American Secondary Education

Fourteen years ago, in my first issue as Editor of ASE, I wrote a piece called "Looking Back, Looking Forward: Directions for American Secondary Education." In that piece, I identified four areas that were worthy of additional attention from secondary educators and researchers. The first of those areas was understanding the attitudes, knowledge, and lifestyles of adolescents. Articles in ASE since that time have often investigated the knowledge and attitudes of secondary school students in relation to educational practices in school. The article in the current issue by Peters, Kruse, Buckmiller, and Townsley that examines student responses to a standards-based grading initiative is a case in point. It is important to remember, however, that adolescents are more than students, and secondary educators would be wise to learn all they can about their lives outside the classroom.Although secondary educators cannot help but be aware of statistics on students' performance on academic tests, they may be less aware of information that is available about factors such as adolescents' knowledge of politics (e.g. Center for Information and Civic Learning Engagement, 2013) reported that teens, their media usage (e.g. Common Sense Media, 2015), the dangers they face (e.g Bichel, 2016) or the choices they are making that will affect their future health (e.g. Kaiser Family Foundation, 2003). National statistics may not always reflect local conditions, but they can help secondary educators relate school learning to the lives of adolescents, and they can alert parents and community leaders as well as educators to potential threats to the health and well-being of adolescents.A second area I identified for greater attention fourteen years ago was middle school philosophy and practice. I suggested that many studentcentered practices of middle schools might be successfully applied to high schools. Since that time, the opposite has arguably happened, as two articles in this issue seem to imply. Robinson reviews research on the characteristics of the adolescent brain and concludes that what is known about adolescent brain development supports many of the practices recommended by the original advocates of middle schools such as participation in the arts and interdisciplinary learning. She notes, however, that those very practices are the ones that are being threatened or eliminated because of concerns about standards and test scores. The article by Mee and Rogers-Haverback, also reflects a conflict between the middle school ideal and the current educational climate. It describes how middle school principals attempt to reconcile their preference for teachers whose preparation program focused on the needs of young adolescents with a climate that favors content specialists.Fourteen years ago, I suggested exploring a broader vision of secondary education that included learning outside classroom and outside of normal school hours. The article in this issue by Jones, is an illustration of how that can occur. It describes how one program balances serving with learning in such a manner that high school students build an understanding of themselves at the same time that they build an understanding of the world around them.Finally, I suggested at the beginning of my editorship that more attention should be paid to the social and cultural forces that influence secondary educators and students. A noticeable shift in that direction has occurred since then. That shift is reflected in the increasing proportion of studies employing qualitative methods that have been submitted to ASE. The study by Kunnath, in this issue, for instance, uses an interpretive framework to describe the interplay of personal and social factors that influence teachers' decisions about grading. Like the other research reported in this issue, it seeks to explain the attitudes and actions of the individuals involved in secondary education rather than to simply report the outcomes. …

Variations of the question, "How are you doing in school?" are among those most frequently posed by adults to students (Reeves, 2004). Grades represent the primary source of that information; indeed, Olson (1995) called grades "one of the most sacred traditions in American education" (p. 24). There is so much trust in the messages conveyed by grades that they have gone without challenge and are resistant to change (Marzano, 2000). Yet reporting only a single mark for each subject may be insufficient to answer meaningful questions about student progress (Guskey, 2001). Bailey and McTighe (1996) noted that when clear responses to these questions are not available, grading's other purposes cannot be effectively carried out.Marzano (2000) has pointed out that the current grading system in America is over a century old and lacks a body of supporting research. He also noted problems such as the arbitrary weighting of assessments and merging of diverse knowledge and skills into single assessment scores. Reeves (2004) noted that grading systems may change drastically from one classroom to another, because grades serve multiple purposes and are unique to each course or teacher.Students are entitled to accurate and timely feedback on their strengths and deficiencies and about actions that can be taken to achieve learning goals. Hattie (2008), in a review of studies on learning, reported that providing students with specific information about their standing in terms of particular objectives significantly increased achievement. Unfortunately, students' awareness of their standing is often made difficult by inaccurate and inconsistent messages about what a particular letter grade means.Concerns over the number of graduates unprepared for the rigors of university and careers, as well as the gap between American students and those in other countries, have led 46 states in the U.S. to adopt the Common Core State Standards (Council of Chief State School Officers, 2015), a set of learning targets designed to drive quality instruction (Spencer, 2012). Thus, it is critical that teachers link grading and reporting to standards (Munoz & Guskey, 2015).Comprehensive standards-based grading systems (SBG), which report what students know and can do relative to standards, purport to facilitate clearer, more targeted feedback compared to traditional letter grades. This is accomplished by such practices as reporting academic achievement separate from behaviors, tying assessment and grading exclusively to standards, prioritizing the most recent evidence of learning, and allowing for editing and resubmission of work (Swan, Guskey, & Jung, 2014). SBG principles also favor median versus mean scores, proficiency-based rubrics versus percentages, and a balance of quality formative and summative assessments (McTighe & O'Connor, 2005; Munoz & Guskey, 2015; O'Connor, 2010; Reeves, 2004).O'Connor (2010) identified strategies that are increasingly being used:* Incorporating more formative work that is not included in final grades.* Updating grades frequently. Since learning is a continuous process, the quality of learning should take precedence over when it occurs.* Thoroughly discussing assessment and grading with students, since a primary objective of education is to have students become selfevaluating.Although a body of scholarship explores issues pertaining to standardsbased grading, there is a dearth of research addressing student perspectives. The purpose of this study, then, was to gain a more thorough understanding of the attitudes, understanding, and experiences of students impacted for the first time by an SBG initiative at their high school. At the beginning and end of an academic year, students shared their perspectives on issues such as the pace of SBG implementation and change, fairness of grading processes, motivation, preparation for college, inconsistencies between courses, the role of homework, and communication with teachers. …

The importance of an effective teacher for student learning is well documented in the literature (Darling-Hammond, 2006). Middle school teachers serve as role models and can influence the lives of impressionable students (Lounsbury & Vars, 2003). Middle level scholars (Lounsbury & Vars, 2003; Virtue, 2007) agree that teachers should undergo specific preparation and develop particular competencies to understand and teach the young adolescent. It is also essential that middle school teachers desire to work with young adolescents, that they possess knowledge of the unique developmental changes of this age group, are knowledgeable in the content they teach, and have autonomy to make decisions about curriculum (AMLE, 2014; Gningue, Sch- roder, & Peach, 2014; Howell, Cook, & Faulkner, 2013). These attributes are underscored in This We Believe: Key to Educating Young Adolescence (AMLE, 2010), and middle level teachers who show such characteristics have a solid understanding of their students and are able to establish a strong rapport with them (White, Ross, Miller, Dever & Jones, 2013).Specific training to teach middle level students is of great import. Ochanji, Chen, Daniels, Deringer, and McDaniel (2016) compared middle school teachers who were trained in middle level programs with those trained in elementary and secondary programs. They found that those who were trained through middle level programs had a greater number of skills, felt success more quickly, and understood adolescent development better than their elementary and secondary counterparts.All principals are important for both student achievement (Brown & Anfara, 2003; Rice, 2010) and for the whole school environment (Jackson & Davis 2000), but middle school principals also have the crucial role of ensuring that the teachers they hire understand the developmental needs of young adolescents and are properly trained to meet those needs. But how is this ideal translated into hiring practices? What type of teacher preparation is valued by middle school principals when they are hiring? What do they believe is most important? Given the scant research in this area, we aimed to examine middle school principals' knowledge and hiring preferences in a state that recently created a new Middle Level Certification.Literature ReviewThis study was informed by current literature on middle level teacher certification and principals' hiring preferences. Although studies exist on the hiring preferences of principals in general, the literature is scant with respect to middle school principals' hiring preferences.The Importance of Middle Level CertificationHaving teachers who are trained in middle level education, as opposed to elementary or secondary education is important ( Howell, Faulkner, Cook, Miller, & Thompson, 2016; Ochanji, Chen, Daniels, Deringer, & McDaniel, 2016). One reason is that early adolescence is a distinctive phase in human growth and development. During this time, middle school children physically grow at a rapid rate, equal to children from birth to ages two or three (Lounsbury, 2000; Lounsbury & Vars, 2003).Emotionally and socially, young adolescents are in a constant state of turbulence; they experience mood swings and have concerns with self-image and identity. Cognitively, they can think abstractly and are ready for critical analysis and problem solving (Kellough & Kellough, 2008). It is also well known that they encounter and grapple with moral and ethical dilemmas. Peer pressure plays a large role, and, according to Kellough and Kellough, teachers must help students learn how best to address those challenges. Specialized training in that area is important to new teachers (Mee & Haverback, 2014).McEwin and Dickinson (1997) advocated for specialized programs for middle level educators. They suggested that effective middle school teachers must have a thorough understanding of early adolescents and their needs as well as the philosophy and organization of middle schools. …

Student report card grades are an integral part of K-12 education, and grading is an important teacher responsibility, but experts are in agreement that grades largely fail to accomplish their main purpose of communicating student academic achievement (Cizek, Fitzgerald, & Rachor, 1995; Guskey, 2015; McMillan, 2001; Stiggins, Frisbie, & Griswold, 1989). Instead, because student grades are often created from an imprecise amalgam of factors that includes achievement, ability, effort, and behavior (Cross & Frary, 1999; Randall & Engelhard, 2010; Reeves, 2011), exactly what they communicate is rarely clear (Allen, 2005; Marzano, 2000). Failure to use grades for their primary purpose leaves educational stakeholders largely uninformed about students' true level of learning. This may lead to such negative consequences as passing students with deficient knowledge and skills, misinforming parents of student learning, and misrepresenting student merit to colleges and universities (Allen, 2005; Reeves, 2011). Although a substantial amount of literature has documented the discrepancy between expert recommendations and teacher grading practices and has called for reform (e.g., Cizek et al., 1995; Cross & Frary, 1999; Randall & Engelhard, 2010), grading practices have remained largely unchanged in schools throughout the country (Reeves, 2011).Teacher Grading Decision-MakingGrading is an especially important area for teacher decision-making (Allen, 2005; Sadler, 2009), and requires an effective teacher decision-making process (Cauley & McMillan, 2000; McMillan, 2003). The literature on teacher decision-making about grading is sparse, but it does include some promising initial findings. Frary, Cross, and Weber (1993) and McMillan (2001), for instance, found that teachers' grading practices often differ from their own grading beliefs. Randall and Engelhard (2010) examined teachers' grading decisions in cases of borderline grades (e.g. grades at the border of an A and B, B and C, etc.) and found teachers made grading decisions based more on student ability, behavior, and effort than on achievement. The authors claimed that teachers regularly rely on a combination of factors to make grading decisions such as personal philosophy, college classes and professional development, school or district policy, and perceived consequences, but they provided no systematic way of interpreting the process.In an article advocating for the use of grades as valid measures of student academic achievement, Allen (2005) suggested that a solution to enabling teachers to create valid grades is helping them to make good grading decisions. He explained that teacher education programs may accomplish this by challenging future teachers' previously held knowledge and beliefs about grades, by presenting strong measurement theory, by providing grading practice opportunities before student teaching, and by facilitating students' creation and implementation of a valid individual evaluation and grading plan.McMillan and Nash (2000) and McMillan (2003) have likely shed the most light on teacher decision-making about grading. McMillan and Nash (2000) conducted a qualitative study of 24 elementary and secondary English and mathematics teachers that explored teacher grading and assessment decision-making. Findings showed that teachers' idiosyncratic grading practices were determined by a decision-making process that largely balanced teachers' personal learning and beliefs about the topic, with classroom reality and external pressures. McMillan and Nash (2000) explained that the tension created in balancing these three influences leads to varying grading practices within and across classrooms. McMillan (2003) further analyzed these findings in a follow-up article and created a refined grading decisionmaking model.Considering the current state of teacher grading practices, the importance of grading decision-making, and the dearth of research on the latter topic, further research on teacher grading decision-making seems warranted. …

The middle school concept began in the 1950s with the goal of addressing the unique needs of early adolescents (Manning, 2000). Early advocates for middle schools recommended a shift from content-based instruction to interdisciplinary teaching, elimination of competition, and an emphasis on exploratory education including vocational classes, arts, and home economics (Manning, 2000). These advocates claimed that this approach, along with teacher teams and strong counseling systems, would better support the developmental needs of early adolescents. The recent focus on standards and test scores, however, has reemphasized discipline-based instruction and reduced the amount of interdisciplinary teaching (Cook & Faulkner, 2010). This shift also led to decreased access to arts classes as more time has been allocated to tested subjects (von Zastrow, & Janc, 2004). Society's focus on sports excellence, moreover, has made middle school sports as competitive as ever (Glover, 2000). At this time, when the middle school concept seems to be unraveling, rethinking middle school education can begin with a deeper understanding of the young adolescent brain.Adolescent Brain ResearchResearch advances have given educators their most accurate analysis ever on the brain changes that occur during adolescence and their impact on behavior. Researchers have also found that environment can influence the brain's development (Crone, 2009) and this brain trainability mandates using knowledge about the brain to organize middle schools and to inform the ways that teachers approach content and pedagogy. Recent adolescent brain research is outlined in Table 1.Some Brain-Based Practices for Young AdolescentsThe following sections will outline brain-based recommendations to best meet the needs of middle school students. These recommendations include several that have been part of the middle school concept from the beginning such as interdisciplinary teaching, but the unique attributes of the adolescent brain have led to more recommendations than those previously included in the middle school concept such as the use of social learning, service learning, teaching metacognitive skills, and discussing controversial topics as well as healthy forms of competition.Interdisciplinary teaching and access to the artsInterdisciplinary teaching was an integral part of the middle school concept but has fallen out of practice in recent years (Musoleno & White, 2010). The neuroscience of adolescence suggests, however, that this method of teaching holds promise for increasing students' ability to make meaning. Perhaps the most substantial change in cognitive function occurring in the adolescent brain is rearrangement and pruning. Adolescent brains' developing tendency to rearrange and prune information means that a simple concept heard once, in a single class, may be quickly forgotten, but, those ideas and skills that they hear and use in many contexts are likely to become part of their longterm understanding.Prior to adolescence, children's brains are undergoing substantial synaptogenesis as they absorb knowledge (Peligrina et al., 2015). Although synaptogenesis continues through adulthood, in adolescence neural connections that are seldom used are pruned out and those that are used often are myelinated (Blakemore & Frith, 2005). Myelination is the process of adding layers of myelin around a nerve axon to strengthen the connection that it is making. Myelination allows those connections to be triggered more quickly, increasing efficiency and speed of cognitive functioning (Blakemore & Frith, 2005). In childhood, connections tend to be short-range within the brain resulting in linear thinking (Crone, 2014). Long-range connections increase during adolescence allowing teenagers to make connections between seemingly disparate information (Blakemore & Frith, 2005).Connectivity across brain regions can be accomplished through teaching that interweaves concepts from different disciplines. …

Culturally and linguistically diverse exceptional (CLDE) middle school students who are educated in inclusive settings are a unique population of learners. They are negotiating the challenges associated with diversity and disability in an environment that is geared toward White, typically developing peers (Kea & Trent, 2013). Mix in fluctuating hormones, puberty, and an overwhelming desire to fit in, and you are left with a very distinct population of learners struggling to achieve academically in general education settings. The achievement gap between CLDE middle school students and their White counterparts leaves many educators unsure about how to provide instructional support for this unique population (Kea & Trent, 2013; Salend, 2016). This article outlines nine instructional strategies that inclusive middle school educators can use in a whole group setting to accommodate for disability, diversity, and adolescence while supporting both typical and atypical learners.The 2010 United States Census report stated that Hispanic or Latino populations have increased by 43% since 2000. Additionally, 27.4% of the United States is now labeled as non-White, compared to 12% of the population in 1970, making culturally and linguistically diverse students the fastest growing population today (Cushner, McClelland, & Safford, 2012). With this influx of diversity in schools has come an overrepresentation of culturally diverse students receiving special education services (Herzik, 2015). Research indicates a disproportionate number of special education referrals, academic underachievement, and increased disciplinary actions for culturally and linguistically diverse students (Cartledge & Kourea, 2008) when compared to White typical peers.Two potential reasons for the achievement disparity can be linked to the achievement disparity for CLDE populations: student-teacher incongruity (Au, 2009) and instructional practices that are appropriate for White learners, but have proven ineffective (Kea & Trent, 2013). While the number of diverse students steadily increases in U.S. schools, teacher demographics remain primarily female and White (U.S. Department of Education, 2013; Ortiz, 2012). As a consequence, Eurocentric teaching styles, which rely heavily on narrowed curriculum and exam based instruction (Renter et al., 2006) are used more commonly than culturally responsive teaching techniques that foster multicultural strength-based approaches where all students are included and expected to achieve (Kea, 2008).Instruction focused on test preparation has replaced content that recognizes student culture, diversity, history, and personal experience (Au, 2009), which are effective strategies for supporting diverse learners (Gay, 2013). The absence of critical thinking, real world learning, and engaging instruction has been associated with the low academic achievement reported for CLDE students (Grigg, Donahue, & Dion, 2007).The lack of culturally responsive pedagogy has ignited increasing concerns over the appropriateness of assessment practices and the lack of evidence-based instructional strategies for culturally and linguistically diverse students (Saenz, Fuchs, & Fuchs, 2005). As a result, schools are being asked to provide a multi-tiered, culturally responsive referral process to properly identify and serve culturally diverse students with disabilities (Hoover, 2012). Educational stakeholders must be confident that their referral process does not mistakenly use culturally incompatible instructional and assessment techniques as evidence of a disability for culturally diverse students (Hoover & Erickson, 2015). Educators are also being asked to use culturally responsive teaching techniques with all students to account for those students' prior learning experiences, cultural background, and language abilities in order to build bridges for new learning experiences and achievement in school (Turnbull, Turnbull, Wehmeyer, & Shogren, 2013; Utley, Obiakor, & Bakken, 2011). …

Chronic school absenteeism affects approximately 14-15% of American students (Balfanz & Byrnes, 2012). Chronic absenteeism is linked to a wide array of problems such as internalizing and externalizing behavior disorders, lower academic performance and achievement, lower reading and mathematics test scores, fewer literacy skills, grade retention, involvement with the juvenile justice system, and dropout (Bridgeland, Dilulio, & Morison, 2006). Chronic absenteeism also leads to a higher likelihood of psychiatric, occupational, and marital problems in adulthood (Kearney & Hugelshofer, 2000). In addition, chronic absenteeism poses a substantial cost in lost revenues, welfare and unemployment programs, underemployment, and crime prevention and prosecution (Christenson & Thurlow, 2004).Chronic school absenteeism is a highly complex issue due to its symptom heterogeneity, myriad risk factors, and breadth of available interventions from numerous disciplines (Lyon & Cotler, 2009). Theoretical frameworks of school absenteeism have thus been developed in recent years to consider this complexity and to inform educational, mental health, and other professionals who commonly address this population (Kearney, 2008). These frameworks surround the organization of risk factors and intervention approaches relevant to chronic absenteeism toward appropriate responses regarding prevention, early intervention, and intensive intervention (DePaoli et al., 2015).One such framework has been designed along a Response to Intervention model (Kearney & Graczyk, 2014). Response to Intervention involves a systematic decision-making process to assign evidence-based strategies based on individual student need (Fox, Carta, Strain, Dunlap, & Hemmeter, 2010). Response to Intervention is a proactive focus that involves identifying and remediating academic and behavioral problems as soon as possible (Gresham, 2007). The model is generally viewed as a multi-tiered approach that organizes interventions into those designed to prevent problems (Tier 1), address emerging problems (Tier 2), and intensively treat severe problems (Tier 3).The transition from Tier 1 to Tier 2 absenteeism is generally marked by the onset of partial or complete absences from school, skipped classes, ongoing tardiness, or considerable distress before or during the school day that precipitates pleas for future nonattendance (Kearney, 2003). Tier 2 absenteeism is generally considered emergent and typically represents a relatively clear departure from previous functioning and good attendance history (Thambirajah, Grandison, & De-Hayes, 2008). In addition, Tier 2 absenteeism is often considered manageable, and many assessment and intervention protocols have been developed for these students (Maynard et al., 2015).The demarcation between Tier 2 and Tier 3 absenteeism, however, is characterized by considerable lack of clarity regarding individual symptoms and absenteeism severity (Balfanz et al., 2014). This is unfortunate, given that school officials often must decide when to implement alternative educational, mental health or other services for absenteeism cases deemed chronic or severe (Dupper, 2008). Simple reliance on codified district definitions of truancy, such as 15 unexcused absences in a given semester, often fails to assist in these situations. This is because absentee students, particularly those moving toward school dropout, display substantial heterogeneity with respect to attendance history, academic status, and especially behavioral profiles (Cabus & De Witte, 2015). As such, empirical data regarding what specific levels of absenteeism severity are most associated with accelerated behavior problems may be instructive for helping to determine a threshold for Tier 2 and 3 cases.Empirical investigations are sparse regarding varying levels of school absenteeism severity and associated symptoms. Bernstein and colleagues (1997) examined the relationship between school absenteeism and somatic, anxious, and depressive symptoms in youth aged 12-18 years. …

Long before Skinner's ping-pong playing pigeons and Pavlov's drooling dogs, classroom management challenged both new and experienced teachers (Koren, 2013). In the novel To Kill a Mockingbird, Scout saw [Miss Caroline] sink down into her chair and bury her head in her arms by lunchtime of her first day of teaching (Lee, I960, p. 29). remember my grandmother recounting the tale from her childhood, nearly a century past, of her young and inexperienced teacher crying about an out-of-control class. According to surveys conducted by the American Psychological Association (APA) as recently as 2006, classroom management ranks first or second among needs listed by teachers in general, firstfor less experienced teachers (Skiba, 2016, p. 121). It is an issue with which every teacher must contend, first establishing and then endlessly refining a system based on the teacher's own disposition and the students currently assigned to the classroom.The following informed commentary article describes a simple, common-sense classroom management technique that is free to implement, requires only a moderate amount of consistent effort from the teacher, encourages parental involvement, provides students immediate and specific feedback, and aligns with self-determination theory. The preventive nature of this strategy addresses, in a small way, current issues of inequity in school discipline by engaging students in learning and motivating them to behave according to accepted classroom and school rules and procedures. began using this technique in 2011-12, my last year as a classroom teacher, and wish had started sooner. should note that am quite short, my voice is a little on the squeaky side, it takes an unbelievable amount of misbehavior to annoy me, and no one has ever found me intimidating. Classroom management was an immense challenge for me. It was, that is, until finally began holding the students accountable for their own behavior choices in an extremely visible and concrete manner. This transparent accountability took the form of a participation grade, but not the arbitrary sort many teachers use to bulk up borderline grades.I created a concrete point system for a daily participation grade and documented each gain or loss of points in the comment section of the online gradebook, to which parents enjoyed unfettered access through the Internet. The students knew exactly the behaviors that would earn or lose them points and were free to make their own choices, fully cognizant of the consequences. The intention was to create an autonomy supportive environment in which the students would decide for themselves how to behave, rather than promote a pressured engagement in self-control activities that might ultimately demotivate them (Vansteenkiste et al. 2012, p. 432). used an unsophisticated system to track their performance: making tally marks in a matrix consisting of names listed vertically and specific behaviors listed horizontally. It took roughly 10 minutes per class to enter the information into the gradebook before left the building for the day. If, for example, a student's daily participation grade were 85 percent, would enter a comment such as tardy, -5; talked out of turn 3 times, -15; answered question correctly, +5. The vast majority of students simply earned 100 percent for participation most days, which required no explanatory comment. The following sample demonstrates the ease with which tracking takes place in real time.During a typical class, started by circulating among the students, taking attendance and checking uniforms as they completed a warm-up exercise. This activity, in reality, had almost nothing to with ensuring proper shirt color and skirt length, as required by the administration, and everything to with greeting each child individually every day. As we segued from the warm-up to the I do portion of the county-mandated five-part lesson plan, the chance to earn points by participating appeared to engage and motivate the students. …

For the past decade, educators, researchers, and measurement experts across the country have stated that gap-gazing studies that focus on gaps subgroups, are no longer informative (e.g., Lubienski & Gutierrez, 2008; Young & Young, 2016). Instead, they have recommended detailed analyses that are more accessible and useful to practitioners because they target areas for improvement and also identify schools and classroom environments in which typically marginalized students are learning and succeeding (Bridgeman & Wendler, 2005; Gutierrez, 2008; Lubienski, 2008).The term gap-gazing has been used, negatively, to refer to research on gaps among subgroups, whether it be in terms of standardized test scores or other indicators such as course-taking, grade point averages, honors programs, admittance to college, dropouts, and discipline infractions (e.g., Rodriguez, 2001; Wilde, 2004). In an American Educational Research Association presi- dential address Ladson-Billings (2006) argued that the focus on the was misplaced and likened the achievement gap Black and White students to an education debt that has accumulated over time. In addition, Gregory, Skiba, and Noguera (2010) dissected relationships achievement and discipline and also suggested the need for additional research to address existing discrepancies in resources and quality across poor and rich schools.The purpose of this study is to provide an illustration of the ways in which schools can use intragroup analysis to identify salient factors that are related to achievement in order to raise questions for further analysis. One urban school district serves as an example of a longitudinal investigation of a Black student cohort during their four years of high school. Much of the previous analysis of the district's data provided only comparisons demographic subgroups and focused heavily on the state mathematics achievement data. Here, the analyses focused on differences within an ethnicity subgroup. In addition, a variety of multiple indicators of mathematics performance beyond the state data was obtained. These included the type of math course taken each year, total number of math courses taken, and cumulative math grade point average across four consecutive years from 9th grade to 12th grade.School districts maintain extensive databases that can be used to explore questions of interest, which in turn provide direction for further indepth qualitative studies in specific schools and classrooms. The wealth of data available often goes untapped because of limited resources, time, and money (Coburn & Talbert, 2006). This is where partnerships with education faculty and researchers at nearby universities can become quite valuable (Parke, 2012). After presenting a portion of findings from this district analysis, the focus of this article turns to describing how the analyses help to guide further qualitative studies in schools and classrooms (e.g., examining environment, climate, curriculum, and instruction) for the ultimate purpose of improving teaching and learning.Review of LiteratureTypes of Nuanced Analysis within SubgroupsAn issue of the Journal of Research in Mathematics Education focused on the direction that future research should take regarding analysis of math performance in schools. In that issue, Gutierrez (2008) outlined the negative impact of between gap research and cited dangers that included offering little more than a static picture of inequities, supporting deficit thinking and negative narratives about students of color and working-class students... and promoting a narrow definition of learning and equity (p. 357). Gutierrez described differences in research on between-group variance (gaps be- tween Black and White students, for example) versus within-group variance (variation among Black students across schools or over time.) The former analyses focus on individual effects to determine success, whereas the latter suggests that school effects are useful in determining success. …

This article reports on five years of research into one secondary social studies teacher's use of screencasting in his classroom. Young (2011) described a as one in which listen to teacher lectures at at their own pace, typically through instructional videos that are posted online or podcasts that they can download easily. They may engage in online discussions with other (p. 6). Although the term is sometimes confused as simply recording videos of lectures (Sams & Bergmann, 2013), a is typically a more hands-on learning environment that includes application-based instruction with tasks that are authentic to the subject matterScreencasting is a component of the that involves students acting independently while watching a lecture, experiment, or some other visual input for the purpose of gaining knowledge necessary to comprehend course curriculum. It is typically the component that students complete for homework, or in some form outside of regular class time. Screencasting is a necessary part of learning (Sams & Bergmann, 2013) that frees the instructor to use class time more creatively, constructively, and authentically.Screencast and classrooms are being used somewhat interchangeably to convey the shift in lesson content from a formal presentation to a pre-recorded, on-demand experience. Screencasts are a form of media originally studied in library science and higher education literature, while classrooms are the pedagogical application of this media. Udell originally branded screencasts as narrated movies of software in action ( p. 26). Although the term was branded first, it appears less in P-12 education research than flipped classroom, and it does not appear as a major citation in common keyword searches within the social studies.The flipped classroom term was coined by two Colorado high school science teachers, Sams and Bergmann (2013), and it particularly appears in practitioner-oriented publications such as commentary or feature articles. It is also increasingly present in other disciplines (see Boucher, Robertson, Wainner, & Sanders, 2013; McLaughlin, Roth, Glatt, Gharkholonarehe, Davidson, Griffin, & Mumper, 2014; Youngkin, 2014). It is now alongside or superseding the screencast as a common publication keyword. Smith and Mader (2015), for instance, included screencasting as one of three tools (along with podcasting and podcasting with a whiteboard) for flipping the science classroom.Although the has entered publications concerned with library media, higher education, and health sciences, there is a surprising lack of empirical research on the screencast/flipped in social studies literature. Keyword searches using multiple variations of the terms social studies, classrooms, and screencasts yielded only a few articles in history education, each published in 2014. Studies published for other subject areas were more common, but even with such studies, there is still too little research on the in general to ascertain its effectiveness (see Goodwin & Miller, 2013). The purpose of the present mixed methods case study was to assess the effectiveness of screencasting and the subsequent with three groups of 9th grade world history high school students as they studied a European World unit.Review of LiteratureInitial articles on classrooms appeared primarily in pedagogical journals, balanced between definitions of and praise for the approach, with snippets of structuring the practice (Brunsell & Horejsi, 2011 & 2013; Paperclip Communications, 2012) or criticism of the technique (Nielsen, 2012). One rationale offered for flipping classrooms was that students were having trouble connecting what they had been taught in class with what they were supposed to apply at home (Young, 2011, p. …

When mobile phones first appeared in the classroom in the 1990s, they were perceived by teachers as classroom disruptors and banned by schools. In the ensuing decades, mobile phones have evolved until they can perform most of the tasks performed by a desktop computer, and do so from almost anywhere. In 2012, UNESCO asserted that mobile devices, because of their ubiquity and portability, were positioned to influence teaching and learning in a way personal computers never did (p. 14). Ninety percent of American adults own a mobile phone (Pew Internet Research, 2014,) and almost two-thirds are now smartphone owners (Lenhart, 2015). Seventy-eight percent of teens own a mobile phone (Madden, Lenhart, Duggan, Cortesi, & Gasser, 2013), and nearly three-quarters own or have access to a smartphone (Len- hart, 2015). Access to mobile phones is seen as a way to provide teachers and students with a wide range of benefits that are associated with mobile learning (M-learning) including:(a) offering students multiple entry points and learning paths and allowing for differentiated learning; (b) enabling multiple modality via mobile devices by which students have a tool to create a different learning artifact to suit their needs; (c) supporting student improvisation in situ, student may improvise as needed within the context of learning (e.g., take pictures to illustrate learning connections); and (d) supporting learning creation on the move with an ease of creating and sharing artifacts. (Liu, Scordino, Renata, Navarrete, Yujung, & Lim, 2015, p. 356)In addition to providing teachers and students with these benefits, the pervasiveness of mobile phones can assist schools in addressing both the traditional and new digital divide. Traditionally, low SES and minority students have had less access to technology than their more affluent, White classmates; however, research indicates that poor and minority individuals have been reducing this traditional digital divide by accessing the Internet via their mobile phones (Lenhart, 2015). A new digital divide has emerged, however, between the low levels of access schools have to technologies in comparison to students' access outside of school. By allowing students to use personal mobile phones, schools can potentially reduce this divide.The benefits claimed for mobile phones in the classroom have caused an increasing number of schools to remove long-standing bans on using them. Some schools have adopted a BYOD (Bring Your Own Device) policy, but the classroom distractions and disruptions that originally prompted banning their use in the classroom still exist. In one study, for example, 72% of students indicated that their phones rang during class (Burns & Lohenry, 2010), and 85% of students in another study admitted to texting during class (McCoy, 2013).As schools move toward BYOD integration, school stakeholders must continue to weigh the benefits of mobile phones against the potential costs. Students' perceptions of integration and the benefits and barriers associated with mobile phones in the classroom should play a part in this cost/benefit analysis. Knowing what specific advantages and disadvantages students see for mobile phones as learning tools could assist schools in deciding appropriate policies and teachers in determining appropriate instructional practices for integrating phones into the classroom. Although there is a growing body of research regarding the perceptions of millennials on the integration of mobile phones in the post-secondary classroom, there is a gap in the literature regarding high school students' perceptions of the benefits and barriers associated with allowing phones in class.Purpose of the StudyThe purpose of this descriptive study was to examine perceptions about mlearning from high school students in one urban district. The specific research questions that guided the study are as follows:(1 ) How supportive are high school students of using mobile phones in the classroom? …

You can't wear that T-shirt in MY school, declared the distraught high school principal. Oh? Why not? I have freedom of speech, don't I? replied the upset student. This quick conversation frames basic dilemma that school authorities face on an ever-increasing basis. In our social mediadriven, controversy-oriented student culture outspoken views are readily proclaimed in chat rooms, blogs, Facebook, Twitter-and on T-shirts. What should principal or school board do when confronted by any of the following T-shirt messages?Jesus is Not HomophobeNobody Knows I am LesbianKeep Calm and Hit HerBe Happy, Not GayBlack Rifles Matter (with gun image)Guns Don't Kill People, I DoI Had an Abortion and I Don't Regret ItI met God, She Is BlackWhite PowerProud AtheistWhere does student's First Amendment right to free prevail versus the school's duty to provide safe, secure, and orderly learning environment? There are no easy solutions to this conundrum, although there are number of useful analyses to help principals evaluate particular school issues and current court cases (Haynes, 2003; Lane, 2005; Zirkel; 2008 Hudson, 2011; and Stader, 2012. In this article, cases from the 1969 U.S. Supreme Court Tinker decision forward to the present are discussed in order to provide beleaguered principals and school boards with some useful guidelines for answering such questions.U.S. Supreme Court DecisionsWhile the Supreme Court has not, so far, rendered any specific rulings on school dress codes for students (including uniforms and T-shirts), the now famous Tinker v. Des Moines decision (1969) established the broad parameters that lower courts have used in subsequent cases. In the Tinker case, John and Mary Beth Tinker were sent home and then suspended for refusing to remove black armbands they had worn to school to protest the controversial Vietnam War. In the Supreme Court decision, Justice Abe Fortas declared that neither teachers nor students shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate. So long as student's speech does not cause a or disruption or invade the rights of others it is protected by the Constitution.The conundrum arises in balancing the two sides of the speech formula in school setting. In the Tinker case, the school authorities could not provide any evidence that disturbance resulted from the armbands, and then the Court ruled that the principal's action discriminated against given political viewpoint. School policies and decisions must be viewpoint neutral. The decision also noted that the had to communicate particularized message that could be easily understood by many people. The message might well be protected by the First Amendment if it is pure political (Hudson, pi50). The term expression is not mentioned in the Constitution's First Amendment list of five freedoms for citizens, but it has been accepted as logical extension of speech per se and includes nonverbal symbolic messages like armbands.Still, the ongoing speech issue is one of interpretation of terms: What exactly constitutes What would school administer say constitutes material disturbance? Or substantial disturbance? These are not easy definitions to establish in given situations! The disturbance may be real or reasonably predicted, but, again, what is reasonable may lead to different interpretations by administrators and courts. In Michigan case in 2003 (Barber v. Dearborn Public Schools) federal court ruled against school ban of T-shirt showing photograph of President George W. Bush with the words INTERNATIONAL TERRORIST in bold. The judge said the banning was more dislike of the message than fear it would cause disruption, much like the reasoning in Tinker, as this message was an apparent objection to Bush's policies in the Iraq war. …

Culturally and linguistically diverse exceptional (CLDE) middle school students who are educated in inclusive settings are a unique population of learners. They are negotiating the challenges associated with diversity and disability in an environment that is geared toward White, typically developing peers (Kea & Trent, 2013). Mix in fluctuating hormones, puberty, and an overwhelming desire to fit in, and you are left with a very distinct population of learners struggling to achieve academically in general education settings. The achievement gap between CLDE middle school students and their White counterparts leaves many educators unsure about how to provide instructional support for this unique population (Kea & Trent, 2013; Salend, 2016). This article outlines nine instructional strategies that inclusive middle school educators can use in a whole group setting to accommodate for disability, diversity, and adolescence while supporting both typical and atypical learners.The 2010 United States Census report stated that Hispanic or Latino populations have increased by 43% since 2000. Additionally, 27.4% of the United States is now labeled as non-White, compared to 12% of the population in 1970, making culturally and linguistically diverse students the fastest growing population today (Cushner, McClelland, & Safford, 2012). With this influx of diversity in schools has come an overrepresentation of culturally diverse students receiving special education services (Herzik, 2015). Research indicates a disproportionate number of special education referrals, academic underachievement, and increased disciplinary actions for culturally and linguistically diverse students (Cartledge & Kourea, 2008) when compared to White typical peers.Two potential reasons for the achievement disparity can be linked to the achievement disparity for CLDE populations: student-teacher incongruity (Au, 2009) and instructional practices that are appropriate for White learners, but have proven ineffective (Kea & Trent, 2013). While the number of diverse students steadily increases in U.S. schools, teacher demographics remain primarily female and White (U.S. Department of Education, 2013; Ortiz, 2012). As a consequence, Eurocentric teaching styles, which rely heavily on narrowed curriculum and exam based instruction (Renter et al., 2006) are used more commonly than culturally responsive teaching techniques that foster multicultural strength-based approaches where all students are included and expected to achieve (Kea, 2008).Instruction focused on test preparation has replaced content that recognizes student culture, diversity, history, and personal experience (Au, 2009), which are effective strategies for supporting diverse learners (Gay, 2013). The absence of critical thinking, real world learning, and engaging instruction has been associated with the low academic achievement reported for CLDE students (Grigg, Donahue, & Dion, 2007).The lack of culturally responsive pedagogy has ignited increasing concerns over the appropriateness of assessment practices and the lack of evidence-based instructional strategies for culturally and linguistically diverse students (Saenz, Fuchs, & Fuchs, 2005). As a result, schools are being asked to provide a multi-tiered, culturally responsive referral process to properly identify and serve culturally diverse students with disabilities (Hoover, 2012). Educational stakeholders must be confident that their referral process does not mistakenly use culturally incompatible instructional and assessment techniques as evidence of a disability for culturally diverse students (Hoover & Erickson, 2015). Educators are also being asked to use culturally responsive teaching techniques with all students to account for those students' prior learning experiences, cultural background, and language abilities in order to build bridges for new learning experiences and achievement in school (Turnbull, Turnbull, Wehmeyer, & Shogren, 2013; Utley, Obiakor, & Bakken, 2011). …

Standardized tests have become the nation's method of determining if K-12 students are meeting academic expectations to compete in the 21st century. That process began in 1965 with the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). The ESEA generated Title III, which offered local districts grants from the U.S. Office of Education for innovative educational practices (DeBray-Pelot & McGuinn, 2009; Elmore & McLaughlin, 1988, p.20; Klein, Zevenbergen, & Brown, 2006). The importance placed on standardized tests has ebbed and flowed, but it picked up momentum with the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB). NCLB stated a need for higher standards in reading, math, science, and history in K-12 schools and required an- nual assessments (U.S. Department of Education, 2001 ). Even though NCLB has expired, many school systems still rely on the results of standardized tests to make decisions on school funding and student promotion.Test-centered curricula are often heralded as an effort to decrease achievement gaps, although analyses have demonstrated that the effort has largely failed (Braun, Chapman, & Vezzu, 2010; Welsh, Eastwood, & D'Agostino, 2014) and has led instead to academic disengagement (Moon, Brighton, Jarvis, & Hall, 2007). Conversely, it is actually higher order thinking and problem solving skills that have been positively correlated with increased test scores (Wenglinsky, 2002).Klein, Zevenbergen, and Brown (2006) conducted a study to examine the effects of standardized tests on instructional application. Seventy- seven percent of the teachers surveyed stated that standardized testing negatively influenced their teaching and student learning, and 100 percent acknowledged that they had implemented some form of test preparation in their instruction. Throughout the country, however, low-performing schools continue to focus on test preparation (Meier & Wood, 2004; Moon, Callahan, & Tomlinson, 2003; Reardon, 2013). This reduces curricula to basic core material, focusing on the standards that are most prevalent on the state test (Kozol, 2005; Orange, 2014). Such test-centered instructional models have been demonstrated to lead to teacher underestimation of students' academic abilities (Crawford, 2004). In turn, there is evidence that this underestimation specifically contributes to the underperformance of minority students (Ferguson, 2003) and to declines in their academic self-efficacy (Wong, Eccles, & Sameroff, 2003).Minority high school students have long reported feeling stereotyped in their school environments ( Howard, 2008; Nieto, 1994; Noguera, 2003). In urban schools, this stereotyping is often presented in the form of standardized test score comparisons (Lewis, James, Hancock, & Hill-Jackson, 2008). There is a perpetual context for such comparisons to be made because standardized test-centered curricula are disproportionately implemented in urban schools with large numbers of minority students (Carnoy & Loeb, 2002; Nichols, Glass, & Berliner, 2006, 2012). The study reported in this article examined African American and Latino students' perceptions of test-centered curricular protocols at an urban high school. Particular attention was paid to the effects of such protocols for students' self-efficacy and feelings of being stereotyped.Stereotype ThreatDecades of research indicate that minority students feel stereotyped as academically incapable in the school (Delpit, 2012; Lee, 1999; Nieto, 1994; Noguera, 2003; Wasserberg, in press). The resulting risk of confirming a negative stereotype about one's group has been termed stereotype threat (Steele, 1997). Stereotype theory posits that awareness of negative societal stereotypes about one's group may lead to distracting thoughts about confirming the said stereotype, and these thoughts may, in turn, lead to the very failure that is feared. This is explained vividly in an example by Jordan and Lovett (2007):For example, a girl who tries out for an improvisational comedy troupe in high school, aware of a stereotype that women do not make good comedians, may find herself flustered and unable to perform to her potential. …

In The Fellowship of the Ring, the wizard Gandalf observed that everyone has the same daunting challenge. He said, All we have to do is decide how to use the time that is given us (Tolkien, 2012, p. 50). Time management is a common goal but an uncommon achievement. People who schedule time so that self-determined priorities receive sufficient attention feel more in control of their lives, experience greater satisfaction, and have a better record at work (Seligman, 2012). On the other hand, parents who schedule too many tasks for themselves may not spend enough time with daughters and sons. Some adolescents, moreover, seem as busy as their parents, juggling responsibilities for classes and after-school activities (Boyd, 2014; Gardner & Davis, 2014).Adolescents need guidance so they can acquire the benefits of learning how to manage time, and society expects public schools and families to provide students with practical lessons that enable them to adjust to this complex aspect of life in a rapidly changing society. This article will provide a rationale for why schools should assess how adolescents view time management. It will also report findings from a polling study about the time management experiences of students at one junior high school and explore how the poll findings implicate the way schools schedule activities. Finally, it will recommend ways for both students and schools to improve how they use time.Overview of the StudyDuring elementary school, students have to meet the expectations of one teacher who provides leadership within a self-contained classroom. In junior high school, conditions change as students must satisfy expectations of multiple teachers representing separate subjects in the curriculum. When students enter junior high, their days of recess are behind them; peer pressures become far more prominent; social networks are a high priority; and everyone undergoes significant changes in physical, emotional, and mental development (Strom & Strom, 2014). Inviting the opinions of adolescents can reveal a unique perspective that is based on their daily experiences in school, including what aspects of learning they value; what opportunities they believe are missing; what forms of instruction they prefer; and what factors influence their motivation, engagement, and satisfaction.Many adolescents are neither vocal nor assertive in public forums about education issues, so gathering their opinions requires the use of procedures that they trust. One format that meets these conditions is Internet polling. Students are willing to share opinions when their responses are anonymous. Based upon their first-hand experience with social media, they consider online polling to be a safe form of self-disclosure, Popular television programs like American Idol, Dancing with the Stars, and America's Got Talent invite the audience to log on or phone in and vote. The oppor- tunity to influence decisions about which contestants win and which are eliminated motivates viewers to become more involved than when they are only passive observers.Student polling enables adolescents to have their voices heard. Polling conveys the message that faculty, parents, elected officials, and members of the community consider adolescents' impressions about school as a necessary information source for improving education. More specifically, the purpose of student polling is to determine how learning needs are being met and ways in which to make school experiences more helpful and satisfying. We devised ten online polls in 2008 and field-tested them with 1,100 students at Title I schools. Since then, 15,000 students have completed polls. The polls are accessible without cost to secondary principals who formally agree that polls will be used for improvement of practices at their school and for addition to a normative data bank of student opinion reflecting demographics (Strom & Strom, 2016).Little is known about the reasoning that adolescents use for deciding how to allocate time. …

Like all human and natural disasters, the events of the April 2011 tornadic outbreak in the Southeastern United States had a deep impact on K-12 students and the educators who needed to support their students' emotional and academic needs (Adams, Sumner, Danielson, McCauley, Resnick, Gros, Paul, Welsh, & Ruggiero, 2014). A small, but growing, scholarly literature base on the topic of teaching about extreme and traumatic events, including human and natural disaster, has emerged in the years since September 11, 2001 (Hlinka, 2013; Lamb & Lewis, 2013; Moss & Nichols, 2002; O'Connor & Takahashi, 2014; Pfefferbaum, Weems, Scott, Nitiema, Noffsinger, Pfefferbaum, Varma, & Chakraburtty, 2013; Ray & Pemberton, 2010; Yamazumi, 2013). Out of this research, and that conducted by researchers in closely connected fields including bereavement and grief (e.g., Black, 2005; Schonfeld & Demaria, 2015) and children's mental health (e.g., Herrman, Stewart, Diaz-Grandadoes, Berger, Jackson, & Yuen, 2011), have emerged specific examples of students' trauma-related behavior in the classroom along with recommendations for K-12 practice, which will be addressed later in this paper.Review of LiteratureTrauma-related Behaviors in the ClassroomDisaster and other trauma related behaviors in the secondary classroom can manifest in the form of personal (Alvarez, 2011), behavioral (National Child Traumatic Stress Network, 2011), cognitive (Lamb & Lewis, 2013) and/or social impacts (Mears, 2012). Specifically, with a tornado, the National Child Traumatic Stress Network (NCTSN) has identified key emotional, cognitive, and behavior issues that educators must be prepared to address in the aftermath of an event in the local community. Issues include fear that another tornado will occur and that family members, friends, and/or other loved ones, including pets, will be hurt or killed. Those fears may be accompanied by feelings of unfairness, anxiety, anger, sadness, or depression coupled with worries about the future. Any or all of these issues can quickly result in disruptive classroom behaviors grounded in irritability, anger, tantrums, and/or hyperactivity. Additionally, physical symptoms including headaches, stomachaches, a loss of or an increase in appetite (i.e., stress eating), nightmares and/or insomnia can further contribute to motivational problems and/or decrease students' performance in the immediate and long-term post-disaster period. Likewise, conflicts with authority (e.g., teachers) are common occurrences among students in any post-disaster period (Mears, 2012; NCTSN, 2011).The Essential Role of Teachers and SchoolsTeachers, because of their close relationship with the students in their care, are on the front line dealing with profound events, including natural disasters when they occur at the local or, national level (Pfefferbaum, et. al, 2004). Therefore, disaster-related professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions must be honed before an event occurs (Ray & Pemberton, 2010). In order to better assure the well-being of the students in their care, teachers must effectively address catastrophic events, particularly those occurring in the local community or region (Moss & Nichols, 2002).Despite the regular annual occurrence of these events across the United States, little is known about teachers' reactions, perceptions..., and under- standing of children's issues following large-scale community traumas (Pfefferbaum, et al., 2004, p. 251). In fact, some researchers have documented a lack of preparedness among many teachers. Preparedness may only emerge as a concern after the fact and is, thus, learned the hard way (Moss & Nichols, 2002). Nevertheless, teachers are expected to maintain the classroom environment, reassure students' fears, and keep students informed in age appropriate ways even as these events play out in both the local and school community (Ingenito, 2004; Pfefferbaum, et. …

Student motivation is at the forefront of educators' minds as high stakes testing continues to pressure teachers to produce passing scores. Educators are also facing rising curricular demands to ensure students have the requisite skills to be successful in the twenty-first century workforce. However, student engagement is often problematic for adolescent students in core subjects (Shernoff, Tonks, & Anderson, 2014). Many simply go through the motions, listen to their teachers passively, and put forth minimum effort (Bedient, Scolari & Kowalewski, 2003). To help counteract this tendency and bolster achievement, teachers are striving to create programs, curricula, and lesson plans that will inspire students. This is especially important at the high school level since motivation and academic interest generally decline as students progress through their K - 12 experience (Lepper, Corpus & Iyenger, 2005; McInerney & Lam, 2011).Teachers' beliefs about student motivation are generally understudied, and their perceptions of effective motivational techniques are often misaligned with what actually motivates students (Wiesman, 2012). Many high school teachers do not effectively make use of the established motivational principles (Anderman & Leake, 2005), and they would likely benefit from a greater understanding of students' motives (Bozack, 2011). Educators understand the importance of student engagement (Sparks, 2014), but unfortunately, a cursory review of in-service workshops and pre-service teacher education courses indicates a lack of focus on the topic.In order to increase academic achievement and student engagement, educators must employ effective motivational strategies. When teachers understand what truly motivates high school students, they are likely to enhance student success. Studies have shown that there is a positive correlation between various motivational constructs and academic achievement (Dishon-Berkovits, 2014; Dweck, 1986; Eccles & Wigfield, 2002). In addition, teachers' efforts and classroom design can make a difference in motivating students (Guvenc, 2015; Wigfield, Eccles, & Rodriquez, 1998), and when proper motivational strategies are used, students' attitudes and behaviors improve (Erwin, 2003).Educators should analyze their perceptions in order to ensure they are implementing motivational techniques that align with research, which in turn will positively influence engagement and academic achievement. The purpose of this study, therefore, was to determine teacher perceptions of student motivation at the high school level and to find out if experienced teachers have a different understanding of how to best motivate students. More specifically, research questions included the following: What are teacher perceptions regarding the effectiveness of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, goal orientation theory, and student self-efficacy? What are the differences between the beliefs of experienced and novice teachers regarding student motivation?Motivational ConstructsExtrinsic and intrinsic motivation are drive-oriented theories that look at why individuals might strive to accomplish a certain task. When students are intrinsically motivated, they take action because they have an inherent desire to accomplish a task, because the task has personal relevance to their lives, or because they want to experience stimulation, fun, and excitement (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002). Linnenbrink and Pintrinch (2002) more specifically claimed that a student's intrinsic motivation can be affected by his or her situational interest, which develops when external factors generate interest. For example, Wigfield, Guthrie, Tonks, and Perencevich (2004) studied the effects of two reading instructional programs on motivation. One incorporated investigative, cooperative, and hands-on activities, and the other did not. After surveying students in both groups, they found that students' levels of intrinsic motivation increased when teachers used the activities that promoted situational interest. …