You are on page 1of 110


A Grounded Theory Study in the Domination of Testing
in Public Schools and the Rise of Charter Schools

JUNE, 2014

Committee Members
Patricia Hoffman-Miller, Ph. D.

Dissertation Chair
William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
Teresa A. Hughes, PhD
G. Soloman Osho, PhD
Marcia Collins Shelton, PhD

Dissertation Format
Chapter I:

Introduction to the Study

Chapter II: Review of the Literature
Chapter III: Methodology
Chapter IV: Findings and Results
Chapter V: Conclusions and

Chapter I
Introduction Highlights

Statement of the Problem: A crisis of failure.
Not meeting a pre-determined standard.
Multiple years of failure = restructuring measures
from the State Education Agency
Purpose of the Study: Bring awareness to the
outcomes and consequences of No Child Left
Behind. Who benefits from NCLB and who is

Introduction Highlights
Adequate Yearly Progress:
Federally mandated accountability standard
Compliance or Non-Compliance
As standards go up, more schools fail.
AYP Matrix of Accountability
Must meet all four criteria.
Make progress toward 100% proficiency by 2014.

Introduction Highlights
AYP Percentages on the Rise:
2011 – 42 % fail
2012 – 75 % fail
2013 – change made
ESEA Waiver – resulted in AYP put on hold.
States submit application for waiver with plan.
States agree to a new curriculum.
The new curriculum = Common Core
State Standards

Introduction Highlights
45 States have been approved for the waiver
Texas is one of five not under the waiver.
No State is currently under the 2014 mandate.
Many schools across the state have gone to extensive
measures to escape AYP, some schools being
restructured. Now AYP is put on hold.

Significance of the Study
The reality of NCLB is demonstrated through through
those who have experienced the final phase of
NCLB – restructure of the school, or closure.
Two groups were chosen to give evidence to the effects
of NCLB.

Significance of the Study
One urban setting has one school closed and another
under instructional supervision from a corporate
entity. The schools are in a city in Central Texas.
In another urban setting located in Southeast Texas all
of the schools in the school district were put under new
management and all professional employees lost their

Research Questions

From the evidence presented, have the NCLB
mandates served to propel schools and school
districts toward AYP non-compliance?

2. What are the perceptions of parents toward the

restructuring of their neighborhood school.

Research Questions (continued)

3. What are the perceptions of teachers and administrators

who have been involved with the restructuring process?

4. What are the perceptions of parents of children affected

through the restructuring of the neighborhood schools
with regards to their taxes for schools being well

Theoretical Framework
This study is framed using the theoretical framework
of the Hegelian Dialectic. Dialectics is the process of
searching for the truth through opposing or
contradicting paradigms.
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel 1770-1831
Thesis – Problem
Antithesis – Reaction
Synthesis - Solution

Theortical Framework Expanded
The importance of Cognitive Dissonance to the Study:
Cognitive Dissonance asserts that we all have fixed
belief systems that when faced with conflict and
disharmony or dissonance, we seek ways to justify the
disharmony and regain balance in our cognitive belief

(McLeod, 2008)

Theoretical Framework Expanded

As long as educators remain in Cognitive Dissonance
the status quo of Outcomes Based Results from
Standardized Testing remains.

Chapter II:
Literature Review

The following topics are included within the Literature
The Specter of AYP
The Issue of Teacher Evaluation
Technology, High Stakes Testing and the Rise of Public

Charter Schools
International Tests
Increased Reliance on the Computer
State Assessments

Literature Review (Cont.)
Proficiency Percentages on the Rise
Linking the Teacher to the Test
Common Core State Standards
The Computer as the Teacher
Outcomes Based Education
Continuity of Agenda

Literature Review (Cont.)
Federal Encroachment
School Closures
Facing Reality
The Hegelian Dialectic Played Out in No Child Left

Escape from Cognitive Dissonance
The Grounded Theory

Literature Review (Cont.)
The Grounded Theory:
With the information researched in the literature, analysis of
NCLB law, and using inductive reasoning and logic, it is
postulated that from its conception in the minds of its
planners, NCLB was and is designed to drive schools to
possible failure or weakened so that a new system of
education is established that supports an entirely different
approach to educating the youth of our country.

Chapter III:
Research Design Summary:
The researcher used a qualitative approach to a

grounded theory study examining the phenomenon
of school failure. What follows is a more detailed
The cause of this phenomenon was explored to

reveal the reality of No Child Left Behind mandates
and policies in the lives of those affected.

Methodology (Cont.)
 “The intent of a grounded theory study is to move

beyond description and to generate or discover a
theory, an abstract analytical schema of a process or
action or interaction” (Creswell, 2007 pp. 62-63).
The perceptions of the parents, teachers, and

administrators will play a large role in interpreting
the data that is collected.


The grounded theory comes out of the research from

the literature and is tested for trustworthiness and
credibility from the participants in the study.

Methodology (Cont.)
 According to Creswell (2012), if existing theories do

not adequately address the issues, then a new
grounded theory is needed.
In the study conducted, those affected by NCLB

policy gave evidence through their testimony and
demonstrated what effect the restructuring process
or closure had on their family or their profession.

The grounded theory postulated previously in the

study drove the research but the people interviewed
gave voice to the support or lack of support, of the

Methodology (Cont.)
Sampling Procedures and Study Sample:
This researcher used a purposeful sampling procedure
to gather data from key parents, teachers, and
The study sample had to fit the criteria needed for the
study, which was personal involvement in either the
restructuring or closure of their school.

Methodology (Cont.)
Snowball or Chain method (Creswell, 2007) involves

asking participants in the study if they know other
people who might have interest in the study and can
provide additional information.
From key initial participants, the snowball or chain

method of sampling was used to contact additional

Methodology (Cont.)
Pilot Study:
In order to lend trustworthiness and credibility to the
questions asked in the survey and interview protocols,
expert witnesses were contacted to review the questions.
This researcher located three expert witnesses to review the
survey and interview protocols. The expert witnesses had
previously worked in the school district that was closed by
TEA in June of 2013. The cause of closure was continued
failure to achieve AYP.

Methodology (Cont.)
Pilot Study Continued:
In the pilot study each expert witness was sent via email
a copy of the survey questions and interview protocols.
They were asked to review the surveys and protocols and

judge the trustworthiness and credibility of each
question for the audience it was addressing. This
researcher also asked the expert witnesses to address
the clarity of the instructions and each question’s

Methodology (Cont.)
Pilot Study Results:
All survey questions and interview protocols were

returned by the expert witnesses and judged
trustworthy, credible and clear to understand.
These results are placed in the Dissertation under

Appendix E.

Methodology (Cont.)
Selection of Participants:
Participants were initially contacted by email. Those

that did not have a computer were contacted by
phone. Phone numbers were obtained from
individuals who knew the participant and could
supply the phone number.


Upon agreement to participate, demographic data

was obtained from each participant.
Informed consent documents were obtained from

each participant. Each participant had prior
knowledge they would be audio recorded in the

Participant Demographic Data
Participant Category Job Field
Education Level
Ed. Pro Ret. Principal
Ed. Pro Asst. Prin.
Ed. Pro
Ed. Pro
Comm. College
Comm. College
Assoc. Degree
Ten Ed. Consultant Business
Eleven Ed. Para. Pro Counselors
Assoc. Degree
Twelve Former School Ret. Principal
Student PhD Candidate Masters

Gender Ethnicity
Male Hispanic
Female White




13 total interviews

7 were in participant’s home.

3 were in the current school of the participant.

2 were over the phone.

1 was in a hotel lobby.

Chapter IV
Participant Data put into Two Groups:
Group One: Parents who are part of the community on
the east side of a Central Texas city.
Their schools are part of a restructure
due to AYP failure. One school closed;
one is under threat of closure and under
a corporate entity for curriculum

Findings (Cont.)
Group Two: Parents, Teachers and Administrators
who are a part of the school community
north of a city in Southeast Texas who
lost their entire school district due to
continued AYP failure. Every education
professional lost their job.
Justification for grouping was simply to clarify and differentiate.
Not meant as a comparison. The testimony will give evidence to the
support or non-support of the research questions.

Ethnic Populations for Group One and Group Two:
 Group 1

White Asian
16.1% 80.0% 1.6% 1.3%

Group 2

68.2% 30.9%



AYP Results
AYP Results for Group One and Two
Group Percentage that met
standard on State Test



Percentage Eco


* 78 %

85.8 %

58.9 %

91.3 %


* 66 %

88.6 %

59.2 %

100 %

 Figure represents the combined percentage for all tests in the 11 th grade.
(TEA, AEIS Report, 2012)

Subgroup Percentages
Subgroups Percentage of Met Standards for ELA/Reading and Math
Group One: African-Am. Hispanic White Eco. Disadv. ELL Sp. Ed.

90 %

67 %



27 %



57 %

75 %


70 %

42 %

55 %

* Population percentage not high enough to count (<10%).
(TEA, AEIS Report, 2012)

Subgroup Percentages
Subgroups Percentage of Met Standards for ELA/Reading and Math
Group Two: African-Am. Hispanic White Eco. Disadv. ELL Sp. Ed.

77 %

89 %




35 %


81 %

77 %


80 %


38 %

* Population percentage not high enough to count (10%).
(TEA, AEIS Report, 2012)

Emergent Theme Development
Interviews were transcribed into a Word Document by this
Transcription was imported into the Nvivo-10 qualitative
software program.
Nvivo-10 was used to run multiple queries looking for nodes
that revealed emergent themes.
Emergent Themes were checked for intersection with
Research Questions.

Node Development
Development of Nodes:
Labeling of the Nodes came from categories and

themes from the interview questions.
Interview questions were developed from the topics

covered in the Literature Review.

Emergent Themes (Cont.)
Think of a Node as a container or bucket that the

researcher can place statements from the
participants that speak about emerging themes.
From the initial nodes, which were too many to

include, the researcher condensed into categorical
nodes that are broader in scope but deal with the
same subject. Example: Crime, living conditions,
child had to work to provide for the family—could all
be placed into one node indicating Society Issues.

Word Frequencies
Creating Word Frequency Maps:
Word Frequency Maps is an element of Nvivo-10

that allows the researcher to condense the Nodes
created by the researcher and check for accuracy of
theme development.

Word Cloud

Tree Map of Word Frequencies

Matrix Coding Query of Emerging Themes
With Research Questions

Business Charter Society Factors in Leadership Instructional Student



Issues Test Failure








































Graphic Illustrations

Using Nvivo-10 Graphic Illustrations are

used to support research findings from the
These Graphic Illustrations correlate with
the Matrix Coding Query of Emergent

Support for Research Question One

Research Questions
and Emerging Themes
From the evidence
presented, have the NCLB mandates served to
propel schools and school districts toward AYP noncompliance?

Research Question One:

Q-1 Emerging Theme One: AYP
Emerging Theme Two: Leadership Failure
Emerging Theme Three: Factors in Test Failure
Emerging Theme Four: Student Issues

Research Questions
and Emerging Themes

Research Question Two:
What are the perspectives of parents toward the
restructuring or closure of their neighborhood school?
Q-2 Emerging Theme One – Leadership Issues
Emerging Theme Two – AYP
Emerging Theme Three – Student Issues
Emerging Theme Four – Charter Schools

Research Questions
and Emerging Themes
Question Three: What are the perceptions of teachers
and administrators who have been involved in the
restructuring or closure process?
Q – 3 Emergent Theme One - AYP
Emergent Theme Two – Factors in Test Failure
Emergent Theme Three – Society Issues
Emergent Theme Four – Student Issues

Participant Responses
Research Question Four:

What are the perceptions of parents of children affected
through the restructuring of the neighborhood schools
with regards to their representation in their taxation.
Q-4 Emerging Theme One – Leadership Failure
Emerging Theme Two – Factors in Test Failure
Emerging Theme Three – Society Issues
Emerging Theme Four – Charter Schools

Summary of Findings
 Using the NVivo software this researcher was able to

create common topics that came out of the literature
and was spoken of by the participants. From the
topics came emerging themes that intersected with
the Research Questions in what is termed a Matrix
Coding Query.

Summary of Findings
When the testimony from the participants was

examined, related to emerging themes intersecting
with the Research Questions, the necessary data to
draw conclusions was produced. Searching for
additional participants ended after participant 13.
The data was varied and represented triangulation
with various demographic data represented.

Summary of Findings
 The data came, however, to saturation level with no

clear new information, or conflicting information,
revealed through the participant’s testimony.
Saturation of the data occurs (Creswell, 2007) when

new information that adds to understanding ceases
to come forward.

Chapter V
Conclusions of the Findings
Research Question One. From the evidence
presented, have the No Child Left Behind mandates
served to propel schools and school districts toward
AYP non-compliance?
This question was directly stated to each education

professional as one of the interview questions. In the
Interview Protocols for Education Professionals they
were asked in question six:

Please explain if you feel the Accountability System

in Texas and the Federal Adequate Yearly Progress
(AYP) standards have served to move schools to noncompliance and school failure?
Each educational professional participant stated
positively that they believed the way the policy of No
Child Left Behind was written and implemented,
there could be no other conclusion drawn except that
it is a policy written to drive schools and school
districts to non-compliance and eventual failure.

Participant Two said: Group Two
What the general public doesn’t understand is that
you can’t compare business standards and school
education standards. With business if you get a
defective product you can send it back. You can’t do
that with a child. You have to work with what you
get. Has the System that is currently in place served
to move schools to non-compliance and school
failure? With the way the system is set-up I would
agree with that statement.

(Participant Two continued)
The fact that the funds were withheld points to the fact

that the powers that be did not want No Child Left
Behind to succeed. And putting a percentage
requirement of 100% by 2014 only confirms that they
did not want it to succeed and schools were doomed to
failure. The federal government made into law what
outcome they wanted but failed to provide the
necessary means to achieve the intended outcome.

 These conclusions were drawn, again from the

participant’s testimony, due to the AYP percentages,
that year after year increased moving schools toward
the 100 % proficiency on the test by 2014.
As evidenced in the testimony, if it had not been for
the AYP percentage mandate elevating beyond reason,
the schools would not be labeled as failing and would
likely still be in operation today.

This question was not asked of the parents involved

in the two groups since the concept of AYP is not as
clear to them as it is with the teachers and
They did, however, understand that the reason for

the restructure or closure of their schools was due to
the mandates and policies of No Child Left Behind.
This is examined in research question two.

Research Question Two. What are the perceptions
of parents toward the restructuring of their
neighborhood school?
Parents were asked the following two questions that

relate to this research question.

Question five of the Interview Protocol for Parents stated:
What is your understanding of the No Child Left Behind
mandates for schools and how they have affected your
child’s education?
Question six of the Interview Protocol for Parents stated:
Is it your perception that No Child Left Behind has

worked for the betterment of children and their

Both of these questions gave insight into Research

Question Two. Four emergent themes dominated
the intersections with Research Question Two:

Parents saw leadership failure as central to the issues

that led to their children’s schools affected by
restructuring and closure.

Participant Responses
Participant Nine stated: Group One
As I said, the school district administration did not

include us until it was a done deal and we became
very vocal and began attending school board
meetings. Now they really pay attention to us. This
is mainly due to the fact that we were able to get
three board members replaced.

Participant Responses
(Participant Nine Cont.)
The new board members organized the platform to

get the charter management company replaced.
Now the school district brought in a new working
partner from Johns Hopkins University to assist the
high school with getting their test scores up. They
have two years to get the scores up to the point of
meeting standards. If they fail, the plan is to close
the school.

Participant Responses
Participant Thirteen said: Group Two
I did feel the pressure of passing the test, but I did

not really know about how severe things had become
in the district or with the schools I attended….I took
AP classes, all the ones we offered, that is. We only
had English and History AP classes. I had very good
teachers, especially in the AP classes. I felt like I was
well prepared for college. I did become more aware
of the problems when TEA came in to run the school.

Participant Responses
(Participant Thirteen continued)
I was very disappointed that the district was closed.

You see, I don’t have any of my schools open
anymore. My elementary school is gone, my
Intermediate school is not there, my middle school
and my high school don’t exist. I can’t return to my
school and go to a football game, or watch the band.
It is a complete erasure of my educational

Research Question Three. What are the
perceptions of teachers and administrators who have
been involved with the restructuring process?
In asking Research Question Three to the education

professionals it was very clear how they felt and how
they perceived the issue of restructuring and school

In the Interview Protocols they were asked:
Question one on the protocol stated:

What contributing factors at your school led to school
Question Six stated:
Please explain if you feel the Accountability System in
Texas and the Federal AYP standards have served to
move schools to non-compliance and school failure?

Important to keep in mind in this testimony from

the education professionals that not only did they go
through restructuring, they also advanced to the final
step in the process laid out in No Child Left Behind
They experienced the final step in the process, which

is closure. With the closure of their school and
school district they lost their job.

 The effects on the educational professionals, the

parents, and the students were devastating. When
one looks at the aftermath of this decision to close
the entire school district, which came directly from
the Commissioner of Education, one can see the full
picture of what the outcomes of sanctions and
penalties deliver to the schools and communities.
This is all a result of the standards set in place by No

Child Left Behind policy and mandates.

Participant Responses
Participant Four stated: Group Two
In my opinion our district was a targeted school

district. Other schools are like ours with even worse
scores. They have not sanctioned them. Several
teachers I know in the district that the Commissioner
gave our schools to, told me they could not figure out
why TEA was doing what they were doing to us. I
look at other high schools close by in that district and
their scores are horrible.

Participant Responses
Participant Four Continued:
They aren’t closing those schools down. This was very

political. I am convinced. If the state wants our
students to have a better opportunity, you should have
sent us to the school district just north and west of us.
They are a better district with better learning
opportunities for the kids. It is apparent that it is about
the money. They want the property that is here. We
know this area is going to be expanded in the roadways.
This was a hostile takeover.

Research Question Four. What are the perceptions of
parents of children affected through the restructuring of
the neighborhood schools with regards to representation
through taxation?
As stated previously, this question proved somewhat
difficult for the parent participants to grasp. The question
was searching for beliefs about proper representation of
their tax dollars and the threat of falling victim to taxation
without representation.

The key question in the parent interview protocol

that dealt with taxation was question four.
It stated:
What are your perceptions or opinions about the
proper use of your tax dollars going to the school
district to support your child’s education?

The parents who contributed to Research Question

Four understand and believe that there is an issue
with taxation when restructuring of a school, or
worse, the closure of a school, takes place.
The entity that is brought in to manage and operate

the school, if it is a charter school operation, is not
answerable to a parent. They do not serve the
taxpayer. They serve their stakeholders in the parent
company that owns the charter school.

Participant Responses
Participant Six said:
My taxes have been represented very poorly. The

taxes we paid were not put back in the schools to run
the programs that would keep the students in school.
Right now we have no representation with the
district that took us over. We don’t have anyone we
can call or write to that represents us in our
community for our schools. The people they say
represent us don’t live in our community.

Participant Responses
Participant Five stated:
The school district that took us over only wants the

buildings and the land they are sitting on so they can
get the tax dollars. They want the land. First of all
the number of school buildings being demolished; I
question that, especially the vocational building
being destroyed. We even had a community garden
over there. We had a medical program there. We
had a dental program.

 When this happens parents lose their representation

with their tax dollars. This is a central point in this
country’s democratic form of government.
In the case of Group Two, the parents lost their

representation on the school board. A parent’s ability
to elect their own representative to a school board is
central to their involvement in the operations and
policies that affect their children’s education. Take that
away and they have no representation, yet they still pay
school taxes.

From the testimony given to the research questions

by the participants, it is reasonable to conclude that
the restructuring process or the closure of a school
has a devastating impact on parents, students,
education professionals, and the community.
The effects are life changing for those who have to

endure the process.

The right of parents to govern the education of their

children through public school board members, that
they elect, is fundamental to the ability of parents to
control how their public schools are operated.
Take that right away and the freedoms the people of

this nation have enjoyed is jeopardized.

Rethinking the current educational paradigm:
 The State has taken control of the education of the

children through the establishment of standards,
applied to the assessment, whose outcomes are used
in the appraisal of the professionals, to give
evidence of accountability, which has resulted in

 Standards is a term that people have come to expect

from just about every business, industry, and
People from the business world or legal profession

are very comfortable with standards. It is expected.
When standards are applied, however, to educating a
young mind it takes on a different connotation and
results in a different outcome.

 While standards are sometimes equated to quality

or good performance, standards can also bring
For an example: the parameters of the standards
will be limited to X. Another example: the
standards for the information related to this topic
will be derived from Y.
 Those that control the standards control the
knowledge allowed and where the knowledge is

 Standards establish parameters for intended

When the intended outcomes are not achieved, it is

the accountability system that puts in the penalties.
The penalties imposed by the accountability system

elicit behaviors in those receiving the penalties.

When the penalties are sufficient enough to impose

fear of job loss, or loss of sovereignty over the
operations of your school, then control of the system
is accomplished.

It is the outcomes that are measured on the test that

indicate if a child has been educated adequately;
not the grade earned by the student in a course
taught by a knowledgeable teacher from his or her
vast experience in the field aided by a quality, district
vetted and approved, curriculum.


Now the education system finds itself moving into

more control as states opt for the waiver to No Child
Left Behind mandates, or accept a grant in the Race
to the Top incentive program launched by the federal

 In each of these endeavors, the waiver or the grant,

the trade-off for the states was to agree to adopt the
Common Core State Standards.
In so doing the states have now placed the

curriculum for every public school district in their
state under federal control.

 At the time of this writing only Texas, Nebraska,

Minnesota, Virginia and Alaska have not adopted the
Common Core Standards.
These states, however, are under the accountability
system that impose the outcomes and control the
school systems.
The subjugation of the public school system in
America is now essentially complete.

Review of the Grounded Theory:
Consider these points.
No Child Left Behind (NCLB) is a policy that

intentionally moves schools, especially those in urban
settings, to failure with the intended outcome of forcing
schools to adopt a new education curriculum for new
outcomes. The theory comes out of the research
embedded in the literature written on the mandates and
policies of NCLB, and from the experience of this

 AYP mandates have driven schools further away

from the goal of NCLB to require all students to be
proficient on the test.
 The intense pressure of high stakes testing has

extracted a toll on the education profession that is
immeasurable. The damage to the children, who
have had their psyches threatened with failure year
after year, has had incalculable consequences.

Considering those points just mentioned, the
Grounded Theory postulated by this researcher states:
With the information researched, analysis of NCLB

law and using inductive reasoning and logic, this
researcher is led to conclude that NCLB was, from its
conception in the minds of its planners, designed to
drive schools to failure so that a new system could be
established that would support an entirely different
approach to educating the youth of America.

The research in this dissertation and the testimony

of those who have lived the experience of the
intended outcome for No Child Left Behind lend
credence to the grounded theory presented.
Those who have looked the endgame of No Child

Left Behind in the face would likely agree with the
grounded theory presented in this dissertation.

Application of the Framework
The standards based accountability system has served to
control and drive the education system to where it is today.
This has been done in traditional Hegelian Dialectic
those who created the standards and established the
outcomes (problem),
managed the aftermath of school failure (reaction),
then presented the waiver that allowed an escape from the

problem (solution).

Some Closing Thoughts

Please consider these remarks that tie in the
framework and offer some recommendations
for the future.

Application of the Framework
Problem – Reaction - Solution
Those managing the Dialectic are those in control of

the education system:
Not the states, nor the independent school districts.

It is those entities that control the standards based
accountability system. That includes business
interests, lobbyist and NGO’s that influence
policymakers. That is who controls the education

Application of the Framework
Those interests controlling the education system are

operating off of a Business Model for Education.

Consider this hypothetical business model for


Application of the Framework
This business model for education is presented in
more detail in the dissertation, but this is the essence
of the model.

Application of the Framework
A standards based assessment of students, linked to

appraisal of teachers and administrators, keeps
employees (teachers and administrators)
accountable to their up-line authority and allows for
said authority to control that which is underneath his
or her supervision. The higher one goes up-line, the
greater the element of control.

Cognitive dissonance has played a huge role in the

minds of those in the education profession.
To allow this type of controlled system to take over a

profession every educator holds dear, would never be
allowed had not educators rationalized away the
dangers that were presenting themselves.


Those teachers that are older and remember a time

when teachers actually taught from a brain-based,
experience driven ability, now find themselves totally
frustrated only working for a pension.
New teachers can’t imagine what they have

encountered with this high stakes, penalty induced
pressure that is not what they imagined for the
teaching profession.

For true reform to take place a monumental effort is

Teachers, counselors and administrators must all
speak in one voice.
School Boards must listen and support that voice.
When government officials in each state hear the
voice of reform from the profession, there is an
opportunity for policy change.

The profession needs to lead the change from the
Reject the business model presented earlier.
Bring back local control.
Superintendents and principals need to support and
bring back the noble profession of teaching.
Continue to support and identify the best and
brightest and provide the full range of accelerated
academic programs.

Bring back the arts, music and extra-curricular

activities that provide enrichment, enjoyment and a
reason for many students to come to school.
Fund and encourage a vibrant and diverse vocational

program to give more opportunities for students to
select their path of interest.

Final Thoughts
 It is really up to everyone who cares about the

future of this great profession to break free for the
shackles and prison of the accountability system.
It is those who are entrenched in the day to day

struggle that have to step back and reclaim the
profession so that the future of teaching is not lost
and students can once again receive a quality
education through the public schools.

Ayers, J. and Owen, I (2012). No Child Left Behind, promising ideas from second round applications.
Center for American Progress. Retrieved from
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design, choosing among five approache, (2nd
edition) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Fraenkel, J. R. & Wallen, N. E. (2009). How to design and evaluate
research in education, (7th Edition). Boston: McCraw-Hill
Companies, Inc.
McLeod, S. (2008). Cognitive dissonance. Simply Psychology. Retrieved from


Raapana, N. and Friedrich, N. (2005). What is the Hegelian Dialectic?
Retrieved from
TASA. (2013) Retrieved from
Texas Education Agency. (2012). Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). Retrieved from
Texas Education Agency. (2011). AdequateYearly Progress (AYP). Retrieved from
Texas Education Agency. (2012). 2012 AYP requirements rise. Retrieved from

Texas Education Agency. (2012). Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP).
Retrieved from
U. S. Department of Education. (n.d.) Overview ESEA flexibility. Retrieved from
Whitaker, R. (2012) Farewell to Allan. The Austin Chronicle. Retrieved
from allan/all/

Thank You