Teachers’ Perceptions of Their Literacy Professional Development

By Patrick Suber

In Title-I schools, how adequately do administrators prepare teachers to implement new reading curriculums? The majority of students at these Title-I schools are from low-income families. Literature has indicated that families from low socioeconomic situations often depend heavily on schools to provide the foundational literacy skills their children need to become capable and lifelong readers (Teale, Paciga, & Hoffman, 2008).

• Language: English
• Publisher: AuthorHouse
• Release date: Feb 17, 2021
• ISBN: 9781665516563

Patrick Suber

The author explored teachers’ perceptions of their preparation to implement a complete change in reading instruction strategy. That exploration helped generate insight into avenues for potential improvements in professional development processes. Those insights could help school administrators provide ongoing learning opportunities for teachers who are required to implement new reading curriculums. Dr. Patrick Suber is a 1988 graduate of Spartanburg High School in Spartanburg, South Carolina. He furthered his education at Spartanburg Methodist College, earning an Associate of Arts Degree in 1990. In 1992 he received a Bachelor of Arts degree from Limestone College in Gaffney, SC, a Master of Education degree from Converse College in 1995, an Educational Specialist degree from Converse College in 1997, and a Master of Arts degree in Pastoral Studies from Beacon University in 2007. Dr. Suber earned a Doctorate of Education degree in School Administration from Walden University in 2014. He holds a valid professional certificate in teaching, administration, and district superintendent from the South Carolina Department of Education. In 1993, Dr. Suber started his career in education as a Third-grade teacher at Cleveland Elementary School. In the fall of that same year, he taught Fourth grade at the former Park Hills Elementary School. In August 1996, at the age of 26, Dr. Suber was hired as the Assistant Principal at E. P. Todd Elementary School. From 2001 until 2012, he served as Principal at Cleveland Elementary School in Spartanburg County School District Seven and Jesse S. Bobo Elementary School in Spartanburg County School District Six. In 2016, he accepted the Coordinator’s position for Truancy and Student Support Services for Spartanburg County School District Six. Dr. Suber currently serves on the Spartanburg Community College Early College Advisory Committee for the tri-county region in the upstate of South Carolina and a former member of the Alumni Board of Directors at Limestone College in Gaffney, South Carolina.

Book preview

© 2021 Patrick Suber. All rights reserved.

No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or

transmitted by any means without the written permission of the author.

Published by AuthorHouse  02/11/2021

ISBN: 978-1-6655-1657-0 (sc)

ISBN: 978-1-6655-1656-3 (e)

Library of Congress Control Number: 2021903293

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Getty Images are models,

and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Certain stock imagery © Getty Images.

Because of the dynamic nature of the Internet, any web addresses or links contained in

this book may have changed since publication and may no longer be valid. The views

expressed in this work are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views

of the publisher, and the publisher hereby disclaims any responsibility for them.

This book is a work of non-fiction. Unless otherwise noted, the author and the publisher

make no explicit guarantees as to the accuracy of the information contained in this book and

in some cases, names of people and places have been altered to protect their privacy.

ABSTRACT

Teachers at a Title I elementary school in South Carolina implemented the Reading Mastery© program (RMP) to improve their students’ reading comprehension, but student reading comprehension scores did not increase. The purpose of this qualitative case project study was to explore teachers’ perceptions of the reading program’s professional development relative to their preparation in implementing the program. Wagner’s 7-step system change model for leading change served as the study’s conceptual foundation. The guiding research question for this study focused on how teachers’ professional training prepared them to implement the new reading curriculum. A purposeful sample of eight teachers in Grades 3–5 at one elementary school participated in semistructured interviews that were analyzed using inductive analysis. The results indicated a need for an improved professional development plan to help teachers better meet the reading needs of their students. Based on those results, it was recommended that a professional development plan intended to help teachers and administrators create and sustain a professional learning community (PLC) be designed and implemented. It was concluded that a PLC would facilitate teacher preparation and presentation of the reading curriculum and improve students’ reading performance. Implementation of a collaborative academic initiative with teachers and administrators could bring about positive social change that benefits students due to the creation of a school culture that supports best practices in reading and student learning.

DEDICATION

This book is dedicated to Dr. Lynda Idlemen, who continuously encouraged me throughout this process; to my classmate, Luis Daniel Garcia, who was willing to lend a listening ear, offer advice, and give encouragement; to Kathy Bell and the entire staff at Youth Stop, who reminded me that all things are possible through Christ Jesus; to my daughters, Asia, India, and Kenya, who offered their support and great sense of humor; and to my church family at Foster Chapel Baptist Church, who reminded me to forget those thing that are behind and press toward the mark of the high calling.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to acknowledge the following people for their guidance and encouragement: Dr. Richard Braley, my doctorial chair, was firm and direct with me. He always challenged me to take risks; Dr. Billie Andersson, my committee member, always showed intense interest in my research. She frequently pointed out the details; and Dr. Mary Howe, who believed in giving me a second chance to finish what I started. I am truly blessed.

CONTENTS

List Of Tables

Section 1:   The Problem

Rationale

Evidence of the Problem

Need to Study the Problem

Purpose Statement

Definitions

Significance of the Problem

Research Question and Research Objectives

Review of the Literature

Conceptual Framework

Elements of an Effective Reading Program

Teachers’ Use of Differentiated Instruction for Students

Managing Differentiation in the Classroom

Basal Readers

Reading Mastery©

Professional Development of Teachers

Teacher Perceptions and Attitudes

The Decision to Change Reading Programs

The Change Process

Initiating the Change

Rigor

Relevance

Respectful Relationships

Effecting the Change

Reaction to Purpose and Focus

Compliance to Engagement

Isolation to Collaboration

The Outcome of the Change

Principal Leadership

Shared Leadership

Implications

Summary

Section 2:   The Methodology

Participants

Selection Criteria

Justification for the Number of Participants

Procedures for Gaining Access to Participants

Methods for Establishing the Researcher/Participant Relationships

Measures for the Ethical Protection of Participants

Data Collection

Data to Collect

Specific Plan for Number and Duration of Interviews

How and When Data Were Collected

Systems for Keeping Track of Data

Role of the Researcher

Data Analysis

Evidence of Accuracy

Discrepant Cases

Scope of the Study

Assumptions

Limitations and Delimitations

Results

Research Objective 1

Research Objective 2

Research Objective 3

Research Objective 4

Conclusions

Section 3:   The Project

Brief Description of the Project

Goals of the Project

Scholarly Rationale for Project Genre

Literature Review

Professional Development

Contemporary Professional Development

Professional Learning Communities

Teacher Learning Processes and PLCs

Building and Supporting a PLC Context

Summary of the Literature Review

Description of the Project

Needed Resources

Implementation Plan

Roles and Responsibilities of Teachers

Project Evaluation Plan

Project Implications

Importance to Stakeholders

Conclusion

Section 4:   Reflections And Conclusions

Project Strengths

Project Limitations

Recommendations for Ways to Address the Problem Differently

Analysis of Learning

Scholarship

Project Development and Evaluation

Leadership and Change

Self-Analysis

Scholar

Practitioner

Project Developer

Overall Reflection

Implications, Applications, and Directions for Future Research

Conclusion

References

Appendix A: A Professional Development Guide To Create And Maintain A Professional Learning Community

Appendix B: IRB Letter To Conduct Study

Appendix C: Consent Form

Appendix D: Interview Protocol

Appendix E: Follow-Up Questions/Probes

Curriculum Vitae

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Percentages of Students Scoring Not Met on the Palmetto Achievement of State Standards at Three Title I Schools (by School and Grade)

Table 2. Percentages of Students Scoring Not Met on the Palmetto Achievement of State Standards at Three Title I Schools (by School, Grade, and Student Group)

SECTION 1

THE PROBLEM

The superintendent of a school district in northwestern South Carolina assigned a committee of administrators, reading coaches, instructional specialists, and teachers to explore, choose, and implement a reading program that would help prepare students to read on grade level. At the start of the new school year, the committee replaced the previous basal reading program with the Reading Mastery© program (RMP) published by McGraw-Hill. Prior to the implementation of the RMP, the faculty were prepared in the use of the reading program through a 3-day professional development workshop facilitated by a regional reading coach. The focus of Day 1 activities was the program’s components, the focus of Day 2 activities was the engagement of teachers in practice scenarios, and the focus of Day 3 activities was the engagement of teachers in peer coaching. After the academic year started, administrators required teachers (a) to participate in three additional training workshops and (b) receive ongoing support (observations, feedback, and modeling) from a regional reading coach. In addition, administrators required all new hires to participate in 3 days of professional development activities to familiarize them with the RMP.

Despite the implementation of the new reading program and the provided teacher training, student performance results on the Palmetto Achievement of State Standards (PASS) test did not improve at three Title I schools in the district. At the time of this study, administrators had not tried to determine if the teachers at the schools were adequately prepared to implement the RMP successfully in their classrooms. Examining the teachers’ preparation to change from a basal reading program to the RMP did provide information for administrators about the failures and successes of the district-provided professional development that teachers experienced during the initial change phase. I limited the investigation to the implementation phase and only collected data from those teachers who were present during that initial change phase. By doing so, I focused on identifying the gap in professional development practices that existed prior to the initiation of the change—practices that influenced the change process—and during the first months of the reading program’s initial change phase.

Effective change is the scope to which delivery of an intervention conforms to the order or curriculum model initially established (Hock et al., 2009). Educational researchers have contended that teachers cooperate more earnestly in staff development when the experience provides intended chances for continual progress (Zmuda, Kuklis, & Kline, 2004). Exploring teachers’ perceptions of their preparation to change from a basal reading program to the RMP is vital in schools where administrators hope to help student achievement by purchasing packages of materials and mandating teacher usage of those materials. The problem at the local schools was that no improvement in student reading scores emerged although teachers implemented a complete change in reading instruction strategy.

As indicated in the 2009 National Assessment of Education Progress report, during the 2007–2008, 2008–2009, and 2009–2010 academic school years, approximately one third of fourth-grade students were not proficient in basic reading (National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2010). Although most groups of students did show progress from 1992 to 2009, the achievement gaps in reading persisted (NCES, 2010). The NCES (2010) reported that 83% of students from poverty-stricken families and 85% of pupils attending high-poverty schools read below grade level.

Rationale

Evidence of the Problem

Administrators at the local school district of focus in this study identified a districtwide goal that no more than 20% of students in the district score at the not met level on the PASS test. However, three Title I schools in the district had a documented achievement gap in reading scores with respect to this goal (see Table 1).

Table 1

Percentages of Students Scoring Not Met on the Palmetto Achievement of State Standards at Three Title I Schools (by School and Grade)

35644.png

Note. Data compiled from South Carolina Department of Education, PASS (Palmetto Assessment of State Standards). Retrieved from http://ed.sc.gov/data/pass/index.cfm

As indicated in Table 1, the percentages of students in Grades 3, 4, and 5 at the three Title I schools who scored at the not met level on the PASS test for the academic school years 2008–2009 through 2011–2012 demonstrate the gap. Because the RMP was implemented during the 2009–2010 academic school year, percentages for the 2008–2009 school year represent scores based on the basal reading program, while percentages for the 2009–2010 through 2011–2012 school years represent scores based on the RMP. Since district administrators began to use the PASS test to measure student performance (2008–2009), only once has the percentage of pupils scoring at the not met level on the PASS test met the district goal (School 2, Grade 3, 2009–2010: 20%), and only once has the percentage of students scoring at the not met level on the PASS test come within 1 percentage point of meeting the district goal (School 2, Grade 3, 2008–2009: 20.4%).

Not only do those scores demonstrate the ongoing gap in overall student achievement, when transitional years are examined by grade level and school year, score percentages demonstrate inconsistent outcomes (see Table 2). For