Do you believe RtI should become standard practice in all elementary

schools in North Carolina?

Yes 117 62.5

No 18 9.63

Undecided 52 27.8

Statistical Properties of Survey Confidence Level

According to Creswell (2012) and Dillman, Smyth, and Christian (2009), a minimum of approximately 90 participants would be needed to achieve a statistically adequate sample, given a confidence interval of 95% with a 10% sampling error and a 50% probability that a participant would select a particular response. Results from this study meet and exceed this statistical threshold. A return rate of 187 provides a confidence interval of 95% with less than 7% sample error and conservatively a 50% probability of choosing a particular response. Thus, there is evidence to suggest the results of this study may provide generalizable

95

public elementary school principals in North Carolina serving preK/Kindergarten through 5th grade).

Measures of Internal Consistency

According to Hopkins, Stanley, and Hopkins (1990), instrument reliability can be established using a generalized coefficient of internal consistency such as Cronbach’s Alpha (Cronbach, 1951 cited in Hopkins, Stanley, Hopkins, 1990). Alpha results from this

administration of the Stages of Concern Questionnaire are presented in Table 4.2. Coefficients were generated using SPSS computer software.

Table 4.2: Alpha Results from SoCQ Administration

Composite Stage 0 Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 Stage 5 Stage 6

Cronbach Alpha for this administration of the SoCQ

.93 .55 .80 .81 .83 .64 .76 .76

Alpha ranges for the SoCQ as cited by George, Hall, & Stiegelbauer, 2006

- .50 - .78 .74 - .87 .65 - .83 .65 - .84 .71 - .84 .79 - .83 .65 - .82

N = 187

Statistically speaking, alpha coefficients above .70 are considered adequate. Alpha coefficients below .70 may reflect a lack of internal consistency; however, they may also indicate narrow statistical variability (Howell, 2011). With regard to Stage 0 (Alpha = .55) and Stage 4 (Alpha = .64), data indicated relatively low variance rather than a lack of

reliability, per se. Regardless, the alpha for Stage 0 fell within a range that is consistent with the literature. A review of inter-item correlations revealed statistically adequate relationships (i.e., r = .165 to .417) for items in Stage 4. Taken as a whole, the composite internal

96

Research Questions and Results

In this exploratory study, the Stages of Concern Questionnaire (SoCQ Form 075; George, Hall, & Stiegelbauer, 2006) and 12 questions designed by this researcher were utilized to answer four research questions regarding elementary principals’ perception of RtI implementation in North Carolina public schools.

Analytical Techniques

The analysis of results for Research Question 1 followed the recommendations of George, Hall, and Stiegelbauer (2006). Specifically, raw scores obtained from the

administration of the SoCQ were converted into percentile scores using software developed specifically for the Stages of Concern Questionnaire (SoCQ-Form 075). Subsequently, a Stages of Concern profile was created based on the converted percentile scores (see Figure 4.2). The profile provided information regarding the relative intensity of concerns reported by the participants (i.e., elementary school principals in North Carolina) as a group. The two highest and lowest Stages of Concern were identified from the profile, and further analyzed in terms of a frequency count showing the percentage of principals who rated each of seven stages as their peak concern. Finally, a matrix was created to examine the relative

relationship and distributed percentage that existed between the principals’ highest and second highest Stage of Concern. Tables 4.3 and 4.4 show the distribution of scores across all seven Stages of Concern.

The analysis of results for Research Question 2 also followed the suggestions of George, Hall, and Stiegelbauer (2006). As indicated for Research Question 1, raw scores obtained from the administration of the SoCQ were converted into percentile scores and then graphed into concern profiles. Unlike Question 1, which address North Carolina principals as a group,

97

the concern profiles for Question 2 were generated for North Carolina elementary principals according to the following subgroups: (a) years of experience as a school principal; (b) years of involvement with RtI implementation; (c) levels of knowledge of RtI; (d) hours of RtI training; (e) use of RtI practices; and (f) beliefs about RtI. The two highest and lowest Stages of Concern were then identified from the various profiles, and further analyzed in terms of frequency counts showing the percentage of principals who rated each of seven stages as their peak concern. To examine the relative relationship and distributed percentage that exists between principals’ highest and second highest Stage of Concern, a matrix was created (see Table 4.5 and Appendix C).

Question 3 was evaluated using comparative statistics (i.e., analysis of variance; ANOVA) to determine if significant differences exist in elementary principals’ Stages of Concern when grouped by years of involvement with RtI implementation. In keeping with the recommendation of George, Hall, and Stiegelbauer (2006), raw scores rather than percentile scores were entered into the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software to generate the ANOVA data.

Question 4 was also evaluated using an analysis of variance (ANOVA); however, in this question the comparative statistic was used to determine if significant differences exist in elementary principals’ Stages of Concern when grouped by levels of knowledge of RtI. As indicated above, the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software was used to generate the ANOVA data, and raw scores rather than percentile scores were used for statistical analyses.

98 Results for Research Question 1

Research Question #1: What Stages of Concern, as measured by the SoCQ, are collectively rated the highest and lowest by elementary principals in North Carolina with regard to the implementation of RtI?

Hypothesis #1a: Because RtI is a relatively recent innovation for North Carolina (i.e., introduced in approximately 2004), it is hypothesized that, as a group, elementary principals in North Carolina will rate Informational (Stage 1) and Personal (Stage 2) as the two highest Stages of Concern.

Hypothesis #1b: It is also hypothesized that, as a group, elementary principals in North Carolina will rate Collaboration (Stage 5) and Refocusing (Stage 6) as the two lowest Stages of Concern.

Results for Question 1. Results indicate that Unconcerned (Stage 0) was the highest Stage of Concern for elementary principals in North Carolina when measured as a group. Based on a frequency count, 92 (49.2%) of 187 principals scored highest on Stage 0. According to George, Hall, and Stiegelbauer (2006), high Stage 0 scores do not necessarily distinguish between users and nonusers of an innovation. Rather, an elevated Stage 0 score may indicate a lack of concern regarding the innovation (in this case, RtI) due to low awareness (or interest) about the innovation, or low engagement with the innovation as compared to other activities and responsibilities (see Figure 4.2, and Tables 4.3 and 4.4).

99

Figure 4.2: Stages of Concern Profile for Elementary Principals as a Group

Table 4.3: Stages of Concern with Converted Percentiles and Frequency Count