Realizing Sustained School Improvement

Author: Jeanice Kerr Swift Title: REALIZING SUSTAINED SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT Advisor: Dr. Kent Seidel and Dr. Linda Brookhart Degree Date: June, 2011 Developing effective methods for improving America's schools is dependent upon coordinated work of practitioners and researchers. School improvement proves a complicated, confusing and most often troubled process; one characterized by the unprecedented challenges of dramatic societal shift, increasing levels of student need, and ongoing involvement from political and governmental influences. The drive to discover better ways to consistently improve schools is fueled by urgency for dramatic results. This research examines both the macro and the micro levels of the school improvement process and illuminates the need for an intentional new way of thinking and leading. At the macro level, the study examined the need for implementing a systems approach to improve America's schools. The study explored a single school's improvement journey. This work aligned individual and group perceptions of staff members alongside student achievement outcome data framed against the findings in the literature. The study rendered themes from within the reflected experiences of participant educators; the work pointed to the need for an improved social technology, the importance of teams, and shared leadership in the orchestrating of successful school improvement processes, particularly the essential roles of collective listening, learning, and leading to realize transformed outcomes for schools.

Constructing a Neuroscientific Pastoral Theology of Fear and Hope

Contemporary therapeutic circles utilize the concept of anxiety to describe a variety of disorders. Emotional reductionism is a detriment to the therapeutic community and the persons seeking its help. This dissertation proposes that attention to the emotion of fear clarifies our categorization of particular disorders and challenges emotional reductionism. I propose that the emotion of fear, through its theological relationship to hope, is useful in therapeutic practice for persons who experience trauma and PTSD. I explore the differences between fear and anxiety by deconstructing anxiety. Through this process, I develop four categories which help the emotion of fear stand independent of anxiety in therapy. Temporality, behaviors, antidote and objects are categories which distinguish fear from anxiety. Together, they provide the impetus to explore the emotion of fear. Understanding the emotion of fear requires an examination of its neurophysiological embodiment. This includes the brain structures responsible for fear production, its defensive behaviors and the evolutionary retention of fear. Dual inheritance evolutionary theory posits that we evolved physically and culturally, helping us understand the inescapability of fear and the unique threats humans fear. The threats humans react to develop through subjective interpretations of experience. Sometimes threats, through their presence in our memories and imaginations, inhibit a person's ability to live out a preferred identity and experience hope. Understanding fear as embodied and subjective is important. Process theology provides a religious framework through which fear can be interpreted. In this framework, fear is developed as an adaptive human response. Moreover, fear is useful to the divine-human relationship, revealing an undercurrent of hope. In the context of the divine-human relationship fear is understood as an initial aim which protects a person from a threat, but also preserves them for novel future relationships. Utilizing a "double-listening" stance, a therapist hears the traumatic narrative and counternarratives of resistance and resilience. These counternarratives express an orientation towards hopeful futures wherein persons thrive through living out a preferred identity. A therapeutic practice incorporating the emotion of fear will utilize the themes of survival, coping and thriving to enable persons to place their traumatic narrative within their meaning systems.

Comparison of Reading Development Across Socioeconomic Status in the United States

It is well known that higher parental socioeconomic status (SES) predicts better child reading outcomes, but little work has been done to unpack this finding. The main overall question addressed by this project was whether cognitive models of the two main reading outcomes, single word reading (SWR) and reading comprehension (RC), performed similarly across levels of parental SES. The current study predicted a differential relation between parental SES and both predictors and outcomes because of the known large relation between parental SES and child oral language development. Three questions examined the mediating effects of cognitive predictors on the relation between parental SES and reading outcomes, the moderating effects of SES on the developmental trajectories of reading outcomes, and the strength of the relationship between SES and the two reading outcomes. Participants were part of two large and comprehensive datasets: the cross-sectional Colorado Learning Disability Research Center (CLDRC; n=1554) sample, and the International Longitudinal Twin Study (ILTS; n=463 twin pairs) sample. In terms of cognitive predictors, the relation between SES and SWR was disproportionately mediated by two language skills, vocabulary (VOC) and phonological awareness (PA). For the RC models, both SWR and oral listening comprehension (OLC) did not disproportionally mediate the relation between RC and SES; however, full mediation was not exhibited. With regard to the trajectory of reading outcomes, SES moderated the starting values of SWR and RC, and the slopes of SWR development. When performance on the control measures of early reading skills (e.g., print knowledge, vocabulary, and decoding skills) was included the models, the moderating effects of SES were completely accounted for by these measures. In terms of outcomes, SES had a stronger relation to RC than to SWR, especially at later ages. These findings have implications for interventions aimed at improving reading outcomes in children from lower SES families.