Leadership Practices in K-12 Public Schools for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students: A Qualitative Study by Erica Jones B. A. in Psychology, December 2009, Shepherd University M.Ed. in Special Education, May 2013, University of Virginia A Dissertation submitted to The Faculty of The Graduate School of Education and Human Development of The George Washington University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education January 10, 2019 Dissertation directed by Kelly Sherrill Linkous Assistant Professor of Education Administration i The Graduate School of Education and Human Development of The George Washington University certifies that Erica Jones has passed the Final Examination for the degree of Doctor of Education as of October 1, 2018. This is the final and approved form of the dissertation. Leadership Practices in K-12 Public Schools for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students: A Qualitative Study Erica Jones Dissertation Research Committee: Kelly Sherrill Linkous, Assistant Professor of Education Administration, Dissertation Director Christine W. Nganga, Assistant Professor of Education Administration, Committee Member Tania N. Thomas-Presswood, Associate Professor of Psychology, Gallaudet University, Committee Member ii Abstract of Dissertation Leadership Practices in K-12 Public Schools for Deaf and Hard-of Hearing-Students: A Qualitative Study This study aspired to understand the practices implemented by school leaders to ensure deaf and hard-of-hearing students have access to nonacademic and extracurricular activities and services commensurate with their hearing peers. The participants for this study were school leaders as well as non-school leaders who worked with deaf and hard- of-hearing students in their nonacademic and extracurricular activities in secondary public schools. The data were collected through document reviews and semi-structured interviews to address the research question: What are the practices, if any, that school leaders implement and employ to support their staff in developing transformative leadership skills to ensure a culture of inclusion that ensures deaf and hard-of-hearing students have access to nonacademic and extracurricular services commensurate with their hearing peers? The data were analyzed through the lens of transformative leadership theory and illuminated three themes: administrative guidance, resources, and culture. Key findings indicated the need for more explicit policies at the district and school levels, more access to resources, and greater professional development opportunities to support the development of a strong culture. iii Table of Content Abstract of Dissertation ..................................................................................................... iii List of Figures .................................................................................................................... iv List of Tables ...................................................................................................................... v Chapter 1: Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2: Review of the Literature.................................................................................. 19 Chapter 3: Overview of Methodology .............................................................................. 63 Chapter 4: Results ............................................................................................................. 74 Chapter 5: Interpretations, Conclusions, and Recommendations ................................... 103 References ....................................................................................................................... 128 Appendix A: Nine Guiding Principles of Leadership ..................................................... 147 Appendix B: Introduction Letter ..................................................................................... 149 Appendix C: Document Review Sheet ........................................................................... 151 Appendix D: School Leaders Interview Protocol ........................................................... 152 Appendix E: Nonschool Leaders Interview Protocol ..................................................... 156 Appendix F: Data Collection Summary Sheet ................................................................ 159 Appendix G: Information Sheet for Potential Participants ............................................. 160 Appendix H: Informed Consent Form ............................................................................ 162 iv List of Figures Figure 1. Conceptual framework. ..................................................................................... 59 Figure 2. Maxwell’s (2013) design for qualitative studies. .............................................. 67 Figure 3. Occurrence of categories ................................................................................... 78 Figure 4. Occurrence of themes........................................................................................ 79 Figure 5. Revised conceptual framework ........................................................................ 90 v List of Tables Table 1. Tenets of Leadership ........................................................................................... 51 Table 2. Participant Information ...................................................................................... 73 Table 3. District A Demographics .................................................................................... 74 Table 4. District B Demographics .................................................................................... 75 Table 5. District C Demographics .................................................................................... 76 vi Chapter I: Introduction Overview Students with disabilities have a long and checkered history with regard to public education. For many years students with disabilities were considered unteachable and were denied access to public schools (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act [IDEA], 2004). Those who received some formal education were often segregated into separate schools isolated from their nondisabled peers (IDEA, 2004). Children with disabilities were merely housed in schools with little accountability for what they were learning (IDEA, 2004). Furthermore, parents of children with disabilities had no rights or parental safeguards regarding their children’s education and limited input into how their children were educated or what they would be learning (IDEA, 2004). Additionally, these students were excluded from fully participating in all curricular, cocurricular, and extracurricular activities to which their nondisabled peers had access. The purpose of this basic qualitative study was to examine the practices school leaders utilize to understand the access deaf and hard-of-hearing students have to nonacademic and extracurricular services and activities. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (1973) guarantees certain rights to people with disabilities. It was the first U.S. federal civil rights protection for people with disabilities (Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund [DREDF], 1997-2018). Section 504 states: No otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States, as defined in section 705(20) of this title, shall, solely due to his or her disability, be excluded from the participation in or be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial 1 assistance or under any program or activity conducted by any Executive Agency or by the United States Postal Service. (DREDF, 1997-2018) Litigation resulted in legislation regarding the education of children with disabilities and the advent of special education (Mills v. Board of Education, 1972); PARC v. Commonwealth, 1972). In 1975 Congress passed Public Law 94-142, which later became known as the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EHA), now known as IDEA. This law guaranteed all students with disabilities a free appropriate public education (FAPE). In 1990, Congress renamed the EHA the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). As did the EHA, the IDEA requires schools that accept federal money to provide individualized special education for any student who qualifies as a student with a disability by stating that “education must be tailored to meet the needs of the individual child with a disability” (U.S. Department of Education, 2007a). The purposes of IDEA are: (1) (A) to ensure that all children with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate public education that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs and prepare them for further education, employment, and independent living; (B) to ensure that the rights of children with disabilities and parents of such children are protected; and (C) to assist States, localities, educational service agencies, and Federal agencies to provide for the education of all children with disabilities; 2 (2) to assist States in the implementation of a statewide, comprehensive, coordinated, multidisciplinary, interagency system of early intervention services for infants and toddlers with disabilities and their families; (3) to ensure that educators and parents have the necessary tools to improve educational results for children with