THE BELIEFS OF ADVANCED PLACEMENT TEACHERS REGARDING EQUITY
AND ACCESS TO ADVANCED PLACEMENT COURSES:
A MIXED-METHODS STUDY
by
Mirynne O’Connor Igualada
A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of
The College of Education
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Florida Atlantic University
Boca Raton, Florida
December 2015
Copyright 2015 by Mirynne O’Connor Igualada
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I cannot express enough gratitude to the many people who provided continued support and encouragement throughout this journey. Thank you to my mother, Maureen, as you have been an endless source of support and encouragement. You always have believed that I could achieve this degree, while also helping me to stay somewhat sane throughout the process. You provided my theoretical framework; had I not been raised in your household and under your spiritual guidance, I would not have felt the need to examine issues of inequity. To my husband, Eric, thank you for your love throughout this process. You may not have always wanted to hear about my research, but you always have been willing to support my hopes and dreams without question. I would not be where I am today without you. I love you. Thank you to my Angel Baby and my
Rainbow Baby, Emalee Jane. I am not sure I would have found the strength and stamina to complete this degree had I not felt the need to make you both proud of my accomplishments.
I would like to thank my dissertation chair, Dr. Dilys Schoorman, who has been by my side through every major event academically, personally, and professionally in my adult life. You have not only been my teacher, but my mentor and role model. I forever will be grateful to have had the opportunity to be your student. To Dr. Diaz, I know this was a “labor of love” and I appreciate all of the advice and encouragement you have provided in both my studies and career path. To Dr. Pat, thank you for believing in my research and providing opportunities to expand and grow within the realm of educational
iv leadership. To Dr. Vasquez, thank you for your patience and expertise in quantitative methodology. Without your gentle guidance, I do not think I would have had the confidence to conduct a mixed methods study.
I must also thank all of my classmates and colleagues who have supported me throughout this journey. Because my research blended the classroom with the workplace,
I truly felt as though accomplishing this took a village. There have been so many who lent a supportive ear or shoulder to cry on. Thank you to all who believed in me and helped me along the way.
v ABSTRACT
Author: Mirynne O’Connor Igualada
Title: The Beliefs of Advanced Placement Teachers Regarding Equity and Access to Advanced Placement Courses: A Mixed-Methods Study
Institution: Florida Atlantic University
Dissertation Advisor: Dr. Dilys Schoorman
Degree: Doctor of Philosophy
Year: 2015
This mixed methods study of teachers’ beliefs about Advanced Placement (AP) equity and access policies occurred in Sunshine County School District, a large south
Florida school district that has received accolades for leading the nation in access and equity in AP. Drawing on social reconstructionism, this study framed AP as an acceleration mechanism with the potential to increase students’ prospects for social advancement. These policies have resulted in a more diverse classroom experience through nontraditional student participation in AP courses.
The purpose of this embedded case study was to examine the relationship between beliefs held by AP teachers in regard to the implementation of equity and access policies, as well as to what extent these beliefs may support or hinder the execution of such policies and procedures. The study occurred in three phases and consisted of document analysis, a survey, and interviews. Surveys collected from 176 AP teachers in the district
vi yielded quantitative data on AP teachers’ beliefs regarding equity and access and the subsequent implementation of equity and access policies. Qualitative data regarding beliefs surrounding equity and access policies and the potential challenges these policies may pose were collected through open-ended survey questions, document analysis, and interviews with eight teachers at two selected high schools representing the highest and the lowest access rates to AP in the district.
The findings indicated that AP teachers support equity and access policies in AP.
Despite these beliefs, there is evidence that such policies are not implemented consistently across schools and particularly in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) related content areas. The analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data led to the conclusion that the historic tension between elitism and equity that surrounds the AP program currently is fueled primarily through state accountability measures. Implications and suggestions for future research are related to policy changes regarding the revision of the state of Florida grading system and district-level procedural changes in relation to the design of school-based professional development and development of clear AP pathways that support access among underrepresented students.
vii THE BELIEFS OF ADVANCED PLACEMENT TEACHERS REGARDING EQUITY
AND ACCESS TO ADVANCED PLACEMENT COURSES:
A MIXED-METHODS STUDY
TABLES ...... xiii
FIGURES ...... xiv
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1
Statement of the Problem ...... 4
Purpose of the Study ...... 6
Research Questions ...... 7
Significance and Potential Contribution ...... 7
Definitions...... 9
CHAPTER 2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE ...... 13
Theoretical Framework ...... 15
Historical and Sociological Foundations of Advanced Placement ...... 19
Creation of the AP Program ...... 19
Issues Surrounding the Role and Purpose of the AP program ...... 21
Initiatives to Increase Equity and Access to AP programs ...... 24
Critical Review of the Advanced Placement Program ...... 26
Benefits of AP Courses ...... 26
Challenges Surrounding AP Courses ...... 27
viii Student Enrollment Trends in AP ...... 30
The Role of Teacher Beliefs ...... 30
AP Teachers’ Beliefs and Patterns of Student Success ...... 30
Beliefs and Policy Implementation ...... 35
How Beliefs Related to Academic Achievement Have Been Studied ...... 37
Policies Related to AP Equity and Access in Sunshine County Public
Schools ...... 39
Implementation of State and Local Policy ...... 39
How Implementation of State and Local Policy Has Been Studied in
SCPS ...... 42
Summary of the Chapter ...... 43
CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY ...... 44
Research Design ...... 45
Setting and Participants ...... 46
Site ...... 46
Sample ...... 49
Role of the Researcher ...... 51
Instrumentation and Protocols ...... 52
Survey ...... 52
Policy Implementation Items in the Survey ...... 53
Policy Belief Items in the Survey ...... 54
Participants’ Background Information ...... 54
Document Analysis ...... 55
ix Interviews ...... 56
Pilot Studies ...... 57
Revisions Based on the First Pilot Study ...... 58
Second Pilot Study ...... 60
Data Collection Procedures ...... 60
Phase One ...... 60
Phase Two ...... 60
Phase Three ...... 61
Data Analysis ...... 61
Quantitative ...... 62
Qualitative ...... 64
Limitations ...... 66
Delimitations ...... 67
Summary of the Chapter ...... 67
CHAPTER 4. FINDINGS ...... 69
Participants ...... 70
Survey Participants ...... 70
Interview Participants ...... 74
Survey Results ...... 75
Beliefs Regarding Equity and Access Policies and Implementation ...... 75
Prediction of Implementation of Policy Based on Beliefs ...... 82
Qualitative Data Results ...... 84
x Exploring AP Teachers’ Beliefs Related to Equity and Access
Policies ...... 85
Philosophical Belief in Equity and Access ...... 85
Impact of State and Local Policy on Equity and Access Policy
Implementation ...... 89
Impact of Content Area on Equity and Access Beliefs ...... 94
AP Teachers’ Perceptions of Nontraditional Students ...... 96
AP Teachers’ Beliefs That Nontraditional Students are in AP
Class by Virtue of the Population ...... 96
The Impact of Enrollment Procedures ...... 99
Additional Barriers in Implementing Equity and Access Policies ...... 102
Competing Acceleration Mechanisms ...... 102
School Culture ...... 104
Summary of the Chapter ...... 107
CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS ...... 109
Discussion ...... 110
The Philosophical Versus Pragmatic Tensions in the Implementation
of Equity and Access Policies ...... 110
Difference in Equity and Access Beliefs and Content Area
Instruction ...... 117
Clearly Developed AP Pathway Impacts Equity and Access ...... 119
Recommendations ...... 122
Limitations and Implications for Further Research ...... 125
xi Conclusion ...... 127
APPENDICES ...... 130
Appendix A. Advanced Placement Program Enrollment and Results ...... 131
Appendix B. 20th Day Enrollment Report ...... 133
Appendix C. AP Enrollment by Grade Level ...... 134
Appendix D. AP Procedural Guide ...... 135
Appendix E. Sunshine County School Board Approval ...... 151
Appendix F. Letter of Cooperation From Principals ...... 152
Appendix G. Interview Protocol ...... 153
Appendix H. Teacher Informed Consent Form: Interview ...... 155
Appendix I. Teacher Informed Consent Form: Survey ...... 157
Appendix J. AP Teachers’ Perspectives Regarding Equity and Access
Survey ...... 159
Appendix K. Email Permission for Survey Adaptation ...... 163
Appendix L. Florida Atlantic University Institutional Research Board
Approval ...... 164
REFERENCES ...... 166
xii TABLES
Table 1. Demographic Characteristics of Two Sample Schools ...... 49
Table 2. Revised Survey Items Based on the First Pilot Study ...... 59
Table 3. Research Questions and Data Analysis Methods ...... 64
Table 4. Participant Demographic Information ...... 71
Table 5. Teacher Reported AP Beliefs Regarding Equity and Access ...... 76
Table 6. Noteworthy Frequencies ...... 81
Table 7. Intervening Policy and Practices ...... 83
xiii FIGURES
Figure 1. AP Participation and Class Size...... 73
Figure 2. Participation in AP Examinations and Pass Rate ...... 73
Figure 3. Free and Reduced-price Lunch Rate ...... 74
xiv CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
Acceleration is an educational model that has been proven successful over time for high-ability students in the U.S. educational system (Colangelo et al., 2010;
Steenbergen-Hu & Moon, 2011; Wood, Portman, Cigrand, & Colangelo, 2010). High- ability students are defined as students who “need more academic challenge than they are receiving in their education, and they need more opportunities to develop their talent”
(Colangelo et al., 2010, p. 9). Longitudinal research has shown that acceleration results in students obtaining advanced degrees, publishing scholarly work, and contributing to professional fields at a higher rate than non-accelerated counterparts (Colangelo et al.,
2010; Steenbergen-Hu & Moon, 2011; Wood et al., 2010). As a result of the research relating to the advantages of acceleration, it has been recommended that a formal acceleration policy be adopted to encourage acceleration (Colangelo et al., 2010). An example of a formal acceleration policy can be found in the state of Florida, the
Academically Challenging Curriculum to Enhance Learning (ACCEL, 2012) policy. The
ACCEL legislation explicitly states that acceleration options (Acceleration Options in
Public Education, 2012) must be available at all grade levels for all students in the state of Florida.
Acceleration comes in various forms and, as a result, varies greatly in its implementation. Acceleration is broadly categorized as either content-based acceleration or grade-based acceleration. Content-based acceleration results in the student remaining with his/her peer group but working on higher-grade level instruction, and does not
1 shorten the amount of time the student spends in the K-12 school system. Conversely, grade-based acceleration results in either whole-grade acceleration (commonly known as
“skipping”) or early entrance into university (Colangelo et al., 2010).
A common form of acceleration that is available nation-wide is the Advanced
Placement (AP) Program. AP is considered a content-based acceleration mechanism, because the course is the equivalent to a course taken upon entrance into a university. AP courses are composed of a national curriculum that is created and executed through the
College Board. The College Board is a not-for-profit organization that oversees various programs and resources related to college readiness and college success. These programs and resources include: AP, SpringBoard, ReadiStep, CollegeEd, Preliminary Scholastic
Assessment Test/National Merit Scholarship Qualifying Test (PSAT/NMSQT),
Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT), and Student Search Service (College Board, 2015b).
Students enrolled in an AP course are required to take an end-of-course examinations that may result in college credits earned in high school. The examinations are scored on a scale of one through five and most universities accept a score of three as a passing rate. Currently, there are 38 AP courses with approximately 1.8 million students enrolling each year. The average student who has enrolled in AP courses enters university with a full semester’s worth of credits already completed (Jeong, 2009; Klopfenstein,
2004b).
Extensive research has been conducted regarding the benefits for students of taking AP courses. In terms of AP outcomes for subject area performance upon entrance into higher education, it has been found that students who earn a three or higher on the
AP examination perform well in college courses with the same content area and
2 subsequent courses in the same subject area (Keng & Dobb, 2008; Morgan & Klaric,
2007; Murphy & Dodd, 2009; Patterson & Ewing, 2013; Patterson, Packman, & Kobrin,
2011). In terms of general performance in higher education, students who have earned a three or higher on an AP examination are more likely to: (a) have a higher GPA compared to non-AP students of the same ability, (b) enter into a second year of college, and (c) complete college in four years (Hargrove, Godin, & Dodd, 2008; Mattern, Shaw,
& Xiong, 2009). AP has also been evaluated and compared to other acceleration mechanisms, namely dual enrollment, and has been found to be more beneficial
(Godfrey, Matos-Elefonte, Ewing, & Patel, 2013; Wyatt & Patterson, 2013).
There have been various federal and state incentive policies that have resulted in the growth of AP courses (Jeong, 2009). In the state of Florida, Sunshine County Public
Schools (SCPS, a pseudonym) has been recognized as one of the leading districts in the nation in access to and performance in AP courses. This resulted in the College Board acknowledging SCPS’ efforts as exemplary by releasing 2012 AP participation and examination scores within the context of national rankings. With regard to diversity and improving achievement among minority groups, SCPS was ranked first in Florida and third in the United States in African American/Black AP student achievement. SCPS was ranked fourth in the nation in Hispanic/Latino AP student achievement. SCPS is one of the largest counties in the state of Florida and has dedicated resources to increasing equity and access to AP, including development of an Advanced Placement Procedural
Guide and locally developed prediction reports to increase participation.
If these policies have led to increased enrollment and achievement in SCPS, this study examined an important variable in the implementation of policies: AP teachers’
3 beliefs about equity and access to their AP courses, which results in a more diverse group of students participating in acceleration mechanisms that have been historically reserved for the academically elite (Klopfenstein, 2004b). The examination of the execution of policies calls for an exploration of the beliefs of those who will be implementing the policies, as those policies that are created at the national, state, and district levels then are most likely to be locally implemented by those who are sympathetic toward the policies’ goals (Chunnu-Brayda, 2012). The aforementioned policies related to access to AP have been implemented at the national, state, and local levels (Sadler, Sonnert, Tai, &
Klopfenstein, 2010), and the power to implement these policies is held partially by AP teachers, thereby providing the basis for the design of this study in focusing on the role of teachers’ beliefs in implementing equity and access policies in relation to AP courses.
Statement of the Problem
Policies targeting equity and access to acceleration mechanisms at the local, state, and national levels have reduced the achievement gap (Klopfenstein, 2004b; Kyburg,
Hertberg-Davis, & Callahan, 2007; Posselt, Jacquette, Bielby, & Bastedo, 2012).
Nevertheless, nontraditional students still are underrepresented in AP courses and do not perform at the same level as students who are White or of a high socioeconomic status
(Contreras, 2011; KewalRamini, Gilbertson, Fox, & Provasnik, 2007; Solorzano &
Ornelas, 2004). As defined by the College Board’s (2002) equity policy statement, nontraditional students are those who come from ethnic, racial, and socioeconomic groups that have been traditionally underrepresented in the AP program. The persistence of this gap, despite targeted policies, can best be understood through Ladson-Billings’s
(2006) argument of educational debt, which comprises historical, economic, and moral
4 components. In relation to this study, the examination of policies targeting unequal access and enrollment rates was coupled with an examination of the moral debt, where “personal responsibility must be coupled with social responsibility” (Ladson-Billings, 2006, p. 8), thus the focus on teachers’ beliefs and the role they play in the AP program.
It can be seen in Sunshine County Public Schools that enrollment and performance in AP courses have increased, but targeted policies have not closed the achievement or enrollment gap among racial or ethnic groups. The enrollment figures can be found in the Advanced Placement Program Enrolment and Results (Appendix A), 20th
Day Enrollment Report (Appendix B), and the AP Enrollment by Grade Level (Appendix
C). These documents, as well as the Advanced Placement Procedural Guide (Appendix
D), are not directly cited or referenced in order to protect the identity of the school district and the participants of this study. From the 2009-2010 to 2011-2012 school years, the number of African American/Black students who took an AP examination increased from 3,938 to 4,314 students. Yet the total high school population of African
American/Black students in 2011-2012 was 25,926 students; only 17% of African
American students took an AP examination. From 2009-2010 to 2011-2012, the number of Hispanic students who took an AP examination increased from 5,045 to 5,748. The total high school population of Hispanic students in 2011-2012 was 19,477; while this result represents the largest percentage of a demographic group participating in AP
(30%), it still does not indicate that even a majority of Hispanic students participated in
AP courses. From 2009-2010 to 2011-2012, the number of White students tested increased from 5,988 to 6,606 students. The total high school population of White students in 2011-2012 was 36,025, meaning only 18% of White students participated in
5 an AP examination. In terms of performance, over the 3-year period, African
American/Black students increased their mean score on the AP examination from 1.75 to
1.83. Hispanic students increased their mean score from 2.63 to 2.77. White students increased their mean score from 2.66 to 2.85. Although all three groups increased their mean score, White students outperformed African American/Black students and Hispanic students. In addition, none of the groups are averaging a passing score, which shows a need to conduct educational research pertaining to AP teachers’ beliefs in reference to their students’ ability and performance in AP classes.
In an attempt to analyze the potential reasons for the gap that continues to persist in SCPS, this study examined AP teachers’ beliefs in relation to implementation of policies and the potential relationship between their beliefs and equity and access policies
(de Wet & Gubbins, 2011; Olszewski-Kubilius, 2010). This study examined the beliefs teachers hold relating to the opening of AP classes to nontraditional students and the resulting emergence of a more diverse group of students who have access to a type of acceleration that was formally reserved for the academically elite. The study also examined if any barriers exist at the classroom level that may prevent a full execution of the local, state, and national policies targeting increased equity and access to AP courses.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this embedded mixed methods case study was to investigate the beliefs held by AP teachers in regard to the implementation of equity and access policies and procedures and to what extent these beliefs support or hinder the execution of such policies and procedures. Levin (2008) argued that teachers’ beliefs play a prominent role in policy creation and implementation; therefore, this study examined AP teachers’
6 enforcement of equity and access policies related to the AP program. “Equity and access” is defined by the College Board’s (2002) equity policy statement, which focuses on the opportunity for all students to participate in an AP course should they choose to enroll and enrollment should reflect the diversity of the school’s student population.
Research Questions
The following questions were examined in this study:
1. What do AP teachers report regarding their beliefs with respect to the
implementation of equity and access to AP?
2. Is there a significant difference between teachers’ beliefs regarding equity and
access policies and their implementation of equity and access policies?
3. What perceptions do AP teachers report to hold in relation to teaching
nontraditional students in AP classes?
4. Can implementation of equity and access policies be predicted from AP
teachers’ beliefs concerning equity and access policies?
5. What do AP teachers report to be the barriers, if any, in implementing equity
and access policies?
Significance and Potential Contribution
While the population of students bound for higher education continues to grow, participation in AP courses has the potential to benefit those students in pursuit of postsecondary education (Godfrey et al., 2013; Hargrove et al., 2008; Keng & Dobb,
2008; Mattern et al., 2009; Morgan & Klaric, 2007; Murphy & Dodd, 2009; Patterson &
Ewing, 2013; Patterson et al., 2011; Wyatt & Patterson, 2013). Equity and access to AP is not only a mission of the College Board (2002), it has become imbedded in policies
7 across the district, state, and nation. Yet, it is local school-based personnel who ultimately have the ability and responsibility to eliminate barriers and provide open access to AP courses. Teachers’ beliefs play a critical role in classroom practices as it is their beliefs that guide the assertions made in relation to facts, principles, and laws
(Dewey, 1916). Pajares (1992) stated that “the beliefs teachers hold influence their perceptions and judgments, which in turn, affect their behaviors in the classroom” (p.
307). Therefore, it is important to examine critically the impact of AP teachers’ beliefs because these beliefs guide the execution of equity and access policies and represent an important variable in AP teachers’ behaviors in AP courses.
This study contributes to the existing literature concerning equity and access to
AP because there is little research related to instructor beliefs with respect to elitism and equality in AP courses. Pajares (1992) argued that there is little research conducted on beliefs in general, despite their importance in the role of both teacher preparation and teacher practices, due to the difficulty in studying beliefs. Despite the difficulties in studying beliefs, this type of research is needed in order to ascertain further information on beliefs and the impact they may have on closing the achievement gap, particularly in relation to accelerated mechanisms that can potentially increase the number of college- and career-ready students (Godfrey et. al, 2013; Wyatt & Patterson, 2013). In addition, this research can explore the broader context of the educational debt; limiting access to these courses could potentially contribute to the wealth gap identified by Ladson-Billings
(2006).
In general, the research that has been conducted on teacher beliefs and the impact on student achievement has been conducted primarily in a quantitative manner (de Wet &
8 Gubbins, 2011; Duffett & Farkas, 2009; Seyfried, 1998; Taliaferro & DeCuir-Gunby,
2008). In addition, the accolades bestowed upon SCPS by the College Board have all been based on quantitative data. Quantitative research does provide information through belief inventories, but it is the context-specific aspect of beliefs that is crucial to delve into after the belief inventory has been administered (Munby, 1984; Pajares, 1992).
Munby, Russell, and Martin (2001) and Richardson, Anders, Tidwell, and Lloyd (1991) argued that the exploration of teachers’ beliefs needs at least a partial qualitative component, specifically through utilizing interviews. Therefore, this study utilized mixed methodology to compliment the quantitative findings obtained from a district-wide beliefs survey with interviews, free-response questions, and document analysis. These three additional data sources provided further inferences and context-specific information that would not be available through a review of quantitative data alone.
The benefits to the school district are twofold. This study provides information for the participating school district about the beliefs of AP teachers with regard to implementation of the equity and access policies encouraged at the district level and through the College Board. The district currently is implementing a local certification program of AP teachers because the state of Florida does not require specific certification requirements to teach AP. The findings from this study also could inform professional development topics in the certification program because the findings show a discrepancy between the stated goals of AP policies in the district and their actual implementation.
Definitions
Advanced Placement: Any course designed and regulated by the College Board that bears the title, Advanced Placement (AP). These courses are designed to offer
9 motivated high school students the chance to pursue a college curriculum for potential college credit. Each AP course culminates in a final examination that is administered nationally and scored by independent raters. Success (typically a score of 3 or higher on a
5-point scale) on these examinations determines whether the student can receive college credit for the course (College Board, 2012).
AP potential: A web-based tool that is based on College Board research that links
PSAT/NMSQT scores to success in AP courses to help identify students who may not have been recommended for AP courses (College Board, 2015d).
Beliefs: A belief is an individual’s view of reality that guides his/her thoughts, behaviors, and actions. Beliefs provide the basis for implementing practices and programs, based on internal assumptions and judgments, within classrooms and schools
(Harvey, 1986; Pajares, 1992).
Cambridge Advanced International Certificate of Education (AICE): An international acceleration mechanism that includes both a curriculum and examination system that focuses on in-depth understanding and mastery of a broad range of skills on a variety of subjects (Cambridge International Exams, 2015).
Content-based acceleration: A program or course where students remain with their peer groups, but work on higher-level instruction. AP is a type of content-based acceleration (Colangelo et al., 2010)
College Board: A not-for-profit membership association whose mission is to connect students to college success and opportunity. The College Board oversees the AP program, including the curricular framework and examinations for AP courses. The
10 College Board also creates and administers the SAT and the PSAT, in addition to several other programs and services (College Board, 2015b).
Dual enrollment: Enrollment of a student in a postsecondary course at a higher education institution (Florida Department of Education [FLDOE], 2015b).
Equity statement: A statement drafted in 2002 by the College Board to promote and necessitate the inclusion of all students regardless of ethnicity, race, gender, or socioeconomic background into AP courses. The College Board encourages all school districts to eliminate barriers that prevent a diverse student population from participating in AP courses and to provide academically challenging coursework prior to AP courses to increase participation by traditionally underserved students (College Board, 2002).
International Baccalaureate: An international acceleration mechanism that includes both a curriculum and examination system that focuses on the global skills needed to participate in educational and employment opportunities (International
Baccalaureate, 2015).
Locally developed prediction reports: Unique to SCPS, students are flagged as eligible for AP courses in order to remove traditional gate-keeping behaviors and provide increased access to AP courses (Vaughn, 2010). Thus, a prediction report is an indicator to school-based staff that students listed should be placed into an advanced course without a teacher recommendation or other enrollment barrier.
Nontraditional AP student: A student who would not get into an AP course without an open access policy due to perceived motivation and/or performance issues
(Klopfenstein & Thomas, 2010). Nontraditional students come from ethnic, racial, and
11 socioeconomic groups that have been traditionally underrepresented in the AP program
(College Board, 2002).
Traditional AP student: A student who is typically an upper- to middle-class gifted and/or high achieving student who would be able to gain access through perceived motivation and performance levels (Klopfenstein, 2003).
Vertical teaming: Teachers work together in a specific discipline to ensure that students are exposed to the foundational skills at each grade level needed to be successful in AP courses (Center for College Readiness, 2015).
12 CHAPTER 2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
This mixed methods study was informed by social reconstructionist theories and research related to teachers’ beliefs and policy implementation. Social reconstructionism provides the theoretical framework for this study as it is an approach that “deals more directly….with oppression and social structural inequality based on race, social class, gender, and disability” (Sleeter & Grant, 1998, p. 176). Through an exploration of the historical and sociological foundations of the AP program, it can be seen that the AP program has been utilized as a tool associated with oppression and inequality for nontraditional students; but also it can be used to serve the interests of all groups of people, especially those who have been historically underrepresented. Thus, the social reconstructionist framework in relation to the AP program provides an investigation of the ways to “ameliorate these conditions by assisting in the reconstruction of our culture and institutions in accordance with democratic values and social and economic justice”
(Stanley, 1985, p. 384). One of the current calls to action for American public high schools is to address the inability of many high school graduates to do college-level work, which is one factor perpetuating unequal societal structures. The AP program provides one benchmark that is utilized across the nation to measure academic rigor and can be used to expand the population of students who have access to college-level courses prior to entering a higher education institution, thereby increasing their chances of academic success. However, African American, Hispanic, and low-income students are underrepresented in these types of courses. As a result, policies recently have been
13 implemented to increase the enrollment of students in AP courses in an attempt to correct historical patterns of limiting enrollment into these formally reserved, elite courses
(Broad Foundation, 2013). Yet, these policies are only one component in what Ladson-
Billings (2006) termed the education debt, which is integral to understanding the persistence of the achievement gap in U.S. schools. The education debt is composed of historical, sociopolitical, economic, and moral debts, which are contributing to the continued stratification in education based on class and race. This study framed AP as an example of the education debt, and how these integral components relate to the AP program.
Counts (1932/1978) argued that teachers could be a social force of considerable magnitude, and Martin (1994) argued that teachers should challenge social stratification, analyze oppression, and take an active role in restructuring unequal relationships. If teachers are asked to meet the challenges of the social reconstructionist ideology presented here, then teachers’ beliefs need to be explored because they play a critical role in the decisions they make throughout their professional lives (Pajares, 1992). Inquiry into AP teachers’ beliefs is particularly relevant due to the opportunities AP provides to those students who have access to the courses. This literature review examines AP teachers’ beliefs within the context of social reconstructionism as it relates to the exploration of the tension that historically has existed surrounding the unequal structures of access to AP courses and the movements toward equality that characterize the current climate related to the AP program. Equity and excellence often have been viewed as antagonists in public education. The literature review discusses the literature on the role teachers’ beliefs play in student access to accelerated courses in order to establish the
14 relationship between teacher beliefs and the employment of policy. Finally, the concluding section provides an overview of the current state and local policies related to equity and access, as well as the current role and application of policies related to equity and access in SCPS.
Theoretical Framework
This study was located within the educational philosophy of social reconstructionism and its emphasis on addressing the purpose of education as democratic value, cultivating a critical consciousness, and structuring a more humane society
(Anyon, 1981; Apple, 1995; Brameld, 1956; Counts, 1932/1978; Freire, 2007; McLaren,
2007; Sleeter, 2005). The philosophy also draws from Dewey’s Democracy and
Education (1916) and emphasizes the focus on community life and how schools can be either a replication of unequal societal structures, or “we may produce in schools a projection in type of the society we should like to realize, and by forming minds in accord with it gradually modify the larger and more recalcitrant features of adult society”
(p. 370). The choice by the researcher to draw on social reconstructionism was its potential to integrate diverse strands of critical theory in the study’s focus on the role of curricular opportunities for social transformation. In this view, this study of AP is framed in terms of an interrogation of the ways in which AP historically was reserved for the academically elite and can be used as a form of tracking (Flores & Gomez, 2011;
McLaren, 2007). The researcher investigated the current nature of the AP program in
SCPS through research questions related to the level of equity and access to AP present in SCPS. Thus, the researcher explored the social reconstructionist notion that the interests of the dominant culture have been served and reproduced in the schools and
15 whether equity and access policies made a meaningful impact in changing the historic patterns of exclusion for underrepresented demographic groups.
The social reconstructionist movement finds its roots in the Great Depression, a time during which people in the U.S.A. began to question the way of life and societal structures. Counts (1932/1978) considered the founder of the social reconstructionist school of thought, brought the social reconstructionist ideology to life at the Progressive
Education Annual Association when he asked, “Dare the school build a new social order?” He believed students should be educated for social change, thus marking a significant split from Progressive schools of thought because the focus of education moved from the individual to society and asked educators to focus on social, economic, and political problems across present and future trends. Specifically, Counts criticized the
Progressive movement for not adopting a specific social welfare component, which resulted in schools and a society that was insensitive to forms of social injustice. Counts’ critique of traditional beliefs related to education mirrors the current critique of the AP program. AP still is viewed and implemented as a sole curriculum reserved for high- performing traditional students with the end goal of passing a standardized examinations.
This view of AP does not take into account the importance of access to AP and the role
AP plays in subsequent success in higher education, as well as the longitudinal benefits of acceleration through adult life (Colangelo et al., 2010). A social reconstructionist view of AP, however, focuses on how access to AP is one facet in resolving stratification in education and, therefore, AP teachers should be agents of change and reform in encouraging access to AP. One central tenet of social reconstructionism is that teachers should be the vanguard of a new social order; this tenet was important to this study as the
16 unit of analysis in teachers’ beliefs. It is their impact on producing change and reform based on their application of equity and access policies within their schools that constituted the major purpose of this study.
World War II represented an interruption in the social reconstructionist movement, but it was reignited in the 1950s with Brameld’s (1956) publication of
Toward a Reconstructed Philosophy of Education, in which he argued that schools should be a force of political and social change. The 1960s and 1970s saw a rise in the popularity of social reconstructionism as it aligned with the various social and political movements of the times, such as the civil rights movement and feminist movements.
Postman and Weingartner (1969) published Teaching as a Subversive Activity (1969) and focused on how education and teaching are maintaining subversive mechanisms rather than reconstructing society and producing critical thinkers. One such subversive mechanism that has been present in the educational system is limited access to quality education for certain demographic groups (Kozol, 1991; McLaren, 2007), thus driving the interest in equity and access to high-quality accelerated courses as a force of potential political and social change.
The social reconstructionist movement was shaped by important historical and philosophical contributions, but also through research related to limited access for nontraditional students and the impact of lower-quality education. One landmark study is on social class and school knowledge by Anyon (1981). Anyon argued that curriculum differs based on the social class of the community and students at school. Specifically, working-class schools focus on practical curriculum with high levels of teacher control, whereas middle-class schools perceive knowledge as a commodity and focus on
17 traditional academic knowledge. Affluent professional and executive elite schools view knowledge as cultural capital and focus on ideology, creativity, and independent thought.
The findings and concerns raised by Anyon’s (1981) research were central to this study on equity and access to AP courses. Of particular interest is the observation that schools in impoverished areas have lower rates of AP enrollment and performance rates (Duffett
& Farkas, 2009).
The research conducted by Apple (1995) also informed the researcher through the identification of ways in which society reproduces hegemonic forces that control society and schools. Specifically, Apple argued that teachers are devalued by using standardized tests as indicators of success in the classroom. Sleeter (2005) agreed with this notion, particularly when curriculum is reduced solely to what can be measured and then is used as a gatekeeping mechanism. Thus, a social reconstructionist view of the role of AP frames access as a step towards transforming the opportunities available to nontraditional students through access to rigorous coursework that meets their academic needs, thereby helping students attain a postsecondary degree. Such a perspective moves beyond the framing of AP courses as individual curricular arrangements for selected students and/or opportunities to demonstrate specific knowledge and achievement whereby both teachers and students are evaluated and/or rewarded through a one-time measurement of performance such as an end-of-course examination. While these realities are acknowledged and critiqued, this study framed AP more broadly, as represented by
Flores and Gomez (2011) in their discussion of the benefits of participation in AP through the experience of accelerated coursework in a comfortable environment prior to entering higher education. The focus on teacher beliefs was crucial to this vision of AP
18 because systemic, deficit-oriented beliefs render AP an elitist gatekeeping mechanism that contributes towards further stratification. The researcher does not perceive AP as a mechanism that should contribute towards further stratification; rather the barriers and gatekeeping behaviors should be removed in an attempt to reduce stratification within the educational system.
Social reconstructionist ideology maintains that there is no neutrality in education; education decisions are value decisions (Anyon, 1981, Counts, 1932/1978; Giroux 1997;
Freire, 2007; McLaren, 2007). For Harvey (1986), Munby (1984,) and Pajares (1992), teacher decisions are influenced by beliefs since beliefs are different from knowledge and provide the basis for passing judgment. In this study, the researcher examined the role of teacher beliefs in implementing policies related to AP courses because these impact the decision of providing access for students or engaging in gate-keeping behaviors. Beliefs are the basis for these decisions and understanding the influence of AP teachers’ beliefs are crucial to ascertain because they guide these decisions related to the AP program.
Understanding beliefs requires making inferences about individuals’ underlying states and cannot be directly observed or measured; they must be inferred from what people say and do. Thus, the instruments designed in this research study sought to draw inferences based upon AP teachers’ beliefs in relation to implementation of equity and access policies.
Historical and Sociological Foundations of Advanced Placement
Creation of the AP Program
The AP program began in the 1950s when the educational climate was focused on the importance of gifted education for high-ability students (Ewing, Huff, & Kaliski,
19 2010; Lacy, 2010). This philosophy emerged at the forefront of educational and political agendas due to the beginning of the Cold War. Essentially, the educational culture embraced the notion “that all students are not created equal” (Schneider, 2009, p. 817) as it was believed that high-ability students needed to be exposed to rigorous curricula in order to produce political and scientific leaders who would be able to compete with the
Soviet Union and contain the spread of Communism. Although there is no direct link to
AP through these historical events, it did produce a climate that was ready and willing to embrace the notion and practice of AP (Rothschild, 1999; Schneider, 2009).
According to Lacy (2010) and Rothschild (1999), the roots for AP lay with the
Ford Foundation and the creation of the Fund for the Advancement of Education (FAE) in 1951. The FAE looked at early admission to university for talented high school sophomores. The belief was that colleges and universities then would be filled with the best students. However, this initial initiative was unpopular with school-based personnel because the best and brightest students were taken out of schools early. As a result, the
FAE began a pilot project offering college-level courses at the high school, thereby preparing the most promising students but keeping them within the high school system.
School-based personnel preferred this type of program because it kept their students enrolled in their current secondary-level school. In 1952, seven schools piloted this project; students were selected for the program through IQ score or teacher recommendation. In 1954, a total of 532 students took the first examinations and their scores were compared against freshmen from 12 colleges. The high school students were highly successful as they performed at the same rate or higher than typical college freshmen. The success of this pilot program resulted in the birth of the AP program.
20 As the pilot project concluded, the AP program was formally taken over by the
College Board in 1955 (Lacy, 2010; Rothschild, 1999). The College Board declared each examination would cost $10 and no examination would last for longer than three hours.
Up until this point, FAE had paid for the AP program. The FAE continued to provide scholarships and grants since AP initially did not turn a profit. With the launching of
Sputnik in 1957, AP gained speed; it became even more important to cater to high-ability students in the context of the struggle for world power and domination during the Cold
War. As a result, the AP program spread to more high schools, had more content areas added (Rothschild, 1999), and became a substitute for enrollment in prestigious private schools (Schneider, 2009).
Issues Surrounding the Role and Purpose of the AP program
The United States moved into the tumultuous political and social movements of the 1960s and AP was not immune to the changes affecting all areas of the public sphere.
AP began to be perceived as elitist and a form of institutional racism. The societal and political changes surrounding civil rights also applied to the dichotomous foundation of
AP: It is a struggle of equity and elitism (Lacy, 2010; Schneider, 2009), while those who were left behind received a second-class education. Indeed, the majority of the students who participated in AP were White and tracked into homogenous classes. Prior to desegregation, African American students were not afforded the opportunity to take AP courses. They did not benefit from the program until the 1980s when the educational landscape began to shift focus from gifted education to education of the many and equal opportunity (Miller, 2010). Gifted education has been criticized historically for limiting opportunities and fostering the underrepresentation of African American and Hispanic
21 students through several mechanisms: teacher under-referral for further testing, test bias in the cognitive screeners utilized, and discriminatory criteria (Ford, 2013). Another criticism of AP was that it relied on formal assessments at a time when individual learning and independent learning had begun to be valued. Although the landscape was shifting, students still chose to enroll in AP and the College Board continued to add new courses (Rothschild, 1999).
According to Rothschild (1999) and Lacy (2010), the beginning of the 1970s marked the only decline in AP examinations in all of AP history due to the aforementioned criticisms of AP. Additionally, AP saw drops in achievement test scores across the nation. However, the resilience of the AP program became evident as the organization began to focus on inner-city schools and the quality of instruction. The possibility of AP to serve the needs of gifted and disadvantaged students emerged (Lacy,
2010; Schneider, 2009). The College Board began to recognize the need to shift focus to equity and access to AP courses. While some critics may state this change occurred to increase enrollment and purchasing of tests, the College Board’s mission and vision as a not-for-profit organization is to increase access to and prepare students for a successful transition to higher education (College Board, 2015b). AP became an effective option for gifted, but disadvantaged students from poorly funded high schools because the exposure to the curriculum correlated with success in college. The College Board further supported this notion through the creation of Document Based Questions (DBQs). This change allowed students who may have been exposed to poor teachers the opportunity to utilize test information to successfully pass the free-response portion of the AP examination. In addition, the late 1970s resulted in cultural changes that made it more acceptable to take
22 accelerated courses without the associated feelings of guilt (when having access to privilege) that were prevalent in the 1960s (Rothschild, 1999).
In the 1980s, public education came under attack with A Nation at Risk (The
National Commission on Excellence in America, 1983) and High School (Boyer, 1983) as these works pointed out the under-utilization of acceleration mechanisms and spoke to the ability of AP to fill this void. As Bruner (1960/2004) argued, schools were not teaching what was needed during this time period and national standards had fallen as a result. AP offers a national standardized curriculum that can serve as a tool to prepare students through high-rigor coursework (Dougherty & Mellor, 2009). There was a sharp increase in the offering of AP programs and states began to implement policies to support the expansion of AP programs. Students’ examination fees were reduced or omitted entirely, teacher professional development was paid for, AP courses received extra funding from state governments, and financial incentives for teachers were appropriated.
As a result of these policies, the minority population taking AP courses in 1983 doubled by the year 1988 (Lacy, 2010; Rothschild, 1999), demonstrating that access was an issue for minority students.
The 1990s saw the largest enrollment increase in the AP program. Through the
Goals 2000: Educate America Act (1994), President Bush encouraged a “world class” education, and President Clinton continued to support the call for national standards through signing this act into law (Sadler, 2010). The AP program became the ultimate model for a national curriculum. As a result of the national attention given to AP, the
Mellon Foundation and Josiah Macy Jr. Foundation began to support AP as a model to improve quality instruction (Rothschild, 1999). The federal government also spent $2.7M
23 on subsidizing AP examinations in 1998-99. These efforts supported teachers who were working with disadvantaged students and, as a result, the student body of AP began to change. Previously, the student body was made up largely of White students who came from professional households. By the end of the 1990s, over half of the nation's high schools offered AP courses resulting in the increased diversity of the students taking the courses (Klopfenstein, 2004b).
Initiatives to Increase Equity and Access to AP programs
The year 2000 marked the increased efforts of the College Board to include all underrepresented groups (Lacy, 2010). In 2002, the College Board published an official
Access and Equity Initiatives Policy stating:
The College Board and the Advanced Placement Program encourage teachers, AP
Coordinators, and school administrators to make equitable access a guiding
principle for their AP programs. The College Board is committed to the principle
that all students deserve an opportunity to participate in rigorous and
academically challenging courses and programs. All students who are willing to
accept the challenge of a rigorous academic curriculum should be considered for
admission to AP courses. The Board encourages the elimination of barriers that
restrict access to AP courses for students from ethnic, racial and socioeconomic
groups that have been traditionally underrepresented in the AP program.
As such, the College Board believes that equity will be achieved when the demographics of student enrollment in AP courses match the demographics of the school.
The College Board also recognized targeted efforts needed to be made at the middle-school level in order to increase equity and access to AP courses and
24 postsecondary opportunities (Friend & Degen, 2007), as well as to meet the goals outlined in the Access and Equity Policy. As a result, the College Board designed a Pre-
AP curriculum called SpringBoard. SpringBoard targets English and mathematics instruction through organized and regimented methods (College Board, 2015e). The focus of SpringBoard is not just on content, but also on critical thinking skills though culturally relevant activities and teacher instruction (College Board, 2012, 2015e).
SpringBoard has been used extensively in the state of Florida. Longitudinal research conducted by the College Board suggests that in districts where the curriculum has been implemented, there has been an increase in nontraditional students enrolling in AP courses and passing their AP examinations (College Board, 2012). The district in this study had implemented the English SpringBoard curriculum in grades 6-10, but no longer utilized the SpringBoard curriculum in the 2014-2015 school year because the district undertook a new textbook adoption and the SpringBoard curriculum was not adopted.
States also have undertaken initiatives to increase the number of students taking
AP courses (Jeong, 2009). Specifically in the state of Florida, no students who attend a public high school need to pay for the AP examination because the College Board subsidizes AP examinations and the state of Florida pays for the remaining balance.
Florida also has utilized both AP participation and passage rates in the calculation of district and school grades. These state policies align to the national push for accountability through performance measurements and are thought to hold AP teachers and schools responsible for levels of enrollment and the quality of instruction in AP courses (Jeong, 2009). As can be seen in policy that specifically targets teachers at the state level, teachers are considered to be an integral component in equity and access to
25 AP courses. Despite these targeted policies, nontraditional AP students in SCPS still do not have full equity and access because the demographics of student enrollment do not match the demographics of the district. The researcher, therefore, explored one barrier that potentially could prevent full equity and access through exploring how teachers feel about these policies and the influence the policies have had on their individual classrooms.
Critical Review of the Advanced Placement Program
Benefits of AP Courses
Colangelo et al. (2010) suggested guidelines for developing academic acceleration policies based on “the research support for acceleration that has accumulated over many decades [and] is robust and consistent and allows us to confidently state that carefully planned acceleration decisions are successful” (p. 180). Colangelo et al. (2010) and Van
Tassel-Baska (2001) argued that acceleration is an educational model that has been proven beneficial over time for high-ability students in the U.S. educational system.
Extensive research has been conducted on the benefits of taking AP courses for traditional and nontraditional AP students (Barnard-Brak, McGaha-Garnett, & Burley,
2011; Curry, MacDonald, & Morgan, 1999; Duffy, 2010; Klopfenstein, 2003, 2004a,
2004b; Kyburg et al., 2007; Sadler & Sonnert, 2010; Tai, Liu, Almarode, & Fan, 2010;
Van Tassel-Baska, 2001). With regard to student benefit, research has focused primarily on higher education. It has been argued that AP offers students the following benefits: (a) shorter amount of time to earn a college degree, (b) lower tuition costs due to placing out of introductory courses, (c) advanced study skills that aid in the successful completion of a degree, (d) increased chance of college admission, and (e) higher grades in
26 postsecondary coursework (Barnard-Brak et al., 2011; Curry et. al., 1999; Klopfenstein,
2003; Kyburg et al., 2007; Sadler & Sonnert, 2010). Therefore, it can be argued that participation in AP is beneficial for both traditional and nontraditional students as it relates to positive opportunities at the postsecondary level. The benefits of AP at the college level are dependent on students’ access to AP at the high school level, an opportunity largely affected by teachers’ perspectives and decisions. Therefore, this study examined how teachers feel about the opportunities AP provides both traditional and nontraditional students.
The benefits of AP have also been framed within the context of how the program benefits both the school and the teacher. Kyburg et al. (2007) argued that AP courses represent a readily available, high-rigor curriculum with structural supports that allow teachers to deliver the AP curriculum with relative ease. Furthermore, the support for AP curriculum is reinforced at the state and federal level through policies related to increasing AP programs (Jeong, 2009). In addition, Van Tassel-Baska (2001) argued that the AP curriculum allows teachers to focus on higher-order thinking skills and advanced concepts. As a result, not only has AP been found to be beneficial for students, but it also has allowed for teachers to engage in a high level of curriculum that requires a high level of skill to deliver within the allotted amount of time.
Challenges Surrounding AP Courses
This study was designed within the context of the criticisms of the AP program because they relate to challenges that affect students and teachers (Flores & Gomez,
2011; Hallett & Venegas, 2011; Klopfenstein 2003, 2004a, 2004b; Klopfenstein &
Thomas, 2010), and these criticisms and the studies that explored them are discussed.
27 One primary challenge the AP program faces is the use of access to AP as a form of tracking, whereby AP courses are only available to high-ability, high-achieving, upper- middle-class White students who are encouraged and granted access to enroll (Flores &
Gomez, 2011; McLaren, 2007). This type of stratification can best be understood through
Anyon’s (1981) study titled “Social Class and School Knowledge.” The study was conducted in five elementary schools, focusing on the curriculum implemented across socially stratified schools. Anyon argued that working class schools focus on practical curriculum with high levels of teacher control, whereas the middle-class schools perceive knowledge as a commodity and focus on traditional academic knowledge. Affluent professional and executive elite schools view knowledge as cultural capital and focus on ideology, creativity, and independent thought. In relation to this study, Anyon’s discussion of social class and school could be categorized as follows: The working-class school could be considered a regular high school course (composed of the underrepresented and underprivileged), the middle-class school is an honors high-school course, and the affluent professional school and executive elite school is the Advanced
Placement course. It can be argued that the same trends hold true in these curricular categories as they did in schools categorized by social class. The best and brightest students traditionally have had access to AP courses and the students know that these categories exist (Klopfenstein, 2004a). An additional challenge facing AP programs is the emphasis on AP examinations in measuring both a student and a school’s worth
(Klopfenstein, 2003; Kyburg et al., 2007). Not only does this focus limit other accelerated options and treat the examination as the only indicator of higher learning, it
28 also affects teacher quality and class size in non-AP courses (Barnard-Brak et al., 2011;
Hallett & Venegas, 2011).
Many of these criticisms were relevant to the design of this study and shaped the decisions the researcher made in the subsequent design of the study. The researcher did not focus on AP students’ examination scores in the study as scholars have identified several concerns with the use of AP examinations as the sole measure of success in an AP course. One concern is that this practice places Hispanic, Black, and low-income students at an inherent disadvantage because these students tend to have less exposure to previous rigorous curriculum (Alsandor, Denyszyn, Platt, Reddick, & Welton, 2011; Contreras,
2011; Klopfenstein, 2003, 2004a; Solorzano & Ornelas, 2004). Rather, the experience of taking the AP course (provided the teacher is aware of the student’s unique needs) may result in a positive experience where the student is able to hone skills necessary to be successful while still in a familiar environment (Flores & Gomez, 2011; Klopfenstein,
2003, 2004b; Kyburg et al., 2007).
Scholars also have acknowledged AP as an important factor in the admissions process to colleges and universities, particularly for first-generation students
(Klopfenstein, 2003, 2004a, 2004b; Kyburg et al., 2007). Therefore, AP should be an opportunity to which all students have access in pursuit of postsecondary education.
Given these findings, the study examined whether teachers support or deny the assertion that limiting access to AP courses is perpetuating an unfair social system and if they are implementing related policies to help to increase access to AP courses.
29 Student Enrollment Trends in AP
Despite the focus at the federal and state levels to increase minority and low- income participation in AP, this demographic remains continuously underrepresented
(Barnard-Brak et al., 2011; Contreras, 2011; KewalRamini et al., 2007; Klopfenstein,
2004a; Kyburg et al., 2007; Posselt et al., 2012; Solorzano & Ornelas, 2004). The College
Board (2015a) recently released the AP National Report of 2013 stating that educators in the United States have increased the number of underrepresented groups in AP courses, yet enrollment and performance inequality still remains for African American and
Hispanic students in particular. Between 1999 and 2005, the number of minority and low- income students taking AP examinations increased by 81%, yet the average mean examination grade for African Americans was 2.01 and 2.52 for Hispanic students, while
White students’ mean examination score was 2.99 (KewalRamini et al., 2007). Therefore, research indicates that there are three areas of concern that are related to this study: (a)
Enrollment has increased nation-wide but the passing rate has not increased significantly
(KewalRamini, 2007; Klopfenstein, 2003), (b) underrepresented groups are not being prepared for the rigor of AP courses (Contreras, 2011; Solorzano & Ornelas, 2004), and
(c) low-income and urban schools that serve Hispanic and Black students have low enrollment in AP courses (Klopfenstein, 2004b; Posselt et al., 2012; Solorzano &
Ornelas, 2004).
The Role of Teacher Beliefs
AP Teachers’ Beliefs and Patterns of Student Success
Research has shown that AP students repeatedly identify the importance of teachers in their participation and subsequent success in AP courses (Alsandor et al.,
30 2011; Klopfenstein, 2004a; Kyburg et al., 2007). Because policies have been created to encourage students to enroll in AP courses (Contreras, 2011; Hallet & Venegas, 2011;
Posselt et al., 2012) and AP courses benefit nontraditional AP students (Alsandor et al.,
2011; Contreras, 2011), these benefits lead to an examination of the policy implementers: teachers. Alsandor et al. (2011) found that supportive relationships with school personnel had a positive impact on success in AP courses, while negative stereotyping from teachers had a negative impact on students’ success rates. Kyburg et al. (2007) found that success of district level policies is based on implementation by the teachers, and this implementation is linked to the teachers’ expectations of the students enrolled in their AP and International Baccalaureate (IB) courses.
These studies indicate that AP programs have increased representation of diverse groups of students, including those with different levels of preparation and different educational needs, signaling the importance of the role of teachers in student success.
This study analyzed the role of teacher beliefs in increasing representation and achievement in AP, because the success of these nontraditional students is partially dependent upon their teachers’ willingness to invest in them (Alsandor et al., 2011;
Klopfenstein, 2004a; Kyburg et al., 2007). This investment includes recognition that all students who choose to enroll should have access and a full commitment from teachers to reach success in AP courses. As Noddings (2008) and Sleeter (2005) argued, a standardized curriculum (AP is a national standardized curriculum) must be differentiated based on students’ needs rather than holding up unequal power dynamics. Equality of education does not mean that all students must take the same course, should be taught in the same manner, or should be provided with the same materials. This argument of
31 “sameness” is fundamentally flawed in a similar fashion as the argument of equality of opportunity. The simple providence of access to the same societal, economic, and political mechanisms does not and will not result in an even playing field. School staff should examine how to educate diverse student populations in meaningful ways.
Research also has shown that when teachers make negative assumptions about diverse learners, these assumptions result in lowered expectations and limited access to accelerated programs (de Wet & Gubbins, 2011; Jacobs & Harvey, 2009; Sadler, 2010;
Swanson, 2010; Taliaferro & DeCuir-Gunby, 2008). These assumptions result in a slower instructional pace, early tracking into courses that will prevent nontraditional students from obtaining access to accelerated courses, and perpetuation of a system that ignores student strengths and focuses on student weaknesses (de Wet & Gubbins, 2011; Jacobs &
Harvey, 2009; Sadler, 2010; Swanson, 2010; Taliaferro & DeCuir-Gunby, 2008;).
Olszewski-Kubilius (2010) argued that “gaps in the achievement of minority and nonminority students at all ages, socioeconomic levels, and levels of ability continue to be the most central problem in the field of education” (p. 85). Therefore, despite the policies that have been created to rectify the achievement gap, the gap continues to exist and needs to be examined in relation to the beliefs teachers hold. The notions teachers hold also are framed within the larger discussion of educational debt in that these differences of treatment are rooted in historical and sociopolitical patterns, and to make progress in education, “personal responsibility must be coupled with social responsibility” (Ladson-Billings, 2006, p. 8).
In examining teachers’ beliefs surrounding traditional and nontraditional students in accelerated courses, a wide range of beliefs and factors influencing these beliefs have
32 been identified (de Wet and Gubbins, 2011; Duffett & Farkas, 2009; Hallam & Ireson,
2003; Swanson, 2010; Taliaferro & DeCuir-Gunby, 2008). For example, in the case of high-ability grouping, most teachers hold a positive attitude and preference towards these types of courses. Hallam and Ireson (2003) found that this wide range of beliefs is influenced by several factors. For example, whether the teacher currently is teaching a high-ability course or a mixed-ability course plays a role. Teachers in mixed-ability courses tend to feel negatively towards high-ability courses. In addition, the subject area being taught (mathematics and foreign language teachers tend to prefer homogenous grouping, whereas English and humanities teachers tend to prefer mixed-grouping) and level of education (teachers with a master’s degree or higher tend to frown upon homogenous grouping and recognize the negative consequences of tracking lower- achieving students) both affect teacher perceptions of traditional versus nontraditional students in accelerated courses.
Duffett and Farkas (2009) have conducted the only nation-wide survey focused on teachers’ perceptions of traditional versus nontraditional students in AP courses (as a specific form of high-ability grouping). In this large-scale examination of perceptions of
AP courses and students, it was found that teachers would like to see more gatekeeping in regard to equity and access to AP. In this study, 52% of the surveyed teachers stated that they felt that the AP students who are now enrolling are not prepared for the rigor and the demands of AP. However, it is interesting to point out that this study also found that 38% of teachers felt that any student who wanted to take an AP course should be allowed to do so. Regardless, the study clearly made the claim that “more teachers are concerned about an open-doors policy than are eager to embrace it” (Duffett & Farkas, 2009, p. iii).
33 Despite this assertion, this study clearly supported the notion that there is a spectrum of beliefs surrounding equity and access and there are several factors that influence how a teacher feels towards traditional versus nontraditional accelerated students. These factors include, but are not limited to, student personality (as social competence is viewed as a construct of academic ability) and socioeconomic status
(Jacobs & Harvey, 2009; Seyfried, 1998; Swanson, 2010). The study was conducted by
Duffett and Farkas (2009) in partnership with the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, which is a “mission-driven group that tends to garner the most skepticism within the research community….but entities like the Education Trust and the Thomas B. Fordham
Foundation have proved immensely influential because of their clarity, policy focus, and energy” (Hess, 2008, p. 247). For this researcher, the focus and intent of the Fordham
Foundation raises issues with respect to how the conclusions were made and presented in the study. Therefore, the researcher made the decision to modify this instrument and administer it on a large scale within SCPS to compare the findings in an attempt to also potentially influence policy focus, but within the context of social reconstructionism as compared to the conservative notions held by the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation.
Another large-scale national study of 4,000 teachers of the gifted and teachers of general education were surveyed across eight states found that a majority of teachers surveyed believe students from diverse backgrounds have the ability for advanced academic programs and should be included in accelerated programs (de Wet & Gubbins,
2011). However, the question still remains: If teachers believe that diverse students should have equity and access to accelerated programs, why has this not yet occurred?
One notable finding from this national survey showed:
34 There was a significant difference in the means on one of the factors between
those who taught in states with mandates and those who taught in states without
mandates… Inspection of the mean scores indicated that teachers in states with no
mandates had marginally higher ratings on the benefits factor, believing more
strongly in the benefits of including diverse students in gifted programs. (de Wet
& Gubbins, 2011, p. 104)
The current study place within a state that has mandated several acceleration policies. Therefore, it may have an effect on teacher beliefs in relationship to traditional and nontraditional students by virtue of teaching within a state where mandated acceleration policies have been implemented. The aforementioned study indicates yet another policy that may affect teacher beliefs.
Beliefs and Policy Implementation
The influence of teacher beliefs on academic achievement is well documented
(Jacobs & Harvey, 2009; Mayfield, 1979; Munby et al., 2001; Pajares, 1992; Richardson et al., 1991; Rosenthal, 2002; Seyfried, 1998). Some areas of educational research view academic ability as a genetic trait (Seyfried, 1998). However, this view of academic ability ignores the role of teacher beliefs on academic achievement and blames the student for not reaching levels of high achievement. Because educational research defines the concept of belief in many different ways and there is not a unified agreement on the term (Pajares, 1992), the current study utilized Harvey’s (1986) definition of a belief system as a “set of conceptual representations which signify to its holder a reality or given state of affairs of sufficient validity, truth, and/or trustworthiness to warrant reliance upon it as a guide to personal thought and action” (p. 660). Pajares’ (1992)
35 argued that beliefs are also “instrumental in defining tasks and selecting the cognitive tools with which to interpret, plan, and make decisions regarding such tasks, hence they play a critical role in defining behavior and organizing knowledge and information” (p.
325). These constructs result in a two-fold definition of beliefs: Harvey’s (1986) definition acknowledges that teacher beliefs are different from knowledge in that beliefs evaluate and pass judgment. Beliefs are formed early through the process of cultural transmission and tend to self-perpetuate. Therefore, beliefs are difficult to change, particularly once a person enters adulthood (Munby et al., 2001; Pajares, 1992;
Richardson et al., 1991). Pajares’ (1992) definition acknowledges the impact beliefs have on classroom practice. In joining these two definitions, teachers use their beliefs as the basis for implementing practices and programs, based on their internal assumptions and judgments, within their classrooms and schools.
In examining the implementation of policies, teacher beliefs must be considered because their beliefs and perceptions will influence whether the policy has been successfully implemented. Access to AP has resulted in policies that have been implemented from the top down at the federal, state, and local levels (Sadler et al., 2010).
However, it is the implementer’s personal beliefs that are among the influential factors influencing the efficacy of such policies (Chunnu-Brayda, 2012). As policies are implemented in a top-down manner, it is imperative that the roles teachers play in this system are not ignored because teachers will implement policies in accordance with their belief systems. As gaps in achievement persist, despite the creation of policies that should result in the closing of the achievement gap, the beliefs of teachers with respect to equity
36 and access to accelerated mechanisms need to be examined (de Wet & Gubbins, 2011;
Olszewski-Kubilius, 2010).
Furthermore, it has been documented repeatedly throughout research studies that teachers’ expectations influence academic performance (Munby et al., 2001; Richardson et al., 1991; Rosenthal, 2002; Seyfried, 1998). Therefore, not only do teacher beliefs affect students enrolling in accelerated mechanisms, their beliefs also affect student performance in these courses (Sadler, 2010). Teachers have been found to prefer courses that are composed of high-ability students, thus treating these high-ability students differently: The teachers are warmer, teach more material, provide more opportunities for teacher-student interaction, and provide more differentiated feedback (Chunnu-Brayda,
2012; Hallam & Ireson, 2003; Rosenthal, 2002; Seyfried, 1998). As a result, teacher perceptions of student ability also have been linked to both grade point average and performance on various standardized tests (Mayfield, 1979; Seyfried, 1998).
How Beliefs Related to Academic Achievement Have Been Studied
Local and national policies related to AP courses need to examined within the context of AP teachers’ beliefs. It is whether their belief matches the assumption that students should have increased access that will determine the success of such efforts. As has been discussed, there are several factors related to teacher beliefs and their role within educational research as it relates to academic achievement. Just as there are several factors related to teacher beliefs, there also have been several ways in which teacher beliefs related to academic achievement have been studied. As a result, it is important to explore how studies on teacher beliefs have been conducted. The research studies selected to inform this study were chosen because they examined teacher beliefs
37 and/or examined beliefs in connection with participation of nontraditional students in accelerated mechanisms.
The studies conducted by Duffett and Farkas (2009), Munby (1984), Richardson et al. (1991), Seyfried (1998), Taliaferro and DeCuir-Gunby (2008), and de Wet and
Gubbins (2011) represented various forms of methodology used to examine teacher perceptions, some of which were specifically related to academic achievement. Pajares’
(1992) and Munby (1984) argued that research exploring teacher beliefs is inductive, and
Richardson et al. (1991) argued that paper and pencil surveys cannot adequately capture belief systems because teachers feel constrained when a typical answer related to belief systems tends to be “it depends.” Therefore, the researcher incorporated free-response questions and interviews because beliefs must be inferred from statements made, which is difficult to obtain through strictly quantitative methodology. Taliaferro and DeCuir-
Gunby (2008) further supported this notion through their use of interviews, and de Wet and Gubbins (2001) argued that their quantitative study of teachers’ beliefs and the ability of diverse students to succeed would have been strengthened through the use of a qualitative component. The same pattern holds true with the national survey administered by Duffett and Farkas (2009) as their findings related to teachers from impoverished schools reporting low AP performance potentially could have been strengthened with the inclusion of a qualitative component in their research study because the findings could have included further context-specific inferences.
The research conducted by Duffett and Farkas (2009) and de Wet and Gubbins
(2011) are the only two recent nationwide surveys conducted on teacher beliefs in relation to nontraditional student participation in accelerated programs. Quantitative
38 studies typically are utilized in the formulation of policy because “there is a desire for a simple bottom line” (Goldhaber & Brewer, 2008, p. 201), yet “at the level of the individual student, classroom, or school site, it is the educators themselves who are the most frequent decision makers” (Goldhaber & Brewer, 2008, p. 202) when implementing policy. It could be possible that policy decisions made solely on findings from quantitative studies were not fully capturing teachers’ beliefs and their pivotal role in achieving equity and access within accelerated programs. Therefore, studies that influence the formulation of policy need to take into account the beliefs of teachers and should incorporate qualitative components in order to be methodologically sound (Munby et al., 2001; Pajares, 1992; Richardson et al., 1991).
Policies Related to AP Equity and Access in Sunshine County
Public Schools
Implementation of State and Local Policy
The state of Florida has created three state statutes related to accessibility of acceleration for all students: Academically Challenging Curriculum to Enhance Learning
(ACCEL, 2012), Articulated Acceleration Mechanisms (2012), and Funds For The
Operation Of Schools (2015). SCPS supports acceleration through offering AP courses and has received accolades for improving equity and access to AP courses. After the state of Florida adopted a formal acceleration policy, ACCEL (2012), local school districts were required to produce a written local acceleration policy. According to Colangelo et al.’s (2010) “Guidelines for Developing an Academic Acceleration Policy,” these local policies should ensure that acceleration mechanisms: (a) are open to all students; (b) serve all populations; (c) provide fair, objective, and systematic entrance into the
39 programs; (d) provide for open communication concerning the policies and procedures with parents/guardians; and (e) provide for open communication for the community concerning the policy and the procedural guidelines. These tenets are embedded in the
ACCEL policy that was adopted by SCPS.
The local ACCEL policy created formalized procedures for participation in acceleration mechanisms. Specifically, SCPS created the following materials:
• Academic Acceleration Referral Form
• Internal Acceleration Checklist (to assist schools in identifying appropriate
acceleration options)
• Acceleration Criteria Guide (to provide guidance in identifying ACCEL
options to meet a student’s needs)
• ACCEL Recommendation Form (to record assessment data and provide a
recommendation)
• ACCEL Parent and Student Opportunity Agreement (to identify obligations of
the parent, student, and school)
• ACCEL Assessment Framework Guide (a menu of possible assessments to be
used in determining ACCEL option eligibility for grades K-8)
• ACCEL Statement for School Release to the Public (a generic statement
provided to principals to meet the public notification requirement of informing
parents and students of the ACCEL opportunities available at their school)
The Internal Acceleration Checklist speaks specifically to AP by providing students, parents, and schools with the opportunity to utilize AP to meet their acceleration
40 needs. At the school level, these documents reiterate the district’s commitment to equity and access.
The Advanced Placement (AP) Procedural Guide, which was created prior to
ACCEL (2012), is in alignment with the recommendations made from two prior statutes:
Articulated Acceleration Mechanisms (2012) and Funds For The Operation Of Schools
(2015). The guide articulates the district’s message regarding equity and access and is communicated to the teachers, parents, and school-based personnel as it relates to their
AP program. The AP Procedural Guide includes a sample contract for students placed in the AP course and outlines the responsibilities when entering such a program. It also contains information as to the process of removing a student from an AP program and suggests that removal is done only once extensive safety nets and guidance interventions have been utilized. The AP Procedural Guide outlines which courses should be offered at which grade level, how to meet the needs of diverse learners, how to support school-wide implementation models of AP, and a timeline for local professional development support.
In regard to increasing enrollment and subsequent performance in AP courses for all students, the local employment of acceleration policy and the procedural guide have similarities and differences from the College Board’s recommendations. For example, the
Advanced Placement Procedural Guide specifically states that all students should be given the opportunity to take AP courses. It also states that schools should utilize native foreign language speakers in giving English-language learners the opportunity to participate in foreign language AP courses. The College Board also puts forth these recommendations: “AP world language courses focus on linguistic proficiency and cultural competency, so in rare situations these courses can be successfully offered earlier
41 than 9th grade among students who can already speak, read, and write the language with fluency” (College Board, 2010). However, one of the main differences between SCPS application of AP policy and the recommendation of College Board is the offering of AP courses in grades nine through twelve. The College Board states that AP courses should primarily be offered in grades eleven and twelve as younger students are better served through focusing on building academic skills and conceptual knowledge prior to entering an AP course (College Board, 2010). However, SCPS offers AP courses to students in the ninth and tenth grade.
How Implementation of State and Local Policy Has Been Studied in SCPS
As has been shown, SCPS has developed an extensive AP program focused on equity and access. In exploring the effects of state and local policies on the Sunshine
County AP program, it became clear that SCPS is committed to increasing equity and access to AP across diverse learning populations. In Vaughn’s (2010) exploration of AP reform in urban school districts, SCPS specifically was named as a leading authority in placing diverse students in AP courses. It was found that researchers employed by SCPS created locally developed prediction reports. These local prediction reports produce a list of students who are ready to be enrolled, or who are ready to be enrolled with assistance, into AP courses. The AP Procedural Guide outlines ways in which to provide this assistance, such as: after-school tutoring that focuses on study skills, the opportunity to receive individual feedback and assistance on areas of curricular weakness, participate in
AP examination reviews, etc. The local prediction report takes into account multiple factors including standardized test scores, attendance data, behavior data, and grade point average. Rather than relying solely on PSAT/NMSQT data, which is discouraged by the
42 College Board (but a common practice across states), SCPS seeks to remove barriers to
AP courses through these locally developed predication reports. The College Board also introduced a new student AP Potential feature in the student score reports for those students who have taken the PSAT/NMSQT (College Board, 2015d).
Summary of the Chapter
The social reconstructionist educational philosophy focuses on social change and achieving equity within society. One important measure of achieving equity is for all students to have access to high quality education, such as the courses provided through the AP program. As the literature has shown, participation in AP courses has the potential to benefit all students in pursuit of postsecondary education, but historically has not been provided to all students. Teachers and their beliefs play an integral role in the enrollment and subsequent success of students enrolled in accelerated courses. In examining teacher beliefs in relation to policies surrounding equity and access to the AP program, the role that teacher beliefs play in the implementation of policy represents a multi-faceted issue that must be examined through a carefully constructed research design (Pajares, 1992).
43 CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY
It has been found across several studies that policies targeting equity and access to accelerated mechanisms have lessened the achievement gap for Black, Hispanic, and low-income students as compared to White, middle-class students (Klopfenstein, 2004b;
Kyburg et al., 2007; Posselt et al., 2012). Yet, in AP courses specifically, there still is a gap in enrollment and performance despite targeted policies to increase both enrollment and performance (Contreras, 2011; KewalRamini et al., 2007; Solorzano & Ornelas,
2004). Studies reveal that teachers’ beliefs play a role in the success or failure of policies at the school level (Levin, 2008). The purpose of this embedded mixed methods case study was to investigate the beliefs held by AP teachers in regard to the implementation of equity and access policies and procedures and to what extent these beliefs support or hinder the execution of such policies and procedures. Through data collection and analysis, the researcher examined AP teachers’ self-reported beliefs in relation to equity and access policies. The study specifically concentrated on the following: the impact of beliefs on the application of AP equity and access policies, teaching nontraditional AP students, and the perceived challenges and/or promises in teaching AP.
The following research questions were used to investigate the extent to which AP teachers believe students should or should not have access to AP courses:
1. What do AP teachers report regarding their beliefs with respect to the
implementation of equity and access to AP?
44 2. Is there a significant difference between teachers’ beliefs regarding equity and
access policies and their implementation of equity and access policies?
3. What perceptions do AP teachers report to hold in relation to teaching
nontraditional students in AP classes?
4. Can implementation of equity and access policies be predicted from AP
teachers’ beliefs concerning equity and access policies?
5. What do AP teachers report to be the barriers, if any, in implementing equity
and access policies?
Research Design
This study used an embedded mixed methods design (Creswell & Plano Clark,
2011), where qualitative data support and expand upon quantitative results. For the purpose of this study, the mixed methods approach was appropriate due to the complex notions of studying beliefs because it requires “assessments of what individuals say, intend, and do” (Pajares, 1992, p. 327) and, therefore, needed a combination of both quantitative and qualitative data to interpret data central to the research questions. The research questions focused on the central tenets of the social reconstructionist view of education (Anyon, 1981; Apple, 1995; Brameld, 1956; Counts, 1932/1978; Freire, 2007;
McLaren, 2007; Sleeter, 2005); exploring the tensions that exist surrounding equity and access to AP courses is integral to equality and social improvement within the educational landscape (College Board, 2015a; Sleeter, 2005). Thus, in order to examine the impact of teachers’ beliefs, the combined methodology provided complex and meaningful findings (Teddlie & Tashakkori, 2008).
45 The definition of an embedded design, as provided by Creswell and Plano Clark
(2011) is “a mixed methods approach where the researcher combines the collection and analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data within a traditional quantitative or qualitative research design” (p. 90). In this study, an embedded mixed methods case study, the researcher collected and analyzed quantitative and qualitative data in order to examine a particular case because this study provides an in-depth examination of a particular case (Creswell, 2007). Educational research centering on beliefs should not be conducted with a single data set, which provides the premise for utilizing the embedded design since this design provides data to answer research questions that require different types of data. In this study, research questions 2 and 4 called for quantitative data, while research questions 1, 3, and 5 called for qualitative data.
The study was conducted in three phases. Phase one of the study included collection of qualitative data in the form of documents related to the College Board’s equity and access policies and the local subsequent policies and procedures implemented at the district level. Phase one also included two pilot tests of the survey instrument and subsequent revisions to the survey instrument. Phase two of the study was an administration of the self-report survey to all AP teachers in SCPS. Following initial quantitative data analysis of the survey items and qualitative analysis of the open-ended response questions, the researcher then moved into phase three of the study and collected qualitative data in the form of interviews.
Setting and Participants
Site
The study took place in one large, public-school district in south Florida. During
46 the 2011-2012 school year, Sunshine County was recognized as one of the districts leading the nation in both Hispanic and African American student participation and achievement in AP. During this time period, Sunshine County’s AP program was offered in all 33 high schools and served 18,630 students in grades 9-12. Permission from the
Sunshine County School Board (Appendix E) was obtain prior to the start of the study.
The site and participants for this embedded mixed methods case study were selected through the method of purposeful sampling (Bogdan & Biklen, 2006; Creswell,
2007; Yin, 2013). Purposeful sampling is defined as when participants are chosen to be included “because they are believed to facilitate the expansion of the developing theory”
(Bogdan & Biklen, 2006, p. 73). The sample in this study was composed of AP teachers since both state and local policies target AP teachers and these teachers are partially responsible for implementation of policies and procedures related to increasing equity and access to AP. The district AP coordinator sent three separate email invitations to all
506 AP teachers in the school district and the survey remained open for three weeks.
The two schools selected to participate in this study represented the highest ranked and lowest ranked schools in terms of equity and access during the time of data collection. The researcher then obtained the principals’ permission (Appendix F) at both sites to contact teachers volunteers, utilizing the method of critical case sampling because it allowed the researcher to focus on the case’s unique contexts through the representation of high equity and access and low equity and access to AP courses (Miles, Huberman, &
Saldaña, 2014). Critical case sampling is a type of purposeful sampling and the researcher sampled these two sites in accordance with the ideas of Patton (2002) in that purposive samples are “those from which one can learn a great deal about the issues of
47 central importance to the purpose of the research” (p. 169). Based on the Advanced
Placement Program Enrollment and Results Report, schools varied in their equity and access to AP courses, despite the accolades received at the district level. The researcher defined equity and access as the number of students earning a 3 or higher on their AP examination divided by the total number of students in the high school. The basis for the selection of the two schools is similar to the College Board’s (2015a) formula utilized in their Equity and Excellence formula, whereby the number of students earning a 3 or higher during their entire school career is divided by the total number of students in the school. However, the design of this study was informed by data pertinent only to the
2011-2012 school year, and the researcher used the number of all AP students in the
2011-2012 school year who earned a 3 or higher on the AP examination, divided by the total number of students enrolled in the high school during the 2011-2012 school year.
This percentage was used to select participants for the qualitative portion of the study.
According to the Advanced Placement Program Enrollment and Results Report, the high school with the highest percentage of AP students scoring 3 or higher in comparison to total high-school population was Salt Life High School (SLHS, a pseudonym), with 84% of students in the school enrolled in an AP course and earning a 3 or higher on their AP examination. SLHS serves the largest student body all of high schools in the county (4,371), and the highest number of AP students (1,631 students in grades 9 through 12). The total school population is composed of 37% White students,
3.06% African American students, 52.8% Hispanic students, 1.96% multi-racial students,
4.07% Asian students, and less than 1% Native American, Native Indian, Native
48 Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander students. In terms of socioeconomic status, 16% of the students qualified for free- and reduced-price lunch (FRPL).
According to the Advanced Placement Program Enrollment and Results Report, the high school with the lowest percentage of students in the school enrolled in an AP course and earning a 3 or higher was Jameson High School (JHS, a pseudonym), at 10%.
JHS has a smaller student enrollment (1,889) and a smaller AP enrollment (287). It does not have the smallest AP enrollment in the county. The total school population is composed of 2% White students, 92% African American students, 5% Hispanic students,
1% multi-racial students, and less than 1% Native American, Native Indian, Native
Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander students. In terms of socioeconomic status, 83% of the students qualified for FRPL. Table 1 shows the demographics of the two sample schools.
Table 1
Demographic Characteristics of Two Sample Schools
School Students White African Hispanic Multi- Native Free or Enrolled in Students American Students Racial American/Native Reduced AP with a 3 Students Students Indian/Native Lunch or Higher Hawaiian/Pacific on Exam Islander SLHS 84% 37% 3% 53% 4% Less than 1% 16% JHS 10% 2% 92% 5% 1% Less than 1% 83%
Sample
Advanced Placement is offered in grades 9-12 in every high school in Sunshine
County Public Schools. Therefore, every teacher who currently is teaching at least one
AP program course in the 2014-2015 school year was asked to participate in the quantitative portion of this study. The survey was sent to 506 teachers who were teaching
49 37 different AP courses in 33 different high schools. In addition, all AP teachers at the two high schools were contacted and invited to participate in interviews. SLHS has 45 teachers in the AP program and JHS has 15 teachers in the AP program.
The researcher obtained a sample size of eight teachers, five from SLHS and five from JHS, in an attempt to maximize information and follow Lincoln and Guba’s (1985) recommendation that “the sampling is terminated when no new information is forthcoming from new sampled units; thus redundancy is the primary criterion” (p. 202).
The researcher piloted the interview protocol (Appendix G) in one school and found that after four interviews, the criteria of redundancy had been met. The researcher was unable to conduct a fourth interview at JHS. Participation was voluntary in both the quantitative and qualitative portions of the study; the only criteria for inclusion was that the teacher currently was teaching at least one AP course. All participants were required to sign an informed consent form (Appendix H and Appendix I) in which they agreed to participate in the quantitative survey and/or interview.
The researcher also collected documents from two public websites: the
Department of Accelerated Mechanisms (a pseudonym) website in Sunshine County
Public Schools, and the College Board (2015b) website. These two websites provided public records related to equity and access policies and procedures. Merriam (2009) has argued that public documents should be selected based on what they can reveal about what has occurred within the public sphere; thus these documents were chosen as they provided the context related to the school district’s equity and access policies prior to the evaluation. The researcher utilized these documents to evaluate the formal and informal
50 messages being transmitted from the creators of the AP program itself as well as from the school district since it is responsible for the implementation of equity and access policies.
Role of the Researcher
The study began when the researcher accepted a district-level position in
Sunshine County Public Schools as the advanced placement coordinator. During this time, the researcher was responsible for the coordination, design, implementation, and targeted improvement of systems related to instructional best practices in AP instruction, with particular attention to increasing equity and access to AP courses. The researcher then moved into an administrative position as the supervisor of advanced programs (a pseudonym). During this time, the researcher became responsible for the implementation of all accelerated mechanisms available in Sunshine County Public Schools, including
AP, gifted education, and dual enrollment. The researcher currently is an employee of the
College Board and oversees the expansion of access to the College Board’s programs and services in six school districts. The researcher is no longer an employee of Sunshine
County Public Schools nor does the researcher work with the district and schools in
SCPS through the current position at the College Board.
However, it is through these experiences that the researcher’s interest in the topic was ignited and sustained. First, the researcher began teaching AP courses in 2003, before the College Board’s equity and access policy had begun to be implemented in the school. As the researcher continued teaching AP courses, the classroom composition of these courses began to change and some teachers were on board with the changes that resulted in increased access, while others were not. As the researcher moved into an administrative position, the researcher continued to believe that students should have
51 access to AP and that participation in the AP program has the potential to be a positive experience for students who choose to enroll in an AP course. The researcher influenced local policies and procedures with this stance and continues to take this stance throughout the study.
The researcher made the conscious decision to write this dissertation in the third person. The reason this choice is being made is that the researcher hopes that this study will influence policymakers and impact subsequent policies. The world of policies and policymakers tends to be one that is conservative (Hess, 2008). Thus, the researcher is abiding by the conservative tradition of writing in the third person as a deliberate choice.
Instrumentation and Protocols
Survey
The survey utilized in this study, the AP Teachers’ Perspectives regarding Equity and Access Survey (Appendix J), was adapted from the study by Duffett and Farkas
(2009). The researcher was granted permission to adapt the survey for use in this study
(Appendix K). The researcher selected this survey because the 2008 administration represented the first national survey conducted on equity and access to AP. The original survey was administered to a nationally representative and randomly selected sample of public high school AP teachers. In the original study, a total of 5,200 questionnaires were mailed out to AP teachers and 1,024 responded. The researchers conducted a series of one-on-one, in-depth interviews with experts in the field to get a variety of points of view and made a special effort to get contrary perspectives. The researchers then held a round of focus groups with AP teachers and crafted the instrument with a pilot phase to ensure that the survey was clear in terms of language, flow, and relevancy. The content validity
52 of the survey had been established through this study, but it did not contain information related to construct validity and data analysis; thus the researcher piloted the adapted survey in two similar counties and had the adapted survey reviewed by a panel of experts.
For the purposes of this study, the researcher reduced the survey from 60 questions to 25 questions to include only those survey items that were related to the research questions in this study. These revisions resulted in three sections on the survey: beliefs about equity and access policies in relation to AP, implementation of equity and access policies in relation to AP courses, and demographic information. The researcher adapted each question to fit on a 5-point Likert scale. The researcher also included two open-ended questions relating to the participants’ beliefs and policies and procedures in order to allow participants to clarify or provide additional information, should they choose to respond. The original survey did not organize the survey items into subscales.
Therefore, the researcher organized the revised survey into two subscales: policy implementation (items 1-8) and policy beliefs (items 9-17). Participants’ background information was captured through items 23-25. The researcher assigned items to each subscale and reorganized the format of the survey based on the review of the literature to focus more specifically on patterns of equity and access and beliefs pertaining to these two concepts.
Policy implementation items in the survey. Previous similar studies conducted focused on the size of the AP classes, the perceived quality of current AP students, and formal and informal policies at the AP teachers’ high school (Alsandor et al., 2011;
Klopfenstein, 2004a; Kyburg et al., 2007). Items 1-8 relate to the teachers’ perceived levels of policy application in their classroom and high school through questions related
53 to the size of their classes because class size may increase in relation to implemented equity and access policies, the quality of the students enrolled, and formal and informal policies related to procedures in their school and classroom. Items from 1-8 were designed to answer research question 2, whether there is a significant difference between teachers’ beliefs, and research question 4, whether implementation of equity and access policies can be predicted from teachers’ beliefs.
Policy belief items in the survey. The policy belief items 9-17 on the survey asked the teachers what they believe in terms of: (a) the rationale for policies, (b) teaching diverse populations in AP, and (c) enrollment and performance patterns. These items relate to findings in previous studies that have been conducted on teachers’ beliefs and the impact on the AP program, student performance, and mandated policies (de Wet
& Gubbins, 2011; Duffett & Farkas, 2009; Seyfried, 1998; Taliaferro & DeCuir-Gunby,
2008). Items 9-17 were designed to answer research question 2, whether there is a significant difference between teachers’ beliefs, and research question 4, whether implementation of equity and access policies can be predicted from teachers’ beliefs.
Participants’ background information. The survey included demographic information related to how long the AP teacher had been an AP teacher in a public high school, what percentage of students take the AP examination, what percentage of students pass the AP examination, and percentage of students who were eligible for FRPL. Items
18-25 were included in order to find analyze contextual factors that could impact the AP teachers’ beliefs. Also, item 20 was used to conduct an independent t-test to determine whether there was a significant difference between those AP teachers’ beliefs in a high
FRPL school versus a low FRPL school.
54 Document Analysis
The document analysis portion of the study focused on data/information gathered from the Achieving Equity feature of the College Board’s (2015c) website and the AP
Procedural Guide feature of the Department of Accelerated Mechanism’s website (2012).
These two features reinforce the commitment to equity and access to AP and portray the policies and procedures related to equity and access in the district and at the College
Board. In the researcher’s previous role as the Supervisor of Advanced Programs, these were the primary resources the district utilized and referred AP teachers to and are therefore of paramount importance. In addition, the policies and procedures related to AP were examined in terms of the institutional message being sent to the district regarding equity and access to AP. Merriam (2009) has argued that public documents are
“particularly important to seek out the paper trail for what it can reveal about the program” (p. 141) and, therefore, these documents were chosen due to what they could reveal about the AP program in SCPS. These data sources provided context that helped the researcher situate and understand the teachers’ points of views. These revelations, such as a formal open-door policy in the AP Procedural Guide and the call to eliminate barriers and prerequisites on the Achieving Equity (College Board, 2015c) website, were explored further through participant interviews. The document analysis occurred prior to the administration of the survey and interviews because these documents provided context for the findings that could emerge from the survey and interviews. The qualitative data from the document analysis were intended to support and explain both the quantitative data and the qualitative data from the interviews.
55 Interviews
Munby (1984) and Pajares (1992) have argued that interviews are particularly important when studying the complex notion of beliefs because the ability to answer “it depends” to clarify why and how is central to studying beliefs. Therefore, interviews were needed in this study to help understand the context that cannot be captured in a survey as the focus of the interviews was on the particular facets of beliefs and how they pertain to equity and access to AP courses. In other words, participants were asked to elaborate on who they believe should take AP courses, why students should take AP courses, and their own personal experiences related to teaching diverse populations in AP courses. Research questions 1, 2, and 5 were the focus of the interviews because the ability to explain answers was needed when discussing the role and purpose of AP as well as beliefs surrounding the opportunities AP potentially could provide. The interview questions targeted why it is important for students to have access to AP and whether teachers feel as though all students are deserving of the benefits AP offers or whether there are negative connotations associated with AP as well.
Fontana and Frey (2005) argued that the interview is bound within the historical and political context in which the interview occurs. The researcher was not neutral in the interview and took a stance in order to advocate certain social policies; it was the researcher’s stance that students should have access to accelerated mechanisms in accordance with the social reconstructionist lens the researcher was using in the approach to this study. Thus, the researcher followed the notion of empathetic interviewing, whereby, “The new empathetic approaches take an ethical stance in favor of the individual or group being studied. The interviewer becomes an advocate and partner in
56 the study, hoping to be able to use the results to advocate social policies” (Fontana &
Frey, 2005, p. 696). The interviewer conducted eight 45-60 minute semi-structured individual interviews as this structure gave the researcher the ability to treat the interview as an active process in which a mutual story is created and the interview is not just an exchange of questions and answers (Fontana & Frey, 2005). In studying beliefs, the empathetic interview allowed the researcher to adjust the interview questions as needed to elicit the ideas of the interviewee.
Pilot Studies
The adaptations made to the survey instrument, which included reducing the number of questions and converting the answer choices to a Likert-type scale, required that the instrument be piloted to ensure reliability in the revised form and to determine what, if any, changes needed to be made to the survey instrument (Fraenkel, Wallen, &
Hyun, 2012). Following Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval for Florida Atlantic
University (Appendix L), two pilot studies were conducted, due to adaptations made to the survey instrument. The researcher reduced the number of questions and converted the answer choices to a Likert-type scale. Thus, the instrument initially needed to be piloted to ensure reliability in the revised form and to determine what changes needed to be made to the survey instrument (Fraenkel et al., 2012). The survey was reviewed by a panel of four experts in SCPS for feedback (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011). The researcher asked one principal with extensive experience with the AP program, the district AP coordinator, the district supervisor over accelerated mechanisms, and the district director over accelerated mechanisms to review the survey for clarity, accessibility of language, appropriateness of the survey items, and depth of issues covered. The survey did not need
57 to be edited based on the feedback of the panel of experts. However, there was a concern raised about whether the teachers would know their school’s FRPL rate. Therefore, the researcher made the decision to include the FRPL rate for every high school in the district and the document was attached when the survey was sent to the AP teachers.
The researcher then collaborated with another school district, Beachside County
Public Schools (BCPS, a pseudonym), which is a similar district in terms of size and demographics and which also has received accolades for improving equity and access to
AP (College Board, 2015a). The researcher sent the survey to 100 AP teachers in BCPS.
Of the 100 AP teachers who were contacted, 78 AP teachers completed the survey, which yielded a response rate of 78% for the first pilot study. This proved to be a useful exercise because the researcher found that the reliability coefficients for the subscales were low.
For the scale policy beliefs, Cronbach’s α was .549. For the scale policy implementation,
Cronbach’s α was .371. As Field (2013) explained, “A value of .7 to .8 is an acceptable value for Cronbach’s α; values substantially lower indicate an unreliable scale” (p. 709).
Thus, the scales in the initial survey were unreliable and the researcher had to review and revise each construct as to what the construct measured in an attempt to increase
Cronbach’s α.
Revisions Based on the First Pilot Study
Based on this examination, the researcher revised the survey and removed questions that were not contributing to the intercorrelation among the survey items. The researcher also added items that more clearly addressed the two subscales: policy beliefs and policy implementation. Last, the researcher changed every question related to the two subscales to add “I believe” or “I think” statements so as to better target AP teachers’
58 beliefs regarding each item. The revised survey items based on the first pilot study are summarized in Table 2.
Table 2
Revised Survey Items Based on the First Pilot Study
Item # Belief Statement 1. The number of students taking AP classes at my high school has 2. The size of the AP classes that I teach has 3. I think the number of nontraditional students (African American, Hispanic, and/or Free and Reduced-Price Lunch students) taking AP classes at my high school has increased. 4. I think my high school follows the formal policy of encouraging as many students as possible to take AP classes. 5. I believe the policies of the school district play the biggest role in determining the size of the AP program. 6. I think my high school has specific goals about increasing AP participation. 7. I believe my high school encourages students to take AP courses as they progress through high school. 8. I believe my high school recruits and encourages nontraditional students to enroll in AP courses. 9. I think the main reason my high school has a policy of encouraging students to take AP classes is to increase opportunity for historically neglected students. 10. I think the more students taking AP courses, the better – even when they do poorly, they benefit from the challenge and the experience. 11. I think all students should have access to one AP course during their high school years. 12. I think only students who can handle the material should take AP courses. 13. I think too many students overestimate their abilities and are in over their heads when they take AP classes. 14. I believe teacher recommendations should play a large role in determining which students take AP courses. 15. I think there may be some students who could thrive in AP, but do not end up taking these classes because the school fails to appropriately encourage them. 16. I believe AP sections should be grouped by ability so that, for example, the most advanced students learn together. 17. I think my high school should conduct more screening of students to ensure that they are ready to do AP-level work before they get in those classrooms.
59 Second Pilot Study
The researcher then conducted a second pilot study in a demographically similar school district, Wild County School District (WCSD, a pseudonym). The researcher sent the revised survey to 48 teachers in WCSD and received 17 responses. The survey yielded a 35% response rate. The reliability coefficients were as follows: .793 for policy beliefs and .722 for implementation. Finally, when the researcher conducted the main study, the reliability coefficients were as follows: .808 for policy beliefs and .709 for policy implementation.
Data Collection Procedures
Upon approval of the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of both Florida Atlantic
University (FAU) and SCPS, the researcher began the data collection process and subsequent analysis during the 2014-2015 school year. Data collection occurred in three separate phases: phase one and three focused on qualitative methods, and phase two utilized quantitative methods.
Phase One
Data collection began prior to the administration of the survey through document collection. Document collection focused on gathering data sources regarding the policies and procedures present in the AP Procedural Guide and on the Achieving Equity (College
Board, 2015c) website. These data sources provided the context needed to situate the findings that emerged from the survey and interviews.
Phase Two
Upon completion of phase one, the district level AP coordinator sent three e-mails
60 to all AP teachers in SCPS inviting them to complete a web-based Likert-type scale survey created through SurveyMonkey (2015). In the email, participants found a link that took them directly to the survey. The survey was adapted by the researcher, and the purpose of this survey was to examine the relationship between beliefs help by AP teachers in regard to the implementation of equity and access policies.
Phase Three
The final phase of data collection took place after quantitative data collection and analysis were complete. All AP teachers located at the critical case sample sites were invited to participate in a 30-minute interview, which was guided by a semi-structured interview protocol. The researcher sent an e-mail to the teachers located at these two schools and asked if they would like to participate in the study. The purpose of the interview was to capture the importance of the qualitative component of beliefs studies
(Munby, 1984; Pajares, 1992); the AP teachers were provided the opportunity to elaborate upon their own personal experiences related to the successes, challenges, and barriers in teaching diverse populations in AP courses.
Data Analysis
According to Day, Sammons, and Gu (2008), quantitative and qualitative data should not be collected and analyzed in isolation. Integrating quantitative and qualitative data produces in-depth understandings of the research findings. This embedded mixed methods research design provides “the advantage of synergistic approaches….resulting in more nuanced, authentic accounts and explanation of complex realities” (Day et al., p.
330). Thus, the three data sources that provided a mix of quantitative and qualitative data were used in conjunction to further the findings of this research study.
61 Quantitative
Survey data were analyzed using both descriptive and correlational statistics. The
AP Teachers’ Beliefs Regarding Equity and Access Survey served as a measure of an AP teacher’s beliefs in relation to AP equity and access and policy implementation. Results of this survey were analyzed to determine descriptive statistics, including the mean, mode, variability of responses, and frequency distribution of responses (Field, 2013;
Kerlinger & Lee, 2000). An examination of these descriptive statistics provided a summary of responses in relation to how the entire sample felt about the application of policies, the rationale for policies, and participation of nontraditional students.
The researcher also conducted a paired t-test and independent t-test in relation to research question 2 in order to compare the mean for the items related to each subscale, policy implementation, and policy beliefs to determine whether there was a significant difference between AP teachers’ beliefs in respect to equity and access and their application of equity and access policies. In order to analyze the data related to research question 2, the researcher compared the mean for the same set of AP teachers on two different measures, policy beliefs and policy implementation, and contrasted these responses (Field, 2013). In addition, the researcher conducted an independent t-test in which the AP teachers were grouped according to the indicated level of FRPL students attending their respective high schools. AP teachers who indicated that their FRPL population was greater than or equal to 51% composed one group; AP teachers who indicated that their FRPL population was less than or equal to 50% composed the second group. This distinction was based on the eligibility for funding for the School Food
Service program to provide free lunches in areas where more than 50% of the children
62 qualify for FRPL (U. S. Department of Agriculture, 2013). Thus, the first group was considered to be teaching in a school with an above-average rate of students who qualify for FRPL and the second group was considered to be teaching in school with a below- average rate of students who qualify for FRPL. The independent t-test was conducted to test the null hypothesis that there is no significant difference between AP policy beliefs and policy implementation in high FRPL schools and low FRPL schools (Field, 2013).
In order to analyze data related to research question 4, the researcher utilized simple regression analysis. The two subscales previously identified provided the independent and dependent variables for the regression relationship. The independent variable was AP teachers’ beliefs with respect to equity and access to AP and the dependent variable was the implementation of AP equity and access policies. Thus, the regression model was utilized to determine whether policy beliefs (predictor) impact the implementation of policy (outcome) (Field, 2013). Table 3 summarizes the research question and the subsequent data analysis method utilized.
63 Table 3
Research Questions and Data Analysis Methods
Research Question Variable Items Test RQ 2: Is there a Policy Beliefs (IV) 1-8 Paired t-test significant difference between AP teachers’ beliefs regarding equity and access policies and their implementation of equity and access policies? Policy Implementation 9-17 Paired t-test (DV) Free and Reduced Lunch 20 Independent t-test School (IV) Policy Beliefs and Policy 1-17 Independent t-test Implementation (DV) RQ 4: Can Policy Beliefs (IV) 1-8 Linear Regression implementation of equity and access policies be predicted from AP teachers’ beliefs concerning equity and access policies? Policy Implementation 9-17 Linear Regression (DV)
Qualitative
The survey was adapted to include two open-ended, free-response questions related to AP beliefs and AP policies and procedures. These responses provided a qualitative data point that was analyzed prior to conducting the interviews, thus providing potential emergent themes that were explored further through interview data. The pre- established school sites, which provided the critical case samples, served as the source for
64 obtaining a purposeful sample of AP teachers for interviews. These teachers provided important information about their beliefs related to equity and access because they teach in the schools with the highest and lowest levels, respectively, of equity and access. All interviews were transcribed verbatim from a tape-recording, with the exception of one participant who did not consent to being recorded. All interviews were transcribed immediately following the interview. As one participant did not consent to being tape- recorded, the researcher took detailed notes during the interview and reviewed them immediately following the interview to add further notes. Each participant also was given the opportunity to check the transcripts and make corrections needed to the transcription.
The researcher provided this opportunity and made the subsequent corrections prior to coding the transcript. The researcher then reviewed each transcript in accordance with each interview question and coded individual responses based on a priori codes from the literature and the free-response survey questions. These codes included: AP potential, enrollment flags, ACCEL, College Board’s equity and access statement, nontraditional students, and readiness for acceleration. The researcher also developed a list of emerging codes after carefully reviewing the interview transcripts. The researcher analyzed documents from the College Board’s Achieving Equity (2015c) website and the AP
Procedural Guide by reviewing them with the same a priori codes that emerged from the literature, as well as allowing codes to emerge.
The researcher then reviewed the assigned codes in relation to each research question and constructed categories that related to the major themes present in the research questions (Merriam, 2009). These categories provided the basis for the themes that emerged across the three data sources and eventually became findings, coupled with
65 the quantitative findings, based on the inferences of the researcher throughout the entire qualitative data analysis process. To ensure internal validity, the researcher kept journal entries detailing assumptions and biases throughout the data collection process and analysis phase. The analysis of the qualitative data also focused on an examination of consistencies and inconsistencies of the teachers’ self-reported beliefs within the context of the AP program.
In a mixed methods study, data can be integrated through triangulation (Creswell
& Plano Clark, 2011). The data were triangulated through comparing the qualitative themes with the survey findings and measuring to what extent these findings were supported or contradicted. However, the researcher selected AP teachers for the interviews as critical case samples and was mindful that these teachers necessarily did not represent the perspective of all teachers in SCPS. To ensure external validity, the researcher provided a detailed description of the research site as well as the assumptions held by the researcher.
Limitations
The primary limitation in this study was the examination of beliefs since teachers may not be aware of their beliefs or may not be forthcoming in their reporting of their beliefs and perceptions in the survey and/or interviews conducted. Furthermore, participation in this study was voluntary. Therefore, the sample size potentially was skewed in both the quantitative and qualitative samples. These issues were compounded further by the decision to conduct the study in only one school district; the researcher did not have a larger pool of AP teachers to draw upon to recruit for the quantitative and qualitative portions of the study.
66 Delimitations
Due to time constraints and accessibility issues, the study was conducted in
Sunshine County Public Schools with a focus on AP teachers. The researcher did not examine the impact of the beliefs on the individual AP students’ scores at the end of the
2014-2015 school year. Rather, the research relied on archival data to identify patterns of equity and access and interviewed teachers at only two schools with the highest and lowest equity and access levels. The researcher formerly was employed by the school district and currently is employed by the College Board. These two roles enabled the researcher to contact those necessary at both the district and the schools to access the sites and participants, but may have influenced the researcher’s perspective because the experiences with both organizations have resulted in a strong belief that access to accelerated mechanisms should be an opportunity afforded to all students.
Summary of the Chapter
This mixed methods study investigated AP teachers’ beliefs and the implementation of AP equity and access policies. The study followed an embedded design, which utilized quantitative data to support and expand upon qualitative results
(Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011). Research question 2, which focused on differences between beliefs and policy implementation, and Research question 4, which focused on the prediction of implementation of policies based on beliefs, were both explored through quantitative analysis. Research questions 1, 4, and 5, which all focused on the context- specific reporting of beliefs related to the AP program, were addressed through the analysis of interviews, free-response survey questions, and documents related to equity and access policies. Likert-type survey data, qualitative data in the form of interview
67 transcripts, free-response survey questions, and document analysis were used to analyze the beliefs held by AP teachers and the subsequent equity and access to their courses and what, if any, impact these beliefs had on the application of such policies.
68 CHAPTER 4. FINDINGS
The purpose of this embedded case study was to examine the relationship between beliefs held by AP teachers in regard to the implementation of equity and access policies, as well as to what extent these beliefs may support or hinder the execution of such policies and procedures. Data regarding equity and access policies as communicated by the College Board (2002) and the Sunshine County School District were collected and analyzed in the first phase in the study. Thereafter, data regarding the beliefs of participants throughout Sunshine County Public Schools were collected and analyzed through a district-wide survey of AP teachers. This second phase of data collection provided both quantitative data as well as qualitative data regarding teacher beliefs. The quantitative data and qualitative data from the survey were analyzed prior to moving to the third phase of the study. Phase three of the study was composed of interviews of eight teachers from two different schools. The study investigated the following research questions:
1. What do AP teachers report regarding their beliefs with respect to the
implementation of equity and access to AP?
2. Is there a significant difference between AP teachers’ beliefs regarding equity
and access policies and their implementation of equity and access policies?
3. What perceptions do AP teachers report to hold in relation to teaching
nontraditional students in AP classes?
69 4. Can implementation of equity and access policies be predicted from AP
teachers’ beliefs concerning equity and access policies?
5. What do AP teachers report to be the barriers, if any, in implementing equity
and access policies?
Participants
Survey Participants
All AP teachers in Sunshine County Public Schools were invited to participate in the study. In total, 176 teachers responded to the survey, all of whom consented to be involved. This yielded a response rate of 35%. The researcher also conducted an a priori power analysis to ensure that the sample size would detect a medium effect. In other words, the researcher wanted to ensure that there was a 50% chance of detecting an effect if one genuinely existed (Field, 2013). The researcher found that in order to obtain a medium effect size the target size of the sample was 128 teachers. The researcher met this criterion as 176 teachers responded to the survey. However, it is important to note that
65% of the AP teachers in the school district did not reply to the survey. Perhaps this was due to unfamiliarity with online surveys, but it also could be due to an unwillingness to answer. Table 4 summarizes the demographic information provided by participants in
Part V of the AP Teachers’ Perspectives Regarding Equity and Access Survey.
70 Table 4
Participant Demographic Information
Teachers’ Background Sub-Categories Frequency Percentage Teaching Experience Fewer than or equal to 5 12 7.1 years 6-10 years 36 21.4 11-15 years 44 26.2 16-20 years 29 17.3 21 or more years 47 28.0 Teaching Experience: AP Fewer than or equal to 5 66 39.3 years 6-10 years 50 29.8 11-15 years 33 19.6 16-20 years 15 8.9 21 or more years 4 2.4 Education Level Bachelor’s Degree 50 29.8 Master’s Degree 103 61.3 Doctoral Degree 15 8.9
The survey participant data revealed several trends. Over 70% of those teachers who responded to the survey had taught for more than 10 years and could be considered experienced teachers. In addition, over 60% had earned a Master’s degree, and, as
Hallam and Ireson (2003) found, teachers who have earned Master’s degrees tend to be more sympathetic towards equity initiatives. The majority of those who responded had 10 or fewer years teaching AP, with 40% of those who responded having taught AP for less than or equal to 5 years and 30% having taught teaching AP between 6 and 10 years.
Overall, the majority of the teachers who responded were experienced teachers with
Master’s degrees who had begun to teach AP over the last 10 years. This potentially
71 could be explained by the recent policy efforts made to increase AP participation since those would result in an increased need for AP teachers.
The survey also included information regarding the participants’ AP classes and
FRPL rates in order to analyze contextual factors that could impact the AP teachers’ beliefs. Figure 1 summarizes the information given on AP participation rates and class size, Figure 2 summarizes information related to participation in AP examinations and average examination pass rate, and Figure 3 summarizes the school’s FRPL rate indicated by those teachers who participated in the survey. As revealed in these three figures, the teachers who participated in the survey reported that AP student participation was increasing, students had a high participation rate in AP examinations, and a slight majority of teachers (59%) taught in high FRPL schools.
The pattern of increasing the AP program also was apparent in data related to student participation in the AP program and AP class size. In terms of the number of students taking AP, 63% of the AP teachers felt as though the number had increased. In addition, 60% of the AP teachers reported that their AP class sizes had increased. As these numbers had risen, the AP examination participation rate had remained high, with
71% of teachers stating that 76%-100% of their students participated in AP examinations.
In addition, the majority of teachers (56%) stated that they had a 51% pass rate or higher.
72 40% 37% 35% 35%
30% 25% 25% 25% Declined Dramatically 25% 23% Declined Somewhat 20% Stayed about the same
15% 13% Increased Somewhat 11% Increased Dramatically 10%
4% 5% 3%
0% Students Taking AP AP Class Size
Figure 1. AP participation and class size.
80% 71% 70%
60%
0% 50% 1%-25% 38% 40% 26%-50%
30% 51%-75% 23% 20% 18% 76%-100% 20% 13% 11% 10% 5% 0% 1% 0% Student Exam Participation AP Exam Pass Rate
Figure 2. Participation in AP examinatons and pass rate.
73 45% 40% 40%
35%
30% 25% 25% 19% 20% 16% 15%
10%
5%
0% 1% - 25% FRPL 26%-50% FRPL 51%-75% FRPL 76%-100% FRPL Figure 3. Free and reduced-price lunch rate.
Interview Participants
All AP teachers at two high schools, Salt Life High School (JHS) and Jameson
High School (SLHS), were invited to participate in a 30-minute interview regarding their perspectives and beliefs related to teaching AP. The researcher was able to interview three teachers at JHS and five teachers at SLHS. The interviews were a combination of face-to-face interviews and phone interviews, depending upon the interviewee’s preference. Every face-to-face interview was conducted in the interviewee’s classroom.
At SLHS, the researcher conducted interviews with two AP science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) teachers, two AP English teachers, and one AP foreign language teacher. At JHS, the researcher conducted interviews with one AP
English teacher and two AP science teachers. In order to maintain confidentiality, pseudonyms were assigned to each interview informant.
74 Survey Results
Beliefs Regarding Equity and Access Policies and Implementation
The web-based survey administered revealed general patterns regarding teachers’ beliefs and their implementation of equity and access policies. The data indicated that a majority of teachers (55%) felt as though nontraditional student participation had increased over time (item 1). In addition, teachers believe that there were policies in place to encourage student participation in AP courses and that participation in AP courses is important. However, the results showed that only 22% of the teachers agreed that providing access to those students who have been historically excluded (item 7) was the main reason for the policies, while 44% did not agree with this statement. Furthermore, teachers were divided over whether the experience of an AP course was beneficial (item
8), despite academic performance in the course. A majority of teachers also supported traditional gate-keeping mechanisms (items 12 and 15), namely teacher recommendations
(86%) and screening processes (75%) prior to entrance into AP courses. Table 5 summarizes the results of Part II of the survey and includes the number of participants who answered each survey item and the frequency of each response displayed as a percentage, as well as the mean and the standard deviation.
75 Table 5
Teacher Reported AP Beliefs Regarding Equity and Access
Scale
Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Disagree Agree nor Agree Disagree Teacher Reported AP Belief % F % F % F % F % F N M SD
1. I think the number of 1.8 3 18.2 31 25.3 43 37.1 63 17.7 30 170 3.5 1.04 nontraditional students (African American, Hispanic, and/or Free and Reduced-Price Lunch students) taking AP classes at my high school has increased. 2. I think my high school follows 1.8 3 4.7 8 8.2 14 54.7 93 30.6 52 170 4.08 .86 the formal policy of encouraging as many students as possible to take AP classes. 3. I believe the policies of the 3.5 6 17.7 30 30.0 51 32.3 55 16.5 28 170 3.41 1.07 school district play the biggest role in determining the size of the AP program at my high school. 4. I think my high school has 2.4 4 11.8 20 14.7 25 48.2 82 22.9 39 170 3.78 1.01 specific goals about increasing AP participation. 5. I believe my high school 1.2 2 2.4 4 6.5 11 55.6 94 34.4 58 169 4.20 .76 encourages students to take AP courses as they progress through high school. Table 5 (Con.’t)
Scale
Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Disagree Agree nor Agree Disagree Teacher Reported AP Belief % F % F % F % F % F N M SD
6. I believe my high school 1.8 3 10.6 18 22.4 38 40.0 68 25.3 43 170 3.77 1.00 recruits and encourages nontraditional students to enroll in AP courses. 7. I think the main reason my 6.5 11 37.2 63 34.3 58 16.0 27 5.92 10 169 2.78 .99 high school has a policy of encouraging students to take AP classes is to increase opportunity for historically neglected students. 8. I think the more students taking 12.4 21 27.2 46 19.5 33 29.5 50 11.2 19 169 3.00 1.23 AP courses, the better – even when they do poorly they benefit from the challenge and the experience. 9. I think all students should have 3.5 6 21.8 37 14.1 24 38.2 65 22.4 38 170 3.54 1.16 access to one AP course during their high school years. 10. I think only students who can 1.8 3 16.1 27 18.5 31 40.5 68 23.2 39 168 3.67 1.06 handle the material should take AP courses. 11. I think too many students 0 0 17.2 29 21.3 36 47.3 80 14.2 24 169 3.59 .94 overestimate their abilities and are in over their heads when they take AP classes. Table 5 (Con.’t)
Scale
Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Disagree Agree nor Agree Disagree Teacher Reported AP Belief % F % F % F % F % F N M SD
12. I believe teacher .6 1 6.0 10 7.2 12 43.7 73 42.5 71 167 4.22 .87 recommendations should play a large role in determining which students take AP courses. 13. I think there may be some 8.3 14 27.2 46 20.7 35 36.1 61 7.7 13 169 3.08 1.13 students who could thrive in AP, but do not end up taking these classes because the school fails to appropriately encourage them. 14. I believe AP sections should 6.5 11 35.9 61 21.8 37 20.1 35 15.3 26 170 3.02 1.20 be grouped by ability, so that, for example, the most advanced students learn together. 15. I think my high school should 0 0 11.8 20 13.0 22 48.8 83 26.5 45 170 3.9 .93 conduct more screening of students to ensure that they are ready to do AP-level work before they get in those classrooms.
To answer Research Question 2, on whether there was a significant difference between AP teachers’ beliefs regarding equity and access policies and their implementation of equity and access policies, the researcher conducted a paired t-test and an independent t-test. The subscales were policy beliefs (questions 1-8) and policy implementation (questions 9-17). The paired t-test was used to compare the means between the policy beliefs subscale and the policy implementation subscale for the entire sample of participants. There was not a significant difference in the scores for policy beliefs (M= 30.11, SD= 5.26) and policy implementation (M= 30.75, SD= 3.36); t(156)= -
1.32, p = .53.
The researcher reviewed item frequencies to ascertain what teachers believe regarding equity of access and subsequent policy implementation to further investigate
Research Question 2. Table 6 contains item frequencies that may explain why there was not a significant difference between policy beliefs and policy implementation. A majority of the teachers believe nontraditional student participation has increased (55%), schools follow access policies (85%), schools have specific goals related to AP participation
(71%), schools encourage students to participate in AP courses (90%), schools recruit nontraditional students to enroll (65%), and all students should have access to one AP course during high school (61%). These responses could have been impacted by the slight majority (59%) of teachers participating from high FRPL schools. However, it also is noteworthy to reflect on those questions where AP teachers seemed to be divided. In combining the percentage of teachers who agreed or strongly agreed, the researcher created a new category: favors the reported AP belief or policy. The researcher also created a second category by combining strongly disagree and disagree: does not favor
79 the reported AP belief or policy. For example, 44% of teachers disagreed or strongly disagreed that the main reason high schools have a policy of encouraging students to take
AP classes is to increase opportunity for historically disadvantaged students. Meanwhile,
22% agreed or strongly agreed with this statement. AP teachers also were divided over whether the experience of participating in AP, regardless of the outcome, is beneficial since 41% of teachers agreed or strongly agreed with this statement, while 40% disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. In addition, 44% of teachers believe that students who could be in AP were not taking classes because the school failed to appropriately encourage them, while 36% did not agree with this statement. Another divergent finding was that 36% believe that AP sections should be grouped by ability, whereas 43% did not agree with this.
To further explore Research Question 2, the researcher conducted an independent t-test to determine whether there was a significant difference between policy beliefs and policy implementation in high FRPL schools and low FRPL schools. There was not a significant difference in policy beliefs between the high FRPL schools (M= 30.57,
SD=5.45) and low FRPL schools (M= 29.54, SD= 4.90); t(158) = -1.23, p = .220. There was not a significant difference in policy implementation between the high FRPL schools
(M= 31.27, SD= 3.57) and low FRPL schools (M= 30.24, SD= 3.07); t(158) = -1.91, p =
.058.
80 Table 6
Noteworthy Frequencies
Teacher Reported AP Belief Favor Do Not Favor I think the number of nontraditional students (African American, 54.7% 20.0% Hispanic, and/or Free and Reduced-Price Lunch students) taking AP classes at my high school has increased. I think my high school follows the formal policy of encouraging 85.% 6.5% as many students as possible to take AP classes. I believe the policies of the school district play the biggest role 48.7% 21.2% in determining the size of the AP program at my high school. I think my high school has specific goals about increasing AP 71.2% 14.1% participation. I believe my high school encourages students to take AP courses 90.0% 3.6% as they progress through high school. I believe my high school recruits and encourages nontraditional 65.3% 12.4% students to enroll in AP courses. I think the main reason my high school has a policy of 22.0% 43.8% encouraging students to take AP classes is to increase opportunity for historically neglected students. I think the more students taking AP courses, the better – even 41.0% 39.7% when they do poorly they benefit from the challenge and the experience. I think all students should have access to one AP course during 60.6% 25.3% their high school years. I think only students who can handle the material should take 63.7% 17.9% AP courses. I think too many students overestimate their abilities and are in 61.5% 17.2% over their heads when they take AP classes. I believe teacher recommendations should play a large role in 86.2% 6.6% determining which students take AP courses. I think there may be some students who could thrive in AP but 43.8% 35.5% do not end up taking these classes because the school fails to appropriately encourage them. I believe AP sections should be grouped by ability, so that, for 35.9% 42.4% example, the most advanced students learn together. I think my high school should conduct more screening of 75.3% 11.8% students to ensure that they are ready to do AP-level work before they get in those classrooms.
81 Prediction of Implementation of Policy Based on Beliefs
In order to determine whether policy beliefs can predict the implementation of policy, a simple regression analysis was conducted to answer Research Question 4. In the regression analysis, policy beliefs were the predictor and the implementation of the policy was the outcome. The total model did not predict implementation of belief; R2 =
.003, F (1, 156) = .04, p = .530.
The researcher reviewed item frequencies to further explore the notion that policy implementation could not be predicted from AP teachers’ beliefs concerning equity and access policies. Table 7 summarizes items that may indicate there are policies and/or procedures outside of the teachers’ control that could be influencing the implementation of equity and access policies. This indicates the need for further exploration regarding these beliefs and the contextual factors impacting these beliefs. For example, only 22% of teacher agreed or strongly agreed that the main reason a high school has an AP enrollment policy is to target historically underrepresented groups. The fact that the majority of the teachers surveyed did not agree with this statement raises questions about why teachers thought AP enrollment policies were in place as these rationales would underlie implementation. Furthermore, could there be other policies and/or procedures that prevent or preclude these underserved students from being in AP classes?
82 Table 7
Intervening Policy and Practices
Teacher Reported AP Belief Favor I think the main reason my high school has a policy of 21.9% encouraging students to take AP classes is to increase opportunity for historically neglected students. I think only students who can handle the material 63.7% should take AP courses. I think too many students overestimate their abilities 61.5% and are in over their heads when they take AP classes. I believe teacher recommendations should play a large 86.2% role in determining which students take AP courses. I think my high school should conduct more screening 75.3% of students to ensure that they are ready to do AP-level work before they get in those classrooms.
Statistical significance was not found in the quantitative data analysis and there is practical significance in these findings. Sunshine County Public Schools has received accolades regarding its implementation of equity and access policies in AP. Thus, not finding a significant difference between the implementation of equity and access policies and equity and access beliefs shows that the teachers surveyed believe in equity and access and implemented those policies and procedures that support equity and access to
AP courses. The focus at the College Board and within the school district, when reviewing the College Board’s (2015c) Achieving Equity website and the AP Procedural
Guide, further supports this notion as the communications being made to AP teachers uphold the importance of providing access to AP courses for all students who are willing to participate. The AP Procedural Guide states that “successful implementation of an AP program requires equity of access to AP” and achieving equity “highlights the strategies schools across the country use to help underserved students succeed in rigorous course 83 work” (College Board, 2015c). Thus, the institutional messaging to the schools is clear:
Equity of access to AP is a goal shared by the district and by the College Board. The quantitative results from the survey indicated that it was evident that teachers believe in equity and access to AP courses in theory, but implementation could not be predicted based on these beliefs, potentially due to intervening policies and procedures that need to be explored further.
Qualitative Data Results
For the current study, qualitative data were collected from three sources: documents from the AP Procedural Guide from Sunshine County Public Schools and the
Achieving Equity website of the College Board (2015c), two open-ended questions on the AP Teachers’ survey, and interview transcripts from eight participants. The documents were used to provide background information and context for the equity and access policies as well as for the expectations surrounding their application from both the
College Board and the district school board. The open-ended response questions allowed
AP teachers to provide further information regarding their beliefs as related to AP policies and their subsequent implementation. Of the 176 teachers surveyed, 99 teachers responded to the question “Is there anything you would like to add concerning your perspectives related to AP,” resulting in a 56% response rate on this question. In addition,
87 teachers responded to the question “Is there anything you would like to add regarding
AP policies and their implementation,” resulting in a 49% response rate on this question.
Eight interview transcripts were analyzed to provide a more detailed account of how AP teachers felt regarding access to AP and equity policies in two critical case samples.
84 Exploring AP Teachers’ Beliefs Related to Equity and Access Policies
Survey results indicated that the majority of the AP teachers believe in access to
AP, as 61% of all teachers surveyed either agreed or strongly agreed that students should have access to one AP course during their high school years. Given that a majority of AP teachers who responded to the survey had earned a Master’s degree (61%), this finding aligned with research related to level of educational attainment and support of access to accelerated mechanisms (Hallam & Ireson, 2003). However, the survey items did not allow the participants the opportunity to share their unique beliefs and experiences that occurred in each of their classroom. In order to learn more about what AP teachers reported regarding their beliefs with respect to the implementation of equity and access to policies to AP, interview transcripts were analyzed from eight AP teachers from the two critical case samples. In addition, the researcher also analyzed the open-ended survey responses from all participants. As a result, three themes emerged from the various data sources: (a) philosophical belief in equity and access, (b) impact of state and local policy on implementation of equity and access policies, and (c) impact of content area on AP teacher beliefs.
Philosophical belief in equity and access. Regardless of the school in which the researcher conducted the interview, all AP teachers interviewed believe in access to AP.
The teachers felt as though students should not be excluded from taking AP, especially if the student showed interest in the subject area. Leon, a foreign language teacher at SLHS, stated:
[I have a] very strong opinion on [access]. I feel every child should have access to
AP….Children need to be challenged at that level. They need to have courses
85 where they have to really think and learn much more challenging material. I am in
100% agreement that all children should have access to AP classes. I get
scandalized when I hear any kids are excluded in any way from any AP course.
Kim, a humanities teacher at SLHS, stated:
Philosophically, no bottom line at all, there should be no exclusion. If the student
wants to, I think the student should be able to take the class. I think it is a
phenomenal experience in terms of exposure to an approach to curriculum that
they have not seen before. Because I truly believe…[that] high school curriculums
and high school standards do not prepare students for the world of academia.
Calvin, a science teacher at JHS, stated: “Professionally, yeah, students should be included, even if they don’t have a chance of passing.”
Of the 99 participants who responded to the free-response question regarding their perspectives, 15 expressed support for access. Of the 87 who responded to the free- response question regarding AP policy implementation, 11 expressed support for access.
Teachers made overt statements such as “I believe that students should have access” and
“For the most part, I believe that students should have access.” Some participants specifically stated that they worked in schools where measures were taken to open access to AP courses and that teachers found that lower level students took advantage of these courses as a result. Another participant spoke to understanding the broader importance of access to AP in that teachers recognized that “AP courses are wonderful opportunities for students who truly want to try them…even if they are not extremely well-prepared.” This does not mean that the remaining participants did not support access; many teachers took the free-response questions as an opportunity to discuss issues related to class size,
86 resource allocation, and general acceleration policies and procedures, and some expressed that they did not support equity of access.
The beliefs that were expressed in support of equity of access philosophically aligned with the messaging from the College Board (2015c) and the school district. Both organizations directly have stated that they support equity and access. The AP Procedural
Guide specifically states that the school district:
Encourages teachers, AP Coordinators and school administrators to make
equitable access a guiding principle for their AP programs. Each and every school
needs to be committed to the principle that all students deserve an opportunity to
participate in rigorous and academically challenging course and programs. All
students who are willing to accept the challenge of a rigorous academic
curriculum should be considered for admission to AP courses. We encourage the
elimination of barriers that restrict access to AP courses for students from ethnic,
racial, and socioeconomic groups that have been traditionally underrepresented in
the AP program. Schools should make every effort to ensure that their AP classes
reflect the diversity of their student population. (p. 7)
Yet, despite the clear messaging from the College Board (2015c) and district, the teachers interviewed and surveyed also placed caveats on their beliefs. For some teachers, although they believe in access, this did not mean that they believe in “open-enrollment” or “AP for all.” Crystal, a STEM teacher at SLHS, best described this notion in her statement:
I don’t believe in AP for all….I think that if you are interested in a subject and
you have a knack for it, you should take it. Or if you are really interested and you
87 are willing to work hard and you don’t mind being frustrated because it is hard for
you, then okay.
Frequently when teachers were stating that they believe in AP access but were qualifying that statement, they spoke to the tension they have experienced between believing in access to AP and being held accountable for examination performance. One respondent on the survey exemplified this tension through the following statement:
While I believe philosophically that all students who want to challenge
themselves should be allowed to take an AP class, the fact that teachers are held
accountable for the scores tempers that practice. I believe that a student may not
pass the AP exam but will have still profited from their time in the class.
Therefore, teachers’ philosophical support of access to AP appeared to be impacted pragmatically. This is further evident in AP teachers’ support of traditional gatekeeping mechanisms. For example, AP teachers believe in the role of teacher recommendations for AP, that there needs to be a level of “AP readiness” in order for students to enter AP, and that there should be limits placed on how many AP classes a student can take. Not only were these traditional gatekeeping mechanisms supported in the survey findings, they also were supported in both interview data and open-ended responses. Every teacher interviewed believes in the role of teacher recommendations for students entering AP. As one respondent on the survey succinctly stated: “I do not agree with putting a student in an AP class unless the recommending teacher feels they can handle the curriculum.”
These beliefs are in contradiction with the recommendations made by the College
Board (2015c) and the AP Procedural Guide. The AP Procedural Guide specifically
88 states, “Don’t allow subjective teacher recommendations to be a requirement for any AP course. Instead, utilize AP Potential, District UL flags, the District progression chart and other objective data” (p. 2). In addition, the College Board (2015c) has suggested on their
Achieving Equity website that best practice is to enroll students automatically in the most rigorous courses and never to recommend down.
It also is important to note that there was a small but significant number of teachers who did not agree with access to AP in Sunshine County Public School. The survey findings revealed that 25% of respondents strongly disagreed or disagreed with the notion that every student should have the opportunity to participate in one AP course while attending high school. In reviewing the open-ended responses on the survey, some teachers felt strongly about limiting access: “I do NOT believe that AP courses are for every student. I do NOT think that their cultural or economic background has
ANYTHING to do with it. I think work ethic and study habits are far more important.”
Another respondent stated, “I don’t think it is for every student, unless they are college- bound.” Thus, although the majority of teachers surveyed and interviewed supported the notion of equitable access to AP courses, some also held contradictory beliefs regarding access, and some did not support the notion at all.
Impact of state and local policy on equity and access policy implementation.
In exploring the contradictory beliefs regarding equitable access to the AP program, it can be seen through the discussion of caveats the AP teachers placed on their philosophical beliefs that state and local policy plays a significant role in the implementation of equity and access policies. Because the survey did not directly speak to the school grading formula, teacher evaluations, and teacher bonus payments, this
89 finding was related only to the open-ended responses and interview data. Due to the embedded mixed methods design, the survey data were reviewed prior to conducting interviews, allowing the researcher to explore this emergent theme in the interview data.
Respondents to the survey spoke of the impact of state policy on AP enrollment in several different ways. A common observation was that there were no class sizes placed on AP courses and, therefore, teachers were frustrated with the enrollment process: “AP classes are great for students to take, but I think our administration enrolls many students in AP not out of academic purposes, but to meet class-size rules and avoiding hiring other teachers and opening new sections of classes.” In the state of Florida, class size requirements have been placed on core content area courses. However, as AP is an accelerated course that the student chooses to take, the class size amendment criteria does not apply to AP courses as they are not considered a core content area course (Florida
Department of Education, 2015a). Of the 99 respondents who spoke of the AP perspectives, 9 of the respondents focused on the negative impact of being excluded from class size. Of the 87 respondents who elaborated on AP policies, 7 stated that class size was an issue in teaching AP.
The open-ended survey data also revealed a focus by teachers on the school grading formula as the primary determinant of participation in AP. Of the respondents on the free-response question regarding the AP perspectives, seven respondents elaborated on school grade. Of the 87 respondents who chose to elaborate upon AP policies, 4 spoke of the school grading formula. As one respondent explained, “State policy, especially regarding school grade, determines the size of AP classes. There’s no debate about this.”
In other words, the teacher was stating that the weight of AP in the school grading
90 formula determined how many AP courses were offered and how many students were allowed into the course. This could explain why AP teachers surveyed were in favor of traditional gatekeeping mechanisms since their courses were subject to pressures regarding state accountability measures.
All of the teachers interviewed discussed the topic of school grades and the impact on AP courses at their school and/or throughout the county. The AP teachers at
JHS believe that the school grade formula greatly impacts the enrollment rates in their AP classes. They felt as though the AP classes rose and fell according to the school grading formula, as Calvin explained:
One year I actually saw a huge surge in my AP class and it all has to do with
school grades, with all of the legislation that came with school funding. So the
year they shifted for a point for every AP student and a point for every AP student
who passes….well if I have 50 AP students, I have 50 points and it doesn’t matter
if they pass or not. So there was a huge bump in my enrollment….
However, the teachers at SLHS felt as though school grades did not have as great an impact at their own school, although they did recognize the importance of the school grading formula in AP enrollment district-wide. For example, an exchange between
Bette, a STEM teacher at SLHS, and the researcher addressed this issue:
Bette: Ok. I think you got to be careful. I think, I know, schools that have put kids
in AP Chemistry without them taking honors Chemistry in order to increase their
enrollment in AP Chemistry. I think that is crazy. And I know educators who have
students in their AP Chemistry class that never took honors Chemistry. Chemistry
it’s like learning a new language. It’s like you are a little kid learning how to
91 write. Now you’ve got a kid there who never took the honors level and as the AP
teacher you’ve got such a rigorous curriculum you’ve got to teach this kid how to
write basically. You’ve got to be careful and schools are doing that.
Researcher: And you think they are doing that because of school grades?
Bette: I think so. I think that is what it is.
Researcher: Here at Salt Life, does the school grade matter?
Bette: No because there are so many AP classes here, if you aren’t ready this year,
you can take a different class this year and then do what you need to do in order to
take my class next year. You know, we have really thought out our process a lot.
Two distinct, underlying reasons for AP enrollment were evident in the interview data from each school. The teachers at JHS felt as though administration and school counselors were utilizing state accountability measures as the driving force in AP placement. Conversely, the teachers at SLHS felt as though the decisions made regarding
AP placement were done in the best interest of the child, rather than based on which placement would provide the most points in the school enrollment formula. In addition, teachers in both the open-ended responses and the interviews mentioned that the school grading formula once again had changed and now only performance would matter in AP courses. Some stated that they had felt a shift in their participation rates, as one respondent stated:
I am not a ‘gatekeeper’ but I have noticed a number of students simply thrown
into AP classes without any real orientation to the rigors of this kind of class.
When the formula gave credit for AP Participation, there was a big push to get as
many students as possible to take AP courses; now that there is more of a focus on
92 performance, another shift is happening. My administration is having us identify
students who ‘don't have a chance’ to pass the test. These students will remain in
the class but will not take the AP test and will not get the AP quality points on
their report cards. They are doing this to affect the performance percentage.
The respondent essentially was arguing that the enrollment in the AP program was based on the school grading, not on overt efforts to increase equity and access.
Two of the teachers interviewed also spoke of the bonus money attached to their passing rates. In the state of Florida, every teacher with a passing student receives a $50 bonus per student, capped at $2,000. If a teacher has a passing rate of 50% or higher, that cap becomes $3,000 (Funds for the Operation of Schools, 2015). In addition, school districts receive extra FTE money for every passing AP score, 80% of which is required to be returned to the school and is placed in the general fund. Interestingly, there were no teachers in the survey who mentioned the bonus funds attached to passing rates in the open-response section. Kim, a humanities teacher at SLHS, felt as though the AP bonus money attached to passing rates acts as the main barrier to open access. She discussed this issue with the researcher:
Kim: Now, you have to align yourself also philosophically with your school and
you don’t want to be terminated or sent to Siberia, because we know those things
happen. If your school is only interested in the money for passing scores, then
they are going to have some kind of a weeding out process.
Researcher: Do you think that is a main barrier to open access? The money
attached to passing rates?
Kim: In Florida with the deal the DOE has with the College Board? Absolutely.
93 The AP Procedural Guide mentions AP bonus money only in terms of how to allocate when students who are homebound or who are attending a private or virtual school are participating in AP examinations. The Achieving Equity (College Board,
2015c) website does not address AP bonus money, presumably because this is a state- funded initiative.
Impact of content area on equity and access beliefs. The impact of content area on equity and access beliefs emerged from the interview transcripts. Out of the eight teachers interviewed, four of the teachers taught in the science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) department. The researcher found that the STEM teachers were less likely to support open enrollment and/or “AP for all.” Rather, the researcher found that the STEM teachers supported utilizing prerequisites and teacher recommendations for their courses more readily than when compared to the humanities teachers in both of the schools in which interviews were conducted. In addition, the teachers interviewed referred to the STEM department as being more difficult to access as compared to the
English, social studies, and foreign language departments. Deanna, a humanities teacher at SLHS, reflected upon what she had observed regarding the STEM department at her school with the researcher:
Deanna: So, you know, there is an elitism with AP…..I hear things like, ‘Well
that kid was only in my honors class….’ Like that child isn’t worthy because they
never made it to AP Chemistry or Physics and that kind of a thing. And I’m like,
‘…..He is in my honors class but he’s a nice kid.’ So there is a certain elitism that
I think goes along with that. Like that kid should not be in my class because they
don’t belong there….. [And students who do not excel in mathematics or science],
94 they never made it into AP math and science classes, they were in AP English, AP
History, and AP Psychology, and those things. And I think that there is an elitism
that especially happens with those courses.
Researcher: Like with the STEM program?
Deanna: Yeah. This kind of like, ‘Here are these kids and here is the rest of the
world.’
The STEM teachers also acknowledged that the mathematics placement of the student had an impact on whether the student would be enrolled into AP STEM courses.
For example, Bette stated that she prepared a flow chart with the prerequisites for every science AP class because there were mathematics requirements for the different AP courses. Calvin stated that students need a background in geometry for some AP science courses, but calculus for the highest level of AP sciences. Minnie stated that she had to provide after-school tutoring help for students in mathematics; otherwise they would not be able to follow the science curriculum. Crystal stated that students must be enrolled in
Algebra II or have already had Algebra II in order to enroll in her course.
This trend of less access in STEM courses is acknowledged by the College Board
(2015c) on their Achieving Equity website. Consistent with the information provided by two AP STEM teachers, Bette and Calvin, Achieving Equity (College Board, 2015c) recommends the practice that all schools backward map their courses to ensure that students are taking Algebra by the time they enter ninth grade in order to maximize AP opportunities. The AP Procedural Guide also provides a direct and specific guideline when it comes to pre-requisites: “Don’t require any prerequisite for AP other than what is published in the state course code directory” (p. 2). These teachers’ perspectives raised
95 the question of the uniform applicability of AP access policies across all content areas. It could be useful for both the College Board and the school district to acknowledge that not all AP courses can be accessed in the same manner. The varying structure of disciplines is such that it is important to consider that it is easier to enroll in some courses than others; AP environmental science does not require a certain course progression and it can be argued that this course could be a good “gateway” course into AP for students who would like to take an advanced science course. Conversely, accessing Physics C would require prerequisites, such as a certain level of mathematics, and therefore a student would need to be placed on a “track” to access this type of course.
AP Teachers’ Perceptions of Nontraditional Students
Survey results indicated that 22% of AP teachers agreed or strongly agreed that the main reason their high school has a policy of encouraging students to take AP classes was to increase opportunity for historically neglected students. As this does not represent a majority of the teachers, but does represent a significant minority, the researcher further explored this finding in the subsequent interviews. The interview protocol allowed those
AP teachers interviewed to elaborate upon their perceptions related to teaching nontraditional students in AP classes. In analyzing the interview transcripts, two themes emerged: (a) AP teachers’ beliefs that nontraditional students are in AP classes by virtue of the population, and (b) the impact of enrollment procedures.
AP teachers’ beliefs that nontraditional students are in AP classes by virtue of the population. Across both critical case samples, teachers did not feel as though nontraditional students had increased participation in AP courses due to an overt effort by
96 the school or district. Rather, the teachers felt as though the classes were diverse because the schools were diverse. Minnie, a STEM teacher at JHS, stated:
I know there are other schools, similar to this one, where the majority of kids, if I
wanted to have an all-White AP [science] class, it would be really hard to make
that happen. There’s just not that many kids, kids that are flagged are usually
going to be a minority….
The teachers interviewed did not attribute SCPS’s recognition for increasing access to AP as a result of any policy or procedure, but rather, because SCPS is a diverse school district. For example, when Bette, a STEM teacher at SLHS, was questioned about why she felt SCPS was recognized, she stated:
We are a very diverse county. The schools mirror the diversity of the county….if
this is the population you have and this is your pool, and other places aren’t as
diverse, you don’t have the pool to pick from. As [SLHS] became more diverse,
our classrooms mirror that.
In addition, the AP teachers interviewed did not see a difference in preparedness based on race or socioeconomic status; rather, they focused on differences in motivation, organizational and time management skills, resources, and parental involvement. At JHS, which has a high level of FRPL students, low equity and access rates, and a high population of African American students, the teachers felt as though all three of these were lacking. Minnie stated:
This particular school, the majority of students are African American. So I mean,
I definitely think there is an issue but that goes far beyond AP and to issues in the
structure of our education system. You know, the district and the country in
97 general, that the kids in the lower economic sections tend to be shafted more than
kids in the affluent areas for several reasons. Some are the fault of the district and
some are not so much. Some are the fault of the parents. I think parental
involvement makes a difference. I think if the parents screamed about some of the
things we were lacking here, maybe we wouldn’t be lacking them so much but
they are not.
Whereas at SLHS, which has a low level of FRPL students, high equity and access rates, and a high population of Hispanic students, AP teachers felt as though students were lacking only in time management and organizational skills. They spoke openly of having enough resources on and off campus and of the high level of parental involvement. For example, responding to the availability of resources at the school, Kim stated:
The kids have resources that they could probably share with other schools that are
not as affluent. Yes, the kids have resources…..They pretty much walk around
with their tablets and their laptops and you ask them to get their hands on a video
or something that perhaps would be challenging, they don’t have those issues. So
I think in that sense, I am privileged to have that kind of supported population.
Crystal further elaborated upon the high level of community involvement at
SLHS:
The community is very much into education I think. More so than other
communities and everyone wants their children to learn. I’m not saying that other
people don’t, but there is more of a push here. That’s what I think. It is so hard to
98 know why. But that is why I want to work here. I want to work in a place where
kids want to learn.
Therefore, despite speaking openly about differences in preparedness teacher by teacher, there was a difference when comparing the two critical case samples. The difference also was replicated when looking at AP enrollment rates in the two schools:
Only 10% of students at JHS had participated in an AP course by the time they graduated, whereas 84% of students at SLHS had participated. Therefore, despite the schools having a diverse population, there was a significant difference in access levels at these two locations.
The impact of enrollment procedures. Despite the AP teachers feeling as though nontraditional students were participating due to SCPS being a diverse county, it was apparent that there were very different levels of access present in the two critical case samples. In reviewing the documents as they relate to enrollment procedures, the AP
Procedural Guide contains guidelines to specifically target nontraditional students. For example, the procedural guide recommends “taking advantage of local talent” to enroll minority students in AP foreign language courses. In addition, the AP Procedural Guide and the College Board’s (2015c) Achieving Equity website strongly encourage the use of
AP Potential and/or the district-level prediction reports in enrolling students into AP courses. In the College Board’s (2015c) guidelines to build an AP program, the first step indicated is to review AP Potential (which is based on a student’s PSAT/NMSQT score).
The AP Procedural Guide states that all department heads must use AP Potential or the local prediction reports to identify students who may be successful in their AP classes and that teachers should be required to meet and recruit these students. The AP
99 Procedural Guide specifies that this procedure helps to identify students who previously may not have enrolled in an AP course, but whose readiness has been indicated.
Despite the focus in the AP Procedural Guide and in Achieving Equity (College
Board, 2015c), none of the free responses spoke of AP Potential or the locally developed prediction reports being utilized in enrollment in AP courses, with the exception of one comment, where the teacher stated that there were 9th and 10th graders with AP Potential who were not enrolling in AP social studies courses. Teachers also were asked in the interviews if they were aware that the district had created its own internal flag system to indicate those students who were ready for acceleration; none of the teachers interviewed was aware of this report. Rather, the free-response data and the interview data repeatedly pointed to state standardized test scores being utilized as the criteria for placement into
AP courses. While these state standardized test scores are not aligned to the AP courses as the PSAT/NMSQT scores are, these tests tend to be the criteria for entrance into an AP course. Perhaps this is due to the ease with which these scores can be accessed as compared to PSAT/NMSQT scores and the subsequent AP Potential data.
In comparing the enrollment procedures in each critical case sample, there were significant differences that emerged. Every teacher at SLHS was able to verbalize the procedure for getting enrolled in an AP course and was familiar with AP Potential. In this process, students received a course selection card, and on this card their AP Potential by subject area was indicated. Students then had their teacher sign off on the course selection card that the AP subject area was an appropriate placement for them. Students were encouraged to speak with the AP teacher regarding what the course required. If a student wanted to take an AP course and was not identified through AP Potential or
100 teacher recommendation, then the school utilized waivers that the parent could sign, which effectively “waiver” the student into the course. The school had a waiver-parent night where the parents who were choosing to waiver their student into the course could attend to learn more about the AP courses. However, none of the teachers interviewed had ever heard of the district-level flag report or that it was suggested by the district to be utilized in placing students into accelerated courses.
The three teachers interviewed did not indicate that JHS had a clearly defined procedure for entering AP and none of the teachers interviewed was familiar with AP potential. Rachel, a teacher interviewed at JHS, stated: “Here, some were recommended by teachers, some placed just because.” Another teacher, Calvin, stated that he was instrumental in the course enrollment for his courses. He recruited directly from his lower-level classes and felt as though he was not supported by administration and guidance in his AP recommendations:
A lot of the advanced science programs at this school are not promoted by
administration. Unfortunately I have had guidance counselors refuse to put
students into [science] because of their beliefs of their ability, regardless of my
recommendation. That kind of hit home for me. I have two students this year who
I highly recommended. I knew them from my previous science classes. And I
actually had to fight to get them in because the guidance counselors did not want
to put them in.
Minnie was not able to describe the enrollment process for AP. When questioned, she stated: “I am not 100% sure. I am not involved in the process.” In essence, the school with the lowest level of equity of access did not have a clearly defined enrollment process
101 for AP courses, and even when there was a way to identify students (as in the case of
Calvin), there were road blocks, thus partially explaining why their access levels were low.
Additional Barriers in Implementing Equity and Access Policies
The barriers that AP teachers reported in implementing AP equity and access policies came from both interview transcripts and the open-ended response questions on the survey. As mentioned in the previous discussion on AP teachers’ beliefs, a significant barrier that was reported was competing state policies. However, two further emergent themes related to barriers also were identified: (a) competing acceleration mechanisms and (b) school culture.
Competing acceleration mechanisms. Through the interview process, the researcher found out that both schools had competing acceleration mechanisms on their campuses. SLHS is a Cambridge Advanced International Certificate of Education (AICE) school (Cambridge International Exams, 2015).
JHS is an International Baccalaureate (IB) (2015) magnet school. Teachers at JHS felt as though the IB program was in direct competition with the AP program. As Minnie stated, “I think the school wants kids in AP and they want that many, but in this particular school because of the IB program, those kids that are high testers that usually get sucked into IB.” The free-response data indicated that teachers also were concerned about
Cambridge posing a direct competition to AP with statements such as, “The AICE
Cambridge Program is cannibalizing the AP program at my school” and “Sunshine
County is making a concerted effort to promote AICE courses and in my particular
102 school this program is undermining the AP program and appears to be the new golden child of administration.”
However, based on interview data, SLHS appeared to be more adept at balancing the different acceleration mechanisms. Several teachers described their school as creating a course progression that blended both AP and AICE courses. As Leon described:
We try to accommodate the child’s abilities so that the child will be most
successful in the choice they make. We don’t want them to feel inadequate also.
So I’ll give you an example in French. Now that we have AICE French as well as
AP French, we try to steer the kids from a level French 3 into AICE French before
going into AP French because AICE French is a really good preparation for kids
before going into AP, I believe.
Another acceleration mechanism that was mentioned, which was available to all students across Sunshine County, is dual enrollment. The survey items did not speak to dual enrollment; however, it emerged as a theme from the free-response data among six participants. Participants made statements such as, “Students are taking dual enrollment classes instead of AP classes, and think that college credit is worth more than the AP class,” and “If the College Board could contact state representatives to support AP classes over dual enrollment classes, this would increase the number of students taking the courses at my school.” When interview participants were questioned about dual enrollment, there seemed to be an underlying feeling that dual enrollment courses were used to increase class rank and GPA because they tended to be less rigorous than AP courses. As Kim, a humanities teacher at SLHS, stated:
103 They are so different in terms of the actual rigor and critical thinking involved. At
least that has been my experience, I have students who have taken my class, the
AP language, and wanted credit for English 4. Didn’t want to take AP Lit, wanted
credit for English 4 through dual enrollment. So they are still taking 1101 or they
are taking 1102 and they will come back to me and they will say, ‘This was the
worst mistake of my life. I should have listened to you. I should have taken AP
Literature. This is a joke.’
School culture. Last, school culture was depicted very differently in the two critical case samples. At JHS, the teachers reported high levels of student and teacher apathy in regard to the AP program. The teachers reported that drop-out policies for AP courses were based on examination performance, and there was a low level of student supports in place (such as after-school tutoring, AP examination review sessions, identification of curricular weaknesses, etc.), insufficient experienced teachers to teach
AP courses, and difficulty in implementing equity and access policies. Rachel, a teacher at JHS, provided a unique perspective on the school culture as it was her first year at the school and she previously had taught in other schools. She described the culture at JHS:
There is a different culture at this school for AP. At my other school kids had to
stay after and they wanted to. They did review sessions with their teachers and
they really wanted to pass. I offer these kids after-school help and not once have
they come for help. We had a meeting with the AP teachers to see if they wanted
to do a half day where we could review with the kids. The AP teachers voted to
keep you guys [the district office] to do the AP review session and they looked at
me like I was crazy [for wanting to hold our own].
104 Another teacher at JHS, Calvin (who had been at the school for four years), echoed her sentiment regarding teachers at JHS:
I think it is a long-term culture at this school. Our principal has really been trying
to change the culture and he gets a lot of resistance from the entrenched
teachers….I have seen so many programs that start at the beginning of the year
with the highest minded ideas, that have just kind of petered off. For example,
AP. We were trying to align AP across all subject areas and find tracks to identify
ninth graders. So for the first three months of school we met twice a month. Big
group of AP teachers. How are we going to do this and how are we going to
tackle this. By the third month we lost half of our members. By the fifth month,
there were only three of us. Because all of the ideas we were coming up with were
not getting enacted school-wide. So it was really that we were shouting but no one
was hearing our voice.
The teachers felt as though the principal was making an effort to improve the AP program, but felt as though the school counselors, assistant principals, and faculty were resisting these efforts, especially due to the focus that the AP Procedural Guide and the
College Board (2015c) places on the role of school counselors and administration in promoting equity of access.
The teachers interviewed also spoke of the focus of the school’s curriculum as one that has high levels of administrative control and one that is focused on what was needed to get students to graduate rather than on the students attending a higher education opportunity. One pertinent example of this is the requirement that all classes engage
105 twice weekly in a reading initiative in their classes, with no instructor input over what materials are read or reviewed critically. Furthermore, Rachel described another issue:
This school has a lot of kids that want to join the military. They aren’t focused on
college. It doesn’t behoove them because it is not necessary to what they want to
do later on. It just doesn’t fall in line with what they want to do.
However, the teachers at SLHS spoke very differently regarding their school culture. Every teacher interviewed stated that curricular decisions made at the school were in the best interest of the student. The majority of the teachers interviewed did not feel as though the school grading formula drove administrative decisions regarding the
AP program. Rather, these teachers reported that there was a high level of interaction between the school and the community related to the AP program and students were encouraged to challenge themselves as often as possible. The teachers at SLHS spoke of a high level of parental involvement, student support systems in place, a focus on vertical teaming within their departments, and curriculum fairs for both current high school students and matriculating middle school students. In addition, the teachers at SLHS who were interviewed had served as mentors for other teachers in the county or had attended the AP examination reading sessions, in addition to attending AP Summer Institutes.
The Achieving Equity (College Board, 2015c) website and the AP Procedural
Guide suggest all of the mechanisms used at SLHS as practices that will increase equity and access. Achieving Equity (College Board, 2015c) states that schools should foster a college-going culture with a clear pathway to AP courses and develop a strong strategic plan that is communicated through the entire school and community. The AP Procedural
Guide states that teachers must be involved in professional development opportunities,
106 involve parents as much as possible in the AP program, utilize objective data when making the decision to place students in AP, have safety net mechanisms in place to support students, and have a clear leadership team defined in the school who will support growing the AP program. Although some teachers at JHS had attended professional development experiences, it also was reported that some did not. In addition, the free- response questions on the survey indicated that the teachers throughout the district felt as though more professional development opportunities for teachers were needed as well as student supports mechanisms to help foster successful AP experiences.
Summary of the Chapter
The current study was conducted to investigate teachers’ beliefs regarding equity and access to AP and their relationship to the impact that those beliefs have on policy implementation. Through a survey of 176 AP teachers in the district, and interviews with eight teachers at two selected high schools, participants shared information regarding their own beliefs and the implementation of these policies in their classroom and school.
Results identified that although AP teachers were supportive of equity and access policies, AP teachers’ beliefs were not the most important construct in equitable implementation of AP policies in Sunshine County Public Schools. Rather, there were intervening policies and procedures related to performance on AP examinations that impacted the implementation of equity and access policies and contributed to a glass ceiling at a structural level.
Despite survey data not yielding statistically significant differences between teacher beliefs and implementation, interviews and comments from open-ended questions revealed patterns of inequity in access, despite teachers’ beliefs in support of equity and
107 access. These findings were particularly salient when comparing the two high schools as historical patterns of unequal access to the AP program for nontraditional students continued to occur. The school with the highest level of equity and access had an experienced faculty that followed a clear AP pathway as delineated by the administration, the district, and the College Board (2015c). Although this school (SLHS) had a high level of Hispanic students, it had a low level of FRPL students as well as a low number of
African American students. The results revealed that, in contrast, the school with the lowest level of equity and access (JHS) struggled with creating a college-going culture that incorporated a successful AP program. These teachers felt as though the expectations of students were low and they struggled with getting support from administration and other faculty members to improve the AP program. Contradicting policies and procedures played a significant role in this disparity as the teachers’ beliefs and implementation of equity and access policies were impacted by content area taught and the state of Florida’s school funding and bonus structures that continue to uphold historic patterns of exclusion.
108 CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS
The purpose of this embedded case study was to examine the relationship between beliefs held by AP teachers in regard to the implementation of equity and access policies, as well as to what extent these beliefs may support or hinder the execution of such policies and procedures. The study was conducted in Sunshine County Public Schools
(SCPS), which has received national accolades for improving equity and access to AP courses. All AP teachers within the school district were invited to participate in an online survey regarding their beliefs. Out of 506 AP teachers, 176 teachers participated in the survey. Interviews of eight AP teachers then were conducted at two schools: Salt Life
High School (SLHS) and Jameson High School (JHS). These high schools were selected because, at the time of data collection, they represented the highest and lowest levels of equity and access, respectively. Five teachers from SLHS and three teachers from JHS consented to interviews. The study design also included document reviews of the AP
Procedural Guide that is published by the school district and the College Board’s (2015c)
Achieving Equity website.
The analysis of data revealed that AP teachers reported that they believe in equity and access, but that policies were not being consistently implemented across schools due to the impact of state accountability measures, funding mechanisms, competing acceleration mechanisms, and school culture. Furthermore, STEM teachers raised concerns regarding equity and access policies in relation to their respective content areas.
This study found that there was not a significant difference in AP teachers’ beliefs and
109 their application of equity and access policies and procedures, which indicates that AP teachers supported equity and access to AP courses. Yet they did not attribute the increased diversity in the student body participating in AP to equity and access policies.
This chapter discusses the results of the study, including recommendations for future research and the implications of this study.
Discussion
The Philosophical Versus Pragmatic Tensions in the Implementation of Equity and
Access Policies
This study found that AP continues to serve as a form of tracking, despite efforts made by the College Board and state and local policies and procedures, due to the focus at the state level of AP performance in the school grading formula and teacher bonus structure. The results of the study revealed that the AP teachers believe in equity and access policies in theory, but engaged in traditional gatekeeping mechanisms due to the pressure to perform on accountability measures that impact school grades. The school grading formula consists of several components, but the teachers in this study were most affected by the use of performance on the end-of-year AP examination as an accountability measure.
The quantitative findings based on the survey results revealed that the majority of the teachers believe in access to AP and the implementation of equity and access policies.
The survey utilized in this study was modified based on Duffett and Farkas’ (2009) national survey. In comparing the results of this study with those of the Duffett and
Farkas’ study, a majority of teachers in SCPS supported open access to AP courses, compared to a minority of teachers (38%) in the previous study. Given the recognition
110 SCPS has received in increasing equity of access, it makes sense that the teachers who participated in this study would support equity of access more readily than those who responded to the national survey. However, Duffett and Farkas also found that teachers would like to see more gatekeeping in regard to equity and access and concluded that the teachers who participated in their study were not in support of an open-door policy.
Through analysis of survey frequencies, this study also found that AP teachers support traditional gatekeeping mechanisms. This finding appears to be contradictory based on the previous finding on teacher beliefs and the accolades received by the district.
Thus, given the contradictions found in the quantitative data, it was important that the current study went on to examine further the beliefs reported through qualitative components. The qualitative findings that emerged from both free-response data on the survey and the interview responses revealed that the AP teachers were engaging in gatekeeping mechanisms out of necessity, while also supporting the philosophy of equity of access. These two data sources elaborated upon the quantitative findings in that AP teachers specifically stated that they believe in AP for all in theory but not in practice as they described polices at the state level and procedures at the school level that were hindering equity and access efforts. Essentially, the teachers were struggling with tensions surrounding policies related to AP: those related to open access and those related to performance rates. It was found that the teachers surveyed and interviewed believe that access to AP courses is important and that, in theory, every student should have access to this particular acceleration mechanism. Although the teachers believe and understand the need for equity and access, access to their course and enrollment procedures were based on implementation of state accountability and funding policies that contradict notions of
111 equity and access. Initiatives to increase equity and access to AP programs were compromised when state policies resulted in the evaluation of the schools and teachers based on examination scores, and, therefore, students were not provided the opportunity to experience the benefits of the AP program due to the sole focus on testing
(Klopfenstein, 2003; Kyburg et al., 2007).
Based on this study, the disjunction between the AP teachers’ beliefs and the mechanisms by which they are realized, especially in the contrasting contexts of the two schools, raises broad-based concerns about the patterns of access and equity available for students. In essence, the reproduction of historic tracking mechanisms was occurring due to school cultures that focused on competing for scarce resources that were distributed through school funding formulas and on bonus payments based upon student performance on a standardized examination. This culture, in turn, became a system of exclusion, as preemptive decisions about examination pass rates were made prior to student enrollment in an AP course. Once both the quantitative data and qualitative data were analyzed, it was found that teachers felt both internal and external pressure to have high examination passing rates in their courses. The emphasis on performance and achievement resulted in a further stratified system where marginalized students were tracked into lower-level courses based on standardization and systems of accountability.
This study also revealed that not all teachers felt as though “open access” to AP was synonymous with achieving equity and access, particularly in science and mathematics courses. Rather, these teachers felt as though “open access” should focus on encouraging a school culture where students are matched with an acceleration opportunity that best fit their needs; for some students, this does not include participation
112 in an AP course. However, these teachers did feel as though students should be provided access to high rigor instruction early in their education to maximize the potential for the opportunity to access AP courses eventually in an attempt to ensure that all students would be able to perform at the level needed to engage in the advanced concepts contained in their curriculum. Their discussion of the skills needed in order to access their courses raised concerns beyond access to AP, as these speak to equity in education more broadly. Essentially, teachers were describing that students are excluded based on systemic deficit-oriented structures, whether it be due to policies and procedures based on
AP examination pass rates or standardized test scores earlier in the student’s career. This was particularly salient in the case of the two high schools, as the students at SLHS knew what was needed to access AP courses and how they might have the potential to do so.
However, at JHS, there was not a clear indication that students were supported, encouraged, and knowledgeable about how to access acceleration mechanisms and the benefits these mechanisms potentially could provide.
As schools are part of the state, they are compelled to act in certain ways depending on the current state of the society (Apple, 1995). The current state of the society for schools is one that is focused on reward policies at both the state and district levels. Rather than engaging students and teachers in the rigorous curriculum, which is the intent of AP as indicated by Kyburg et al. (2007), these policies might facilitate teacher de-professionalization. Apple (1995) stated that the de-professionalization of teachers occurs when they are removed from the role of expert and are forced to comply with external accountability measures. In this study, these accountability measures undermine the equity and access policies that could provide opportunity for underserved
113 communities. Furthermore, Sleeter (2005) argued, “Because assumptions guide what teachers do, it is worthwhile to spend time examining the basis on which one makes teaching decisions” (p. 30). This study sought to investigate the teachers’ role, acknowledging that it is teacher beliefs that are crucial to whether AP contributes to greater stratification as a result of their teaching decisions. It was found that teachers could not accept the challenge to teach all students and to help students enjoy education when the measure of success is not the joy and inspiration kindled by teaching AP courses, but performance on a test. Thus, the teachers also were de-professionalized by using standardized tests as indicators of success in the classroom (Sleeter, 2005) since end-of-the-year evaluations and bonus structures are based partially on the AP examination pass rate, and the value of what happens on a daily basis in the classroom is negated.
Regardless of performance on the examination, there have been several benefits found in participating in AP: shorter amount of time to earn a college degree (Barnard-
Brak et al., 2011; Curry et al., 1999; Kyburg et al., 2007); lower tuition costs as students can begin to earn college credits while they are still in high school (Barnard-Brak et al.,
2011; Kyburg et al., 2007); advanced study skills that contribute to successful completion of a degree (Kyburg et al., 2007; Klopfenstein, 2004b); increased chance of college admission, especially for first-generation students (Klopfenstein, 2003); and higher grades in postgraduate coursework (Sadler & Sonnert, 2010). AP also provides increased benefits as compared to other accelerated counterparts, such as dual enrollment (Godfrey et al., 2013; Wyatt & Patterson, 2013). The benefits of participating in AP go beyond those that are linked to college placement; students who are able to access AP courses
114 also are being taught by more experienced teachers and accessing a more rigorous curriculum that focuses on higher-order thinking skills and advanced concepts (Sadler,
2010; Van Tassel-Baska, 2001).
This study further extended De Wet and Gubbins’ (2011) discussion of teacher beliefs and students from diverse backgrounds. These researchers found that teachers believe students from diverse backgrounds have the ability and should be included in accelerated programs. However, they also found that those teachers who taught in states without acceleration mandates believe more strongly in the benefits of including diverse students in acceleration programs and were less likely to support standardized testing as the measurement of diverse students’ abilities. The researchers thought that perhaps this could be explained by the possibility that teachers are influenced by the constraints put on nontraditional students through policies and procedures delineated by mandates in terms of accessing acceleration mechanisms. It appears as though the pattern identified by de
Wet and Gubbins (2011) also holds true in this study. In the state of Florida, acceleration mandates have been implemented. Furthermore, acceleration mandates have been tied to school grading formulas, and teacher performance bonuses have been tied to AP examination performance. This study found that teachers supported equity of access, but with caveats based on policies and procedures tied to the school grading formula. This study also found that teachers believe that the change of the school grading formula over time also has impacted the participation of students in the AP program. This partially could explain why some progress has been made, but that a gap continues to persist. In essence, for the first two years that accelerated mechanisms became a part of the school grade, participation in accelerated courses counted more in the school grading formula
115 (Funds for the Operation of Schools, 2009). Then, during the 2011-2012 school year, participation and performance counted equally (Funds for the Operation of Schools,
2011). In 2014-2015, the formula was changed once again, and now school grades are based solely on performance in AP courses (Funds for the Operation of Schools, 2014).
Based on the interview data, it would appear as though the school grading formula (with the focus on participation) was a significant factor in the national accolades the school district received since teachers did not indicate that they felt the recognition bestowed was a result of targeted efforts to increase access for nontraditional students. Rather, they felt as though the increase in AP participation was a calculated attempt to increase school grades.
The trend of increasing the importance of AP examination pass rates also held true in the teacher bonus structure. Teacher bonus funds for AP began in the 2000-2001 school year (Funds for the Operation of Schools, 2000) where AP teachers were awarded a $50 bonus for every student who passed the AP examination with a score of 3 or higher.
This bonus was capped at $2,000 regardless of how many students passed the examination. In addition, if a teacher taught in a “D” or “F” school and had at least one student pass the AP examination with a score of 3 or higher, that teacher would be allotted an additional bonus of $500. This teacher bonus structure changed in 2013-2014 and increased the maximum bonus a teacher could now earn to $3,000. However, the teacher only qualified for the $3,000 if at least 50% of the students enrolled in the teacher’s AP course earned a score of 3 or higher in an “A,” “B,” or “C” school. If teachers are employed in a “D” or “F” school, they qualify for the $3,000 if at least 25% of the students enrolled earn a passing score.
116 Thus, even though AP teachers believe that students should have access to AP, these beliefs cannot be acted upon in the face of high-stakes policies, particularly as these policies are tied to both school-based funding and teacher bonuses. Just as Klopfenstein
(2003) and Kyburg et al. (2007) warned, the emphasis on AP examinations in measuring both a student and a school’s worth limits acceleration options and treats the examinations as the only indicator of higher learning. Therefore, although the teachers know that students would benefit from taking AP courses, they are unable to focus on the experience of taking the AP course and the positive results that occur when a student is able to hone skills necessary to be successful without operating in a high-stakes environment (Flores & Gomez, 2011; Klopfenstein, 2003, 2004b; Kyburg et al., 2007).
These policies interrupt the implementation of equity and access policies and procedures and contribute to the moral debt identified by Ladson-Billings (2006) that there continues to be a “disparity between what we know is right and what we actually do” (p. 8).
Difference in Equity and Access Beliefs and Content Area Instruction
This study also found that teacher beliefs about equity per se are not at the root of implementation distinctions at the local level; rather differences in content areas might be more explanatory because the subject area being taught affects the perceptions of equity and access. The finding that STEM teachers at both schools did not support “AP for all” as readily as the humanities teachers merits further discussion particularly as it relates to how different AP courses are accessed. This differentiation is not acknowledged in the
AP Procedural Guide, as it does not address equity and access in terms of subject area.
Yet it became clear that STEM teachers felt as though there should be particular course progressions followed in order to access their courses and that following these
117 progressions were in the best interest of the student, particularly as part of the broader discussion related to equity in education. If students, parents, and the matriculating middle school are not aware of these course progressions, students will be unable to access accelerated mechanisms upon their entrance to high school.
For STEM teachers, the role of prerequisites was a significant factor in describing course progressions and marked a difference in perspectives as compared to humanities teachers. These findings were consistent with those of Hallam and Ireson (2003), where they felt that these differences were related to how learning is perceived within the content areas: STEM teachers see learning as linear and building directly on prior knowledge, whereas humanities courses are more flexible in differentiating instruction.
STEM teachers indicated that they were in favor of students completing honors-level versions of their AP courses prior to entering their particular AP course. Furthermore, not only did STEM teachers want to see students in an earlier honors version of the course, they also repeatedly mentioned the impact of mathematics placement on eventual AP placement. These findings confirmed the argument that placement into STEM AP courses begins much earlier than entrance into high school. The College Board (2015c) specifies on the Achieving Equity website that early access to mathematics is a key in accessing
AP courses. In addition, some of the STEM and humanities teachers interviewed spoke of how it was easier to progress and access AP courses in English and social studies. They felt as though there was more of a clear-cut path into those courses; for example, following a basic course path would allow the student to access one of those AP courses in their junior or senior year.
118 Clearly Developed AP Pathway Impacts Equity and Access
Results confirmed that a clear AP Pathway (as evidenced by SLHS, which had high equity and access) can serve as a local effort to increase equity and access (as compared to JHS, which had low equity and access). SLHS had a clearly developed AP
Pathway that was supported by the AP Procedural Guide and by the suggestions made on the College Board’s (2015c) Achieving Equity website. SLHS’ pathway focused on utilizing student data to provide targeted support through the use of AP Potential data, fostering a college-going culture through curriculum fairs and parent nights, focusing on curricular alignment through vertical teaming efforts within departments, and promoting professional development opportunities that result in more experienced teachers. The pathways highlight contrasting structural features between the two schools. This is particularly salient as the survey findings did not show a difference between policy beliefs and implementation in high FRPL schools as compared to low FRPL schools.
Furthermore, the difference in these structural features shows that AP can perpetuate inequities unless interrupted, at the local level, by the presence of an individually developed school-wide AP pathway that is supported by the community.
The teachers interviewed at JHS did not detail an AP Pathway that incorporates those recommendations made by Contreras (2011) and Kyburg et al. (2007), which focused on quality instruction, tutoring, and access to curricular resources that would raise student achievement. Rather, the teachers identified several mechanisms through which the reproduction of inequity was occurring: (a) lack of a clearly defined AP pathway, (b) rationale for placement due to administrative focus on school grading formulas, (c) low teacher expectations and the subsequent failure to encourage enrollment
119 in AP courses, (d) the absence of a school culture that focuses on the link between AP and college, and (e) lack of teacher awareness related to AP Potential and local district prediction flags.
The differences apparent in the AP pathways at each school also highlight the differences between those who have access and those who do not. The low socioeconomic status school, with the lowest level of access, is focused on practical curriculum with a high level of administrative control over classrooms and teachers (that is, looking at what it takes to graduate as the bottom line), whereas the high socioeconomic status school offers every AP subject, aligns them to AICE courses, and provides every opportunity for students to participate in as many acceleration mechanisms as possible. The curricular focus of these two schools appears to be based on the social class of the community and students at the school. Following the analyses of
Anyon (1981) and Kozol (1991), troubling patterns emerged in the differences between the two schools. JHS is a high FRPL school and the focus is on traditional academic knowledge; only 10% of the student population is accessing the AP curriculum. The comparison with SLHS, an affluent school that has an 84% participation rate in AP, is stark. Furthermore, teacher interview data also revealed that the teachers at JHS felt as though there were negative assumptions made about diverse learners by the faculty, which upholds research findings that negative assumptions result in lowered expectations and limited access to accelerated programs (de Wet & Gubbins, 2011; Jacobs & Harvey,
2009; Sadler, 2010; Swanson, 2010; Taliaferro & DeCuir-Gunby, 2008).
The experiences described in the interview data at each of these socially stratified schools align with the findings of Anyon’s (1981) landmark study. The link between
120 curriculum focus and socioeconomic status of the community is clear: AP is viewed as cultural capital at SLHS, and the AP teachers felt as though their students needed to be prepared for academic and economic success. Anyon described the executive elite school in her setting as “academic, intellectual, and rigorous” (p. 31), and this description could easily be applied to SLHS. When comparing the opportunities available at each site, coupled with the insight provided on how access to acceleration is philosophically viewed, “We can see the schools reproducing the tensions and conflicts of the larger society” (Anyon, 1981, p. 38). Anyon argued that in order to see how schools reproduce the tensions and conflicts of society, a comparative study is needed. Thus, in comparing these two sites, it appears that this inequitable cycle of social class impacting quality of educational opportunities is continuing in SCPS.
Brameld (1956) believes that teachers and the school should lead the path in progressing towards a democratic reorganization of society, rather than uphold dominant ideologies. This study found, however, that the education system continues to perpetuate social inequities through emphasis on performance and achievement that are linked to funding mechanisms (Kozol, 1991; McLaren, 2007). The further stratification these policies cause, particularly through AP course enrollment procedures and access to AP
STEM courses, continues to uphold unequal power dynamics (Noddings, 2008; Sleeter,
2005). Furthermore, these policies render AP teachers unable to interrupt stratification and overcome the dominant ideologies of the current system (Apple, 1995; Brameld,
1956; Sleeter, 2005) or to move towards a resolution of the education debt (Ladson-
Billngs, 2006) because they must compete within this system due to the ways in which funds are distributed.
121 Recommendations
This study, in accordance with its social reconstructionist framework, looked at the structural forces at work in society that shape the human experience through the examination of a glass ceiling that exists within our schools. This study focused on whether teachers are implementing related policies to increase access to AP courses in an attempt to undo the tracking that historically has existed in AP. Thus, the results of this study led to four recommendations for practitioners and policy makers. These recommendations are not based on an exploration of differential ability, but rather on the benefits that exist, on some level, for the general mass of students who have access to
AP. Findings indicated that teachers’ beliefs regarding equity and access are not being implemented due to the structure of school grading and subsequent funding. Combining the quantitative and qualitative data sources allowed for the following recommendations to emerge. These four recommendations are based on teachers’ identification of policies and procedures that work against equity and access.
First, the state grading formula should be revised to include AP participation and performance, rather than focus solely on AP performance. The inclusion of both participation and performance rates would allow for a shift in the discussions surrounding
AP. The purpose of including participation and performance would be to increase access and focus on the benefits of participating in an AP course, rather than focus solely on earning a 3 or higher on the examinations. It is not recommended that AP be removed from the school grading formula entirely. The reason behind the recommendation to continue to include AP participation and performance in the school grading formula is due to the historical exclusion of underrepresented students in AP (Lacy, 2010;
122 Schneider, 2009). Because there have been policies made at the state and local level to increase access to AP, the school grading formula also must align with these policies in order to provide the greatest impact on equitable access to acceleration mechanisms.
The second recommendation is to include the district-level local prediction flags in the state’s measurement of equity and access because these take into account standardized assessment data, attendance data, behavior data, and grade point average.
AP teachers provided significant warnings that simply focusing on participation could result in students being placed haphazardly into AP courses, particularly with legislation excluding AP courses from the class size amendment. AP teachers also were clear in believing that there should be a screening process for entrance into AP courses. As part of this recommendation, school-level enrollment procedures should be revised to include the district-level local prediction flags as the primary screening mechanism through which equity and access are increased. These prediction reports would avoid the JHS complaints of “throwing students in the course just to get participation points” and would provide a more detailed review of student placement and the corresponding impact on equity and access rates. In addition, these prediction reports would allow the state and district to review demographic profiles to determine which students are recommended for AP, as well as those who are recommended with assistance, and compare subsequent enrollment.
These demographic profiles could provide insights into identifying patterns in accessing acceleration mechanisms and could provide an explanation regarding diverse classrooms since teachers felt classrooms are diverse only because the schools are diverse.
Third, the school district should provide professional development for STEM teachers regarding access to AP courses. This recommendation is not only for AP STEM
123 teachers, but middle school STEM teachers as well. This recommendation is based on the need to provide further support in early access to mathematics courses because this finding emerged as an indicator of access to AP. Furthermore, STEM teachers’ tendency to lean towards prerequisites as necessary for participation in AP courses indicates the need for schools to work on vertical teaming as STEM teachers noted that students need to come to their advanced courses with a common body of knowledge related to their subject area. This professional development could result in a revision of the AP
Procedural Guide as well as procedures followed in their individual schools to ensure that students are aware of course progressions needed to access advanced STEM courses at both the middle and high school levels.
Fourth, an increased focus is needed at the local level on clear AP Pathway mechanisms and recommendations. This pathway could prove to increase equity and access, despite other intervening policies and/or procedures. As part of this recommendation, the AP Procedural Guide should be revised to acknowledge that different schools may develop different AP Pathways based on the school population they serve as well as on the content area the student is accessing. This flexibility would avoid the “one-size-fits-all” mentality. For example, the same pathway should not be promoted at JHS because these students face different challenges as elaborated upon by the faculty interviews. Rather, Contreras (2011) and Kyburg et al. (2007) found that it is of particular importance that in a school like JHS, with high levels of underprivileged students, focusing on access to school resources is a key factor that facilitates a student’s success.
Thus, the articulated pathway at JHS would incorporate a focus on creating environments that nurture the growth of academic talent among nontraditional students and the
124 willingness of faculty to engage in student-based support systems by focusing on quality instruction, tutoring, and curricular resources to raise student achievement (Contreras,
2011). As part of this recommendation, the school district should provide administrators professional development that highlights the theoretical underpinnings of AP opportunities and delineates how to promote a successful and equitable AP program based on a school’s individual needs. The administrators’ professional development could provide the opportunity to submit AP Pathway plans to the district to increase the equity of access across the district.
Limitations and Implications for Further Research
Due to the exploratory nature of the current study, further research investigating the impact of teacher beliefs on equity and access policies is needed. The design of this study had several limitations. First, although the researcher sent the survey out to the entire cohort of AP teachers, only 176 teachers (35%) responded. Lynn (2008) found that response rate is impacted by the design and delivery of surveys, and that web surveys can be challenging for several reasons: Participants may not ever receive the email containing the link to the survey, they may choose to not open the email containing the link to the survey, and/or the participants may stop taking the survey in the middle of their response.
Perhaps if the survey were administered face-to-face after district-wide professional development, rather than online, participation rates would increase.
In addition, the survey did not include items that became important once qualitative data were reviewed. Therefore, only qualitative data could be analyzed in relation to state level accountability measures and bonus funding, teachers’ content area, and the ranking of AP as compared to other acceleration mechanisms. The survey should
125 be revised a third time to include questions regarding these emergent themes.
Furthermore, the researcher chose to explore AP teachers’ beliefs related only to equity of access. However, the qualitative data also revealed that teachers felt as though school counselors and administrators were responding to external forces that were impacting the implementation of equity and access policies. The survey also should be revised so that it could be administered to a wider group of school-based faculty.
Another potential limitation was the researcher’s affiliation with both the school district and the College Board. Sunshine County Public Schools served as an ideal location to conduct this study due to the national accolades it has received; however, the researcher’s affiliation with the district and the College Board may have impacted the participants’ motivation to participate in the survey and interviews. In particular, this affiliation could have influenced teachers who were “pro-AP” to be more likely to participate, and those who were not “pro-AP” to be less likely to participate.
For this study, the researcher surveyed and interviewed only teachers in Sunshine
County. However, further research should be conducted throughout the state of Florida based on the impact of state level accountability measures that emerged in this study. In particular, further research should be conducted on whether there is a relationship between changes in the school grading formula and teacher bonus structure and AP enrollment. Also, the study should be expanded to include other acceleration mechanisms, namely AICE, IB, and dual enrollment to explore enrollment trends in these courses as compared to AP, given their equal weight in the school grading formula.
Finally, further research should be conducted on the impact of teachers’ content areas on their beliefs regarding equity and access. As Hallam and Ireson (2003) found,
126 the subject area being taught affects teacher perceptions in accelerated courses. This study looked at enrollment trends in AP in general; however, further research potentially could reveal an even larger enrollment and achievement gap in STEM areas as compared to humanities courses. In addition, further research surrounding the STEM subject areas also may reveal a difference in accessing those courses that have prerequisites attached versus those that do not. A subsequent examination of teachers’ beliefs in these courses could provide insight into why their perceptions differed from other content area teachers.
Conclusion
Though previous research has been conducted on the impact of teacher beliefs (de
Wet & Gubbins, 2011; Duffett & Farkas, 2009; Munby, 1984; Richardson et al., 1991;
Seyfried, 1998; Taliaferro & DeCuir-Bunby, 2008), and a large body of research surrounding equity and access to AP also exists (Flores & Gomez, 2011; Hallett &
Venegas, 2011; Klopfenstein 2003, 2004a, 2004b; Klopfenstein & Thomas, 2010), research linking these two subjects is lacking. The results of this exploratory study showed that the historical tension surrounding unequal structural access to AP courses and movements toward equality still exists in SCPS. In exposing the ways in which AP continues to be reserved for the academically elite, it became apparent that this continuing tension between elitism and equity is fueled primarily by state accountability measures rather than by teacher beliefs. One of the primary ways in which AP continues to be reserved for the academically elite is due to the structure of school policy and the funding constraints placed upon the school, which results in competition for scarce resources and the potential decision to implement unsound practices.
127 Data analysis revealed that measures can be implemented to increase the application of equity and access policies, and thereby increase access by nontraditional students, through defining a clear AP Pathway that minimizes gatekeeping mechanisms and focuses on curricular alignment, parental involvement, and student support systems.
Thus, despite finding that the interests of the dominant culture have been served and reproduced in the schools, the analysis revealed that equity and access policies can have a meaningful impact in changing the historic patterns of exclusion if addressed through school-based procedures that focus on inclusion.
Considering the benefits of participating in accelerated mechanisms (Flores &
Gomez, 2011; Hallett & Venegas, 2011; Klopfenstein 2003, 2004a, 2004b; Klopfenstein
& Thomas, 2010) and the national accolades received by the school district, the results of this exploratory study highlight the need for policy changes regarding accountability measures. These measures must be revised to include at least one measurement of equity of access rather than a sole focus on performance, which will continue to mitigate the impact of less-powerful equity and access policies. The inclusion of an equity of access measurement also is important due to the persistence of the achievement gap following the removal of participation from the grading formula. Furthermore, a focus on participation alone is not sufficient because it reduces school-based decision-making regarding AP courses to merely a scheduling issue, rather than an appropriate placement of the student in the correct accelerated mechanism. As this study of AP teachers demonstrated, teachers can be a social force of considerable magnitude to challenge social stratification, analyze oppression, and take an active role in restructuring unequal
128 relationships, but not if teachers are tied to accountability measures that focus solely on high stakes end-of-course examinations and competition for limited resources.
129 APPENDICES
130 Appendix A. Advanced Placement Program Enrollment and Results
131
132 Appendix B. 20th Day Enrollment Report
Appendix C. AP Enrollment by Grade Level
134 Appendix D. AP Procedural Guide
PROCEDURAL GUIDE FOR ADVANCED PLACEMENT (AP)
Department of College and Career Readiness Department of Student Assessment Broward Virtual Education
Broward County Public Schools (BCPS)
Section 1: COMMON SENSE GUIDE
This section provides tips and strategies for building and sustaining an advanced placement program:
Take advantage of your local talent. Do you have great student artists? Offer AP Studio Art. Lots of French speakers? Offer AP French.
Have an “AP Team” at your school consisting of the principal, an assistant principal, guidance staff, and department heads.
Make sure every AP teacher is trained in his/her content by The College Board via a 5- day content specific training.
Encourage all AP teachers to apply to become AP exam readers. They will be trained as to how to grade AP exams, increase their content-area knowledge, which is an essential component to increasing teacher efficacy.
Make sure every AP teacher’s syllabus has been submitted to The College Board for approval. New teachers should submit their syllabus by June or within 1 month of hire. School administrators should renew previously approved teachers. All teachers should have syllabi approved by December. The College Board suggests that all teachers submit a first attempt by mid-October.
135 Schedule AP Parent/Student recruitment events at the beginning of each school year as this is mandated in State Statute. Sessions should be designed to educate parents and students (a) about all opportunities to earn college credit in high school and (b) that grades are not the most important part of a high school education. A “B” in an AP class is better than an “A” in a regular class.
Require all Department heads to use AP Potential to identify students who may be successful in their AP classes. Require teachers to meet and recruit these students via casual meetings or formal recruitment events.
Require teachers to sign-for and plan around the AP Planning Instructional Reports produced by The College Board. Data chats should be scheduled with AP teachers based upon these reports.
Establish AP Learning Communities for AP teachers as a forum for identifying and rectifying any and all barriers to AP success (scheduling, writing skills, etc.) and to create school wide plans to improve AP success. Establish AP Vertical Teams with the purpose of aligning all instruction to major concepts and skills taught in AP. All teachers should be exposed to what is required on AP exams. Establish AP teachers as the instructional leaders of the school who are charged with establishing school wide support of AP.
By default, schedule students identified by District UL Flags (for grade 9) and AP Potential (for grades 10-12) into AP courses to the greatest extent possible.
Have clear school guidelines for revising student schedules for the purpose of dropping AP courses. All administrative staff should follow the same guidelines.
For block schools, don’t pair unlike AP classes (ex. English Language and Micro Economics) so that students must take either both or neither AP course.
Don’t require any prerequisite courses for AP other than what is published in the state course code directory.
Don’t allow subjective teacher recommendations to be a requirement for any AP course. Instead, utilize AP Potential, District UL flags, the District progression chart and other objective data.
136 Section 2: SAMPLE PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Steps for developing a quality school Advanced Placement (AP) Development Plan: 1. Assess teacher needs using the Needs Assessment Matrix for Teachers 2. Assess leadership needs using the Needs Assessment Matrix for Leadership 3. Create the AP Development Plan below by creating appropriate action steps based on data collected from steps 1 and 2 above. 4. Organize the AP Development Plan according to school priority. Please see Appendix A for sample program development planning tool.
Section 3: NEEDS ASSESSMENT MATRIXES
Teacher needs and leadership needs can be assessed by utilizing the matrixes below. The purpose of the matrix is to create appropriate action steps based on data to improve a school’s AP program. Please see Appendix B for sample needs assessment matrixes. Please see Appendix B for sample needs assessment matrixes.
Section 4: SAMPLE TIMELINE OF SITE-BASED SUPPORT
Successful implementation of an AP program requires equity of access to AP, equity of performance, quality instruction, high success rate on AP exams, vertical alignment, and fostering passion for content and critical thinking. As a result, responsibilities must be divided based upon tasks and assignments that are specific to the needs of a school. Below is a sample of a timeline that shows frequent steps needed to build a successful AP program:
Month Responsible Task/Assignment Status Due Party May Principals/Area Finalize AP teachers for summer Directors institute 5-day AP content area training. July/Aug College Board Provide AP Summer Institute AAP Staff training (5-days, content specific) using College Board consultants as trainers.
137 Month Responsible Task/Assignment Status Due Party Aug Principal Insure all AP teachers have instructional needs met by reviewing AP Needs Tool. Establish AP learning communities and vertical teams. Identify training gaps. Utilize AP Central to identify trainings/workshops available. Contact AAP for assistance in finding a mentor teacher to aid new teachers. Aug Principal Set up an AP Team, consisting of the principal, an assistant principal, guidance staff, and department heads. Use this AP Team to ensure that every teacher has downloaded their instructional planning report and is utilizing the data in their classes. Aug Principals New AP teachers submit Teachers syllabus to College Board for Area Directors approval. School assigns administrator to follow-up on syllabus approval process. If teachers need assistance with syllabus, contact AAP Aug AP Team Schedule AP Parent/Student Night Aug AP Team Create media center plan to ensure that AP students have full access to the media center on a daily basis Aug Principal All of the core content area AP Master scheduler courses are offered in accordance AP Coordinator with the guidelines of the CCC Sept AP Teachers Join AP Central, join AP teachers CAB conference and subject-area conference, and sign-up for online textbook support. If needed, create account on AP audit website and begin syllabus process.
138 Month Responsible Task/Assignment Status Due Party Sept- AP Team Establish AP Learning April Communities for AP teachers. Meet on professional study- days/planning days to identify and rectify any and all barriers to AP success Sept- AP Team Establish AP Vertical Teams. April AP teachers should be instructional leaders of the school ensuring that all faculty members align instruction to major skills and concepts taught in AP Sept AP Teachers Create a “safety-net” plan for students that are struggling. See the Procedural Guide for suggestions. Sept AP Learning Helping students that are Communities struggling /study-skills/note- taking skills, etc. Sept AP Teachers Teachers that are qualified should apply to become an AP reader Oct AP Teachers Begin to order and utilize practice AP exams. Look over curriculum and match practice multiple choice questions and practice essays to units in your course to ensure that students are practicing authentic test questions throughout the year. Oct AP Learning Integrating practice exam Communities questions and strategies. Utilize teachers that have participated in AP Exam Reading to lead these meetings. Provide time for teachers to apply to become AP Exam Readers. Oct-April AP Team Utilize test schedule disruptions to allow AP teachers to administer practice exams.
139 Month Responsible Task/Assignment Status Due Party Nov AP Learning Collaboration and Interaction – Communities mentors, networking, individual or collaborative research interests. Dec College Board Release of PSAT scores to Principals principals. Attend the SOAS AAP Staff workshop (along with math and English department heads). Schools notified of AP Potential access codes and reports. Dec AP Team All syllabi should be approved. Principal Contact AAP with any issues. AP Teachers Jan AP Teachers Pace out the course to the end of the school year, paying special attention to testing schedules and leaving enough time to practice exams and review. Jan AP Learning Pacing to ensure that curricular Communities requirements as outlined by the College Board are met completely. Jan Principals School letters to 10th&11th Area Directors grade students re PSAT results and AP potential (including announcement of AP recruitment parent nights). Sample letters on AP Potential & District AAP websites. Feb AP Learning Project-based learning in AP Communities Mar AP Learning Best practices reviewing for AP Communities exams Mar AP Teachers Establish exam review schedule Principals (after school, before school, on Saturdays) and schedule any building issues Mar Principals Review Common Sense Guide to In Progress Area Directors AP (on AAP website) and address any local program deficits (e.g., adding courses that take advantage of local talent, pairing courses properly, etc.)
140 Month Responsible Task/Assignment Status Due Party Mar- AP Coordinators Order AP Tests April Select Test Administrators Select Testing Locations Create testing schedule Complete pre-registration process (highly recommended but not required) Receive materials Plan for secure storage of materials Prepare materials for test administrators Mar- AP Teachers Disseminate information April regarding the AP Exam Review and ensure that students are registered and attending Mar-Apr Principals Using UL report, schedule all On Schedule UL flagged 9th graders into AP Human Geo . Schedule all UL flagged10th graders into a minimum of 1 AP and/or honors course. Using AP Potential, schedule all flagged students into appropriate AP courses. April AP Teachers Review for AP exam and administer practice exams. Mar-Apr Principals/Area Assess instructional needs for Directors AP using AP Needs Tools on AAP website. Order instructional materials/technology appropriately. Mar-Apr Principals Review Common Sense Guide to Area Directors AP (on AAP website) and address any local program deficits (e.g., adding courses that take advantage of local talent, pairing courses properly, etc.)
Section 5: CLASSROOM OBSERVATION
Direct classroom observation is an important component in building an AP program. Classroom observations can be used to evaluate AP objectives, appropriate instructional
141 materials, implementation of professional development strategies, and teacher-student interactions. Please see Appendix C for a sample classroom observation checklist.
Section 6: MANDATORY COURSE OFFERINGS
In accordance with Condition 4 of the School Board of Broward County, Florida, Citizens Concerned for our Children (CCC) Agreement Settlement, core AP courses must be taught at every high school. The core courses are American History, Biology, Calculus AB, English Language Composition, English Literature, and Spanish/French.
Section 7: SAMPLE STUDENT CONTRACT
As AP is a rigorous and demanding academic curriculum, it is recommended that students sign a contract outlining the expectations in regard to their participation in the course(s). Please see Appendix D for a sample contract.
Section 8: WHO SHOULD TAKE AP
There are many ways to determine if a student is qualified to take AP. Every means necessary to make AP inclusive rather than exclusive should be taken. AP Potential, a web based tool using PSAT/NMSQT data, is one such tool. AP Potential helps identify students who may not have thought of themselves as AP students and indicates AP courses for which they might be suited. Other criteria include looking for students who are flagged from research services as either ready to take advanced courses or with help are ready to take more rigors course. Intangibles such as interest in subject and motivation all need to be considered.
Section 9: ACCESS AND EQUITY
Broward County encourages teachers, AP Coordinators and school administrators to make equitable access a guiding principle for their AP programs. Each and every school needs to be committed to the principle that all students deserve an opportunity to participate in rigorous and academically challenging course and programs. All students who are willing to accept the challenge of a rigorous academic curriculum should be considered for admission to AP courses. We encourage the elimination of barriers that restrict access to AP courses for students from ethnic, racial and socioeconomic groups that have been traditionally underrepresented in the AP program. Schools should make every effort to ensure that their AP classes reflect the diversity of their student population.
Section 10: AP PREPARATION
142 To eliminate the shock of AP and to prevent students from withdrawing it is recommended AP teachers trade with honors teachers to talk and explain the rigor of AP course to students not currently enrolled in AP classes.
AP information sessions with parents should be held to inform stakeholders about specific instructional techniques and course expectation.
Vertical team training in both middle and high schools is invaluable to help prepare a student for the rigor of AP. Vertical teams are groups of educators from different grade levels in a given discipline who work cooperatively to develop and implement a vertically aligned program aimed at helping students acquire the academic skills and habits of mind necessary for success in college-level work and AP courses.
Section 11: STRUGGLING STUDENTS
A flag system for identification of a student struggling exists in the Pinnacle grading system. The system will automatically email the parent when a student’s grade falls below a pre-set limit. Schools should utilize this tool in both identification and monitoring of struggling Advanced Placement students.
Schools should adopt best practices regarding the monitoring of a student that is struggling in Advanced Placement classes: • Schools should hold an Advanced Placement orientation parent and student night at the beginning of the school year to ensure that the demands of a rigorous curriculum are understood. • The College Board provides three publications that should be distributed to help motivate and encourage struggling students. These three publications are Get with the Program, Experience College Success, and The Values of AP Courses and Exams. All three of these publications are available online at apcentral.collegeboard.com/freepubs. • Students should sign an expectations document when they enroll in the Advanced Placement course. • Teachers should contact parents by phone when a student receives a failing grade.
Assisting a struggling AP student requires a collaborative effort combining teacher, student, and parental aid. The following are suggestions as to how to foster this collaborative effort: • Schools can utilize student organizations to provide peer-tutoring in subject areas. • Hold AP Learning Communities focusing on best-practices and Pre-AP strategies. • Teachers should provide “safety net” times before school and/or after school to meet with students that need extra support. • Teacher utilizes practice free-response questions and released exams to promote success on the AP exam.
143 • Students should become familiar with http://www.collegeboard.com/student/index.html?student as the website provides tutorials, tips for success, exam practice opportunities, etc. to help aid students. • Parents can assist their child at home through the College Board’s parent website: http://www.collegeboard.com/parents/. The website contains important information regarding the AP program, exams, and tips and strategies for success. • Teachers should utilize AP Central http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/apc/Controller.jpf for classroom strategies and professional development resources to help aid struggling students. • Parents and students should familiarize themselves with the online resources provided via the textbook that can be used at home for extra instruction. The decision to allow a struggling student to drop an AP course should be a multi-faceted decision that is facilitated through a guidance conference. The decision should be based on the following components: • Recommendation of the pre-requisite (or similar subject) teacher. • Grade in pre-requisite course (or similar subject) and current grade. • The student’s interest in the subject area. • Current teacher’s opinion regarding level of student effort in completing the rigorous academic curriculum. • Parent’s opinion regarding level of student effort in completing the rigorous academic curriculum.
Section 12: SUMMER READING
While summer reading and handing out syllabi/books in June for the following year does give a student a head start it is not mandatory. If an assignment handed out in the spring is to be accessed in the fall the teacher needs to make arrangements for instructional time to assist students. If students new to the course come in to the class assistance needs to be made available to students. This assistance may take the form of additional time given for assignment, or tutoring the student.
Section 13: HOMEWORK
AP courses are designed by college faculty and master AP teachers to cover the information, skills and assignments found in the corresponding college courses. The courses provides student with a learning experience equivalent to a college level course. For these reasons it should be expected that homework and /or reading is an integral part of AP classes. However, there is not a minimum or maximum amount of homework required for AP courses. It should be expected, though, the student put forth the necessary time and effort required to be current in AP classes.
144
Section 14: STUDENTS WHO ARE DUALLY ENROLLED IN A REGULAR
HIGH SCHOOL AND AN ONLINE AP COURSE
For any student who is enrolled in a BCPS high school and concurrently taking a virtual AP course, the high school orders the AP exam and the district pays for the exam. This holds true whether or not the student’s online AP course is taken through Broward Virtual Education, Florida Virtual School, or other accredited online vendors of AP courses.
The school’s AP Coordinator should access the district report of the school’s students who are taking a course through Broward Virtual Education or Florida Virtual School in order to determine the number of tests that need to be ordered for these students. Students are responsible for turning in the AP test order form and must submit the form in order to request that the test be ordered. Students who are taking a course through other accredited online vendors of AP courses are responsible for notifying the school’s AP Coordinator, in writing, that they will require a test. This written notification should occur prior to March 1 of the school year for which the test will be administered.
If the school does not traditionally offer the exam that the virtual student is required to take, it is the school’s responsibility to find a host school to administer the exam and to request that the host school order the exam for the student. Transportation to the host school for the exam is the responsibility of the student.
Broward Virtual Education students are required to bubble in Broward Virtual’s school number when they take the AP exam. It is the online teacher’s responsibility to communicate this to the student and to provide the school number.
Teacher bonus monies received from the state for students who score a 3 or above on the AP exam will be delivered to the online teacher who instructs the course in the case of students who take an online course through Broward Virtual Education and Florida Virtual School. In the case of students enrolled with other accredited online vendors of AP courses, teacher bonus monies will be given to the school.
Section 15: FULL TIME BROWARD VIRTUAL STUDENTS WHO ARE TAKING AN ONLINE AP COURSE
For full time online AP students (Broward Virtual Education), it is the responsibility of the Broward Virtual AP Coordinator to order the AP test and administer the AP test (or find a host high school that can order and administer the test). In the case that a student takes a test at a host school, it is the Broward Virtual AP Coordinator’s responsibility to
145 request that the host school order the exam for the student. Transportation to the host school for the exam is the responsibility of the student
Broward Virtual Education students who are taking an AP course through other accredited online vendors of AP courses are responsible for notifying the Broward Virtual Education AP Coordinator, in writing, that they will require a test. This written notification should occur prior to March 1 of the school year for which the test will be administered. It is the Broward Virtual AP Coordinator’s responsibility to find a host school to administer the exam and to request that the host school order the exam for the student. Transportation to the host school for the exam is the responsibility of the student.
Broward Virtual Education students are required to bubble in Broward Virtual’s school number when they take the AP exam. It is the online teacher’s responsibility to communicate this to the student and to provide the school number.
Teacher bonus monies received from the state for students who score a 3 or above on the AP exam will be delivered to the online teacher who instructs the course.
Section 16: HOMEBOUND STUDENTS WHO ARE TAKING AN ONLINE AP COURSE
For homebound students who are taking an online AP course through Broward Virtual
Education or Florida Virtual School, it is the responsibility of the homebound guidance counselor to order the AP test and administer the AP test (or find a host high school that can order and administer the test). In the case that a student takes a test at a host school, it is the homebound guidance counselor’s responsibility to request that the host school order the exam for the student. Transportation to the host school for the exam is the responsibility of the student
Home bound students who are taking an AP course through other accredited online vendors of AP courses are responsible for notifying their designated guidance counselor, in writing, that they will require a test. This written notification should occur prior to
March 1 of the school year for which the test will be administered. It is the homebound
146 guidance counselor’s responsibility to find a host school to administer the exam and to request that the host school order the exam for the student. Transportation to the host school for the exam is the responsibility of the student.
Teacher bonus monies received from the state for students who score a 3 or above on the
AP exam will be delivered to the online teacher who instructs the course in the case of students who take an online course through Broward Virtual Education and Florida
Virtual School.
Section 17: PRIVATE SCHOOL STUDENTS WHO ARE TAKING AN ONLINE
AP COURSE
For private school students who are taking an online AP course through Broward Virtual Education it is the responsibility of the Broward Virtual Education AP Coordinator to order the AP test and administer the AP test (or find a host high school that can order and administer the test). In the case that a student takes a test at a host school, it is the Broward Virtual Education AP Coordinator’s responsibility to request that the host school order the exam for the student. Transportation to the host school for the exam is the responsibility of the student
There is no exam administration provision for private school students who are taking an AP course through Florida Virtual or other accredited online vendors of AP courses.
Section 18: BCPS STUDENTS WHO WANT TO TAKE AN AP TEST WITHOUT
COMPLETING AN AP COURSE.
In the case of any BCPS student who wishes to take a test without taking the corresponding AP course, it is the student’s responsibility to notify the school’s AP Coordinator, in writing, that they will require a test and to pay for the test. This written notification and payment should occur prior to March 1 of the school year for which the test will be administered. If the boundaried school is offering the requested exam to other students in the school, it is the responsibility of the boundaried school AP Coordinator to order and administer the AP exam. If the boundaried school is not offering the requested exam, it is the AP Coordinator’s responsibility to refer the student to the district’s
147 Department of College and Career Readiness. The Department of College and Career Readiness will identify a host school to order and administer the exam.
Section 19: TEACHER CERTIFICATION
Although there is no state certification/endorsement for teaching AP, it is strongly advised that all AP teachers be "in-field." Schools are encouraged to provide opportunities for their AP teachers to attend workshops, summer institutes or other professional development activities. It is recommended that a teacher take 3-5 day training before teaching AP for the first time and on a periodic basis thereafter. The 1/2- day training that College Board and or the county provides each year is not enough.
In addition, once the teacher has enough classroom based experience, it is strongly recommended that they apply to become an AP Exam Reader. This is an important professional development experience that provides a rigorous schedule in increasing content-area knowledge as well as increasing student scores.
Section 20: COURSE DESCRIPTION
As of June 2007 teachers must submit a syllabus to the College Board for approval in order to have their course designated as “AP”. Teachers are required to show via their syllabus how each of the curricular requirements of The College Board is met. The teacher should have read the most recent Course Description available from College Board on apcentral.collegeboard.com
Section 21: TEXTBOOKS
The school needs to ensure that each student has a copy of all required readings for individual use inside and outside of the classroom. The web site of The Department of College and Career Readiness has a list of approved textbooks for the core courses. A non-exhaustive list of example textbooks that fulfill curricular requirements appear on AP central.
Section 22: INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS
Instructional materials need to include activities, assignments, and assessments appropriate to the level of course where appropriate instructional materials include a variety of authentic audio and/or video recordings. Instructional materials include written texts, such as newspaper and magazines articles, literary texts and other non- technical writings. The AP audit form recognizes subject specific materials and students should have access to these materials.
Section 23: ACCESSING ONLINE SCORE REPORTS
As of July 2011, the College Board no longer requires that districts pay a fee for any AP score reporting services. As a result, all data is now available online at
148 https://epl.collegeboard.com/epl/login.do. Administrators and teachers will need to enter their username and password, and select ‘My Account’ in the drop down window. On the My Account Programs and Services page, select ‘Manage Enrollment’ under Online Reports. On the Online Reports enrolment page, search for the Organization, enter the corresponding access code, and either select ‘Save and continue’. The user will return to the My Account Programs Services page. From there the user can log out, or can select ‘Access the Service’ to get to the Online Reports system. Administrators and teachers will have access to various types of score reports and student information.
Section 24: CHARTER SCHOOLS Charter schools order and administer their own AP exams. Charter schools pay for their own exams through the AP success funds as the performance FTE goes straight to the charter school.
Section 25: AP EXAM READERS Selection for substitute coverage is only available for teachers that have been selected by the College Board to read AP exams. Priority will be given to schools that have a need for readers in the applicant’s content area. Please fax the form below to 754-321-2118 or PONY to College and Career Readiness, KCW.
Registrant Information- Principal Must Complete and Return to CCR Teacher Last Name Teach First Name Principal Name[Type a quote
Subject Area/Grade Personnel Number School Name Level
Number of Years Number of Years Pass Rate Teaching AP Reading Exams
Please list the teachers on your staff that have read AP Exams and their respective content areas: 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
149 Section 26: AP COURSES IN MIDDLE SCHOOL Per College Board policy, the AP designation may only be applied to courses offered at or above the 9th grade level which have received authorization through the annual AP Course Audit process. The AP label cannot be affixed to courses and transcripts prior to 9th grade. There is one exception to this policy: AP world language courses. These courses focus on linguistic proficiency and cultural competency, so in rare situations these courses can be successfully offered earlier than 9th grade among students who can already speak, read, and write the language with fluency. However, should you wish to offer a middle school AP Language Course you must contact the Department of College and Career Readiness to obtain approval. summary, the AP Course Audit will only renew or authorize courses that are offered exclusively in grades 9–12, with the exception of AP world language programs, provided District approval.
150 Appendix E. Sunshine County School Board Approval
151 Appendix F. Letter of Cooperation From Principals
152 Appendix G. Interview Protocol
Name of Interviewer: Name of Interviewee: Position: Place: Starting Time: Ending Time:
Introduction: Hello and thank you for taking the time to talk with me today. I appreciate your willingness to share your perspectives and experiences in teaching AP courses. I want to let you know that I will use pseudonyms to protect your identity and all information you share with me will be kept confidential. I will only use the information you share with me for my dissertation research. The interview will last approximately 30 minutes. Do I have your permission to audio record this interview? 1. What AP course(s) are you currently teaching? What other AP courses have you taught in the past? 2. Could you describe what your AP classes “look like” in terms of diversity? Has this changed over time? Why do you think it has/has not changed? 3. How would you describe the enrollment process for students to enter your AP course? How do you feel about this process? Is there anything you would change about the enrollment process? 4. In your opinion, how prepared are students when they arrive in your AP course? a. Are there any differences in preparation that you see across the students? Could you provide an example? b. How prepared are your nontraditional students? 5. The president of the College Board, David Coleman, has called for school districts to increase access to AP opportunity for all students as some students have been historically excluded. Some people feel as though AP should be reserved for top performing students only. What do you think? 6. An AP teacher, in responding to David Coleman’s call for increased opportunities for students, was quoted as saying: “It’s just so hard to fix parts of a system that aren’t under your control. Every day I wish I could wave a wand and have every one of them come in ready for AP. But that isn’t reality”. How do you feel about what this teacher said? 7. How do you feel about the district’s policy of encouraging students who want to take AP to do so, even though they may not have been recommended? Does your school follow this policy? How do you feel about your school following or not following this policy? 8. Based on the survey of AP teachers, we found that AP teachers believed/did not believe that students should have open access to AP courses. What do you think a majority of teachers feel this way? What do you think?
153 9. Also based on the survey, we found that AP teachers were implementing/were not implementing access policies. Why do you think this is occurring? How do you feel about this? 10. What can you tell me about AP potential and/or local prediction reports? 11. Sunshine County Public Schools has received national recognition for increases in access and performance in AP courses. As an AP teacher, you have been part of this achievement. What would you say has contributed to the achievement? 12. Are there any questions you were expecting me to ask, that I did not ask you? If so, what are they, and how would you respond?
Closing: Thank you for spending time with me today and for participating in my study. This information will remain confidential. Is there anything that you’d like to add that might help me with this study? May I contact you again if I have follow-up questions?
154 Appendix H. Teacher Informed Consent Form: Interview
155
156 Appendix I. Teacher Informed Consent Form: Survey
157
158 Appendix J. AP Teachers’ Perspectives Regarding Equity and Access Survey
Part I. For the following statements, please select the best response to fill in the blank. Please consider your AP experience over the past five years when answering the questions below. Mark only one response per row. Declined Declined Stayed Increased Increased Dramatically Somewhat About Somewhat Dramaticall the y Same 1. The number of students taking AP classes at my high school has ______. 2. The size of the AP classes that I teach has ______.
Part II. For the following statements, please select the level of your agreement or disagreement, using the scale provided. Mark only one response per row. Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Disagree Agree Agree nor Disagree 3. I think the number of nontraditional students (African American, Hispanic, and/or Free and Reduced Lunch students) taking AP classes at my high school has increased. 4. I think my high school follows the formal policy of encouraging as many students as possible to take AP classes. 5. I believe the policies of the school district play the biggest role
159 in determining the size of the AP program at my high school. 6. I think my high school has specific goals about increasing AP participation. 7. I believe my high school encourages students to take AP courses as they progress through high school. 8. I believe my high school recruits and encourages nontraditional students to enroll in AP courses. 9. I think the main reason my high school has a policy of encouraging students to take AP classes is to increase opportunity for historically neglected students. 10. I think the more students taking AP courses, the better – even when they do poorly they benefit from the challenge and the experience. 11. I think all students should have access to one AP course during their high school years. 12. I think only students who can handle the material should take AP courses.
160 13. I think too many students overestimate their abilities and are in over their heads when they take AP classes. 14. I believe teacher recommendations should play a large role in determining which students take AP courses. 15. I think there may be some students who could thrive in AP but do not end up taking these classes because the school fails to appropriately encourage them. 16. I believe AP sections should be grouped by ability, so that, for example, the most advanced students learn together. 17. I think my high school should conduct more screening of students to ensure that they are ready to do AP-level work before they get in those classrooms.
Part III. For the following statements, please answer the following questions regarding students at your school. Mark only one response per row. None 1% - 26% - 51% - 76% - 25% 50% 75% 100% 18. What percentage of your students typically take the AP exam? 19. What percentage of your students typically score 3 or better on the
161 AP exam? 20. What percentage of students at your school are eligible for the free or reduced lunch program?
Part IV. Please complete the following open-ended questions. 21. Is there anything you would like to add concerning your perspectives related to AP? 22. Is there anything you would like to add regarding AP policies and their implementation?
Part V. Please complete the following information. Mark only one response per row. Fewer Than 6 - 10 11 - 15 16 - 20 21 or or Equal to years years years more 5 years years 23. For how long have you been a public school teacher? 24. For how long have you been teaching AP courses? Bachelor’s Master’s Doctoral Degree Degree Degree 25. What is the highest level of education you have completed?
162 Appendix K. Email Permission for Survey Adaptation
163 Appendix L. Florida Atlantic University Institutional Research Board Approval
164
165 REFERENCES
Academically Challenging Curriculum to Enhance Learning, F.S. 1002 § 3105 (2012).
Acceleration Options in Public Education, F.S. 2012 § 191 (2012).
Alsandor, D. J., Denyszyn, J. L., Platt, C. S., Reddick, R. J., & Welton, A. D. (2011).
Stories of success: High minority, high poverty public school graduate narratives
on accessing higher education. Journal of Advanced Academics, 22(4), 594-620.
Anyon, J. (1981). School class and school knowledge. Curriculum Inquiry, 11(1), 3-42.
Apple, M. (1995). Education and power (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Apple, M. (2010). Theory, research, and the critical scholar/activist. Educational
Researcher, 39(2), 152-162.
Articulated Acceleration Mechanisms, F.S. 1007 § 27 (2012).
Barnard-Brak, L., McGaha-Garnett, V., & Burley, H. (2011). Advanced placement
course enrollment and school level characteristics. NASSP Bulletin, 95(3), 165-
174.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2006). Qualitative research for education: An
introduction to theories and methods (5th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson Education
Group.
Boyer, E. (1983). High school: A report on secondary education in America. New York,
NY: Harper & Row.
Brameld, T. (1956). Toward a reconstructed philosophy of education. New York, NY:
Dryden Press, Inc.
166 Broad Foundation. (2013). Foundation reports. Retrieved from:
http://www.broadfoundation.org/foundation_report.html
Bruner, J. S. (2004). The process of education. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.
(Original work published 1960)
Cambridge International Exams. (2015). Cambridge AICE diploma. Retrieved from:
http://www.cie.org.uk/programmes-and-qualifications/cambridge-
advanced/cambridge-aice-diploma/
Center for College Readiness. (2015). Vertical teams. Retrieved from:
http://collegeready.rice.edu/vertical-teams
Chunnu-Brayda, W. (2012). Querying top-down, bottom-up implementation guidelines:
Education policy implementation in Jamaica. Journal of Eastern Caribbean
Studies, 37(2), 24-45.
Colangelo, N., Assouline, S., Marron, M., Catellano, J., Clinkenbeard, P., Rogers, K., …
Smith, D. (2010). Guidelines for developing an academic acceleration policy.
Journal of Advanced Academics, 21(2), 180-203.
College Board. (2002). Equity policy statement. Retrieved from
http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/apc/members/repository/ap03_ap_equity_polic
y_22057.pdf
College Board. (2010). Policies and procedures. Retrieved from
http://www.collegeboard.com/html/apcourseaudit/faq.html
167 College Board. (2012). Rigorous coursework closes the educational gap across diverse
student populations: College Board’s SpringBoard helps to boost minority
enrollment in AP courses for a Florida district. District Administration, May, 65-
66.
College Board. (2015a). The 10th annual AP report to the nation. Retrieved from
www.collegeboard.com/apreport
College Board. (2015b). About us. Retrieved from http://about.collegeboard.org
College Board. (2015c). Achieving equity. Retrieved from
https://professionals.collegeboard.com/k-12/assessment/ap/equity
College Board. (2015d). Student score reports. Retrieved from
http://www.collegeboard.com/student/testing/psat/scores/report.html
College Board. (2015e). SpringBoard: Compendium of research. Retrieved from
http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/springboard/springboard-
research-compendium.pdf
Contreras, F. (2011). Strengthening the bridge to higher education for academically
promising underrepresented students. Journal of Advanced Academics, 22(3),
500-528.
Counts, G. S. (1978). Dare the school build a new social order? Carbondale, IL: S.
Illinois Univ. Press. (Original work published 1932)
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods
research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
168 Curry, W., MacDonald ,W., & Moran, R. (1999). The advanced placement program:
Access to excellence. Journal of Advanced Academics, 11(1), 17-23.
Day, C., Sammons, P., & Gu, Q. (2008). Combining qualitative and quantitative
methodologies in research on teachers’ lives, work, and effectiveness: From
integration to synergy. Educational Researcher, 37(6), 330-342. de Wet, C. F., & Gubbins, J. (2011). Teachers’ beliefs about culturally, linguistically, and
economically diverse gifted students: A quantitative study. Roper Review, 33(2),
97-108.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York, NY: Macmillan Company.
Dougherty, C., & Mellor, L. (2009). Preparation matters. Retrieved from
https://www.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/Preparation-Matters.pdf
Duffett, A., & Farkas, S. (2009). Growing pains in the advanced placement program: Do
tough trade-offs lie ahead? Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Foundation &
Institute.
Duffy, W. R. (2010). Persistence and performance at a four year university. In P. M.
Sadler, G. Sonnert, R. H. Tai, & K. Klopfenstein (Eds.), A critical examination of
the advanced placement program (pp. 139-166). Cambridge, MA: Harvard
Education Press.
Ewing, M., Huff, K., & Kaliski, P. (2010). Validating AP exam scores. In P. M. Sadler,
G. Sonnert, R. H. Tai, & K. Klopfenstein (Eds.), A critical examination of the
advanced placement program (pp. 85-105). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education
Press.
169 Field, A. P. (2013). Discovering statistics using SPSS. Los Angeles, CA: Sage
Publications.
Flores, S., & Gomez, M. O. (2011). Strategies for increasing advanced placement
participation for underrepresented students: Barriers, practices, and positive
outcomes. NASSP Bulletin, 95(1), 65-79.
Florida Department of Education. (2015a). Class size reduction - legislation. Retrieved
from http://www.fldoe.org/finance/budget/class-size/class-size-reduction-
legislation.stml
Florida Department of Education. (2015b). Dual enrollment. Retrieved from:
http://www.fldoe.org/schools/higher-ed/fl-college-system/academic-student-
affairs/dual-enrollment.stml
Fontana, A., & Frey, J. H. (2005). The interview: From neutral stance to political
involvement. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of
qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 695-727). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ford, D. (2013). Multicultural issues: Gifted underrepresentation and prejudice. Gifted
Child Today, 36(1), 62-67.
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate
research in education (8th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Freire, P. (2007). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum.
Friend, J., & Degen, E. (2007). Middle-level reform: The introduction of advanced
English and science courses. Journal of Advanced Academics, 18(2), 246-276.
Funds For the Operation of Schools, F.S. 1011 § 62 (2000).
Funds For the Operation of Schools, F.S. 1011 § 62 (2009).
170 Funds For the Operation of Schools, F.S. 1011 § 62 (2011).
Funds For the Operation of Schools, F.S. 1011 § 62 (2014).
Funds For The Operation Of Schools, F.S. 1011 § 62 (2015).
Giroux, H. (1997). Pedagogy and the politics of hope: Theory, culture and schooling, a
critical reader. Boulder, CO: Westview.
Goals 2000: Educate America Act, P.L. 103 § 227 (1994).
Godfrey, K., Matos-Elefonte, H., Ewing, M., Patel, P. (2013, July). AP completion:
Comparing AP, dual-enrolled, and regular students on four college outcomes.
Paper presented at the AP Annual Conference, Las Vegas, NV.
Goldhaber, D. D., & Brewer, D. J. (2008). What gets studies and why: Examining the
incentives that drive education research. In F. Hess (Ed.), When research matters
(pp. 197-218). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Hallam, S., & Ireson, J. (2003). Secondary school teachers’ attitudes towards beliefs
about ability grouping. The British Psychological Society, 73, 343-356.
Hallett, R. E., & Venegas, K. M. (2011). Is increased access enough? Advanced
placement courses, quality and success in low-income urban schools. Journal for
the Education of the Gifted, 24(3), 468-487.
Hargrove, L., Godin, D., & Dodd, B. G. (2008). College outcomes comparisons by AP
and non-AP high school experiences (Research Rep. No. 2008-3). New York,
NY: The College Board.
Harvey, O. J. (1986). Belief systems and attitudes toward the death penalty and other
punishments. Journal on Personality, 54, 143-159.
171 Hess, F. M. (2008). Conclusion: Education research and public policy. In F. Hess (Ed.),
When research matters (pp. 239-256). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
International Baccalaureate. (2015). About the IB. Retrieved from:
http://www.ibo.org/en/about-the-ib/
Jacobs, N., & Harvey, D. (2009). The extent to which teacher attitudes and expectations
predict academic achievement of final year students. Educational Studies, 36(2),
195-206.
Jeong, D. W. (2009). Student participation and performance on advanced placement
exams: Do state-sponsored incentives made a difference? Educational Evaluation
and Policy Analysis, 31(4), 346-366.
Keng, L., & Dodd, B. (2008). A comparison of college performances of AP and non-AP
student groups in 10 subject areas (College Board Research Report 2008-7). New
York, NY: The College Board.
Kerlinger, F. N., & Lee, H. B. (2000). Foundations of behavioral research (4th ed.). Holt,
NY: Harcourt College Publishers.
KewalRamani, A., Gilbertson, L., Fox, M., & Provasnik, S. (2007). Status and trends in
the education of racial and ethnic minorities. Washington DC: National Center
for Education Statistics.
Klopfenstein, K. (2003). Recommendations for maintaining the quality of advanced
placement programs. American Secondary Education, 32(1), 39-48.
Klopfenstein, K. (2004a). Advanced placement: Do minorities have equal opportunity?
Economics of Education Review, 23, 115-131.
172 Klopfenstein, K. (2004b). The advanced placement expansion of the 1990s: How did
traditionally underserved students fare? Education Policy Analysis, 12(68), 1-15.
Klopfenstein, K., & Thomas, M. K. (2010). Advanced placement participation:
Evaluating the policies of states and colleges. In P. M. Sadler, G. Sonnert, R. H.
Tai, & K. Klopfenstein (Eds.), A critical examination of the advanced placement
program (pp. 167-188). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Kozol, J. (1991). Savage inequities. New York, NY: Crown Publishers, Inc.
Kyburg, C., Hertberg-Davis, H., & Callahan, C. (2007). Advanced placement and
international baccalaureate programs: Optimal learning environments for talented
minorities? Journal of Advanced Academics, 18(2), 172-215.
Lacy, T. (2010). Examining AP: Access, rigor and revenue in the history of the advanced
placement program. In In P. M. Sadler, G. Sonnert, R. H. Tai, & K. Klopfenstein
(Eds.), A critical examination of the advanced placement program (pp. 17-48).
Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). From the achievement gap to the education debt:
Understanding achievement in U.S. schools. Educational Researcher, 35(7), 3-12.
Levin, B. (2008). Curriculum policy and the politics of what should be learned in schools.
In F. M. Connelly, M. F. He, & J. Phillon (Eds.), The Sage handbook of
curriculum and instruction (pp. 7-25). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Publications.
173 Lynn, P. (2008). The problem of nonresponse. In D. de Leeuw, J. J. How, & D. A.
Dillman (Eds.), International handbook of survey methodology (pp. 35-55). New
York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associations.
Martin, R. J. (1994). Multicultural social reconstructionist education: Design for diversity
in teacher education. Teacher Education Quarterly, 21(3), 77-89.
Mattern, K. D., Shaw, E. J., & Xiong, X. (2009). The relationship between AP exam
performance and college outcomes (College Board Research Report 2009-4).
New York, NY: The College Board.
Mayfield, B. (1979).Teacher perception of creativity, intelligence and achievement.
Gifted Child Quarterly, 23(4), 812-820.
McLaren, P. (2007). Life in schools. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (2nd
ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A
methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Miller, J. K. (2010). Advanced placement. In Encyclopedia of African American
Education. Retrieved from
http://knowledge.sagepub.com/view/africanamericaneducation/n6.xml
Morgan, R., & Klaric, J. (2007). AP students in college: An analysis of five-year
academic careers. (College Board Research Report 2007-4). New York, NY: The
College Board.
Munby, H. (1984). A qualitative approach to the study of a teacher’s beliefs. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 21, 27-38.
174 Munby, H., Russell, T., & Martin, A. (2001). Teachers’ knowledge and how it develops.
In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 877-904).
Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Murphy, D., & Dodd, B. (2009). A comparison of college performance of matched AP R
and non-AP student groups (Research Rep. No. 2009-6). New York, NY: The
College Board.
National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The
imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Noddings, N. (2008). The aims of education. In D. Flinders & S. Thornton (Eds.), The
curriculum studies reader (pp. 425-438). New York, NY: Routledge.
Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (2010). Working with academically gifted students in urban
settings: Issues and lessons learned. In J. VanTassel-Baska (Ed.), Patterns and
profiles of promising learners from poverty (pp. 85-106). Waco, TX: Prufrock
Press Inc.
Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy
construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307-332.
Patterson, B. F., & Ewing, M. (2013). Validating the use of AP exam scores for college
course placement (Research Rep. No. 2013-2). New York, NY: The College
Board.
Patterson, B. F., Packman, S., & Kobrin, J. L. (2011). Advanced placement exam taking
and performance: Relationships with first-year subject area college grades
(College Board Research Report 2011-4). New York, NY: The College Board.
175 Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
Posselt, J. R., Jacquette, O., Bielby, R., & Bastedo, M. N. (2012). Access without
equality: Longitudinal analyses of institutional stratification by race and ethnicity,
1972-2004. American Educational Research Journal, 49(6), 1074-1111.
Postman, N., & Weingartner, C. (1969). Teaching as a subversive activity. New York,
NY: Dell.
Richardson, V., Anders, P., Tidwell, D., & Lloyd, C. (1991). The relationship between
teachers’ beliefs and practices in reading comprehension. American Educational
Research Journal, 28(3), 559-586.
Rosenthal, R. (2002). The Pygmalion effect and its mediating mechanisms. In J. Aronson
(Ed.), Improving academic achievement: Impact of psychological factors on
education (pp. 25-36). San Diego: CA: Academic Press.
Rothschild, E. (1999). Four decades of the advanced placement program. The History
Teacher, 32(2), 175-206.
Sadler, P. M. (2010). Advanced placement in a changing educational landscape. In P. M.
Sadler, G. Sonnert, R. H. Tai, & K. Klopfenstein (Eds.), A critical examination of
the advanced placement program (pp. 3-16). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education
Press.
Sadler, P. M., & Sonnert, G. (2010). High school advanced placement success in college
coursework and the sciences. In P.M. Sadler, G. Sonnert, R. H. Tai, & K.
Klopfenstein (Eds.), A critical examination of the advanced placement program
(pp. 119-138). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
176 Sadler, P. M., Sonnert, G., Tai, R. H., & Klopfenstein, K. (2010). A critical examination
of the advanced placement program. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Schneider, J. (2009). Privilege, equity and the advanced placement program: Tug of war.
Journal of Curriculum Studies, 41(6), 813-831.
Seyfried, S. F. (1998). Academic achievement of African American preadolescents: The
influence of teacher perceptions. American Journal of Community Psychology,
26(3), 381-402.
Sleeter, C. (2005). Un-standardizing curriculum: Multicultural teaching in standards-
based classrooms. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Sleeter, C., & Grant, C. (1998). Making choices for multicultural education: Five
approaches to race, class, and gender. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Solorzano, D., & Ornelas, A. (2004). A critical race analysis of Latina/o and African
American advanced placement enrollment in public high schools. The High
School Journal, 87(3), 15-26.
Stanley, W. B. (1985). Social reconstructionism for today’s social education. Social
Education, 49(5), 384-389.
Steenbergen-Hu, S., & Moon, S. (2011). The effects of acceleration on high-ability
learners: A meta-analysis. Gifted Child Quarterly, 55, 39-53.
SurveyMonkey. (2015). Make better decisions with the world's #1 survey platform.
Retrieved from https://www.surveymonkey.com/?ut_source=header
Swanson, J. D. (2010). The patterns and profiles of gifted low-income Caucasian
children. In J. VanTassel-Baska (Ed.), Patterns and profiles of promising learners
from poverty (pp. 129-156). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press Inc.
177 Tai, R. H., Liu, C. Q., Almarode, J. T., & Fan, X. (2010). Advanced placement course
enrollment and long-range educational outcomes. In P. M. Sadler, G. Sonnert, R.
H. Tai, & K. Klopfenstein (Eds.), A critical examination of the advanced
placement program (pp. 109-118). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Taliaferro, J. D., & DeCuir-Gunby, J. T. (2008). African American educators’
perspectives on the advanced placement opportunity gap. The Urban Review,
40(2), 164-185.
Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2008). Foundations of mixed methods research:
Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral
sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
U. S. Department of Agriculture. (2013). National school lunch program.
http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/NSLPFactSheet.pdf
VanTassel-Baska, J. (2001). The role of advanced placement in talent development.
Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 12(3), 126-131.
Vaughn, E. S. (2010). Reform in an urban school district: The role of PSAT results in
promoting advanced placement course-taking. Education and Urban Society,
42(4), 394-406.
Wood, S. M., Portman, T., Cigrand, D. L., & Colangelo, N. (2010). School counselors’
perceptions and experience with acceleration as a program option for gifted and
talented students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 54(3), 168-178.
Wyatt, J., & Patterson, B. (July, 2013). A comparison of the college outcomes of AP and
dual enrollment students. Paper presented at the AP Annual Conference. Las
Vegas, NV.
178 Yin, R. K. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Los Angeles, CA:
Sage.
179