Massive gaps exist within and across climate efforts, which are often siloed, inequitable, and ineffective within and across local, national, and global community contexts. Climate justice was defined in this study as the need for activism and advocacy to address the disproportionate crises, impacts, and intersectional needs that communities experience due to climate crises. The intent of the “Climate Justice Collaborative Toolkit” and co-development process that I developed and examined in this dissertation was to improve intersectional collaboration, capacity building, and reciprocal agreements that would ensure better mitigation and adaptation of climate crisis events. The purpose of this study was to answer this research question: What are community participants' perceptions of this toolkit and collaborative co-development process for purposes of climate and racial justice? The purpose of this study was also to assess the impacts of the toolkit and accompanying process among members involved in climate justice and action groups, and develop case study stories to help revise and finalize the toolkit and surrounding co-development process for inclusive purposes. I asked these questions via a mixed-methods action research study, in which participants completed a pre-survey instrument, engaged in group orientations and toolkit meetings, participated in group leader interviews, and completed a post-survey instrument. Mixed-methods data suggested the near-unanimous need for greater participation, as well as representation, in climate efforts in order to create more equitable and racial justice outcomes. Additional findings involved to what extent collective groups, organizations, and other entities might better focus on the significant impacts of gender inequality within climate change crises. Another finding evidenced was that the toolkit was also used by participants as a decision-making system that helped enhance participants’ communication efforts and subsequent identifications of climate and racial justice issues, as well as potential solutions. Future iterations from these findings will include more detailed toolkit versions to effectively promote collaboration as linked to case studies presented as stories in the toolkit. This supports that a diverse range of community members’ lived experiences and intersectional issues considered in any climate effort can lead to more equitable, intersectional, and systems changing processes and outcomes.

This study investigated the impact of learning about cultural intelligence (CQ) from senior U.S. Army Special Forces leaders (Group Commanders and Group Command Sergeants Major) on aspiring Special Forces Captains (students) at the Captains Career Course. Three research questions addressed the influence of senior leader interventions on students’ CQ scores, motivation to work with partner forces, and intentions to improve CQ. The study involved quantitative and qualitative data for each of the three comparison groups: control, face-to-face (in-person interaction with senior leaders), and podcast (audio-only recordings). The quantitative data measured CQ capabilities of motivation, cognition, metacognition, and behavior. Descriptive statistics revealed that from the pre-test to the post-test, the control and podcast groups experienced increased self-assessment scores on all four constructs but decreased observer assessment scores. By contrast, the face-to-face group experienced both a decrease in observer assessment scores as well as a marginal decrease in self-assessment scores (on motivation and metacognition). Exploring motivation to work with partner forces, analysis of the group interview transcripts revealed that the control group attributed their motivation primarily to their prior experiences, while participants in the face-to-face group reported mixed feelings regarding prior experiences but highlighted the impact of senior Special Forces leaders' stories on their motivation. The podcast group credited their course experience and the senior leaders' narratives for their increased motivation. Examining the influence of senior leader stories on intent to improve CQ, the control group provided generic responses focused on improving cognition. The face-to-face group offered more specific, action-oriented answers emphasizing business systems, sociolinguistics, and cultural values. The podcast group produced varying responses, with some sharing basic intent and others detailing specific strategies such as language fluency and cultural immersion. Participants across all three groups expressed a strong intention to seek out mentorship and stories from experienced individuals. In conclusion, this study highlights the myriad influences on aspiring Special Forces Captains' CQ and the multifaceted impact of senior Special Forces leaders' stories. The narratives contributed to increased motivation, deeper understanding of the Special Forces mission, and specific strategies for improving CQ, providing valuable insights for military education and training programs.

This study applied the Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) to explore the sources of self-efficacy and professional development activities that are most predictive of PreK-6 music teachers’ efficacious beliefs. This study also compared teacher efficacy levels across different groups. The target population for this study was PreK-6 music teachers in the state of Arizona. The survey was disseminated through the National Association for Music Education (NAfME), the Arizona chapters of the American Orff-Schulwerk Association (AOSA), the Organization of American Kodály Educators (OAKE), and snowball sampling via a Facebook message. Of the 660 teachers invited to participate, 92 (13.94%) voluntarily completed the survey. Results from simultaneous multiple regression analyses indicated that teacher efficacy for instructional strategies was best predicted by their mastery experience, followed by vicarious experience, while mastery experience was the strongest predictor of teacher efficacy for student engagement. Additionally, the acquisition of method certification and watching teaching resources via YouTube were significant predictors of teacher efficacy for instructional strategies, while observation hours per year was the only predictor of teacher efficacy for student engagement. Results from factorial between-subjects ANOVAs indicated that teaching experience had a significant main effect on teacher efficacy for instructional strategies and student engagement. However, neither main teaching areas nor the combined effects of main teaching areas and teaching experience had a significant effect on teacher efficacy for instructional strategies and student engagement. Results from independent-samples t-test analyses showed that school types had a significant effect on teacher efficacy for student engagement, while no differences were found between school types regarding teacher efficacy for instructional strategies. The analysis of open-ended comments identified themes related to factors that strengthen or weaken participant teacher efficacy, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on teacher efficacy, the types of professional development activities that they engaged during the year, the most effective professional development activities for enhancing teacher efficacy. Findings of this study have theoretical and practical implications for school principals, school administrators, policy makers, music teacher educators, and music teachers to promote and support music teachers’ self-efficacy.

In this mixed-methods study, I sought to design and develop a test delivery method to reduce linguistic bias in English-based mathematics tests. Guided by translanguaging, a recent linguistic theory recognizing the complexity of multilingualism, I designed a computer-based test delivery method allowing test-takers to toggle between English and their self-identified dominant language. This three-part study asks and answers research questions from all phases of the novel test delivery design. In the first phase, I conducted cognitive interviews with 11 Mandarin Chinese dominant speakers and 11 Spanish speaking dominant undergraduate students while taking a well-regarded calculus conceptual exam, the Precalculus Concept Assessment (PCA). In the second phase, I designed and developed the linguistically adaptive test (LAT) version of the PCA using the Concerto test delivery platform. In the third phase, I conducted a within-subjects random-assignment study of the efficacy the LAT. I also conducted in-depth interviews with a subset of the test-takers. Nine items on the PCA revealed linguistic issues during the cognitive interviews demonstrating the need to improve the linguistic bias on the test items. Additionally, the newly developed LAT demonstrated evidence of reliability and validity. However, the large-scale efficacy study showed that the LAT did not appear to make a significant difference in scores for dominant speakers of Spanish or dominant speakers of Mandarin Chinese. This finding held true for overall test scores as well as at the item level indicating that the LAT test delivery system does not appear to reduce linguistic bias in testing. Additionally, in-depth interviews revealed that many students felt that the linguistically adaptive test was either the same or essentially the same as the non-LAT version of the test. Some participants felt that the toggle button was not necessary if they could understand the mathematics item well enough. As one participant noted, “It's math, It's math. It doesn't matter if it's in English or in Spanish.” This dissertation concludes with a discussion about the implications for test developers and suggestions for future direction of study.

Over the past 20 years in the United States (U.S.), teachers have seen a marked

shift in how teacher evaluation policies govern the evaluation of their performance.

Spurred by federal mandates, teachers have been increasingly held accountable for their

students’ academic achievement, most notably through the use of value-added models

(VAMs)—a statistically complex tool that aims to isolate and then quantify the effect of

teachers on their students’ achievement. This increased focus on accountability ultimately

resulted in numerous lawsuits across the U.S. where teachers protested what they felt

were unfair evaluations informed by invalid, unreliable, and biased measures—most

notably VAMs.

While New Mexico’s teacher evaluation system was labeled as a “gold standard”

due to its purported ability to objectively and accurately differentiate between effective

and ineffective teachers, in 2015, teachers filed suit contesting the fairness and accuracy

of their evaluations. Amrein-Beardsley and Geiger’s (revise and resubmit) initial analyses

of the state’s teacher evaluation data revealed that the four individual measures

comprising teachers’ overall evaluation scores showed evidence of bias, and specifically,

teachers who taught in schools with different student body compositions (e.g., special

education students, poorer students, gifted students) had significantly different scores

than their peers. The purpose of this study was to expand upon these prior analyses by

investigating whether those conclusions still held true when controlling for a variety of

confounding factors at the school, class, and teacher levels, as such covariates were not

included in prior analyses.



Results from multiple linear regression analyses indicated that, overall, the

measures used to inform New Mexico teachers’ overall evaluation scores still showed

evidence of bias by school-level student demographic factors, with VAMs potentially

being the most susceptible and classroom observations being the least. This study is

especially unique given the juxtaposition of such a highly touted evaluation system also

being one where teachers contested its constitutionality. Study findings are important for

all education stakeholders to consider, especially as teacher evaluation systems and

related policies continue to be transformed.

This mixed-methods study explored perceptions of new adjuncts on various trainings with regards to satisfying their professional and aspirational needs. Three trainings were offered in fall 2018 quarter as optional professional development: workshop, and two roundtable sessions. These trainings assisted adjuncts with their teaching skills, educational technology and pedagogy. Guidance was provided from experienced adjuncts and staff.

Surveys and interviews with adjuncts, along with a focus group with staff were the sources of data for this study. A repeated measures Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) model was utilized. Analysis of data showed that there was a positive and statistical significance of change in perceptions of adjuncts who participated in all trainings towards fulfilling their needs, as compared to those who did not participate in any trainings. Adjuncts perceived an improvement in their professional growth based on Herzberg’s motivation-hygiene theory and the trainings also fulfilled their higher-level growth needs based on Maslow’s hierarchical needs theory. A large practical significance was also found which measures the practical impact of such trainings at local communities of practice.

Public schools across the country are increasingly dealing with children who enter schools speaking a language other than English and Arizona is not the exception. As a result, schools across the country have to adequately ensure this populations’ academic achievement, which is directly impacted by English proficiency and ELLs (English Language Learners) program placement. However, restrictive language policies such as Proposition 203, the four-hour English Language Development (ELD) block, and the exclusion of ELLs from Dual Language Programs (DLPs) in Arizona are not effectively preparing linguistic minority and ethnic student populations for academic achievement and competitiveness in a global economy.

For the first part of the analysis, the author examined bilingual education and DLPs policies, access, and practices impacting Latina/o communities by utilizing a case study methodology framework to present the phenomenon of DLPs in a state that by law only supports English only education. The author discussed the case study research design to answer the research questions: (1) Which public k-12 schools are implementing Dual Language Programs (DLPs) in the state of AZ? (2) What are the DLPs’ characteristics? (3) Where are the schools located? (4) What are the stakeholder participants’ perceptions of DLPs and the context in which these DLPs navigate? The author also describe the context of the study, the participants, data, and the data collection process, as well as the analytical techniques she used to make sense of the data and draw findings.

The findings suggest that bilingual education programs in the form of DLPs are being implemented in the state of Arizona despite the English only law of Proposition 203, English for the Children. The growing demand for DLPs is increasing the implementation of such programs, however, language minority students that are classified as ELL are excluded from being part of such programs. Moreover, the findings of the study suggest that although bilingual education is being implemented in Arizona through DLPs, language minority education policy is being negatively influenced by Interest Convergence tenets and Racist Nativist ideology in which the interest of the dominant culture are further advanced to the detriment of minority groups’ interest.

In 2010, the Arizona Legislature established a performance-based diploma initiative known as Move On When Ready (MOWR). The policy relies on an education model designed to evaluate students' college and career readiness by measuring their academic ability to succeed in the first credit-bearing course in community college. Move On When Ready is a structurally oriented, qualification system that attempts to attain a relatively narrow goal: increase the number of students able to successfully perform at a college-level academic standard. By relying on a set of benchmarked assessments to measure success and failure, MOWR propagates a categorical binary. The binary establishes explicit performance criteria on a set of examinations students are required to meet in order to earn a high school qualification that, by design, certifies whether students are ready or not ready for college.

This study sought to reveal how students’ perceptions of the policy and schooling in general affect their understanding of the concept of college readiness and the college readiness binary and to identify factors that help formulate those perceptions. This interpretivist, qualitative study relied on analysis of multiple face-to-face interviews with students to better understand how they think and act within the context of Move On When Ready, paying particular attention to students from historically vulnerable minority subgroups (e.g., the Latina (a)/Hispanic sub-population) enrolled in two schools deploying the MOWR strategy.

Findings suggest that interviewed students understand little about MOWR's design, intent or implications for their future educational trajectories. Moreover, what they believe is generally misinformed, regardless of aspiration, socio-cultural background, or academic standing. School-based sources of messaging (e.g., teachers and administrators) supply the bulk of information to students about MOWR. However, in these two schools, the flow of information is constricted. In addition, the information conveyed is either distorted by message mediators or misinterpreted by the students. The data reveal that formal and informal mediators of policy messages influence students’ engagement with the policy and affect students’ capacity to play an active role in determining the policy’s effect on their educational outcomes.

ABSTRACT

This study examines validity evidence of a state policy-directed teacher evaluation system implemented in Arizona during school year 2012-2013. The purpose was to evaluate the warrant for making high stakes, consequential judgments of teacher competence based on value-added (VAM) estimates of instructional impact and observations of professional practice (PP). The research also explores educator influence (voice) in evaluation design and the role information brokers have in local decision making. Findings are situated in an evidentiary and policy context at both the LEA and state policy levels.

The study employs a single-phase, concurrent, mixed-methods research design triangulating multiple sources of qualitative and quantitative evidence onto a single (unified) validation construct: Teacher Instructional Quality. It focuses on assessing the characteristics of metrics used to construct quantitative ratings of instructional competence and the alignment of stakeholder perspectives to facets implicit in the evaluation framework. Validity examinations include assembly of criterion, content, reliability, consequential and construct articulation evidences. Perceptual perspectives were obtained from teachers, principals, district leadership, and state policy decision makers. Data for this study came from a large suburban public school district in metropolitan Phoenix, Arizona.

Study findings suggest that the evaluation framework is insufficient for supporting high stakes, consequential inferences of teacher instructional quality. This is based, in part on the following: (1) Weak associations between VAM and PP metrics; (2) Unstable VAM measures across time and between tested content areas; (3) Less than adequate scale reliabilities; (4) Lack of coherence between theorized and empirical PP factor structures; (5) Omission/underrepresentation of important instructional attributes/effects; (6) Stakeholder concerns over rater consistency, bias, and the inability of test scores to adequately represent instructional competence; (7) Negative sentiments regarding the system's ability to improve instructional competence and/or student learning; (8) Concerns regarding unintended consequences including increased stress, lower morale, harm to professional identity, and restricted learning opportunities; and (9) The general lack of empowerment and educator exclusion from the decision making process. Study findings also highlight the value of information brokers in policy decision making and the importance of having access to unbiased empirical information during the design and implementation phases of important change initiatives.

Teacher evaluation policies have recently shifted in the United States. For the first time in history, many states, districts, and administrators are now required to evaluate teachers by methods that are up to 50% based on their "value-added," as demonstrated at the classroom-level by growth on student achievement data over time. Other related instruments and methods, such as classroom observations and rubrics, have also become common practices in teacher evaluation systems. Such methods are consistent with the neoliberal discourse that has dominated the social and political sphere for the past three decades. Employing a discourse analytic approach that called upon a governmentality framework, the author used a complementary approach to understand how contemporary teacher evaluation polices, practices, and instruments work to discursively (re)define teachers and teacher quality in terms of their market value.

For the first part of the analysis, the author collected and analyzed documents and field notes related to the teacher evaluation system at one urban middle school. The analysis included official policy documents, official White House speeches and press releases, evaluation system promotional materials, evaluator training materials, and the like. For the second part of the analysis, she interviewed teachers and their evaluators at the local middle school in order to understand how the participants had embodied the market-based discourse to define themselves as teachers and qualify their practice, quality, and worth accordingly.

The findings of the study suggest that teacher evaluation policies, practices, and instruments make possible a variety of techniques, such as numericization, hierarchical surveillance, normalizing judgments, and audit, in order to first make teachers objects of knowledge and then act upon that knowledge to manage teachers' conduct. The author also found that teachers and their evaluators have taken up this discourse in order to think about and act upon themselves as responsibilized subjects. Ultimately, the author argues that while much of the attention related to teacher evaluations has focused on the instruments used to measure the construct of teacher quality, that teacher evaluation instruments work in a mutually constitutive ways to discursively shape the construct of teacher quality.