database searches. The overwhelming majority provided quantitative data and focused on survey data to share students’ experiences (Cite some of the studies). Of this majority, many focused on middle and elementary school students’ experiences in remediation programs or test-preparatory programs, but no study located thus far provided longitudinal data on the students receiving these programs (Cite some of the studies).

Blazer’s (2011) analysis of the positive and negative effects of the high-stakes testing movement provided the greatest direction. Through her summaries of and references to existing studies, other resources were located in a snowballing fashion. Because the boundary for students included in this case study is enrollment in accelerated instruction, studies discussing the negative side of high-stakes testing were selected and evaluated. Nichols and Berliner (2005) portrayed high-stakes testing as a cause of narrowed curriculum that affects student interest in schools. In 2008, these authors furthered this into a synthesis of existing qualitative data from teachers and students regarding the lack of academic interest resulting from high-stakes testing. Amrein and Berliner (2002) identified a link between states with high school graduation examinations and dropout rates, but Bridgeland, DiJulio, and Morison (2006) concluded that no one factor can conclusively determine whether or not a student will drop out of high school[DS6] .

Only one study could be located that specifically mentioned SSI. Christenson (2010) looked at the effect of retention due to SSI mandates on elementary students. Her findings, although not quite aligned with the scope of this study, echoed those in the Center for Children and Families’ (2012) study of retention policies in Florida. Researchers from both studies agreed that retention can be damaging to students and places them at additional risk of dropping out of high school, but neither concluded whether the risk of retention policies had any long-lasting effects on students after eighth grade.

While several studies have been conducted on the impact of NCLB on elementary and middle school students, few have been able to draw significant conclusions about NCLB’s effect on graduation rates (Blazer 2011). Furthermore, no studies included longitudinal, qualitative data from middle school students involved in accelerated instructional programs, and no studies on the pressure of SSI’s additional requirements could be located. Not only will a longitudinal study shed light on the students’ phenomenological experience, but it could also provide insight into what connection, if any, high-stakes testing has to high school dropout rates. When the purpose is to understand the impact high-stakes testing has on students, it seems cruelly ironic to reduce their feelings to pre-scripted responses on a survey for analysis as quantifiable data; that reason, along with those listed above, provides the rationale for conducting longitudinal, qualitative research on this subject.

Research Procedures

'''Overall Approach and Rationales for the Study'''

Because the aim of this study is to give a voice to the students too often reduced to mere data, a qualitative research approach was selected. The case study format will allow for a wider lens on the subject, and following the students involved in the case throughout high school will allow for greater exploration into whether high-stakes testing and SSI mandates impact high school dropout rates[DS7] . Rather than give students generic responses to check on a survey, authentic narratives will be sought to better understand the lasting impact governmental educational decisions have on students.

Site and Sample Collection[DS8]

Using purposive, criterion sampling, a sample size of ten students will be used for the duration of the longitudinal case study. Although a random sample would be more representative, selecting participants who are able to provide insight into this particular phenomenon takes priority (Gay, Mills, & Airasian, 2012[DS9] ). Students must meet the criteria of being participants in a specified campus’s accelerated reading instruction (ARI) course prior to retaking the State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR).

In order to study the effects of high-stakes testing and Texas’s Student Success Initiative on students, potential case study subjects must be enrolled in and attending the course. Accelerated instruction courses are limited to 10 students (Texas Administrative Code, 2006). The researcher believes involving all 10 students will maximize the number of students still involved in the case study in its later years. Even though using all 10 students in a course increases the likelihood of a homogenous experience between the students and reduces the potential for diverse data, the likelihood that some students will move out of the district before the conclusion of the study is far greater. Maximizing the initial case study size by including all 10 course members means that there will be more data within the longitudinal study.

While sample size could be expanded by using randomly selected students within ARI courses throughout the district, the researcher believes that students will be more likely to participate if they know others in their course are participating. Furthermore, the researcher has access to a specific district and campus within Region VI made possible through employment in the district and has knowledge of accelerated reading instruction (ARI) programs through personal experience. While all of these purposive choices could lead to bias, the driving belief behind these choices is that existing personal relationships with campus administrators and staff as well as familiarity with topic of study will yield more credible results.

The Researcher’s Role

Access to the research site will need to be granted at both district and campus levels. Because research subjects are minors, parental informed consent in addition to student informed consent will also need to be secured. At all times, the anonymity of students, campus, and district will be protected. The researcher will need to form and maintain interpersonal relationships with district and campus staff, student participants, and student participants’ families so as to foster the trusting relationships required for qualitative research.

In addition, the researcher needs to form lasting bonds with the student participants as the study will continue from eighth grade through each participant’s completion of high school. A possible dilemma in this area is the researcher’s ability to remain objective should student participants debate dropping out of high school[DS10] .

Data Collection Methods

While students are attending ARI courses, individual interviews will be conducted with each student in the case study querying previous academic experiences, current experiences and perceptions of the ARI course, and expectations for the upcoming additional STAAR administration. Students will also participate in group interviews to discuss the overall ARI class experience at the beginning, middle, and end of the course, and individual family interviews will be conducted to better understand each student’s academic history and gain insights to his or her background. After receiving updated STAAR scores, each student will be interviewed again with reactions and expectations for the future.

Twice each school year, beginning after the completion of ARI classes until each student completes high school, students will participate in individual interviews to monitor progress and perceptions as they continue in school. Students’ final interviews will be conducted after leaving high school, whether upon graduation or upon dropping out. Because of the possible differences in results, progress, and retention, no group interviews will be conducted during this phase.

Every interview is intended to take less than 20 minutes and will occur on the student’s campus, in person. Interviews will be recorded and maintained during the course of the case study. The researcher will follow up by sending the interviewee a transcript of the notes taken and responses captured for his or her review; any discrepancies would warrant an additional meeting for clarification.

Data Management Strategies

All data will be kept and reviewed only by the researcher and research participants until publication. Interviews will be recorded, and videos will be marked with date, time, and interview subject. Interviews will also be saved on computer and backed up to an external hard drive daily during data collection. Field notes will be stored in a similar fashion. Prior to publication, each participant will have the option to review his or her contribution, but all names will be kept confidential so as to make responses anonymous.

Data Analysis Strategies

Data will be analyzed from the initial interactions on the campus and will be collated according to students’ feelings towards self and feelings towards academics. Positive and negative perceptions will be placed on a continuum and categorized both by student and by point in time. For example, student A’s positive self-perception at the onset would be placed high on the continuum. It would be compared to other participants’ self-perceptions at that point in time as well as compared to student A’s self-perception over time. This style of data monitoring will be useful to spot trends both over time and across the group. It will also be helpful to analyze data in this fashion so as to identify any points requiring follow up questioning or more in-depth study. Should any students fail to complete high school, their responses will be isolated to look for themes and possible causes. Finally interviews will be reviewed and coded so as to reduce data into a manageable form prior to the study’s conclusion (Gay et al., 2012).

[DS11]

Trustworthiness Features

Because research exists on separate parts of the study, for example, research documenting reasons why students choose to drop out of high school can be found in other studies, this outside research will be used as a reliability check and assist in establishing credibility. The researcher will also take copious descriptive notes about the setting for the purpose of creating transferability. Additionally, the researcher will inform students of the importance of honesty both through ongoing informed consent and the modeling of trustworthiness by the researcher.

Ethical Considerations

            The researcher will ensure that proper research ethics are followed throughout the case study; this intent will be backed by the researcher’s own ethical code which closely aligns to professional ethics. Informed consent will be established with district, campus, student, and parent or guardian at the onset of the study and reviewed throughout the student’s participation. At any point during the process, students and their families have the option of withdrawing from the study with no repercussions or pressuring from the researcher.

Limitations

As with all qualitative research, the generalizability is limited because the researcher does not set out to form conclusions that can be applied to larger or different settings (Gay et al., 2012). The sample size is small, and the district’s populations are neither representative of Texas’s school populations nor the nation’s (Texas Education Agency, 2011a; Texas Education Agency, 2011b). Multi-site case studies might increase the study’s reliability but this method is not practical with only one available researcher. Similarly, triangulation would increase trustworthiness and validity but is also not feasible for the current study (Gay et al., 2012). Lastly, although the researcher’s longitudinal study may provide more stable and representative data than a single year’s data, the study will be performed on only one group at only one time.

References[DS12]

Amrein, A. L., & Berliner, D C. (2002). An analysis of some unintended and negative consequences of high-stakes testing. Tempe, AZ: Education Policy Research Unit, Arizona State University. Retrieved from http://epsl.asu.edu/epru/documents/EPSL-0211-125-EPRU-exec.pdf

Blazer, C. (2011). ''Unintended consequences of high-stakes testing''. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED536512)

Bridgeland, J. M., DiJulio, J. J., & Morison, K. M. (2006). The silent epidemic: Perspectives of high school dropouts. Washington, DC: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Retrieved from http://docs.gatesfoundation.org/united-states/documents/thesilentepidemic3-06final.pdf

Center for Children and Families. (2012, August). ''Is retaining students in the early grades self- ''

''defeating? ''(Issue Brief No. 48). Washington, DC: West, M. R.

Christenson, B. L. (2010). The effect of grade-level retention on student success as defined by the student success initiative of Texas. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED522970)

Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2012). ''Educational research: Competencies for analysis and application ''(10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Joftus, S., & Maddox-Dolan, B. (2003). ''Left out and left behind: NCLB and the American high school''. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED 476303)

Kelly, D. H., & Grove, W. D. (1981). Teachers’ nominations and the production of academic “misfits”. Education, 101, 246-263.  Retrieved from http://ehis.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.

shsu.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=5191a4db-63a4-44e1-835e-33ecf47b9935% 40sessionmgr12&vid=7&hid=8

Maleyko, G. (2011). The impact of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) on school achievement and accountability. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED535756)

Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2005). ''The inevitable corruption of indicators and educators through high-stakes testing''. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED508510)

Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2008). Testing the joy out of learning. Educational Leadership, 65(6), 14-18. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/mar08/vol65/num06/Testing-the-Joy-Out-of-Learning.aspx

Texas Administrative Code, Part II, Texas Education Agency. §101.2006

Texas Education Agency. (2011a). ''Snapshot 2011 summary tables: State totals''. Retrieved from http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/snapshot/2011/state.html

Texas Education Agency. (2011b). ''Snapshot 2011 summary tables: Conroe independent school district''. Retrieved from http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/cgi/sas/broker

Texas Education Agency. (2013). ''Student Success Initiative manual: Grade advancement requirements''. Retrieved from http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index3.aspx?id=3230

[DS1]Katie, this is really good and nearly a finished product. I made a few notes for you to consider, but nothing major. Overall, great work. Kudos on your efforts!

[DS2]This section was very well written! I think that this section is a finished product. Excellent use of  references.

[DS3]Excellent refrence.

[DS4]I did not see your research question(s). This would be an appropriate place to place them or after the review of the literature.

[DS5]This is a good start. You actually do a great job of synthesizing the existing literature. I think that you should strive for about two or three pages. Also, consider adding subheadings in order to aid the reader.

[DS6]Excellent synthesis of sources.

[DS7]This is great work. But why did you choose a case study as a design? You may use your textbook as a reference.

[DS8]This is another great section that is final product readry.

[DS9]GREAT!

[DS10]You need one more sentence in order to make a complete paragraph.

[DS11]Please remove the extra space

[DS12]Excellent job on the references!!

Impact of Student Success Initiative on High School Dropout Rate: A Longitudinal Case Study

Katie York[DS1]

Sam Houston State University

'''Abstract '''

'''Impact of Student Success Initiative on High School Dropout Rate: A Longitudinal Case Study'''

Introduction[DS2]

In 2002, George W. Bush signed No Child Left Behind (NCLB) into law as a measure intended to address the disparity between poor and/or minority students’ achievements and that of their peers (Joftus & Maddox-Dolan, 2003). Whereas the intent was to hold schools accountable for the academic achievements of all students, the result has been increasing concern for the myriad negative consequences of high-stakes testing (Nichols & Berliner, 2005[DS3] ). One of the most troubling consequences has been excessive test preparation, which too often leads to student boredom and burnout (Blazer, 2011). On the surface, test preparation seems innocuous; indeed, it makes sense that students identified as at risk of failing the test are provided intervening remediation. Problems result, however, when students at risk of test failure are given such remediation in lieu of pursuing other educational interests or to such degree that students believe they have no value outside of achieving satisfactory scores (Amrein & Berliner, 2002).

Adding to the pressures of NCLB are the requirements of Texas’s Student Success Initiative (SSI). Enacted while George W. Bush was governor, SSI requires additional accelerated instruction for fifth and eighth grade students who do not meet the passing standards on annual assessments in reading and mathematics (Texas Education Agency, 2013). Imagine now a student who has been previously identified as at risk of test failure and is currently enrolled in a remediation course fails the first administration of the eighth grade State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR) in reading. Under SSI provisions, the student must now be enrolled in additional accelerated instruction until he passes a subsequent administration or risk being retained. On top of the pressures of test-taking and test-failure, this student must now address the possibility of being retained. It is no wonder why so many of these academically at-risk students feel disengaged from school and ultimately drop out (Bridgeland, DiJulio, & Morison, 2006).

Rather than continue to see the type of student hypothesized above as data on a page, this study seeks to delve into the world of academically at-risk students in accelerated instructional programs to understand their experiences. Rather than relying on survey data or large and anonymous samples, individual students within the case will speak for themselves to share the reality and consequences of high-stakes testing. These students will be followed through the end of their high school careers to identify the repercussions, if any, high-stakes testing in middle schools under SSI has on the high-school graduation rates of academically at-risk students.

Statement of the Problem

The purpose of this qualitative study will be to understand the nature of NCLB’s high-stakes testing as seen through the eyes of academically at-risk eighth graders currently receiving accelerated instruction under SSI. In addition, these students will be followed throughout high school to see the lasting impact SSI requirements have and whether or not academic pressures lead to students dropping out of high school. Throughout the course of the case study, insight gained from interviews will shed light onto the intrapersonal effects of government mandates.

Research Question(s[DS4] ) 

'''Review of Related Literature'''[DS5]

Since the inception of NCLB, high-stakes testing has been the subject of over 1000 studies found in EBSCO and ERIC database searches. The overwhelming majority provided quantitative data and focused on survey data to share students’ experiences (Cite some of the studies). Of this majority, many focused on middle and elementary school students’ experiences in remediation programs or test-preparatory programs, but no study located thus far provided longitudinal data on the students receiving these programs (Cite some of the studies).

Blazer’s (2011) analysis of the positive and negative effects of the high-stakes testing movement provided the greatest direction. Through her summaries of and references to existing studies, other resources were located in a snowballing fashion. Because the boundary for students included in this case study is enrollment in accelerated instruction, studies discussing the negative side of high-stakes testing were selected and evaluated. Nichols and Berliner (2005) portrayed high-stakes testing as a cause of narrowed curriculum that affects student interest in schools. In 2008, these authors furthered this into a synthesis of existing qualitative data from teachers and students regarding the lack of academic interest resulting from high-stakes testing. Amrein and Berliner (2002) identified a link between states with high school graduation examinations and dropout rates, but Bridgeland, DiJulio, and Morison (2006) concluded that no one factor can conclusively determine whether or not a student will drop out of high school[DS6] .

Only one study could be located that specifically mentioned SSI. Christenson (2010) looked at the effect of retention due to SSI mandates on elementary students. Her findings, although not quite aligned with the scope of this study, echoed those in the Center for Children and Families’ (2012) study of retention policies in Florida. Researchers from both studies agreed that retention can be damaging to students and places them at additional risk of dropping out of high school, but neither concluded whether the risk of retention policies had any long-lasting effects on students after eighth grade.

While several studies have been conducted on the impact of NCLB on elementary and middle school students, few have been able to draw significant conclusions about NCLB’s effect on graduation rates (Blazer 2011). Furthermore, no studies included longitudinal, qualitative data from middle school students involved in accelerated instructional programs, and no studies on the pressure of SSI’s additional requirements could be located. Not only will a longitudinal study shed light on the students’ phenomenological experience, but it could also provide insight into what connection, if any, high-stakes testing has to high school dropout rates. When the purpose is to understand the impact high-stakes testing has on students, it seems cruelly ironic to reduce their feelings to pre-scripted responses on a survey for analysis as quantifiable data; that reason, along with those listed above, provides the rationale for conducting longitudinal, qualitative research on this subject.

Research Procedures

'''Overall Approach and Rationales for the Study'''

Because the aim of this study is to give a voice to the students too often reduced to mere data, a qualitative research approach was selected. The case study format will allow for a wider lens on the subject, and following the students involved in the case throughout high school will allow for greater exploration into whether high-stakes testing and SSI mandates impact high school dropout rates[DS7] . Rather than give students generic responses to check on a survey, authentic narratives will be sought to better understand the lasting impact governmental educational decisions have on students.

Site and Sample Collection[DS8]

Using purposive, criterion sampling, a sample size of ten students will be used for the duration of the longitudinal case study. Although a random sample would be more representative, selecting participants who are able to provide insight into this particular phenomenon takes priority (Gay, Mills, & Airasian, 2012[DS9] ). Students must meet the criteria of being participants in a specified campus’s accelerated reading instruction (ARI) course prior to retaking the State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR).

In order to study the effects of high-stakes testing and Texas’s Student Success Initiative on students, potential case study subjects must be enrolled in and attending the course. Accelerated instruction courses are limited to 10 students (Texas Administrative Code, 2006). The researcher believes involving all 10 students will maximize the number of students still involved in the case study in its later years. Even though using all 10 students in a course increases the likelihood of a homogenous experience between the students and reduces the potential for diverse data, the likelihood that some students will move out of the district before the conclusion of the study is far greater. Maximizing the initial case study size by including all 10 course members means that there will be more data within the longitudinal study.

While sample size could be expanded by using randomly selected students within ARI courses throughout the district, the researcher believes that students will be more likely to participate if they know others in their course are participating. Furthermore, the researcher has access to a specific district and campus within Region VI made possible through employment in the district and has knowledge of accelerated reading instruction (ARI) programs through personal experience. While all of these purposive choices could lead to bias, the driving belief behind these choices is that existing personal relationships with campus administrators and staff as well as familiarity with topic of study will yield more credible results.

The Researcher’s Role

Access to the research site will need to be granted at both district and campus levels. Because research subjects are minors, parental informed consent in addition to student informed consent will also need to be secured. At all times, the anonymity of students, campus, and district will be protected. The researcher will need to form and maintain interpersonal relationships with district and campus staff, student participants, and student participants’ families so as to foster the trusting relationships required for qualitative research.

In addition, the researcher needs to form lasting bonds with the student participants as the study will continue from eighth grade through each participant’s completion of high school. A possible dilemma in this area is the researcher’s ability to remain objective should student participants debate dropping out of high school[DS10] .

Data Collection Methods

While students are attending ARI courses, individual interviews will be conducted with each student in the case study querying previous academic experiences, current experiences and perceptions of the ARI course, and expectations for the upcoming additional STAAR administration. Students will also participate in group interviews to discuss the overall ARI class experience at the beginning, middle, and end of the course, and individual family interviews will be conducted to better understand each student’s academic history and gain insights to his or her background. After receiving updated STAAR scores, each student will be interviewed again with reactions and expectations for the future.

Twice each school year, beginning after the completion of ARI classes until each student completes high school, students will participate in individual interviews to monitor progress and perceptions as they continue in school. Students’ final interviews will be conducted after leaving high school, whether upon graduation or upon dropping out. Because of the possible differences in results, progress, and retention, no group interviews will be conducted during this phase.

Every interview is intended to take less than 20 minutes and will occur on the student’s campus, in person. Interviews will be recorded and maintained during the course of the case study. The researcher will follow up by sending the interviewee a transcript of the notes taken and responses captured for his or her review; any discrepancies would warrant an additional meeting for clarification.

Data Management Strategies

All data will be kept and reviewed only by the researcher and research participants until publication. Interviews will be recorded, and videos will be marked with date, time, and interview subject. Interviews will also be saved on computer and backed up to an external hard drive daily during data collection. Field notes will be stored in a similar fashion. Prior to publication, each participant will have the option to review his or her contribution, but all names will be kept confidential so as to make responses anonymous.

Data Analysis Strategies

Data will be analyzed from the initial interactions on the campus and will be collated according to students’ feelings towards self and feelings towards academics. Positive and negative perceptions will be placed on a continuum and categorized both by student and by point in time. For example, student A’s positive self-perception at the onset would be placed high on the continuum. It would be compared to other participants’ self-perceptions at that point in time as well as compared to student A’s self-perception over time. This style of data monitoring will be useful to spot trends both over time and across the group. It will also be helpful to analyze data in this fashion so as to identify any points requiring follow up questioning or more in-depth study. Should any students fail to complete high school, their responses will be isolated to look for themes and possible causes. Finally interviews will be reviewed and coded so as to reduce data into a manageable form prior to the study’s conclusion (Gay et al., 2012).

[DS11]

Trustworthiness Features

Because research exists on separate parts of the study, for example, research documenting reasons why students choose to drop out of high school can be found in other studies, this outside research will be used as a reliability check and assist in establishing credibility. The researcher will also take copious descriptive notes about the setting for the purpose of creating transferability. Additionally, the researcher will inform students of the importance of honesty both through ongoing informed consent and the modeling of trustworthiness by the researcher.

Ethical Considerations

            The researcher will ensure that proper research ethics are followed throughout the case study; this intent will be backed by the researcher’s own ethical code which closely aligns to professional ethics. Informed consent will be established with district, campus, student, and parent or guardian at the onset of the study and reviewed throughout the student’s participation. At any point during the process, students and their families have the option of withdrawing from the study with no repercussions or pressuring from the researcher.

Limitations

As with all qualitative research, the generalizability is limited because the researcher does not set out to form conclusions that can be applied to larger or different settings (Gay et al., 2012). The sample size is small, and the district’s populations are neither representative of Texas’s school populations nor the nation’s (Texas Education Agency, 2011a; Texas Education Agency, 2011b). Multi-site case studies might increase the study’s reliability but this method is not practical with only one available researcher. Similarly, triangulation would increase trustworthiness and validity but is also not feasible for the current study (Gay et al., 2012). Lastly, although the researcher’s longitudinal study may provide more stable and representative data than a single year’s data, the study will be performed on only one group at only one time.

References[DS12]

Amrein, A. L., & Berliner, D C. (2002). An analysis of some unintended and negative consequences of high-stakes testing. Tempe, AZ: Education Policy Research Unit, Arizona State University. Retrieved from http://epsl.asu.edu/epru/documents/EPSL-0211-125-EPRU-exec.pdf

Blazer, C. (2011). ''Unintended consequences of high-stakes testing''. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED536512)

Bridgeland, J. M., DiJulio, J. J., & Morison, K. M. (2006). The silent epidemic: Perspectives of high school dropouts. Washington, DC: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Retrieved from http://docs.gatesfoundation.org/united-states/documents/thesilentepidemic3-06final.pdf

Center for Children and Families. (2012, August). ''Is retaining students in the early grades self- ''

''defeating? ''(Issue Brief No. 48). Washington, DC: West, M. R.

Christenson, B. L. (2010). The effect of grade-level retention on student success as defined by the student success initiative of Texas. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED522970)

Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2012). ''Educational research: Competencies for analysis and application ''(10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Joftus, S., & Maddox-Dolan, B. (2003). ''Left out and left behind: NCLB and the American high school''. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED 476303)

Kelly, D. H., & Grove, W. D. (1981). Teachers’ nominations and the production of academic “misfits”. Education, 101, 246-263.  Retrieved from http://ehis.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.

shsu.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=5191a4db-63a4-44e1-835e-33ecf47b9935% 40sessionmgr12&vid=7&hid=8

Maleyko, G. (2011). The impact of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) on school achievement and accountability. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED535756)

Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2005). ''The inevitable corruption of indicators and educators through high-stakes testing''. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED508510)

Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2008). Testing the joy out of learning. Educational Leadership, 65(6), 14-18. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/mar08/vol65/num06/Testing-the-Joy-Out-of-Learning.aspx

Texas Administrative Code, Part II, Texas Education Agency. §101.2006

Texas Education Agency. (2011a). ''Snapshot 2011 summary tables: State totals''. Retrieved from http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/snapshot/2011/state.html

Texas Education Agency. (2011b). ''Snapshot 2011 summary tables: Conroe independent school district''. Retrieved from http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/cgi/sas/broker

Texas Education Agency. (2013). ''Student Success Initiative manual: Grade advancement requirements''. Retrieved from http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index3.aspx?id=3230

[DS1]Katie, this is really good and nearly a finished product. I made a few notes for you to consider, but nothing major. Overall, great work. Kudos on your efforts!

[DS2]This section was very well written! I think that this section is a finished product. Excellent use of  references.

[DS3]Excellent refrence.

[DS4]I did not see your research question(s). This would be an appropriate place to place them or after the review of the literature.

[DS5]This is a good start. You actually do a great job of synthesizing the existing literature. I think that you should strive for about two or three pages. Also, consider adding subheadings in order to aid the reader.

[DS6]Excellent synthesis of sources.

[DS7]This is great work. But why did you choose a case study as a design? You may use your textbook as a reference.

[DS8]This is another great section that is final product readry.

[DS9]GREAT!

[DS10]You need one more sentence in order to make a complete paragraph.

[DS11]Please remove the extra space

[DS12]Excellent job on the references!!

Impact of Student Success Initiative on High School Dropout Rate: A Longitudinal Case Study

Katie York[DS1]

Sam Houston State University

'''Abstract '''

'''Impact of Student Success Initiative on High School Dropout Rate: A Longitudinal Case Study'''

Introduction[DS2]

In 2002, George W. Bush signed No Child Left Behind (NCLB) into law as a measure intended to address the disparity between poor and/or minority students’ achievements and that of their peers (Joftus & Maddox-Dolan, 2003). Whereas the intent was to hold schools accountable for the academic achievements of all students, the result has been increasing concern for the myriad negative consequences of high-stakes testing (Nichols & Berliner, 2005[DS3] ). One of the most troubling consequences has been excessive test preparation, which too often leads to student boredom and burnout (Blazer, 2011). On the surface, test preparation seems innocuous; indeed, it makes sense that students identified as at risk of failing the test are provided intervening remediation. Problems result, however, when students at risk of test failure are given such remediation in lieu of pursuing other educational interests or to such degree that students believe they have no value outside of achieving satisfactory scores (Amrein & Berliner, 2002).

Adding to the pressures of NCLB are the requirements of Texas’s Student Success Initiative (SSI). Enacted while George W. Bush was governor, SSI requires additional accelerated instruction for fifth and eighth grade students who do not meet the passing standards on annual assessments in reading and mathematics (Texas Education Agency, 2013). Imagine now a student who has been previously identified as at risk of test failure and is currently enrolled in a remediation course fails the first administration of the eighth grade State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR) in reading. Under SSI provisions, the student must now be enrolled in additional accelerated instruction until he passes a subsequent administration or risk being retained. On top of the pressures of test-taking and test-failure, this student must now address the possibility of being retained. It is no wonder why so many of these academically at-risk students feel disengaged from school and ultimately drop out (Bridgeland, DiJulio, & Morison, 2006).

Rather than continue to see the type of student hypothesized above as data on a page, this study seeks to delve into the world of academically at-risk students in accelerated instructional programs to understand their experiences. Rather than relying on survey data or large and anonymous samples, individual students within the case will speak for themselves to share the reality and consequences of high-stakes testing. These students will be followed through the end of their high school careers to identify the repercussions, if any, high-stakes testing in middle schools under SSI has on the high-school graduation rates of academically at-risk students.

Statement of the Problem

The purpose of this qualitative study will be to understand the nature of NCLB’s high-stakes testing as seen through the eyes of academically at-risk eighth graders currently receiving accelerated instruction under SSI. In addition, these students will be followed throughout high school to see the lasting impact SSI requirements have and whether or not academic pressures lead to students dropping out of high school. Throughout the course of the case study, insight gained from interviews will shed light onto the intrapersonal effects of government mandates.

Research Question(s[DS4] ) 

'''Review of Related Literature'''[DS5]

Since the inception of NCLB, high-stakes testing has been the subject of over 1000 studies found in EBSCO and ERIC database searches. The overwhelming majority provided quantitative data and focused on survey data to share students’ experiences (Cite some of the studies). Of this majority, many focused on middle and elementary school students’ experiences in remediation programs or test-preparatory programs, but no study located thus far provided longitudinal data on the students receiving these programs (Cite some of the studies).

Blazer’s (2011) analysis of the positive and negative effects of the high-stakes testing movement provided the greatest direction. Through her summaries of and references to existing studies, other resources were located in a snowballing fashion. Because the boundary for students included in this case study is enrollment in accelerated instruction, studies discussing the negative side of high-stakes testing were selected and evaluated. Nichols and Berliner (2005) portrayed high-stakes testing as a cause of narrowed curriculum that affects student interest in schools. In 2008, these authors furthered this into a synthesis of existing qualitative data from teachers and students regarding the lack of academic interest resulting from high-stakes testing. Amrein and Berliner (2002) identified a link between states with high school graduation examinations and dropout rates, but Bridgeland, DiJulio, and Morison (2006) concluded that no one factor can conclusively determine whether or not a student will drop out of high school[DS6] .

Only one study could be located that specifically mentioned SSI. Christenson (2010) looked at the effect of retention due to SSI mandates on elementary students. Her findings, although not quite aligned with the scope of this study, echoed those in the Center for Children and Families’ (2012) study of retention policies in Florida. Researchers from both studies agreed that retention can be damaging to students and places them at additional risk of dropping out of high school, but neither concluded whether the risk of retention policies had any long-lasting effects on students after eighth grade.

While several studies have been conducted on the impact of NCLB on elementary and middle school students, few have been able to draw significant conclusions about NCLB’s effect on graduation rates (Blazer 2011). Furthermore, no studies included longitudinal, qualitative data from middle school students involved in accelerated instructional programs, and no studies on the pressure of SSI’s additional requirements could be located. Not only will a longitudinal study shed light on the students’ phenomenological experience, but it could also provide insight into what connection, if any, high-stakes testing has to high school dropout rates. When the purpose is to understand the impact high-stakes testing has on students, it seems cruelly ironic to reduce their feelings to pre-scripted responses on a survey for analysis as quantifiable data; that reason, along with those listed above, provides the rationale for conducting longitudinal, qualitative research on this subject.

Research Procedures

'''Overall Approach and Rationales for the Study'''

Because the aim of this study is to give a voice to the students too often reduced to mere data, a qualitative research approach was selected. The case study format will allow for a wider lens on the subject, and following the students involved in the case throughout high school will allow for greater exploration into whether high-stakes testing and SSI mandates impact high school dropout rates[DS7] . Rather than give students generic responses to check on a survey, authentic narratives will be sought to better understand the lasting impact governmental educational decisions have on students.

Site and Sample Collection[DS8]

Using purposive, criterion sampling, a sample size of ten students will be used for the duration of the longitudinal case study. Although a random sample would be more representative, selecting participants who are able to provide insight into this particular phenomenon takes priority (Gay, Mills, & Airasian, 2012[DS9] ). Students must meet the criteria of being participants in a specified campus’s accelerated reading instruction (ARI) course prior to retaking the State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR).

In order to study the effects of high-stakes testing and Texas’s Student Success Initiative on students, potential case study subjects must be enrolled in and attending the course. Accelerated instruction courses are limited to 10 students (Texas Administrative Code, 2006). The researcher believes involving all 10 students will maximize the number of students still involved in the case study in its later years. Even though using all 10 students in a course increases the likelihood of a homogenous experience between the students and reduces the potential for diverse data, the likelihood that some students will move out of the district before the conclusion of the study is far greater. Maximizing the initial case study size by including all 10 course members means that there will be more data within the longitudinal study.

While sample size could be expanded by using randomly selected students within ARI courses throughout the district, the researcher believes that students will be more likely to participate if they know others in their course are participating. Furthermore, the researcher has access to a specific district and campus within Region VI made possible through employment in the district and has knowledge of accelerated reading instruction (ARI) programs through personal experience. While all of these purposive choices could lead to bias, the driving belief behind these choices is that existing personal relationships with campus administrators and staff as well as familiarity with topic of study will yield more credible results.

The Researcher’s Role

Access to the research site will need to be granted at both district and campus levels. Because research subjects are minors, parental informed consent in addition to student informed consent will also need to be secured. At all times, the anonymity of students, campus, and district will be protected. The researcher will need to form and maintain interpersonal relationships with district and campus staff, student participants, and student participants’ families so as to foster the trusting relationships required for qualitative research.

In addition, the researcher needs to form lasting bonds with the student participants as the study will continue from eighth grade through each participant’s completion of high school. A possible dilemma in this area is the researcher’s ability to remain objective should student participants debate dropping out of high school[DS10] .

Data Collection Methods

While students are attending ARI courses, individual interviews will be conducted with each student in the case study querying previous academic experiences, current experiences and perceptions of the ARI course, and expectations for the upcoming additional STAAR administration. Students will also participate in group interviews to discuss the overall ARI class experience at the beginning, middle, and end of the course, and individual family interviews will be conducted to better understand each student’s academic history and gain insights to his or her background. After receiving updated STAAR scores, each student will be interviewed again with reactions and expectations for the future.

Twice each school year, beginning after the completion of ARI classes until each student completes high school, students will participate in individual interviews to monitor progress and perceptions as they continue in school. Students’ final interviews will be conducted after leaving high school, whether upon graduation or upon dropping out. Because of the possible differences in results, progress, and retention, no group interviews will be conducted during this phase.

Every interview is intended to take less than 20 minutes and will occur on the student’s campus, in person. Interviews will be recorded and maintained during the course of the case study. The researcher will follow up by sending the interviewee a transcript of the notes taken and responses captured for his or her review; any discrepancies would warrant an additional meeting for clarification.

Data Management Strategies

All data will be kept and reviewed only by the researcher and research participants until publication. Interviews will be recorded, and videos will be marked with date, time, and interview subject. Interviews will also be saved on computer and backed up to an external hard drive daily during data collection. Field notes will be stored in a similar fashion. Prior to publication, each participant will have the option to review his or her contribution, but all names will be kept confidential so as to make responses anonymous.

Data Analysis Strategies

Data will be analyzed from the initial interactions on the campus and will be collated according to students’ feelings towards self and feelings towards academics. Positive and negative perceptions will be placed on a continuum and categorized both by student and by point in time. For example, student A’s positive self-perception at the onset would be placed high on the continuum. It would be compared to other participants’ self-perceptions at that point in time as well as compared to student A’s self-perception over time. This style of data monitoring will be useful to spot trends both over time and across the group. It will also be helpful to analyze data in this fashion so as to identify any points requiring follow up questioning or more in-depth study. Should any students fail to complete high school, their responses will be isolated to look for themes and possible causes. Finally interviews will be reviewed and coded so as to reduce data into a manageable form prior to the study’s conclusion (Gay et al., 2012).

[DS11]

Trustworthiness Features

Because research exists on separate parts of the study, for example, research documenting reasons why students choose to drop out of high school can be found in other studies, this outside research will be used as a reliability check and assist in establishing credibility. The researcher will also take copious descriptive notes about the setting for the purpose of creating transferability. Additionally, the researcher will inform students of the importance of honesty both through ongoing informed consent and the modeling of trustworthiness by the researcher.

Ethical Considerations

            The researcher will ensure that proper research ethics are followed throughout the case study; this intent will be backed by the researcher’s own ethical code which closely aligns to professional ethics. Informed consent will be established with district, campus, student, and parent or guardian at the onset of the study and reviewed throughout the student’s participation. At any point during the process, students and their families have the option of withdrawing from the study with no repercussions or pressuring from the researcher.

Limitations

As with all qualitative research, the generalizability is limited because the researcher does not set out to form conclusions that can be applied to larger or different settings (Gay et al., 2012). The sample size is small, and the district’s populations are neither representative of Texas’s school populations nor the nation’s (Texas Education Agency, 2011a; Texas Education Agency, 2011b). Multi-site case studies might increase the study’s reliability but this method is not practical with only one available researcher. Similarly, triangulation would increase trustworthiness and validity but is also not feasible for the current study (Gay et al., 2012). Lastly, although the researcher’s longitudinal study may provide more stable and representative data than a single year’s data, the study will be performed on only one group at only one time.

References[DS12]

Amrein, A. L., & Berliner, D C. (2002). An analysis of some unintended and negative consequences of high-stakes testing. Tempe, AZ: Education Policy Research Unit, Arizona State University. Retrieved from http://epsl.asu.edu/epru/documents/EPSL-0211-125-EPRU-exec.pdf

Blazer, C. (2011). ''Unintended consequences of high-stakes testing''. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED536512)

Bridgeland, J. M., DiJulio, J. J., & Morison, K. M. (2006). The silent epidemic: Perspectives of high school dropouts. Washington, DC: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Retrieved from http://docs.gatesfoundation.org/united-states/documents/thesilentepidemic3-06final.pdf

Center for Children and Families. (2012, August). ''Is retaining students in the early grades self- ''

''defeating? ''(Issue Brief No. 48). Washington, DC: West, M. R.

Christenson, B. L. (2010). The effect of grade-level retention on student success as defined by the student success initiative of Texas. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED522970)

Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2012). ''Educational research: Competencies for analysis and application ''(10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Joftus, S., & Maddox-Dolan, B. (2003). ''Left out and left behind: NCLB and the American high school''. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED 476303)

Kelly, D. H., & Grove, W. D. (1981). Teachers’ nominations and the production of academic “misfits”. Education, 101, 246-263.  Retrieved from http://ehis.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.

shsu.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=5191a4db-63a4-44e1-835e-33ecf47b9935% 40sessionmgr12&vid=7&hid=8

Maleyko, G. (2011). The impact of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) on school achievement and accountability. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED535756)

Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2005). ''The inevitable corruption of indicators and educators through high-stakes testing''. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED508510)

Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2008). Testing the joy out of learning. Educational Leadership, 65(6), 14-18. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/mar08/vol65/num06/Testing-the-Joy-Out-of-Learning.aspx

Texas Administrative Code, Part II, Texas Education Agency. §101.2006

Texas Education Agency. (2011a). ''Snapshot 2011 summary tables: State totals''. Retrieved from http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/snapshot/2011/state.html

Texas Education Agency. (2011b). ''Snapshot 2011 summary tables: Conroe independent school district''. Retrieved from http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/cgi/sas/broker

Texas Education Agency. (2013). ''Student Success Initiative manual: Grade advancement requirements''. Retrieved from http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index3.aspx?id=3230

[DS1]Katie, this is really good and nearly a finished product. I made a few notes for you to consider, but nothing major. Overall, great work. Kudos on your efforts!

[DS2]This section was very well written! I think that this section is a finished product. Excellent use of  references.

[DS3]Excellent refrence.

[DS4]I did not see your research question(s). This would be an appropriate place to place them or after the review of the literature.

[DS5]This is a good start. You actually do a great job of synthesizing the existing literature. I think that you should strive for about two or three pages. Also, consider adding subheadings in order to aid the reader.

[DS6]Excellent synthesis of sources.

[DS7]This is great work. But why did you choose a case study as a design? You may use your textbook as a reference.

[DS8]This is another great section that is final product readry.

[DS9]GREAT!

[DS10]You need one more sentence in order to make a complete paragraph.

[DS11]Please remove the extra space

[DS12]Excellent job on the references!!

Impact of Student Success Initiative on High School Dropout Rate: A Longitudinal Case Study

Katie York[DS1]

Sam Houston State University

'''Abstract '''

'''Impact of Student Success Initiative on High School Dropout Rate: A Longitudinal Case Study'''

Introduction[DS2]

In 2002, George W. Bush signed No Child Left Behind (NCLB) into law as a measure intended to address the disparity between poor and/or minority students’ achievements and that of their peers (Joftus & Maddox-Dolan, 2003). Whereas the intent was to hold schools accountable for the academic achievements of all students, the result has been increasing concern for the myriad negative consequences of high-stakes testing (Nichols & Berliner, 2005[DS3] ). One of the most troubling consequences has been excessive test preparation, which too often leads to student boredom and burnout (Blazer, 2011). On the surface, test preparation seems innocuous; indeed, it makes sense that students identified as at risk of failing the test are provided intervening remediation. Problems result, however, when students at risk of test failure are given such remediation in lieu of pursuing other educational interests or to such degree that students believe they have no value outside of achieving satisfactory scores (Amrein & Berliner, 2002).

Adding to the pressures of NCLB are the requirements of Texas’s Student Success Initiative (SSI). Enacted while George W. Bush was governor, SSI requires additional accelerated instruction for fifth and eighth grade students who do not meet the passing standards on annual assessments in reading and mathematics (Texas Education Agency, 2013). Imagine now a student who has been previously identified as at risk of test failure and is currently enrolled in a remediation course fails the first administration of the eighth grade State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR) in reading. Under SSI provisions, the student must now be enrolled in additional accelerated instruction until he passes a subsequent administration or risk being retained. On top of the pressures of test-taking and test-failure, this student must now address the possibility of being retained. It is no wonder why so many of these academically at-risk students feel disengaged from school and ultimately drop out (Bridgeland, DiJulio, & Morison, 2006).

Rather than continue to see the type of student hypothesized above as data on a page, this study seeks to delve into the world of academically at-risk students in accelerated instructional programs to understand their experiences. Rather than relying on survey data or large and anonymous samples, individual students within the case will speak for themselves to share the reality and consequences of high-stakes testing. These students will be followed through the end of their high school careers to identify the repercussions, if any, high-stakes testing in middle schools under SSI has on the high-school graduation rates of academically at-risk students.

Statement of the Problem

The purpose of this qualitative study will be to understand the nature of NCLB’s high-stakes testing as seen through the eyes of academically at-risk eighth graders currently receiving accelerated instruction under SSI. In addition, these students will be followed throughout high school to see the lasting impact SSI requirements have and whether or not academic pressures lead to students dropping out of high school. Throughout the course of the case study, insight gained from interviews will shed light onto the intrapersonal effects of government mandates.

Research Question(s[DS4] ) 

'''Review of Related Literature'''[DS5]

Since the inception of NCLB, high-stakes testing has been the subject of over 1000 studies found in EBSCO and ERIC database searches. The overwhelming majority provided quantitative data and focused on survey data to share students’ experiences (Cite some of the studies). Of this majority, many focused on middle and elementary school students’ experiences in remediation programs or test-preparatory programs, but no study located thus far provided longitudinal data on the students receiving these programs (Cite some of the studies).

Blazer’s (2011) analysis of the positive and negative effects of the high-stakes testing movement provided the greatest direction. Through her summaries of and references to existing studies, other resources were located in a snowballing fashion. Because the boundary for students included in this case study is enrollment in accelerated instruction, studies discussing the negative side of high-stakes testing were selected and evaluated. Nichols and Berliner (2005) portrayed high-stakes testing as a cause of narrowed curriculum that affects student interest in schools. In 2008, these authors furthered this into a synthesis of existing qualitative data from teachers and students regarding the lack of academic interest resulting from high-stakes testing. Amrein and Berliner (2002) identified a link between states with high school graduation examinations and dropout rates, but Bridgeland, DiJulio, and Morison (2006) concluded that no one factor can conclusively determine whether or not a student will drop out of high school[DS6] .

Only one study could be located that specifically mentioned SSI. Christenson (2010) looked at the effect of retention due to SSI mandates on elementary students. Her findings, although not quite aligned with the scope of this study, echoed those in the Center for Children and Families’ (2012) study of retention policies in Florida. Researchers from both studies agreed that retention can be damaging to students and places them at additional risk of dropping out of high school, but neither concluded whether the risk of retention policies had any long-lasting effects on students after eighth grade.

While several studies have been conducted on the impact of NCLB on elementary and middle school students, few have been able to draw significant conclusions about NCLB’s effect on graduation rates (Blazer 2011). Furthermore, no studies included longitudinal, qualitative data from middle school students involved in accelerated instructional programs, and no studies on the pressure of SSI’s additional requirements could be located. Not only will a longitudinal study shed light on the students’ phenomenological experience, but it could also provide insight into what connection, if any, high-stakes testing has to high school dropout rates. When the purpose is to understand the impact high-stakes testing has on students, it seems cruelly ironic to reduce their feelings to pre-scripted responses on a survey for analysis as quantifiable data; that reason, along with those listed above, provides the rationale for conducting longitudinal, qualitative research on this subject.

Research Procedures

'''Overall Approach and Rationales for the Study'''

Because the aim of this study is to give a voice to the students too often reduced to mere data, a qualitative research approach was selected. The case study format will allow for a wider lens on the subject, and following the students involved in the case throughout high school will allow for greater exploration into whether high-stakes testing and SSI mandates impact high school dropout rates[DS7] . Rather than give students generic responses to check on a survey, authentic narratives will be sought to better understand the lasting impact governmental educational decisions have on students.

Site and Sample Collection[DS8]

Using purposive, criterion sampling, a sample size of ten students will be used for the duration of the longitudinal case study. Although a random sample would be more representative, selecting participants who are able to provide insight into this particular phenomenon takes priority (Gay, Mills, & Airasian, 2012[DS9] ). Students must meet the criteria of being participants in a specified campus’s accelerated reading instruction (ARI) course prior to retaking the State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR).

In order to study the effects of high-stakes testing and Texas’s Student Success Initiative on students, potential case study subjects must be enrolled in and attending the course. Accelerated instruction courses are limited to 10 students (Texas Administrative Code, 2006). The researcher believes involving all 10 students will maximize the number of students still involved in the case study in its later years. Even though using all 10 students in a course increases the likelihood of a homogenous experience between the students and reduces the potential for diverse data, the likelihood that some students will move out of the district before the conclusion of the study is far greater. Maximizing the initial case study size by including all 10 course members means that there will be more data within the longitudinal study.

While sample size could be expanded by using randomly selected students within ARI courses throughout the district, the researcher believes that students will be more likely to participate if they know others in their course are participating. Furthermore, the researcher has access to a specific district and campus within Region VI made possible through employment in the district and has knowledge of accelerated reading instruction (ARI) programs through personal experience. While all of these purposive choices could lead to bias, the driving belief behind these choices is that existing personal relationships with campus administrators and staff as well as familiarity with topic of study will yield more credible results.

The Researcher’s Role

Access to the research site will need to be granted at both district and campus levels. Because research subjects are minors, parental informed consent in addition to student informed consent will also need to be secured. At all times, the anonymity of students, campus, and district will be protected. The researcher will need to form and maintain interpersonal relationships with district and campus staff, student participants, and student participants’ families so as to foster the trusting relationships required for qualitative research.

In addition, the researcher needs to form lasting bonds with the student participants as the study will continue from eighth grade through each participant’s completion of high school. A possible dilemma in this area is the researcher’s ability to remain objective should student participants debate dropping out of high school[DS10] .

Data Collection Methods

While students are attending ARI courses, individual interviews will be conducted with each student in the case study querying previous academic experiences, current experiences and perceptions of the ARI course, and expectations for the upcoming additional STAAR administration. Students will also participate in group interviews to discuss the overall ARI class experience at the beginning, middle, and end of the course, and individual family interviews will be conducted to better understand each student’s academic history and gain insights to his or her background. After receiving updated STAAR scores, each student will be interviewed again with reactions and expectations for the future.

Twice each school year, beginning after the completion of ARI classes until each student completes high school, students will participate in individual interviews to monitor progress and perceptions as they continue in school. Students’ final interviews will be conducted after leaving high school, whether upon graduation or upon dropping out. Because of the possible differences in results, progress, and retention, no group interviews will be conducted during this phase.

Every interview is intended to take less than 20 minutes and will occur on the student’s campus, in person. Interviews will be recorded and maintained during the course of the case study. The researcher will follow up by sending the interviewee a transcript of the notes taken and responses captured for his or her review; any discrepancies would warrant an additional meeting for clarification.

Data Management Strategies

All data will be kept and reviewed only by the researcher and research participants until publication. Interviews will be recorded, and videos will be marked with date, time, and interview subject. Interviews will also be saved on computer and backed up to an external hard drive daily during data collection. Field notes will be stored in a similar fashion. Prior to publication, each participant will have the option to review his or her contribution, but all names will be kept confidential so as to make responses anonymous.

Data Analysis Strategies

Data will be analyzed from the initial interactions on the campus and will be collated according to students’ feelings towards self and feelings towards academics. Positive and negative perceptions will be placed on a continuum and categorized both by student and by point in time. For example, student A’s positive self-perception at the onset would be placed high on the continuum. It would be compared to other participants’ self-perceptions at that point in time as well as compared to student A’s self-perception over time. This style of data monitoring will be useful to spot trends both over time and across the group. It will also be helpful to analyze data in this fashion so as to identify any points requiring follow up questioning or more in-depth study. Should any students fail to complete high school, their responses will be isolated to look for themes and possible causes. Finally interviews will be reviewed and coded so as to reduce data into a manageable form prior to the study’s conclusion (Gay et al., 2012).

[DS11]

Trustworthiness Features

Because research exists on separate parts of the study, for example, research documenting reasons why students choose to drop out of high school can be found in other studies, this outside research will be used as a reliability check and assist in establishing credibility. The researcher will also take copious descriptive notes about the setting for the purpose of creating transferability. Additionally, the researcher will inform students of the importance of honesty both through ongoing informed consent and the modeling of trustworthiness by the researcher.

Ethical Considerations

            The researcher will ensure that proper research ethics are followed throughout the case study; this intent will be backed by the researcher’s own ethical code which closely aligns to professional ethics. Informed consent will be established with district, campus, student, and parent or guardian at the onset of the study and reviewed throughout the student’s participation. At any point during the process, students and their families have the option of withdrawing from the study with no repercussions or pressuring from the researcher.

Limitations

As with all qualitative research, the generalizability is limited because the researcher does not set out to form conclusions that can be applied to larger or different settings (Gay et al., 2012). The sample size is small, and the district’s populations are neither representative of Texas’s school populations nor the nation’s (Texas Education Agency, 2011a; Texas Education Agency, 2011b). Multi-site case studies might increase the study’s reliability but this method is not practical with only one available researcher. Similarly, triangulation would increase trustworthiness and validity but is also not feasible for the current study (Gay et al., 2012). Lastly, although the researcher’s longitudinal study may provide more stable and representative data than a single year’s data, the study will be performed on only one group at only one time.

References[DS12]

Amrein, A. L., & Berliner, D C. (2002). An analysis of some unintended and negative consequences of high-stakes testing. Tempe, AZ: Education Policy Research Unit, Arizona State University. Retrieved from http://epsl.asu.edu/epru/documents/EPSL-0211-125-EPRU-exec.pdf

Blazer, C. (2011). ''Unintended consequences of high-stakes testing''. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED536512)

Bridgeland, J. M., DiJulio, J. J., & Morison, K. M. (2006). The silent epidemic: Perspectives of high school dropouts. Washington, DC: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Retrieved from http://docs.gatesfoundation.org/united-states/documents/thesilentepidemic3-06final.pdf

Center for Children and Families. (2012, August). ''Is retaining students in the early grades self- ''

''defeating? ''(Issue Brief No. 48). Washington, DC: West, M. R.

Christenson, B. L. (2010). The effect of grade-level retention on student success as defined by the student success initiative of Texas. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED522970)

Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2012). ''Educational research: Competencies for analysis and application ''(10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Joftus, S., & Maddox-Dolan, B. (2003). ''Left out and left behind: NCLB and the American high school''. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED 476303)

Kelly, D. H., & Grove, W. D. (1981). Teachers’ nominations and the production of academic “misfits”. Education, 101, 246-263.  Retrieved from http://ehis.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.

shsu.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=5191a4db-63a4-44e1-835e-33ecf47b9935% 40sessionmgr12&vid=7&hid=8

Maleyko, G. (2011). The impact of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) on school achievement and accountability. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED535756)

Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2005). ''The inevitable corruption of indicators and educators through high-stakes testing''. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED508510)

Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2008). Testing the joy out of learning. Educational Leadership, 65(6), 14-18. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/mar08/vol65/num06/Testing-the-Joy-Out-of-Learning.aspx

Texas Administrative Code, Part II, Texas Education Agency. §101.2006

Texas Education Agency. (2011a). ''Snapshot 2011 summary tables: State totals''. Retrieved from http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/snapshot/2011/state.html

Texas Education Agency. (2011b). ''Snapshot 2011 summary tables: Conroe independent school district''. Retrieved from http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/cgi/sas/broker

Texas Education Agency. (2013). ''Student Success Initiative manual: Grade advancement requirements''. Retrieved from http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index3.aspx?id=3230

[DS1]Katie, this is really good and nearly a finished product. I made a few notes for you to consider, but nothing major. Overall, great work. Kudos on your efforts!

[DS2]This section was very well written! I think that this section is a finished product. Excellent use of  references.

[DS3]Excellent refrence.

[DS4]I did not see your research question(s). This would be an appropriate place to place them or after the review of the literature.

[DS5]This is a good start. You actually do a great job of synthesizing the existing literature. I think that you should strive for about two or three pages. Also, consider adding subheadings in order to aid the reader.

[DS6]Excellent synthesis of sources.

[DS7]This is great work. But why did you choose a case study as a design? You may use your textbook as a reference.

[DS8]This is another great section that is final product readry.

[DS9]GREAT!

[DS10]You need one more sentence in order to make a complete paragraph.

[DS11]Please remove the extra space

[DS12]Excellent job on the references!!

Impact of Student Success Initiative on High School Dropout Rate: A Longitudinal Case Study

Katie York[DS1]

Sam Houston State University

'''Abstract '''

'''Impact of Student Success Initiative on High School Dropout Rate: A Longitudinal Case Study'''

Introduction[DS2]

In 2002, George W. Bush signed No Child Left Behind (NCLB) into law as a measure intended to address the disparity between poor and/or minority students’ achievements and that of their peers (Joftus & Maddox-Dolan, 2003). Whereas the intent was to hold schools accountable for the academic achievements of all students, the result has been increasing concern for the myriad negative consequences of high-stakes testing (Nichols & Berliner, 2005[DS3] ). One of the most troubling consequences has been excessive test preparation, which too often leads to student boredom and burnout (Blazer, 2011). On the surface, test preparation seems innocuous; indeed, it makes sense that students identified as at risk of failing the test are provided intervening remediation. Problems result, however, when students at risk of test failure are given such remediation in lieu of pursuing other educational interests or to such degree that students believe they have no value outside of achieving satisfactory scores (Amrein & Berliner, 2002).

Adding to the pressures of NCLB are the requirements of Texas’s Student Success Initiative (SSI). Enacted while George W. Bush was governor, SSI requires additional accelerated instruction for fifth and eighth grade students who do not meet the passing standards on annual assessments in reading and mathematics (Texas Education Agency, 2013). Imagine now a student who has been previously identified as at risk of test failure and is currently enrolled in a remediation course fails the first administration of the eighth grade State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR) in reading. Under SSI provisions, the student must now be enrolled in additional accelerated instruction until he passes a subsequent administration or risk being retained. On top of the pressures of test-taking and test-failure, this student must now address the possibility of being retained. It is no wonder why so many of these academically at-risk students feel disengaged from school and ultimately drop out (Bridgeland, DiJulio, & Morison, 2006).

Rather than continue to see the type of student hypothesized above as data on a page, this study seeks to delve into the world of academically at-risk students in accelerated instructional programs to understand their experiences. Rather than relying on survey data or large and anonymous samples, individual students within the case will speak for themselves to share the reality and consequences of high-stakes testing. These students will be followed through the end of their high school careers to identify the repercussions, if any, high-stakes testing in middle schools under SSI has on the high-school graduation rates of academically at-risk students.

Statement of the Problem

The purpose of this qualitative study will be to understand the nature of NCLB’s high-stakes testing as seen through the eyes of academically at-risk eighth graders currently receiving accelerated instruction under SSI. In addition, these students will be followed throughout high school to see the lasting impact SSI requirements have and whether or not academic pressures lead to students dropping out of high school. Throughout the course of the case study, insight gained from interviews will shed light onto the intrapersonal effects of government mandates.

Research Question(s[DS4] ) 

'''Review of Related Literature'''[DS5]

Since the inception of NCLB, high-stakes testing has been the subject of over 1000 studies found in EBSCO and ERIC database searches. The overwhelming majority provided quantitative data and focused on survey data to share students’ experiences (Cite some of the studies). Of this majority, many focused on middle and elementary school students’ experiences in remediation programs or test-preparatory programs, but no study located thus far provided longitudinal data on the students receiving these programs (Cite some of the studies).

Blazer’s (2011) analysis of the positive and negative effects of the high-stakes testing movement provided the greatest direction. Through her summaries of and references to existing studies, other resources were located in a snowballing fashion. Because the boundary for students included in this case study is enrollment in accelerated instruction, studies discussing the negative side of high-stakes testing were selected and evaluated. Nichols and Berliner (2005) portrayed high-stakes testing as a cause of narrowed curriculum that affects student interest in schools. In 2008, these authors furthered this into a synthesis of existing qualitative data from teachers and students regarding the lack of academic interest resulting from high-stakes testing. Amrein and Berliner (2002) identified a link between states with high school graduation examinations and dropout rates, but Bridgeland, DiJulio, and Morison (2006) concluded that no one factor can conclusively determine whether or not a student will drop out of high school[DS6] .

Only one study could be located that specifically mentioned SSI. Christenson (2010) looked at the effect of retention due to SSI mandates on elementary students. Her findings, although not quite aligned with the scope of this study, echoed those in the Center for Children and Families’ (2012) study of retention policies in Florida. Researchers from both studies agreed that retention can be damaging to students and places them at additional risk of dropping out of high school, but neither concluded whether the risk of retention policies had any long-lasting effects on students after eighth grade.

While several studies have been conducted on the impact of NCLB on elementary and middle school students, few have been able to draw significant conclusions about NCLB’s effect on graduation rates (Blazer 2011). Furthermore, no studies included longitudinal, qualitative data from middle school students involved in accelerated instructional programs, and no studies on the pressure of SSI’s additional requirements could be located. Not only will a longitudinal study shed light on the students’ phenomenological experience, but it could also provide insight into what connection, if any, high-stakes testing has to high school dropout rates. When the purpose is to understand the impact high-stakes testing has on students, it seems cruelly ironic to reduce their feelings to pre-scripted responses on a survey for analysis as quantifiable data; that reason, along with those listed above, provides the rationale for conducting longitudinal, qualitative research on this subject.

Research Procedures

'''Overall Approach and Rationales for the Study'''

Because the aim of this study is to give a voice to the students too often reduced to mere data, a qualitative research approach was selected. The case study format will allow for a wider lens on the subject, and following the students involved in the case throughout high school will allow for greater exploration into whether high-stakes testing and SSI mandates impact high school dropout rates[DS7] . Rather than give students generic responses to check on a survey, authentic narratives will be sought to better understand the lasting impact governmental educational decisions have on students.

Site and Sample Collection[DS8]

Using purposive, criterion sampling, a sample size of ten students will be used for the duration of the longitudinal case study. Although a random sample would be more representative, selecting participants who are able to provide insight into this particular phenomenon takes priority (Gay, Mills, & Airasian, 2012[DS9] ). Students must meet the criteria of being participants in a specified campus’s accelerated reading instruction (ARI) course prior to retaking the State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR).

In order to study the effects of high-stakes testing and Texas’s Student Success Initiative on students, potential case study subjects must be enrolled in and attending the course. Accelerated instruction courses are limited to 10 students (Texas Administrative Code, 2006). The researcher believes involving all 10 students will maximize the number of students still involved in the case study in its later years. Even though using all 10 students in a course increases the likelihood of a homogenous experience between the students and reduces the potential for diverse data, the likelihood that some students will move out of the district before the conclusion of the study is far greater. Maximizing the initial case study size by including all 10 course members means that there will be more data within the longitudinal study.

While sample size could be expanded by using randomly selected students within ARI courses throughout the district, the researcher believes that students will be more likely to participate if they know others in their course are participating. Furthermore, the researcher has access to a specific district and campus within Region VI made possible through employment in the district and has knowledge of accelerated reading instruction (ARI) programs through personal experience. While all of these purposive choices could lead to bias, the driving belief behind these choices is that existing personal relationships with campus administrators and staff as well as familiarity with topic of study will yield more credible results.

The Researcher’s Role

Access to the research site will need to be granted at both district and campus levels. Because research subjects are minors, parental informed consent in addition to student informed consent will also need to be secured. At all times, the anonymity of students, campus, and district will be protected. The researcher will need to form and maintain interpersonal relationships with district and campus staff, student participants, and student participants’ families so as to foster the trusting relationships required for qualitative research.

In addition, the researcher needs to form lasting bonds with the student participants as the study will continue from eighth grade through each participant’s completion of high school. A possible dilemma in this area is the researcher’s ability to remain objective should student participants debate dropping out of high school[DS10] .

Data Collection Methods

While students are attending ARI courses, individual interviews will be conducted with each student in the case study querying previous academic experiences, current experiences and perceptions of the ARI course, and expectations for the upcoming additional STAAR administration. Students will also participate in group interviews to discuss the overall ARI class experience at the beginning, middle, and end of the course, and individual family interviews will be conducted to better understand each student’s academic history and gain insights to his or her background. After receiving updated STAAR scores, each student will be interviewed again with reactions and expectations for the future.

Twice each school year, beginning after the completion of ARI classes until each student completes high school, students will participate in individual interviews to monitor progress and perceptions as they continue in school. Students’ final interviews will be conducted after leaving high school, whether upon graduation or upon dropping out. Because of the possible differences in results, progress, and retention, no group interviews will be conducted during this phase.

Every interview is intended to take less than 20 minutes and will occur on the student’s campus, in person. Interviews will be recorded and maintained during the course of the case study. The researcher will follow up by sending the interviewee a transcript of the notes taken and responses captured for his or her review; any discrepancies would warrant an additional meeting for clarification.

Data Management Strategies

All data will be kept and reviewed only by the researcher and research participants until publication. Interviews will be recorded, and videos will be marked with date, time, and interview subject. Interviews will also be saved on computer and backed up to an external hard drive daily during data collection. Field notes will be stored in a similar fashion. Prior to publication, each participant will have the option to review his or her contribution, but all names will be kept confidential so as to make responses anonymous.

Data Analysis Strategies

Data will be analyzed from the initial interactions on the campus and will be collated according to students’ feelings towards self and feelings towards academics. Positive and negative perceptions will be placed on a continuum and categorized both by student and by point in time. For example, student A’s positive self-perception at the onset would be placed high on the continuum. It would be compared to other participants’ self-perceptions at that point in time as well as compared to student A’s self-perception over time. This style of data monitoring will be useful to spot trends both over time and across the group. It will also be helpful to analyze data in this fashion so as to identify any points requiring follow up questioning or more in-depth study. Should any students fail to complete high school, their responses will be isolated to look for themes and possible causes. Finally interviews will be reviewed and coded so as to reduce data into a manageable form prior to the study’s conclusion (Gay et al., 2012).

[DS11]

Trustworthiness Features

Because research exists on separate parts of the study, for example, research documenting reasons why students choose to drop out of high school can be found in other studies, this outside research will be used as a reliability check and assist in establishing credibility. The researcher will also take copious descriptive notes about the setting for the purpose of creating transferability. Additionally, the researcher will inform students of the importance of honesty both through ongoing informed consent and the modeling of trustworthiness by the researcher.

Ethical Considerations

            The researcher will ensure that proper research ethics are followed throughout the case study; this intent will be backed by the researcher’s own ethical code which closely aligns to professional ethics. Informed consent will be established with district, campus, student, and parent or guardian at the onset of the study and reviewed throughout the student’s participation. At any point during the process, students and their families have the option of withdrawing from the study with no repercussions or pressuring from the researcher.

Limitations

As with all qualitative research, the generalizability is limited because the researcher does not set out to form conclusions that can be applied to larger or different settings (Gay et al., 2012). The sample size is small, and the district’s populations are neither representative of Texas’s school populations nor the nation’s (Texas Education Agency, 2011a; Texas Education Agency, 2011b). Multi-site case studies might increase the study’s reliability but this method is not practical with only one available researcher. Similarly, triangulation would increase trustworthiness and validity but is also not feasible for the current study (Gay et al., 2012). Lastly, although the researcher’s longitudinal study may provide more stable and representative data than a single year’s data, the study will be performed on only one group at only one time.

References[DS12]

Amrein, A. L., & Berliner, D C. (2002). An analysis of some unintended and negative consequences of high-stakes testing. Tempe, AZ: Education Policy Research Unit, Arizona State University. Retrieved from http://epsl.asu.edu/epru/documents/EPSL-0211-125-EPRU-exec.pdf

Blazer, C. (2011). ''Unintended consequences of high-stakes testing''. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED536512)

Bridgeland, J. M., DiJulio, J. J., & Morison, K. M. (2006). The silent epidemic: Perspectives of high school dropouts. Washington, DC: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Retrieved from http://docs.gatesfoundation.org/united-states/documents/thesilentepidemic3-06final.pdf

Center for Children and Families. (2012, August). ''Is retaining students in the early grades self- ''

''defeating? ''(Issue Brief No. 48). Washington, DC: West, M. R.

Christenson, B. L. (2010). The effect of grade-level retention on student success as defined by the student success initiative of Texas. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED522970)

Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2012). ''Educational research: Competencies for analysis and application ''(10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Joftus, S., & Maddox-Dolan, B. (2003). ''Left out and left behind: NCLB and the American high school''. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED 476303)

Kelly, D. H., & Grove, W. D. (1981). Teachers’ nominations and the production of academic “misfits”. Education, 101, 246-263.  Retrieved from http://ehis.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.

shsu.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=5191a4db-63a4-44e1-835e-33ecf47b9935% 40sessionmgr12&vid=7&hid=8

Maleyko, G. (2011). The impact of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) on school achievement and accountability. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED535756)

Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2005). ''The inevitable corruption of indicators and educators through high-stakes testing''. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED508510)

Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2008). Testing the joy out of learning. Educational Leadership, 65(6), 14-18. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/mar08/vol65/num06/Testing-the-Joy-Out-of-Learning.aspx

Texas Administrative Code, Part II, Texas Education Agency. §101.2006

Texas Education Agency. (2011a). ''Snapshot 2011 summary tables: State totals''. Retrieved from http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/snapshot/2011/state.html

Texas Education Agency. (2011b). ''Snapshot 2011 summary tables: Conroe independent school district''. Retrieved from http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/cgi/sas/broker

Texas Education Agency. (2013). ''Student Success Initiative manual: Grade advancement requirements''. Retrieved from http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index3.aspx?id=3230

[DS1]Katie, this is really good and nearly a finished product. I made a few notes for you to consider, but nothing major. Overall, great work. Kudos on your efforts!

[DS2]This section was very well written! I think that this section is a finished product. Excellent use of  references.

[DS3]Excellent refrence.

[DS4]I did not see your research question(s). This would be an appropriate place to place them or after the review of the literature.

[DS5]This is a good start. You actually do a great job of synthesizing the existing literature. I think that you should strive for about two or three pages. Also, consider adding subheadings in order to aid the reader.

[DS6]Excellent synthesis of sources.

[DS7]This is great work. But why did you choose a case study as a design? You may use your textbook as a reference.

[DS8]This is another great section that is final product readry.

[DS9]GREAT!

[DS10]You need one more sentence in order to make a complete paragraph.

[DS11]Please remove the extra space

[DS12]Excellent job on the references!!

Impact of Student Success Initiative on High School Dropout Rate: A Longitudinal Case Study

Katie York[DS1]

Sam Houston State University

'''Abstract '''

'''Impact of Student Success Initiative on High School Dropout Rate: A Longitudinal Case Study'''

Introduction[DS2]

In 2002, George W. Bush signed No Child Left Behind (NCLB) into law as a measure intended to address the disparity between poor and/or minority students’ achievements and that of their peers (Joftus & Maddox-Dolan, 2003). Whereas the intent was to hold schools accountable for the academic achievements of all students, the result has been increasing concern for the myriad negative consequences of high-stakes testing (Nichols & Berliner, 2005[DS3] ). One of the most troubling consequences has been excessive test preparation, which too often leads to student boredom and burnout (Blazer, 2011). On the surface, test preparation seems innocuous; indeed, it makes sense that students identified as at risk of failing the test are provided intervening remediation. Problems result, however, when students at risk of test failure are given such remediation in lieu of pursuing other educational interests or to such degree that students believe they have no value outside of achieving satisfactory scores (Amrein & Berliner, 2002).

Adding to the pressures of NCLB are the requirements of Texas’s Student Success Initiative (SSI). Enacted while George W. Bush was governor, SSI requires additional accelerated instruction for fifth and eighth grade students who do not meet the passing standards on annual assessments in reading and mathematics (Texas Education Agency, 2013). Imagine now a student who has been previously identified as at risk of test failure and is currently enrolled in a remediation course fails the first administration of the eighth grade State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR) in reading. Under SSI provisions, the student must now be enrolled in additional accelerated instruction until he passes a subsequent administration or risk being retained. On top of the pressures of test-taking and test-failure, this student must now address the possibility of being retained. It is no wonder why so many of these academically at-risk students feel disengaged from school and ultimately drop out (Bridgeland, DiJulio, & Morison, 2006).

Rather than continue to see the type of student hypothesized above as data on a page, this study seeks to delve into the world of academically at-risk students in accelerated instructional programs to understand their experiences. Rather than relying on survey data or large and anonymous samples, individual students within the case will speak for themselves to share the reality and consequences of high-stakes testing. These students will be followed through the end of their high school careers to identify the repercussions, if any, high-stakes testing in middle schools under SSI has on the high-school graduation rates of academically at-risk students.

Statement of the Problem

The purpose of this qualitative study will be to understand the nature of NCLB’s high-stakes testing as seen through the eyes of academically at-risk eighth graders currently receiving accelerated instruction under SSI. In addition, these students will be followed throughout high school to see the lasting impact SSI requirements have and whether or not academic pressures lead to students dropping out of high school. Throughout the course of the case study, insight gained from interviews will shed light onto the intrapersonal effects of government mandates.

Research Question(s[DS4] ) 

'''Review of Related Literature'''[DS5]

Since the inception of NCLB, high-stakes testing has been the subject of over 1000 studies found in EBSCO and ERIC database searches. The overwhelming majority provided quantitative data and focused on survey data to share students’ experiences (Cite some of the studies). Of this majority, many focused on middle and elementary school students’ experiences in remediation programs or test-preparatory programs, but no study located thus far provided longitudinal data on the students receiving these programs (Cite some of the studies).

Blazer’s (2011) analysis of the positive and negative effects of the high-stakes testing movement provided the greatest direction. Through her summaries of and references to existing studies, other resources were located in a snowballing fashion. Because the boundary for students included in this case study is enrollment in accelerated instruction, studies discussing the negative side of high-stakes testing were selected and evaluated. Nichols and Berliner (2005) portrayed high-stakes testing as a cause of narrowed curriculum that affects student interest in schools. In 2008, these authors furthered this into a synthesis of existing qualitative data from teachers and students regarding the lack of academic interest resulting from high-stakes testing. Amrein and Berliner (2002) identified a link between states with high school graduation examinations and dropout rates, but Bridgeland, DiJulio, and Morison (2006) concluded that no one factor can conclusively determine whether or not a student will drop out of high school[DS6] .

Only one study could be located that specifically mentioned SSI. Christenson (2010) looked at the effect of retention due to SSI mandates on elementary students. Her findings, although not quite aligned with the scope of this study, echoed those in the Center for Children and Families’ (2012) study of retention policies in Florida. Researchers from both studies agreed that retention can be damaging to students and places them at additional risk of dropping out of high school, but neither concluded whether the risk of retention policies had any long-lasting effects on students after eighth grade.

While several studies have been conducted on the impact of NCLB on elementary and middle school students, few have been able to draw significant conclusions about NCLB’s effect on graduation rates (Blazer 2011). Furthermore, no studies included longitudinal, qualitative data from middle school students involved in accelerated instructional programs, and no studies on the pressure of SSI’s additional requirements could be located. Not only will a longitudinal study shed light on the students’ phenomenological experience, but it could also provide insight into what connection, if any, high-stakes testing has to high school dropout rates. When the purpose is to understand the impact high-stakes testing has on students, it seems cruelly ironic to reduce their feelings to pre-scripted responses on a survey for analysis as quantifiable data; that reason, along with those listed above, provides the rationale for conducting longitudinal, qualitative research on this subject.

Research Procedures

'''Overall Approach and Rationales for the Study'''

Because the aim of this study is to give a voice to the students too often reduced to mere data, a qualitative research approach was selected. The case study format will allow for a wider lens on the subject, and following the students involved in the case throughout high school will allow for greater exploration into whether high-stakes testing and SSI mandates impact high school dropout rates[DS7] . Rather than give students generic responses to check on a survey, authentic narratives will be sought to better understand the lasting impact governmental educational decisions have on students.

Site and Sample Collection[DS8]

Using purposive, criterion sampling, a sample size of ten students will be used for the duration of the longitudinal case study. Although a random sample would be more representative, selecting participants who are able to provide insight into this particular phenomenon takes priority (Gay, Mills, & Airasian, 2012[DS9] ). Students must meet the criteria of being participants in a specified campus’s accelerated reading instruction (ARI) course prior to retaking the State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR).

In order to study the effects of high-stakes testing and Texas’s Student Success Initiative on students, potential case study subjects must be enrolled in and attending the course. Accelerated instruction courses are limited to 10 students (Texas Administrative Code, 2006). The researcher believes involving all 10 students will maximize the number of students still involved in the case study in its later years. Even though using all 10 students in a course increases the likelihood of a homogenous experience between the students and reduces the potential for diverse data, the likelihood that some students will move out of the district before the conclusion of the study is far greater. Maximizing the initial case study size by including all 10 course members means that there will be more data within the longitudinal study.

While sample size could be expanded by using randomly selected students within ARI courses throughout the district, the researcher believes that students will be more likely to participate if they know others in their course are participating. Furthermore, the researcher has access to a specific district and campus within Region VI made possible through employment in the district and has knowledge of accelerated reading instruction (ARI) programs through personal experience. While all of these purposive choices could lead to bias, the driving belief behind these choices is that existing personal relationships with campus administrators and staff as well as familiarity with topic of study will yield more credible results.

The Researcher’s Role

Access to the research site will need to be granted at both district and campus levels. Because research subjects are minors, parental informed consent in addition to student informed consent will also need to be secured. At all times, the anonymity of students, campus, and district will be protected. The researcher will need to form and maintain interpersonal relationships with district and campus staff, student participants, and student participants’ families so as to foster the trusting relationships required for qualitative research.

In addition, the researcher needs to form lasting bonds with the student participants as the study will continue from eighth grade through each participant’s completion of high school. A possible dilemma in this area is the researcher’s ability to remain objective should student participants debate dropping out of high school[DS10] .

Data Collection Methods

While students are attending ARI courses, individual interviews will be conducted with each student in the case study querying previous academic experiences, current experiences and perceptions of the ARI course, and expectations for the upcoming additional STAAR administration. Students will also participate in group interviews to discuss the overall ARI class experience at the beginning, middle, and end of the course, and individual family interviews will be conducted to better understand each student’s academic history and gain insights to his or her background. After receiving updated STAAR scores, each student will be interviewed again with reactions and expectations for the future.

Twice each school year, beginning after the completion of ARI classes until each student completes high school, students will participate in individual interviews to monitor progress and perceptions as they continue in school. Students’ final interviews will be conducted after leaving high school, whether upon graduation or upon dropping out. Because of the possible differences in results, progress, and retention, no group interviews will be conducted during this phase.

Every interview is intended to take less than 20 minutes and will occur on the student’s campus, in person. Interviews will be recorded and maintained during the course of the case study. The researcher will follow up by sending the interviewee a transcript of the notes taken and responses captured for his or her review; any discrepancies would warrant an additional meeting for clarification.

Data Management Strategies

All data will be kept and reviewed only by the researcher and research participants until publication. Interviews will be recorded, and videos will be marked with date, time, and interview subject. Interviews will also be saved on computer and backed up to an external hard drive daily during data collection. Field notes will be stored in a similar fashion. Prior to publication, each participant will have the option to review his or her contribution, but all names will be kept confidential so as to make responses anonymous.

Data Analysis Strategies

Data will be analyzed from the initial interactions on the campus and will be collated according to students’ feelings towards self and feelings towards academics. Positive and negative perceptions will be placed on a continuum and categorized both by student and by point in time. For example, student A’s positive self-perception at the onset would be placed high on the continuum. It would be compared to other participants’ self-perceptions at that point in time as well as compared to student A’s self-perception over time. This style of data monitoring will be useful to spot trends both over time and across the group. It will also be helpful to analyze data in this fashion so as to identify any points requiring follow up questioning or more in-depth study. Should any students fail to complete high school, their responses will be isolated to look for themes and possible causes. Finally interviews will be reviewed and coded so as to reduce data into a manageable form prior to the study’s conclusion (Gay et al., 2012).

[DS11]

Trustworthiness Features

Because research exists on separate parts of the study, for example, research documenting reasons why students choose to drop out of high school can be found in other studies, this outside research will be used as a reliability check and assist in establishing credibility. The researcher will also take copious descriptive notes about the setting for the purpose of creating transferability. Additionally, the researcher will inform students of the importance of honesty both through ongoing informed consent and the modeling of trustworthiness by the researcher.

Ethical Considerations

            The researcher will ensure that proper research ethics are followed throughout the case study; this intent will be backed by the researcher’s own ethical code which closely aligns to professional ethics. Informed consent will be established with district, campus, student, and parent or guardian at the onset of the study and reviewed throughout the student’s participation. At any point during the process, students and their families have the option of withdrawing from the study with no repercussions or pressuring from the researcher.

Limitations

As with all qualitative research, the generalizability is limited because the researcher does not set out to form conclusions that can be applied to larger or different settings (Gay et al., 2012). The sample size is small, and the district’s populations are neither representative of Texas’s school populations nor the nation’s (Texas Education Agency, 2011a; Texas Education Agency, 2011b). Multi-site case studies might increase the study’s reliability but this method is not practical with only one available researcher. Similarly, triangulation would increase trustworthiness and validity but is also not feasible for the current study (Gay et al., 2012). Lastly, although the researcher’s longitudinal study may provide more stable and representative data than a single year’s data, the study will be performed on only one group at only one time.

References[DS12]

Amrein, A. L., & Berliner, D C. (2002). An analysis of some unintended and negative consequences of high-stakes testing. Tempe, AZ: Education Policy Research Unit, Arizona State University. Retrieved from http://epsl.asu.edu/epru/documents/EPSL-0211-125-EPRU-exec.pdf

Blazer, C. (2011). ''Unintended consequences of high-stakes testing''. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED536512)

Bridgeland, J. M., DiJulio, J. J., & Morison, K. M. (2006). The silent epidemic: Perspectives of high school dropouts. Washington, DC: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Retrieved from http://docs.gatesfoundation.org/united-states/documents/thesilentepidemic3-06final.pdf

Center for Children and Families. (2012, August). ''Is retaining students in the early grades self- ''

''defeating? ''(Issue Brief No. 48). Washington, DC: West, M. R.

Christenson, B. L. (2010). The effect of grade-level retention on student success as defined by the student success initiative of Texas. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED522970)

Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2012). ''Educational research: Competencies for analysis and application ''(10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Joftus, S., & Maddox-Dolan, B. (2003). ''Left out and left behind: NCLB and the American high school''. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED 476303)

Kelly, D. H., & Grove, W. D. (1981). Teachers’ nominations and the production of academic “misfits”. Education, 101, 246-263.  Retrieved from http://ehis.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.

shsu.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=5191a4db-63a4-44e1-835e-33ecf47b9935% 40sessionmgr12&vid=7&hid=8

Maleyko, G. (2011). The impact of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) on school achievement and accountability. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED535756)

Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2005). ''The inevitable corruption of indicators and educators through high-stakes testing''. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED508510)

Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2008). Testing the joy out of learning. Educational Leadership, 65(6), 14-18. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/mar08/vol65/num06/Testing-the-Joy-Out-of-Learning.aspx

Texas Administrative Code, Part II, Texas Education Agency. §101.2006

Texas Education Agency. (2011a). ''Snapshot 2011 summary tables: State totals''. Retrieved from http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/snapshot/2011/state.html

Texas Education Agency. (2011b). ''Snapshot 2011 summary tables: Conroe independent school district''. Retrieved from http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/cgi/sas/broker

Texas Education Agency. (2013). ''Student Success Initiative manual: Grade advancement requirements''. Retrieved from http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index3.aspx?id=3230

[DS1]Katie, this is really good and nearly a finished product. I made a few notes for you to consider, but nothing major. Overall, great work. Kudos on your efforts!

[DS2]This section was very well written! I think that this section is a finished product. Excellent use of  references.

[DS3]Excellent refrence.

[DS4]I did not see your research question(s). This would be an appropriate place to place them or after the review of the literature.

[DS5]This is a good start. You actually do a great job of synthesizing the existing literature. I think that you should strive for about two or three pages. Also, consider adding subheadings in order to aid the reader.

[DS6]Excellent synthesis of sources.

[DS7]This is great work. But why did you choose a case study as a design? You may use your textbook as a reference.

[DS8]This is another great section that is final product readry.

[DS9]GREAT!

[DS10]You need one more sentence in order to make a complete paragraph.

[DS11]Please remove the extra space

[DS12]Excellent job on the references!!

Impact of Student Success Initiative on High School Dropout Rate: A Longitudinal Case Study

Katie York[DS1]

Sam Houston State University

'''Abstract '''

'''Impact of Student Success Initiative on High School Dropout Rate: A Longitudinal Case Study'''

Introduction[DS2]

In 2002, George W. Bush signed No Child Left Behind (NCLB) into law as a measure intended to address the disparity between poor and/or minority students’ achievements and that of their peers (Joftus & Maddox-Dolan, 2003). Whereas the intent was to hold schools accountable for the academic achievements of all students, the result has been increasing concern for the myriad negative consequences of high-stakes testing (Nichols & Berliner, 2005[DS3] ). One of the most troubling consequences has been excessive test preparation, which too often leads to student boredom and burnout (Blazer, 2011). On the surface, test preparation seems innocuous; indeed, it makes sense that students identified as at risk of failing the test are provided intervening remediation. Problems result, however, when students at risk of test failure are given such remediation in lieu of pursuing other educational interests or to such degree that students believe they have no value outside of achieving satisfactory scores (Amrein & Berliner, 2002).

Adding to the pressures of NCLB are the requirements of Texas’s Student Success Initiative (SSI). Enacted while George W. Bush was governor, SSI requires additional accelerated instruction for fifth and eighth grade students who do not meet the passing standards on annual assessments in reading and mathematics (Texas Education Agency, 2013). Imagine now a student who has been previously identified as at risk of test failure and is currently enrolled in a remediation course fails the first administration of the eighth grade State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR) in reading. Under SSI provisions, the student must now be enrolled in additional accelerated instruction until he passes a subsequent administration or risk being retained. On top of the pressures of test-taking and test-failure, this student must now address the possibility of being retained. It is no wonder why so many of these academically at-risk students feel disengaged from school and ultimately drop out (Bridgeland, DiJulio, & Morison, 2006).

Rather than continue to see the type of student hypothesized above as data on a page, this study seeks to delve into the world of academically at-risk students in accelerated instructional programs to understand their experiences. Rather than relying on survey data or large and anonymous samples, individual students within the case will speak for themselves to share the reality and consequences of high-stakes testing. These students will be followed through the end of their high school careers to identify the repercussions, if any, high-stakes testing in middle schools under SSI has on the high-school graduation rates of academically at-risk students.

Statement of the Problem

The purpose of this qualitative study will be to understand the nature of NCLB’s high-stakes testing as seen through the eyes of academically at-risk eighth graders currently receiving accelerated instruction under SSI. In addition, these students will be followed throughout high school to see the lasting impact SSI requirements have and whether or not academic pressures lead to students dropping out of high school. Throughout the course of the case study, insight gained from interviews will shed light onto the intrapersonal effects of government mandates.

Research Question(s[DS4] ) 

'''Review of Related Literature'''[DS5]

Since the inception of NCLB, high-stakes testing has been the subject of over 1000 studies found in EBSCO and ERIC database searches. The overwhelming majority provided quantitative data and focused on survey data to share students’ experiences (Cite some of the studies). Of this majority, many focused on middle and elementary school students’ experiences in remediation programs or test-preparatory programs, but no study located thus far provided longitudinal data on the students receiving these programs (Cite some of the studies).

Blazer’s (2011) analysis of the positive and negative effects of the high-stakes testing movement provided the greatest direction. Through her summaries of and references to existing studies, other resources were located in a snowballing fashion. Because the boundary for students included in this case study is enrollment in accelerated instruction, studies discussing the negative side of high-stakes testing were selected and evaluated. Nichols and Berliner (2005) portrayed high-stakes testing as a cause of narrowed curriculum that affects student interest in schools. In 2008, these authors furthered this into a synthesis of existing qualitative data from teachers and students regarding the lack of academic interest resulting from high-stakes testing. Amrein and Berliner (2002) identified a link between states with high school graduation examinations and dropout rates, but Bridgeland, DiJulio, and Morison (2006) concluded that no one factor can conclusively determine whether or not a student will drop out of high school[DS6] .

Only one study could be located that specifically mentioned SSI. Christenson (2010) looked at the effect of retention due to SSI mandates on elementary students. Her findings, although not quite aligned with the scope of this study, echoed those in the Center for Children and Families’ (2012) study of retention policies in Florida. Researchers from both studies agreed that retention can be damaging to students and places them at additional risk of dropping out of high school, but neither concluded whether the risk of retention policies had any long-lasting effects on students after eighth grade.

While several studies have been conducted on the impact of NCLB on elementary and middle school students, few have been able to draw significant conclusions about NCLB’s effect on graduation rates (Blazer 2011). Furthermore, no studies included longitudinal, qualitative data from middle school students involved in accelerated instructional programs, and no studies on the pressure of SSI’s additional requirements could be located. Not only will a longitudinal study shed light on the students’ phenomenological experience, but it could also provide insight into what connection, if any, high-stakes testing has to high school dropout rates. When the purpose is to understand the impact high-stakes testing has on students, it seems cruelly ironic to reduce their feelings to pre-scripted responses on a survey for analysis as quantifiable data; that reason, along with those listed above, provides the rationale for conducting longitudinal, qualitative research on this subject.

Research Procedures

'''Overall Approach and Rationales for the Study'''

Because the aim of this study is to give a voice to the students too often reduced to mere data, a qualitative research approach was selected. The case study format will allow for a wider lens on the subject, and following the students involved in the case throughout high school will allow for greater exploration into whether high-stakes testing and SSI mandates impact high school dropout rates[DS7] . Rather than give students generic responses to check on a survey, authentic narratives will be sought to better understand the lasting impact governmental educational decisions have on students.

Site and Sample Collection[DS8]

Using purposive, criterion sampling, a sample size of ten students will be used for the duration of the longitudinal case study. Although a random sample would be more representative, selecting participants who are able to provide insight into this particular phenomenon takes priority (Gay, Mills, & Airasian, 2012[DS9] ). Students must meet the criteria of being participants in a specified campus’s accelerated reading instruction (ARI) course prior to retaking the State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR).

In order to study the effects of high-stakes testing and Texas’s Student Success Initiative on students, potential case study subjects must be enrolled in and attending the course. Accelerated instruction courses are limited to 10 students (Texas Administrative Code, 2006). The researcher believes involving all 10 students will maximize the number of students still involved in the case study in its later years. Even though using all 10 students in a course increases the likelihood of a homogenous experience between the students and reduces the potential for diverse data, the likelihood that some students will move out of the district before the conclusion of the study is far greater. Maximizing the initial case study size by including all 10 course members means that there will be more data within the longitudinal study.

While sample size could be expanded by using randomly selected students within ARI courses throughout the district, the researcher believes that students will be more likely to participate if they know others in their course are participating. Furthermore, the researcher has access to a specific district and campus within Region VI made possible through employment in the district and has knowledge of accelerated reading instruction (ARI) programs through personal experience. While all of these purposive choices could lead to bias, the driving belief behind these choices is that existing personal relationships with campus administrators and staff as well as familiarity with topic of study will yield more credible results.

The Researcher’s Role

Access to the research site will need to be granted at both district and campus levels. Because research subjects are minors, parental informed consent in addition to student informed consent will also need to be secured. At all times, the anonymity of students, campus, and district will be protected. The researcher will need to form and maintain interpersonal relationships with district and campus staff, student participants, and student participants’ families so as to foster the trusting relationships required for qualitative research.

In addition, the researcher needs to form lasting bonds with the student participants as the study will continue from eighth grade through each participant’s completion of high school. A possible dilemma in this area is the researcher’s ability to remain objective should student participants debate dropping out of high school[DS10] .

Data Collection Methods

While students are attending ARI courses, individual interviews will be conducted with each student in the case study querying previous academic experiences, current experiences and perceptions of the ARI course, and expectations for the upcoming additional STAAR administration. Students will also participate in group interviews to discuss the overall ARI class experience at the beginning, middle, and end of the course, and individual family interviews will be conducted to better understand each student’s academic history and gain insights to his or her background. After receiving updated STAAR scores, each student will be interviewed again with reactions and expectations for the future.

Twice each school year, beginning after the completion of ARI classes until each student completes high school, students will participate in individual interviews to monitor progress and perceptions as they continue in school. Students’ final interviews will be conducted after leaving high school, whether upon graduation or upon dropping out. Because of the possible differences in results, progress, and retention, no group interviews will be conducted during this phase.

Every interview is intended to take less than 20 minutes and will occur on the student’s campus, in person. Interviews will be recorded and maintained during the course of the case study. The researcher will follow up by sending the interviewee a transcript of the notes taken and responses captured for his or her review; any discrepancies would warrant an additional meeting for clarification.

Data Management Strategies

All data will be kept and reviewed only by the researcher and research participants until publication. Interviews will be recorded, and videos will be marked with date, time, and interview subject. Interviews will also be saved on computer and backed up to an external hard drive daily during data collection. Field notes will be stored in a similar fashion. Prior to publication, each participant will have the option to review his or her contribution, but all names will be kept confidential so as to make responses anonymous.

Data Analysis Strategies

Data will be analyzed from the initial interactions on the campus and will be collated according to students’ feelings towards self and feelings towards academics. Positive and negative perceptions will be placed on a continuum and categorized both by student and by point in time. For example, student A’s positive self-perception at the onset would be placed high on the continuum. It would be compared to other participants’ self-perceptions at that point in time as well as compared to student A’s self-perception over time. This style of data monitoring will be useful to spot trends both over time and across the group. It will also be helpful to analyze data in this fashion so as to identify any points requiring follow up questioning or more in-depth study. Should any students fail to complete high school, their responses will be isolated to look for themes and possible causes. Finally interviews will be reviewed and coded so as to reduce data into a manageable form prior to the study’s conclusion (Gay et al., 2012).

[DS11]

Trustworthiness Features

Because research exists on separate parts of the study, for example, research documenting reasons why students choose to drop out of high school can be found in other studies, this outside research will be used as a reliability check and assist in establishing credibility. The researcher will also take copious descriptive notes about the setting for the purpose of creating transferability. Additionally, the researcher will inform students of the importance of honesty both through ongoing informed consent and the modeling of trustworthiness by the researcher.

Ethical Considerations

            The researcher will ensure that proper research ethics are followed throughout the case study; this intent will be backed by the researcher’s own ethical code which closely aligns to professional ethics. Informed consent will be established with district, campus, student, and parent or guardian at the onset of the study and reviewed throughout the student’s participation. At any point during the process, students and their families have the option of withdrawing from the study with no repercussions or pressuring from the researcher.

Limitations

As with all qualitative research, the generalizability is limited because the researcher does not set out to form conclusions that can be applied to larger or different settings (Gay et al., 2012). The sample size is small, and the district’s populations are neither representative of Texas’s school populations nor the nation’s (Texas Education Agency, 2011a; Texas Education Agency, 2011b). Multi-site case studies might increase the study’s reliability but this method is not practical with only one available researcher. Similarly, triangulation would increase trustworthiness and validity but is also not feasible for the current study (Gay et al., 2012). Lastly, although the researcher’s longitudinal study may provide more stable and representative data than a single year’s data, the study will be performed on only one group at only one time.

References[DS12]

Amrein, A. L., & Berliner, D C. (2002). An analysis of some unintended and negative consequences of high-stakes testing. Tempe, AZ: Education Policy Research Unit, Arizona State University. Retrieved from http://epsl.asu.edu/epru/documents/EPSL-0211-125-EPRU-exec.pdf

Blazer, C. (2011). ''Unintended consequences of high-stakes testing''. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED536512)

Bridgeland, J. M., DiJulio, J. J., & Morison, K. M. (2006). The silent epidemic: Perspectives of high school dropouts. Washington, DC: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Retrieved from http://docs.gatesfoundation.org/united-states/documents/thesilentepidemic3-06final.pdf

Center for Children and Families. (2012, August). ''Is retaining students in the early grades self- ''

''defeating? ''(Issue Brief No. 48). Washington, DC: West, M. R.

Christenson, B. L. (2010). The effect of grade-level retention on student success as defined by the student success initiative of Texas. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED522970)

Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2012). ''Educational research: Competencies for analysis and application ''(10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Joftus, S., & Maddox-Dolan, B. (2003). ''Left out and left behind: NCLB and the American high school''. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED 476303)

Kelly, D. H., & Grove, W. D. (1981). Teachers’ nominations and the production of academic “misfits”. Education, 101, 246-263.  Retrieved from http://ehis.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.

shsu.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=5191a4db-63a4-44e1-835e-33ecf47b9935% 40sessionmgr12&vid=7&hid=8

Maleyko, G. (2011). The impact of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) on school achievement and accountability. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED535756)

Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2005). ''The inevitable corruption of indicators and educators through high-stakes testing''. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED508510)

Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2008). Testing the joy out of learning. Educational Leadership, 65(6), 14-18. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/mar08/vol65/num06/Testing-the-Joy-Out-of-Learning.aspx

Texas Administrative Code, Part II, Texas Education Agency. §101.2006

Texas Education Agency. (2011a). ''Snapshot 2011 summary tables: State totals''. Retrieved from http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/snapshot/2011/state.html

Texas Education Agency. (2011b). ''Snapshot 2011 summary tables: Conroe independent school district''. Retrieved from http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/cgi/sas/broker

Texas Education Agency. (2013). ''Student Success Initiative manual: Grade advancement requirements''. Retrieved from http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index3.aspx?id=3230

[DS1]Katie, this is really good and nearly a finished product. I made a few notes for you to consider, but nothing major. Overall, great work. Kudos on your efforts!

[DS2]This section was very well written! I think that this section is a finished product. Excellent use of  references.

[DS3]Excellent refrence.

[DS4]I did not see your research question(s). This would be an appropriate place to place them or after the review of the literature.

[DS5]This is a good start. You actually do a great job of synthesizing the existing literature. I think that you should strive for about two or three pages. Also, consider adding subheadings in order to aid the reader.

[DS6]Excellent synthesis of sources.

[DS7]This is great work. But why did you choose a case study as a design? You may use your textbook as a reference.

[DS8]This is another great section that is final product readry.

[DS9]GREAT!

[DS10]You need one more sentence in order to make a complete paragraph.

[DS11]Please remove the extra space

[DS12]Excellent job on the references!!