Methodology
Study Preparation
In preparation for the CMS Case Study, the cohort read, analyzed, and discussed research articles, chapters from Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education by Sharan B. Merriam (1998), as well as case studies conducted by previous University of Texas cohorts. Also, The Principalship: New Roles in a Professional Learning Community by L. Joseph Matthews and Gary M. Crow (2010) proved relevant and useful in our research.
In order to adhere to research standards, all cohort members completed the Institutional Review Board (IRB) training necessary to pursue research involving human subjects. All matters pertaining to our case study were completed in accordance with IRB standards.
Study Design
The cohort created questions to be posed to the study participants and planned the data collection needed, including faculty interviews, community walks, and interviews with various community members. Cohort members also observed and documented various areas within the neighborhood surrounding CMS. Concurrently, the cohort reviewed pertinent CMS data and documents. The specific documents and analysis processes are detailed in later subsections. Finally, the cohort made use of online file sharing such as Google Docs and Dropbox to facilitate timely collaboration amongst all members.
Data Sources
The cohort used sources both qualitative and quantitative in nature. Much effort was spent collecting and compiling data from personal interviews with district personnel, CMS faculty, and various community members. Additionally, personal observations were recorded at CMS and in the neighborhood surrounding Cullen. Multiple documents including, but not limited to, the 2009-2010 School Improvement Plan, the 2009-2010 CMS Student Handbook, the 2009-2010 CMS Faculty and Staff Handbook, the 2005-2010 School Profile, current TEA Academic Excellence Indicator System (AEIS) reports, and preliminary 2011 Pearson TAKS reports were utilized. These sources were useful in informing the study of CMS.
Participants
For this study, the cohort interviewed an HISD School Improvement Officer, the CMS Principal, a sample of faculty members, and many community members, including residents, church personnel, and business owners.
Limitations
Although the cohort was committed to maintaining research validity, there are limitations to this process that must be recognized. The greatest limitation of the study was the limited amount of time as the study was completed in eight weeks. Most case studies extend over a longer period of time than was available to this cohort.
Because this case study was completed during the summer, our number and sample of faculty participants was limited, and the faculty who participated did so on a voluntary basis. Also, no students were formally interviewed. And, as summer school for CMS students was held on an alternate campus, we were not able to observe teachers or students in classroom settings.
Finally, we did not complete member-check, a system of checking with study respondents to verify accuracy. For these reasons, this case study should be viewed as a modified case study.
Data Analysis
After completing the interviews, the cohort transcribed them in order to capture the participants’ thoughts as accurately as possible. Then the cohort made use of the affinity process—a diagramming and brainstorming process that groups utilize to organize large amounts of data—to develop two metacategories, each with three subcategories. These categories provided a pathway for further inquiry and research related to the case study and recommendations:
In preparation for the CMS Case Study, the cohort read, analyzed, and discussed research articles, chapters from Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education by Sharan B. Merriam (1998), as well as case studies conducted by previous University of Texas cohorts. Also, The Principalship: New Roles in a Professional Learning Community by L. Joseph Matthews and Gary M. Crow (2010) proved relevant and useful in our research.
In order to adhere to research standards, all cohort members completed the Institutional Review Board (IRB) training necessary to pursue research involving human subjects. All matters pertaining to our case study were completed in accordance with IRB standards.
Study Design
The cohort created questions to be posed to the study participants and planned the data collection needed, including faculty interviews, community walks, and interviews with various community members. Cohort members also observed and documented various areas within the neighborhood surrounding CMS. Concurrently, the cohort reviewed pertinent CMS data and documents. The specific documents and analysis processes are detailed in later subsections. Finally, the cohort made use of online file sharing such as Google Docs and Dropbox to facilitate timely collaboration amongst all members.
Data Sources
The cohort used sources both qualitative and quantitative in nature. Much effort was spent collecting and compiling data from personal interviews with district personnel, CMS faculty, and various community members. Additionally, personal observations were recorded at CMS and in the neighborhood surrounding Cullen. Multiple documents including, but not limited to, the 2009-2010 School Improvement Plan, the 2009-2010 CMS Student Handbook, the 2009-2010 CMS Faculty and Staff Handbook, the 2005-2010 School Profile, current TEA Academic Excellence Indicator System (AEIS) reports, and preliminary 2011 Pearson TAKS reports were utilized. These sources were useful in informing the study of CMS.
Participants
For this study, the cohort interviewed an HISD School Improvement Officer, the CMS Principal, a sample of faculty members, and many community members, including residents, church personnel, and business owners.
Limitations
Although the cohort was committed to maintaining research validity, there are limitations to this process that must be recognized. The greatest limitation of the study was the limited amount of time as the study was completed in eight weeks. Most case studies extend over a longer period of time than was available to this cohort.
Because this case study was completed during the summer, our number and sample of faculty participants was limited, and the faculty who participated did so on a voluntary basis. Also, no students were formally interviewed. And, as summer school for CMS students was held on an alternate campus, we were not able to observe teachers or students in classroom settings.
Finally, we did not complete member-check, a system of checking with study respondents to verify accuracy. For these reasons, this case study should be viewed as a modified case study.
Data Analysis
After completing the interviews, the cohort transcribed them in order to capture the participants’ thoughts as accurately as possible. Then the cohort made use of the affinity process—a diagramming and brainstorming process that groups utilize to organize large amounts of data—to develop two metacategories, each with three subcategories. These categories provided a pathway for further inquiry and research related to the case study and recommendations:
The concept of triangulation, “using multiple investigators, multiple sources of data, or multiple methods to confirm the emerging findings,” was exercised throughout the process to increase validity of the case study (Merriam, 1998, p. 204). Finally, to organize the abundance of information into a relevant, meaningful, useful, and readable document for CMS, a guiding question was developed to structure the case study:
What school-wide systems should be developed to-
What school-wide systems should be developed to-
- improve student achievement?
- develop highly effective teachers?
- engage internal and external stakeholders?
- improve the community perception?