Categories and Codes Based on Interview Questions.
Research Question 1 (RQ1).How do teachers conceptualize RTI? CODE: R=Reading RQ1. R G (Reading Goal) RQ1.R P (Reading Progress) RQ1.R T (Reading Training) RQ1.R R (Reading Resources) RQ1.R I (Reading Improvement) RQ1.R S (Reading Satisfaction)
Research Question 2 (RQ2).How does the RTI team conceptualize the reading class? RQ2. AP (Academic Performance) RQ2. SP (Student Progress) RQ2. FA (Formative Assessment) RQ2. SA (Summative Assessment) RQ2. RP (Reading Progress) RQ2. SD (Student Difficulty) RQ2. PM (Progress Monitoring)
Research Question 3 (RQ3). What have been the benefits/challenges of the reading class?
RQ3. RS (Reading Success methods) RQ3. TI (Teacher Instruction)
RQ3. CI (Computer-based Instruction) RQ3. IR (Independent Reading) RQ3. RC (Reading Challenges) RQ3. RR (Reading Resources) RQ3. AR (Adequate Resources) RQ3. PR (Preferred Resources) RQ3. PI (Performance Increase)
APPENDIX J: SAMPLE INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT
How does the school’s RTI model meet the needs of at-risk students?
T2: I don’t feel we are doing it. We are setting up a mentoring program and we want to do more evaluations.
T3: By successfully locating these students through initial teacher referrals and having SST meetings.
T4: They were put in study skills classes. Being grouped in study skills does not meet the needs. They need to be separated from study skills to gauge the various levels of their needs.
T5: Through intervention at Tier 2 level, teacher referrals, and monitoring students progress every 9 weeks.
Please give me details of the RTI training in your school?
P2: Professional development; Information the MTSS committee discusses at the monthly meetings are disseminated throughout the school via emails and through the departments.
Are high schools reading classes effective in improving at risk students’ reading?
A1: We thought it was. We had reading class in some students schedule for the first implementation of the reading class but it was difficult to keep up with; but now with IF we are able to better schedule students, so it might be effective.
A2: Yes; if they are implemented properly. It should have consistency and relevancy to the students.
APPENDIX K: SAMPLE REFLECTIVE JOURNAL
Reflective Journal
10/31/13: Today I got IRB approval to begin my study. I am so elated! My wait for this moment seemed like an eternity and now it feels like Christmas in October! Now that I’ve gotten approval, I can proceed to collect my data.
11/ 7/ 13: I met with the first reading teacher in the morning on her planning period to notify her that I got approval to collect data on students’ work. She informed me that she had cleaned out her file cabinet and had disposed of most of the work samples since she was no longer teaching the class but she will check to see if she still had any. I felt disappointed. We discussed a time when we would have the phone interview and after looking at her calendar, she was free to do it on the Friday before Thanksgiving break. I met with the second reading teacher in the afternoon after school to let her know that I would like to collect whatever students’ work samples that she has, and that I would like her to obscure any identifiable information that would identify who the students are. She said she has some samples and she would need time to collect and de-identify the
students, so getting them to me after the holiday break would be more practical for her. I agreed. I told her I was interviewing the former reading teacher (T2) Friday before the break and she agreed that it was also a good day for her, so we set a time for it to be done. 11/8/13: I’m on a roll! Since I met with 2 participants, I might as well get the others to commit to a day and time for the interviews. Fridays are mostly good days for everyone
since we don’t have school the next day and we are more relaxed to talk without
inhibition. I contacted the other participants during the course of the day and was able to secure the interviews. Mission accomplished!
11/15/13: I have 2 interviews scheduled today after school- T1 and A2. I reminded them of the time and they assured me that it was still as planned. The interviews went very smoothly. T1 answered all the questions without hesitation. She is extremely
knowledgeable about RTI and I value her input. She has over twenty years teaching experience and has been at the school for eighteen years. She sends out RTI progress reports and student failure list every 9 weeks via email to the faculty. She is walking data. She opposes the dismantling of the 9th grade teams who helped track students’ need for
intervention. She believes there are not enough reading classes and wants more teachers to be reading certified. A2 has worked at the school for ten years and has thirteen years teaching experience. A2 is new to RTI. He was deliberate with his answers making sure they were politically correct. He was transparent with his responses regarding keeping the students out of trouble. He is an advocate for mentoring which he believes is the first step in gaining students’ trust. Once it is gained, they will listen and the transition to RTI academic interventions would be smoother.
11/16/13: My interviews today with T2 and T5 are on schedule. T2 works closely with T1 so I am looking forward to hear what’s on her mind. When I contacted her, she had a situation to attend to, but she said she would still do the interview, only that it may be within a shorter time frame. I told her it was no problem since she did not want to
reschedule. Just like T1, she is a walking encyclopedia on RTI/ MTSS. She has over twenty years of teaching experience and has been at the school over 15 years. She has been involved in RTI since the implementation so she has seen the ups and downs of it. She believes that RTI is not meeting the needs of at-risk students so the new MTSS focus team is setting up teacher/student mentoring which should meet the needs at hand. She uses Key Train regularly and vouches for its success. The interview lasted approximately 30 minutes which was within her time frame.
Curriculum Vitae Ann-Marie Popwell
Education: Walden University, Minneapolis, MN, 2007- present
Doctor of Education candidate
Emphasis in Administrative Leadership
Walden University, Minneapolis, MN, 2004- 2006 Master of the Arts in Curriculum and Instruction
Mercer University, McDonough, GA, 2004 Bachelor of Science in Social Services Professional Experience: xxxxxxxxxx School System,
High School Special Education Teacher 2002 – present
Career & Technical Instruction Coordinator – 4 years
Professional Duties: CTI Leadership Team Member – 4 years Served as RTI Team Member – 2 years High School Ladies Club Advisor – 2 years
Memberships: Georgia Association of Educators