Page 1

The$William$and$Mary$Educational$Review$ Volume$2,$Issue$1$

The William and Mary Educational Review Volume Two, Issue One Fall 2013 ISSN 2330-7498 Š 2013

Information for Contributors The William and Mary Educational Review is an independent, refereed journal published by graduate students of the School of Education at The College of William and Mary. Our mission is to make a substantive contribution to educational and counseling literature through the publication of high-quality literature reviews, scholarly papers, and studies along with reports from the field, interviews, and other short pieces in order to build interest and understanding through multiple perspectives on education and counseling. In so doing, we provide graduate students first-hand experience with the publishing process. The William and Mary Educational Review welcomes manuscripts that employ qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods; literature reviews that disclose relevant gaps in existing research on a relevant topic; theoretical analyses of important issues in education and counseling; policy analysis papers and briefs; and historical papers. Submitted papers should have a clearly specified research question and a theoretical or conceptual framework, employ appropriate methods, and contribute new knowledge to the body of educational and counseling literature. Submissions are accepted year-round, with two publications in the Fall and Spring. Please visit our website,, for complete submission guidelines.

Table of Contents Letter from the Editor Kerrigan Mahoney




History of the Wren's Nest


The Wren's Nest An Interview with Spencer Niles Jeff Christensen An Interview with Eddie Cole Amy Morgan Schmidt An Interview with Margaret (Peggie) Constantino Paige Hendricks An Interview with Jacqueline Rodriguez Linda Innemee Looking Back: Reflections on Life as a Doctoral Student Augustine Kang Passion for Education and Leadership: Lessons from My Mentor Julie K. Marsh Not for Sale: Peer Review, the Academy and the Bulwark of True Knowledge Angelo Letizia Education: The Desperate Need for New Perspectives Bettina Staudt Mobile Education in Cambodia Cameron R. Nelson Rethinking Financial Aid Policy Tehmina Khwaja English Language Learners and Their Families: Paradigm Shifts Alexis Harvey China Study Abroad Trip Introduction - Jess Hench Pictures - Meredith Allred, Jim Barber, Sean Bates, Jess Hench, Leslie Bohon, Richelle Joe, Debra-Ann Butler, Katharine Sperandio Manucripts How Parenting Style Influences Children: A Review of Controlling, Guiding, and Permitting Parenting Styles on Children’s Behavior, Risk-Taking, Mental Health, and Academic Achievement Clare Merlin, Justine Okerson, Philip Hess

4 7 9 11 13 14 16 18 20 22 26 29


Just Say Know: Pros and Cons of Allowing Drug Testing of Students in Public Schools Anna Weigel Thomas


Remaining Globally Competitive: Leadership and the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Paige Hendricks



The William & Mary Educational Review

From the Editor... Dear readers, September 2013 brought the beginning of a new school year, new students to The College of William and Mary, new members to The William & Mary Educational Review (WMER), as well as the inaugural event in the WMER and GEA Brown Bag Seminar Series (BBSS): a faculty panel discussion entitled “Advocacy in Education.” At this event, Dr. Hardinge reminded students that “Advocacy is a lifelong process.” The following articles and manuscripts published in our second issue of The William & Mary Educational Review are written and edited by students who wish to take on the challenge of being lifelong educators, counselors, and advocates. We do this by considering the advice, guidance, and experience shared by our professors as well as by exploring our own beliefs, values, experiences, and passions. In the fields of education and counseling we are advocates – for our students, our colleagues, our clients, ourselves – thus, we must see ourselves as advocates every day, so we can take on this work with passion, with intention, and with great energy. Since September, I have been carrying around my notes from the panel discussion. I keep looking back at them and feeling either completely overwhelmed or absolutely inspired. Dr. Barber, Dr. Charity Hudley, Dr. Eddy, Dr. Grant, and Dr. Rodriguez joined Dr. Hardinge on the panel, and they talked about starting at home, knocking on doors in D.C., arming ourselves with information, valuing the process of policy implementation, building relationships globally and locally, asking critical questions (even if they make people uncomfortable), being up front, bringing more people to the table, being “innovative, engaged, and impactful educators,” banding together, using the skills we have, showing up, and much more. I know our professors engage in this critical work, and so must we, as students, educators, and counselors. During the discussion, Dr. Barber challenged each student present to “see yourself as an advocate.” I want to echo that challenge here and ask you to be inspired by not only our W&M professors, but by your colleagues, peers, clients, and students; the people you meet in passing in every day life and those you hear about who are living a world away. In our roles in the fields of education and counseling, we have a responsibility

to take on the role of advocate and consider how to maximize our impact in ways small and large, close and far. As you peruse the articles, photographs, and manuscripts that follow, I ask you to read with purpose. What are the areas of need and paths to change in education and counseling identified by William and Mary student authors? Where can you make a difference in these areas? How will you seek out members of your community with similar interests and passions to help you along the way? The pieces in this edition of the WMER will take you from the third floor of the School of Education to Cambodia and China. They will inspire you to consider leadership, families, students, and colleagues; drug testing, financial aid, and peer review. Who do you want to be as an advocate and leader? How can you make the most of your time as a student? The WMER and BBSS are two venues that I hope will help the W&M School of Education grow as a community by providing places for students and faculty at the School of Education and across campus to consider the answers to the questions I have posed. We must continue to work together on creating spaces for shared experiences, following paths of inquiry, engaging in meaningful dialogue, and finding the spark of inspiration that changes words into actions. Sincerely,

Kerrigan Mahoney Editor-in-Chief


The Wren's Nest

Executive Board Editor-in-Chief: Kerrigan Mahoney Managing Editor: Kristen Tarantino Production Editor: Julie K. Marsh Director of Marketing: Keisha Mayfield Programming Director: Carla Costello Copy Editors: Alexis Harvey, Amy Schmidt, Diana Theisinger, Linda Innemee, Krista Root Editorial Board Angelo Letizia Paige Hendricks Leslie Bohon Victoria McLaughlin Jeffrey Christensen Tehmina Khwaja Alyssa Hoffman Sakhavat Mammadov Ceilidh Mapes Jessica Lloyd-Hazlett Matt Kiser Christina Thames Nataliya Dudnystska

Review Board Jess Hench Amanda Hughes Robert G. Wood Zack Quaratella Debi Butler Rachel McDonald Laura Feltman Duna Alkhudhair Darlene Wiggins Dockery April Lawrence Faculty Advisors Jamel K. Donnor, PhD James P. Barber, PhD

The History of the Wren's Nest The story behind the name… A Scottish fable tells the story of the Eagle and the Wren: THE Eagle and the Wren once tried to see who could fly highest, and the victor was to be king of the birds. So the Wren flew straight up, and the Eagle flew in great circles, and when the Wren was tired he settled on the Eagle's back. When the Eagle was tired he stopped, and-"Where art thou, Wren?" said the Eagle. "I am here above thee," said the Wren. And so the Wren won the match. The history behind the name . . . The Wren Building on the campus of William and Mary is the oldest college building in the United States. Gutted by fire three times – in 1705, 1859, and 1862 – the interior of the structure was rebuilt, but the building itself remains the heart and soul of William and Mary. It is for both of these qualities - resiliency and perspective - that the name The Wren's Nest was chosen for the front section of The William & Mary Educational Review.


The William & Mary Educational Review

An Interview with Spencer Niles Jeff Christensen There are many things that have come to define my time here in the Counselor Education program at William and Mary, but a sense of gratitude for being exposed to the excellent faculty, staff, and my future colleagues, will be what comes to stand out. Never before have I been in a setting where everyone with whom I interact possesses some quality, trait, or disposition that I wish I could emulate. Being surrounded by such inspiring individuals is one of the distinguishing features for graduate students in the School of Education. Having the opportunity to interview our new Dean, Spencer Niles, a world-renowned counselor educator with countless contributions to the counseling field, falls into that pattern very nicely. Dean Niles’ accomplishments are greatly valued in the field of counseling. He is author and coauthor of more than a hundred publications and he is the recipient of numerous awards such as the highly esteemed David Brooks Distinguished Mentor Award, The Eminent Career Award, and American Counseling Association's Extended Research Award. His reputation earned him several offers to serve as dean for other programs that he respectfully declined. He explains that, though some may have had a great faculty or a high national ranking, they lacked a sense of community that he feels makes William and Mary’s School of Education unique. “We are small enough for a community, but large enough to be excellent. I think many programs claim this, but William and Mary really exemplifies it. That's what makes us really special." Prior to being offered the position, Dean Niles’ speech to the School of Education told of how some programs grow to be so large that students could graduate without having a single class taught by a core faculty member, and how for those programs, this is more the norm than the exception. For those of us seeking a career in academia, we have prepared for the sad reality that faculty are inundated with countless responsibilities from their institutions and are faced with pressure to expand programs to meet those obligations. In poorly run programs, faculty are overworked, tired, and minimally motivated to exceed the expectations of them. As a result, students can be

left feeling unimportant or used, mirroring the negative feelings and attitudes of faculty and administrators. The School of Education is a complete contrast to this, something that Dean Niles had been aware of for some time, observing from afar while advising students in other programs. “We have great teachers that not only do excellent work in the classroom, but they do outstanding research as well. This is not always the case as many universities say they value teaching but actions don’t always reflect their contentions. We mean it here. And while it’s not requisite, it’s always nice when that kind of work can be done in a beautiful building on a beautiful campus at a tremendous university with a stellar reputation.” Dean Niles' topic of interest is hope, and he believes that it is central to skill development. His model is guided by Snyder's Hope Theory, which defines hope as the cognitions that frame the expectation and ability to attain important goals (Snyder, 2002). But it is more than just the expectation that a goal will come to fruition; hope involves a person’s determination and capacity (known as agency) to devise and follow through with the plans and strategies necessary to attain those goals (known as pathways). A hope that Dean Niles has for the School of Education is fostering a sense of “mattering” for everyone faculty, staff, and students. “It is important that people feel that they


The Wren's Nest matter - that their work and presence matters to the community. I want to do what I can to foster this sense among faculty, staff, and students within the SOE.” Mattering is defined as, "the feeling that others depend upon us, are interested in us, are concerned with our fate, or experience us as an egoextension" (Rosenberg & McCullough, 1981; p. 165) and has been described as the belief that we are cared for, significant to others, and appreciated by them (Elliott, Kao, & Grant, 2004). Research has indicated that fostering a sense of mattering does indeed matter (Wicker, 2004) and higher education institutions that foster a sense of mattering can see positive influences in student retention, better student performance, and increased energy and enthusiasm among administration, faculty and staff (Schlossberg, 1989). Additional studies document the relationship of mattering with positive qualities like self-esteem and mental health (Pearlin & LeBlanc, 2001; Rosenberg & McCullough, 1981). "I want this for students and for the school, and we each have a certain responsibility to foster this. We all have an obligation to be excellent in the services we provide the community, and ultimately, students excelling in their field will come to reflect favorably on our school. It's what we want for them and it's what students ultimately want. " In the short time that he's been here, Dean Niles has already taken purposeful steps in fostering a mattering environment. He has met with some faculty and staff, and wishes to meet everyone, preferably by setting foot into their own office, to get to know who they are and hear what they hope for themselves and the School of Education in the upcoming years. Within three years he would like to see the school having an environment where everyone is feeling supported and experiencing a sense of mattering. "I want to be a part of creating that positive environment, but that's a collaborative endeavor." In addition to fostering a more positive climate, Dean Niles understands the necessity of doing what he can to portray the School of Education in a positive light. “Things like national rankings are important and are things that I of course have to pay attention to. But fostering a sense of mattering for everyone involved - faculty, staff and students - will lead to those top rankings." Dean Niles would certainly know – he led multiple programs at Pennsylvania State University (two undergraduate, seven masters and five

doctoral) into rankings within the top 20 in the nation. Prior to that, he was the Assistant Dean for the Curry School of Education at the University of Virginia for two years, which was also ranked within the top 20. Dean Niles holds other visions for the School of Education, one of which is creating more global opportunities for students to learn. "I would love for our school to grow relative to our internal collaborations. Such collaborations create a natural appreciation for diversity relative to global contexts, values, and challenges." Throughout his career, Dean Niles has served as a visiting scholar and professor in several international countries, and has, on occasion, taken students with him. He tells of the richness of learning how different cultures can shape the knowledge and process of education and counseling, and how our practice improves from that understanding. He would like to see more opportunities for students to come to that realization on their own and have similar, if not more extraordinary, experiences. “I love working with students and will seek those opportunities formally in the classroom and informally with student groups. I have also taught each year and I look forward to resuming that activity as the deanship allows.” My hope for this article is to give readers a fair and encouraging introduction of Dean Niles, both as a professional and as a person, and express what we, as a school, can come to expect from him. While we all collectively feel the loss of our former dean stepping down, we can take great comfort that our new dean is one who is fully committed to all of us and that, through his leadership, the School of Education is in very capable hands. "I come from a long lineage of educators and have great respect for the tradition of William and Mary’s School of Education. I hope to honor and respect that tradition in my work as dean.” References Elliott, G. C., Kao, S., & Grant, A. M. (2004). Mattering: Empirical validation of a social-psychological construct. Self and Identity, 3, 339–354. Pearlin, L. I. & LeBlac, A. J. (2001). Bereavement and the Loss of Mattering. In N. Goodman, T. Owens, & S. Stryker (Eds.), Extending Self-Esteem

6 Theory and Research, Cambridge:Oxford University Press. Rosenberg, M. & McCullough, B. (1981). Mattering: Inferred significance and mental health among adolescents. Research in Community and Mental Health, 2, 163–182 Schlossberg, N. K. (1989). Marginality and mattering: Key issues in building community. New Directions for Student Services, 48, 5–15. Snyder, C. R. (2002). Hope theory: Rainbows in the mind. Psychological Inquiry, 13, 249–275. Wicker, A. H. (2004). The relationship of demographic, aspirational, situational, employment, and commuting factors to commuter students’ perceptions of mattering at a large public university. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park, 2004).

The William & Mary Educational Review

About the author Jeff Christensen is a PhD student in the Counselor Education program. He is currently Co-Director of the New Leaf Clinic and specializes in working with youth around addictions and suicide.


The Wren's Nest

An Interview with Eddie Cole Amy Morgan Schmidt The College of William and Mary School of Education is fortunate to welcome aboard Dr. Eddie Cole, assistant professor in the Educational Policy, Planning, and Leadership Higher Education program. He hails from Indiana University where he previously served as a research project associate at the Center for Postsecondary Research and an instructor in the School of Education. This Fall, Dr. Cole teaches the graduate level course “The History of Higher Education” and the new course “Special Mission Colleges and Universities.” The transition makes perfect sense for me. Dr. Cole did not begin college with higher education aspirations. He earned his Bachelor of Science in speech communication with an emphasis in journalism at Tennessee State University. Journalism, it turned out, was his connection to higher education. As the editor in chief of his student journal, he was able to work with freshman and sophomore journalism students. He found this work a “ton of fun.” He took far more pleasure in showing them how the writing process worked as well as connecting them to parts of the university than in his own journalism. Seeing what he was doing with younger students, his professors suggested he pursue a graduate degree in student affairs. A notable experience with Dr. Shaun Harper, professor at Penn State University who works with student affairs and Black student leaders, also showed Dr. Cole that he had a future in student affairs. What can I do to keep me on campus and involved with the learning process? In his senior year, Dr. Cole turned down a few newspaper opportunities to pursue his Master’s at Indiana University. There he was the co-editor of Journal of the Indiana University Student Personnel Association, an annual publication that focuses on higher education, specifically. He enjoyed working on the journal, which was 41-42 years old at the time. Indiana University gave him opportunities to grow in higher education and

build his repertoire. He graduated with a Master of Science in Student Affairs Administration. When asked about the transition from a Historically Black College and University (HBCU) such as Tennessee State University to a Predominantly White Institution (PWI) like Indiana University, Dr. Cole stated that HBCUs prepare students for making this leap. Looking back at the history of higher education and Black students, he explained that segregation led to the establishment of HBCUs. Since these schools did not offer graduate schools, students went to the Midwest or North to pursue graduate degrees. It has been argued that HBCUs do not give students real world experience, but this is a misconception. Students are well coached to make the transition with an understanding that the environment of the HBCU is not a reality. Students must be aware that the world is much more integrated, and they must be able to function within a more integrated world. A Special Mission Dr. Cole continued at Indiana University to earn his Ph.D. in Higher Education. While there, he had the opportunity to work with a professor to design a course in special mission colleges and universities. His name was brought up when this professor asked faculty to nominate students that would be good to help with the course. Dr. Cole was one of two students nominated, and he was chosen. For an entire year, the professor and he talked about class


The William & Mary Educational Review

readings, field trips, and guest speakers; and when they finished later that summer, the professor said, “This is yours. You can take this with you. You built it.” This year, the School of Education is debuting Special Mission Colleges and Universities for the graduate level higher education course offerings. This class will discuss institutions outside of traditional four year institutions such as tribal colleges and universities, HBCUs, Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs), single sex institutions, work colleges, for profit, and military academies. In addition to the Special Mission Colleges and Universities, Dr. Cole will teach The History of Higher Education. “How cool is it to say I teach history of higher education at the nation’s second oldest college?” he exclaimed. Research Focus Dr. Cole’s research agenda is to expand his focus on diverse campuses and special mission colleges, which is part of the reason why he is here. HBCUs reported higher campus involvement beyond the classroom. His previous research has focused on the history of university presidents and what has been said historically during student addresses. According to his research, what presidents say affects campus culture and shapes teaching practices and learning on campus. Virginia and The College of William and Mary are appealing to his research, since the state is southern and the college very historical. He still has plans to work with Indiana University and the redesign of the Faculty Survey of Student Engagement (FSSE) project. The William and Mary Educational Review welcomes Dr. Cole, whose energy and enthusiasm is palpable. We, as members of a student-run, graduate level publication, are fortunate to have someone with his experience in journalism join the faculty. We wish him the very best this year and look forward to learning more about his research and what he brings to the School of Education and The College of William and Mary.

About the author Amy Morgan Schmidt is a PhD student in the Educational Planning, Policy, and Leadership program for Gifted Education. She is focusing on adolescent and adult giftedness.


The Wren's Nest

An Interview with Margaret (Peggie) Constantino Paige Hendricks “Happiness is loving what you do. I feel like I now have my dream job working at The College of William and Mary.” Dr. Constantino began her career in education later in life, after some time in both special education and administration. She credits her path in teaching and leadership to wonderful people in the field giving her chances and opportunities. After teaching in New York and northern Virginia, she moved toward administrative jobs in Georgia and southern Virginia. Before joining the faculty of The College of William and Mary as the Director of the Executive Ed.D. program, Dr. Constantino was the principal of York High School in nearby York County. “I ended up in the right places because of good leadership around me. I want to help the students here [at William and Mary] have similar leadership opportunities, combined with strong advising and mentoring and high-levels of classroom instruction.” Dr. Constantino hopes to help students at William and Mary bridge the gap between educational theory and practice. “I hope all students have the ability to have bad days, keep smiling, and move forward to become their personal best.” Keeping in line with her educational background in special education, Dr. Constantino knows first-hand how strong instruction combined with high levels of teacher self-efficacy can go a long way in helping all students to learn. She often recalls a situation early in her career where she fought hard for her students to learn and succeed: “I remember working very hard to teach a group of 6th through 12th grade girls a flag routine for an upcoming state band competition.” The girls were struggling with the routine and in danger of not maintaining a winning tradition. The high school band program had won this competition for many years and the pressure was on and resting on the shoulders of the students to perform and come out on top. “The day of the competition, after working very hard for the past few weeks, the routine came together and the girls got it!” Dr. Constantino exclaimed. After returning to school, Dr. Constantino was approached by the administration for a job well done. She learned that many of the girls in the flag group had

difficulties in academic learning and were receiving special education services in the school district. Dr. Constantino reflected on how her high expectations coupled with the students’ persistence and perseverance allowed them to excel. “I thought, ‘I am really good at this [teaching] and should consider this path for my career.” Dr. Constantino’s dissertation and areas of interest combine special education, policies, and practice in schools and districts. She wants to ensure that all educators understand special education law and can confidently implement these legal aspects with students in districts, schools, and classrooms. Dr. Constantino contends that students receiving special education services are affected by administrators’ interpretations and behaviors surrounding the laws. “Regardless of the policy in place for these students, we have to do things well.” She wants to ensure that administrators have the knowledge and training to not fear special education, thus allowing students to be properly identified and receive the services and assistance that they need. Dr. Constantino’s current goal for the Executive Ed.D. program at William and Mary is getting as much teaching, pedagogical, and content knowledge as possible in a collegiate leader-training program. “The program is short and I want to help the students here get as much knowledge out of the program as possible so that they can take this knowledge to the next level in practice.” Dr. Constantino wants to take her love of the classroom and provide students

10 at William and Mary the connections between theory and the “wow moments in classroom practice.” Through advising and mentoring, Dr. Constantino wants to recognize the sacrifices students make to attend this program and be successful, while still allowing ample time to pause and reflect. Dr. Constantino reasons that reflection helps in both the learning process and in bridging the gap between theory and practice. Taking time to reflect on current and future goals of the Executive Ed.D. program will also help Dr. Constantino continue to recruit qualified, diverse, and dynamic candidates in the future. “I very much admire the people here at William and Mary. I want to not only move myself to this next level but be challenged by the wonderful people here; both the other professors and students. I am excited to explore, give, and receive and move forward in this educational journey.”

The William & Mary Educational Review

About the author Paige Hendricks is a doctoral student in the Educational Policy, Planning, and Leadership program, with concentrations in Gifted Administration and K-12 Administration.


The Wren's Nest

An Interview with Jacqueline Rodriguez Linda Innemee This fall semester, we are glad to welcome Dr. Jacqueline Rodriguez as a new Assistant Professor of Special Education at The College of William and Mary School of Education. Particularly interested in global inclusion practices, STEM education for linguistically and culturally diverse exceptional students, and the use of simulated environments in teacher training, Dr. Rodriguez has a wealth of knowledge and experiences to share with students, faculty, and staff. Dr. Rodriguez grew up “with parents, who had international lifestyles,” which greatly influenced her interests and career path. As an undergraduate at The George Washington University, Dr. Rodriguez earned a BA in International Affairs with a concentration in International Development, as well as a BA in Latin American Studies with a concentration in Culture and Society. After college, she taught high school special education through Teach for America, which allowed her to gain more multicultural and special education experience. She continued her studies at American University, where she earned her Master’s in Special Education, Learning Disabilities Track. She then earned her Ph.D. in Education, Exceptional Education Track, from the University of Central Florida. During her doctoral internship, Dr. Rodriguez worked with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) for Palestinian refugees in the Near East. “My grandfather used to be on Air Force duty in the Middle East, and my sister currently lives there; so I have long been familiar with the area,” she responded when asked why she chose this particular location. Education is one of the many services UNRWA provides for Palestine refugees, and the organization presented Dr. Rodriguez with the perfect opportunity to combine her interests in international affairs and special education. “My research focused on current inclusive practices in UNRWA classrooms. I was able to come to an agreement with the organization that I would help them with their policies, strategies, and advocacy materials in return for letting me work as an intern,” she explained. There appear to be minimal inclusive practices in place in UNRWA classrooms. According to Dr.

Rodriguez, “Teachers are currently provided with zero preparation for inclusive education and teaching special education students, except for one course on differentiation.” However, she pointed out that there are informal strategies in place, such as giving a student more attention or providing different work. “Students with disabilities are included in these schools based on ability and parent advocacy for enrollment. Teachers do not have enough support, especially for students with moderate to severe disabilities,” she stated. It requires teachers to look at themselves and say, “How do I teach this specific content to this particular child?” UNRWA has endorsed a promising inclusive policy this past January but still needs to be implemented across the fields of operation. Through her experience working with UNRWA, Dr. Rodriguez has come to believe that “inclusive education has a place in every region. However, the definition of inclusive education needs to be localized and should integrate aspects of cultural, historical, and financial context.” In order for the UNRWA inclusive policy mentioned earlier to be truly effective, input from the local people should have been used to develop and localize it, Dr. Rodriguez argued. Another one of Dr. Rodriguez’s interests is STEM education for diverse learners. “As codirector of a STEM camp in the summer of 2010, we brought in students from Central

12 Florida for a week-long camp, which included site visits to interact with engineers, students, and other professionals in the field,” she explained. The students also completed group work and projects to learn how to brainstorm, collaborate, manage time, problem solve, and multitask. She estimated that ninety percent of the students had not considered a STEM career before coming to this camp. When asked about challenges the nation faces in terms of STEM education, Dr. Rodriguez responded, “Starting in middle school, schools do not offer the kind of curriculum students need to successfully enter a STEM college program…Teachers also need to know how to teach this coursework to diverse students and those with disabilities. Hands-on experiences, apprenticeships, internships, and other real-life experiences are very important.” Therefore, Dr. Rodriguez hopes to see changes in the STEM education field in the upcoming years in terms of curriculum access, teacher knowledge, and access to STEM professionals. Dr. Rodriguez also shared some information about her work as the program director of TLE TeachLivE™, a simulated mixed-reality environment at the University of Central Florida. As Dr. Rodriguez explained, “It is a lab that involves real experience and avatar experience. It is a normal classroom with a high-end computer and a TV screen or projector. A teacher walks into the room and works with five diverse avatar students who respond to anything that is said by the teacher.” Currently the only program in the country of its kind, it has been used to prepare pre-service teachers for delivering content, managing classrooms, and combining the two. Inservice teachers have used it to work on difficulties encountered in the field. According to Dr. Rodriguez, “The program is very dynamic and can be molded to any environment or setting. For example, administrators can learn how to interact with parents about an IEP, or counselors can practice counseling techniques.” While working at The College of William and Mary, Dr. Rodriguez hopes to pursue international research and continue to collaborate with the United Nations. Eventually, she would like to take students abroad so that they can learn from and exchange ideas with other teachers. Since she has done a considerable amount of policy work at the national level, she also plans to advocate on Capitol Hill for educational policies. As a professor in the

The William & Mary Educational Review School of Education, she hopes to develop a sense of mentorship with her students and is looking forward to working closely with her new colleagues, who have been welcoming throughout the process. It is clear that Dr. Rodriguez is a valuable addition to our faculty who has exciting experiences to share and promising plans in store for her work at William and Mary.

About the author Linda Innemee is an EdS student in the School Psychology program.


The Wren's Nest

Looking Back: Reflections on Life as a Doctoral Student Augustine Kang As soon as I received my acceptance letter into the EPPL program at William & Mary’s School of Education, I told myself, “Get in, get out – get this done as quickly as possible.” I was intent on distancing myself from graduate college life and immersing myself completely in my studies…and I did just that. I overloaded on classes, focused on my coursework, and proceeded to find opportunities purely for my own professional selfinterest. However, by the end of the first semester of this self-imposed lifestyle, I caught myself itching for opportunities to talk about education. I wanted to share experiences; I wanted to discuss and debate to see how my ideals and arguments stood against the criticisms of some of the best and brightest. I wanted to do things, to lead projects, and make changes. For a course assignment, I was assigned to present on a strategy known as Open Space Technology, which I would discover, seemed to parallel the needs of the students at the School of Education. Harrison Owen, a professional consultant, recognized that his audience was often far more engaged during the coffee breaks than during his presentations. They each had their own experiences and expertise and could not wait to share their ideas with others who had common interests and needs. The School of Education needed these “open spaces” to develop more creative ideas based on perspectives that may not traditionally be taken into account. Our Graduate Education Association has begun to establish these safe sharing venues. Students have organized the first ever School of Education Symposium, and this very journal, The William and Mary Educational Review, serves as another “open space” to share and learn. Shells have cracked through the past year and students are emerging with their opinions and ideas. I see it at Thursday Night Sabbaticals, in hallways before and after class, and even during class discussions. We are primed for the emergence of this collaborative environment, which I see as the first step toward building a community of learners and leaders.

The following are several additional things I have learned along my doctoral experience: 1) Learning is good; the real value is in the sharing and doing. Share often, but do not forget to listen. 2) Bounce ideas off of others as much as possible, especially if they have conflicting ideas. How better to improve ideas than to place yourself in the position to defend your assertions? 3) As leaders, give up some power, trust others, and guide them to become better leaders. Really listen and always follow through. 4) Get involved in student life. Pay attention to what happens on campus. You will always get left behind if you do not stay current. 5) Leave emotions and attitude out of the debates and decision-making processes. We all have a default emotional reaction, but David Wallace once explained that being truly educated means understanding that we have the choice to react the way we want.

About the author Augustine Kang is a PhD student in the Education Policy, Planning, and Leadership program, focusing on K-12 Administration.


The William & Mary Educational Review

Passion for Education and Leadership: Lessons from My Mentor Julie K. Marsh Dr. Christopher Corallo was Assistant Superintendent for Elementary Education and Organizational Development for Henrico County Public Schools in Richmond, Virginia. Dr. Corallo died on June 11, 2013, at the age of 56. The following is an interview conducted a few months before his death: When Dr. Corallo was 13 years old, he started work at a large, family-owned restaurant. He stayed until he was 22, learning leadership as he worked through the ranks. His experience at the restaurant taught him to surround himself with people who believed in him and pushed him to be better. Corallo was a music major in school, but he wanted to teach instead of perform. He looked at his principal and thought, “I can do a better job than that,” which pushed him to observe other principals and start thinking about better ways to run a school. Corallo met his mentor, Len Gearuea, at a professional development conference. Gearuea encouraged Corallo to become a middle school principal and assistant superintendent. Gearuea’s purpose was to groom Corallo to be the superintendent; however, Corallo soon decided he did not want to be superintendent: Every superintendent I’ve ever seen is so far removed from the instructional piece that […] it is a very political role. I get concerned about getting stuck in a position where there is more concern with going to the Rotary Club meeting…and building that frame for the other people to do their work. I like the work too much. Corallo enjoyed pulling an idea apart, asking how it worked, and then putting it together again in a more creative way to move to the next level. Corallo changed many times as a leader over the years, but the most significant change occurred after he made the decision not to become a superintendent. This decision helped Corallo clarify what was most important to him. He left the school division and worked for the Virginia Department of Education (VDOE) for three years before moving to work for Appalachian Education

Labs (AEL). His roles put him on a national stage to make changes within education, work with other researchers across the country, and work on the state superintendent level. These experiences changed Corallo as a leader and led him to Henrico County where he became Director of Staff Development and, ultimately, Assistant Superintendent. Corallo’s nontraditional career trajectory afforded him a broader perspective on education. Corallo’s experiences sculpted his own vision for Henrico County. His vision included creating a viable framework within Organizational Development and changing educational expectations and outcomes in elementary education. The framework he instituted focused on analyzing process, setting goals, and creating strong strategic planning. While in the early stages of this vision, Corallo was aware the county did not always have structure and had a lot of redundancy: We have lots of standard operating systems that we have built. We have a very strong strategic plan…we have good communication to our stakeholder groups, which is a big part of being a quality organization. Where we are falling down in meeting that vision is we don’t always have the structures in place for easy flow of information…we have a lot of redundancy that is not necessary [and] that really is not the hallmark of a quality organization. The other piece of Corallo’s vision was improving elementary education. Corallo wanted to create the expectation that all students should read by third grade, and focus on the parents’ need to understand that students need literature-rich environments from birth. Corallo’s expectation was that students who could read on level by the third grade would stay on level. Corallo also expressed the need to focus on 21st century learning skills starting in prekindergarten. Corallo recognized there are many obstacles to overcome when in a leadership position, like


The Wren's Nest

the difficulties in innovation and attempts to shift the culture of what a classroom should look like. Corallo noted that educators have too much on their plates, but educators still need to get people excited about new ways to improve education: People who give only lip service to really making a change, people that you have been unable to get them excited about the vision because they have been teaching this way for a long time, classrooms have looked this way for a long time, parents expect things to look a certain way. To change people’s mindsets or to change people’s vision of what things could be, I think, is very hard work and you need to keep chipping away at it. Corallo stated the best way to overcome these obstacles is to show the way, step-by-step, in how new ideas can make a difference, expose teachers and parents to technology, and continue to communicate the vision. Corallo’s path to leadership was not easy, and he experienced many personal sacrifices along the way. When asked what his major personal sacrifice was, he mentioned the dissolution of his marriage. Corallo explained that his wife did not expect the many changes that occurred when he went from teacher to administrator; she thought she married a teacher. Corallo also did not regret his decision to pursue an Ed.D. instead of going to law school: That was not where my passion was. I would be chasing money and not my passion. So, to me, that is kind of a sacrifice. I’ve done well financially, I can’t complain, but…I work every night: I’m either at a meeting or I am at home working on something for work. There’s not a whole lot of downtime with this job. But I love it. When asked for his advice for aspiring leaders, Corallo suggested following a passion. He said you must love what you do and surround yourself with others who do as well. Corallo also suggested finding a good mentor, someone to believe in your goals and push you to be the best. Finally, Corallo said do not shy away from opportunities or failures even if they take you off your original path. Corallo noted that sometimes it is the surprises in life that lead to the most successful outcomes. “It is okay to have failures, but learn from them and don’t be afraid to take the next step.”

About the author Julie K. Marsh is a PhD student in the Educational Policy, Planning, and Leadership program, focusing on Curriculum and Educational Technology.


The William & Mary Educational Review

Not for Sale: Peer Review, the Academy and the Bulwark of True Knowledge Angelo Letizia The peer review process in academia is something that is so engrained in the academic milieu, that sometimes we can lose sight of its importance. I wrote this piece to remind all in the academic community of the importance of the peer review process during the information age of which we currently find ourselves. The information age, as the name suggests, is based on the production, control and dissemination of all types of information. In many ways, the peer review process serves as an unbiased moderator of the ever growing stock of knowledge in the information age. I am currently a peer review editor for two journals, including this one. My first peer review experience allowed me to see the power and importance of the process. I had submitted a manuscript to a graduate journal of history. I was also asked by the editor to be peer reviewer. The article that I reviewed was an excellent piece that dealt with anti-German propaganda in Serbian textbooks prior to the First World War. I gave the article a good deal of constructive criticism, but I found the piece an excellent fit for the journal and recommended it be published. To my dismay, a few weeks later I had found out that my manuscript had been rejected. However, when I read the journal, I saw that the article I had reviewed had been published with the recommended changes I had made. In addition, in a footnote, the author had thanked an anonymous peer reviewer for his/her helpful suggestions regarding the profession of teaching, that anonymous peer reviewer being me. While I was obviously disappointed that my manuscript was rejected, I did take some consolation in the fact that I had contributed in a small way to this superb article. This event illustrated how important the process of peer reviewing is in the creation of new knowledge. The peer review process typically works like this. An author submits a manuscript to a journal. The editor then assigns the journal to two reviewers. This is a blind process which means that the author does not know who is reviewing

his/her manuscript and the reviewers do not know whose manuscript they are reviewing. The reviewers critique the manuscript, write recommendations and offer suggestions to strengthen it. Typically the editors look at both reviewers recommendations and based on them, decide whether or not to publish the piece as is, send it back to the author for further revisions, or reject it. This process can take anywhere from six weeks to six months. Some have called this process cumbersome and inefficient. Some astute businessmen have even set up pay to publish schemes, charging up to 650 US dollars to publish one article, usually in less than a month. The legitimacy and quality of these pay to publish journals however is questionable. Pay to publish journals claim to have peer review, but it is doubtful if any author that is willing to pay a fee is rejected (Truth, 2012). Despite the slow nature of the process and the emerging predatory pay to publish schemes, peer review is still the most effective mode of knowledge creation and transmission. In an age when everything is for sale, true peer-review is not. When a person’s work appears in a journal, they did not buy their way in there or draw on their social connections. Rather, their manuscript was of high quality and contributes significantly to the ever growing stock of knowledge. The amount of journals in the sciences, business and the humanities is increasing exponentially as a result of this growth. Due to its ability to produce knowledge, academia is the lifeblood of the information age. Yet academia is also increasingly dominated by corporate interests (Rhoads & Torres, 2006). So it is imperative that knowledge produced by scholars remains disinterested and free of corporate influence. If not, then knowledge production will be geared toward profit and not service. The slow, inefficient and cumbersome process of peer review is the cornerstone of disinterested, unbiased knowledge production. Peer reviewers are anonymous, their contributions to the journal are also anonymous


The Wren's Nest but their importance and impact cannot be understated. In the most far reaching sense, peer reviewers, along with the authors and editors, are the drivers of socially beneficial knowledge which fuels the information age.

References Rhoads, R., & Torres, C. (2006). University, state and market: The political economy of globalization in the Americas. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Press. Truth, F. (2012). Pay big to publish fast: Academic journal rackets. Journal of Critical Educational Policy Studies, 10, 54-105.

About the author Angelo Letizia is a PhD student in the Educational Policy, Planning, and Leadership program, focusing on Higher Education.


The William & Mary Educational Review

Education: The Desperate Need for New Perspectives Bettina Staudt

On July 12th, 2013, a remarkable, teenage girl from Pakistan, Malala Yousafzai, spoke at the United Nations. She called for the education of all children. Malala, who was shot and almost killed last year by the Taliban, marked her sixteenth birthday with courageous words, reminding us that education is capable of transforming the entire world. Her appeal to the U.N. emphasized that change is catalyzed by education and constitutes a basic, human right for all. Malala stated, “Education will help us to improve lives.” She asked world leaders to promise global, primary education for all children by the end of the year 2015. The U.N. honored her resilience, passion and courage by declaring July 12th as “Malala Day.” As an educator, mother and peace activist, I was moved by her words. We have much to learn from our young students, such as Malala. They offer us a different perspective on what truly matters. Children in places around the world, especially girls, still have limited opportunities to learn. In this country, we face our own educational challenges. Our students are not likely to be killed by extremists opposed to education, but they face an increasingly dehumanizing and, to them, meaningless system where they feel their voices are not heard. Schools are paralyzed by attempts at educational reform, bashing teachers, worshiping core standards, data analysis, and accountability measures. As teachers, we have less time to instruct, and curricula can be so tightly regulated that opportunities for discussion and quality learning become more and more limited. Testing and retesting have clearly become more important than the individual student, and this is not without a heavy price. We produce students good at regurgitating answers, but with limited abilities for critical thinking, generalization and global awareness. It is my opinion that the time is ripe for innovative thinking that takes us outside of the proverbial box. If we persist in ignoring the expertise and wisdom of our teachers, and as important, the voice of the students, we will miss the point.

Merely giving lip-service to the concept of student-centered instruction is not enough. It should be fully and rigorously implemented. Also, it is time to fully embrace social collaborative learning. Students in Europe are fluent in several languages and take advantage of convergent technologies, connecting with students from around the world. Abroad, these skills are encouraged and reinforced. They are valued over a score on a standardized test. Maybe the time has come to build passionate, creative learning communities where our students are not only consuming knowledge, but are co-creators of knowledge. Good teachers do not simply “teach,” but explore learning with their students. Maybe we are asking the wrong questions. Instead of asking if our students can learn, we might ask how they can learn in a way that is meaningful to them. Asking what is wrong with our teachers may not be as helpful or productive as asking what is right and what is working well. Recently I talked with a German student who had graduated from a collaborative school called “Freie Comenius Schule,” in Darmstadt, Germany. When I asked him to describe his school experience he responded, “It was great and I am going to miss my teachers. For the first six years I explored and played. For the next three years, I learned how to learn, and this last year, I was just eager to show everyone and myself what I knew and what I could do.” His graduation project was a review on Voltaire’s impact on Frederick the Great. He graduated with superior grades, is fluent in English and French, and has travelled extensively. His educational internships included working on an organic farm, serving with an attorney at juvenile court, and training with a professional photographer. He found his education fun, challenging, fascinating, and practical. When I shared this experience with several American educators, the consensus, sadly, seemed to be that “It could never happen in an American


The Wren's Nest school.� I posit that not only can it happen here, but that it should. I hope that you had the opportunity and privilege to hear Malala’s presentation to the U.N. It is my hope that her speech will resonate with you as well. We need to listen to all of the young Malalas of the world, their aspirations and recommendations. It is through the students that we can obtain a much needed, new perspective on education. Sometimes our students are the best teachers.

References United Nations (July 12, 2013). Malala Yousafzai addresses United Nations Youth Assembly. Retrieved from

About the author Bettina Staudt is an EdD student in the Educational Policy, Planning, and Leadership program, focusing on K-12 Education.


The William & Mary Educational Review

Mobile Education in Cambodia Cameron R. Nelson A couple of years ago, I had the opportunity to spend several unforgettable days volunteering at a mobile dental education clinic that visited remote villages in the Cambodian jungles and taught children about proper dental hygiene. My time with the dentists was spent serving the villages near the small city of Siem Riep in north-central Cambodia. Despite the city’s proximity to the most popular tourist destination in Cambodia – Angkor Wat – this area was one of the poorest in the country. I was in the middle of a one year around the world backpacking trip and was there as a volunteer with my friend Tessa from England to help volunteer dentists wherever they needed us. Tessa loved this kind of in-your-face getting to know the locals sort of volunteer work. The year before, she had distributed Christian pamphlets and videos in Tibet. This was at the risk of imprisonment or death due to strict Chinese antiproselytizing regulations. I got a ride with the volunteer dentists from my hotel in Siem Riep early in the morning, and by the time we setup at an elementary school 20 miles away, I was exhausted. Because the villages we served were all so remote and the state of public transportation in that part of Cambodia horrendous, the only way the majority of the locals could get affordable, modern healthcare was if it came to them. The mobile clinic was setup in a classroom of a small elementary school. I spent the first part of the day wearing thick rubber gloves cleaning dental tools in a solution of chemicals so that they could immediately be reused on other patients. While I scrubbed blood and grime off of shiny metal instruments, an endless stream of kids, no older than nine years old, came and went from the clinic. They came from the countryside, where dental hygiene and even the sight of a toothbrush, was alien to them. At the school for only six days, they had treated over 150 orphaned children. The clinic was funded by the Baptist Outreach Program out of Utah, and staffed by international volunteers like myself. The team of professional dentists pulled teeth and filled cavities, all the while giving lessons to the

kids about dental hygiene. Their strategy was to alleviate the most suffering they could with their limited funds. Accordingly, the program carefully planned their route and contacted local authorities ahead of time to let them know when they would be there. Due to their creed of helping the maximum number of souls, they only had enough Novocain to use on the children getting teeth pulled out; the ones getting fillings had to bear with the pain. And bear with it they did. Not once did I hear screaming or wailing from the numerous children lying supine on their backs. One of the dentists called me over and asked me to shine a flashlight into a little girl’s mouth as he pulled out two of her rotten teeth. Though it must have hurt terribly, the girl was as quiet and as still as a mouse. After the dentist was done, the girl very respectfully put her hands together in front of her heart in the traditional Cambodian way of greeting and thanks. As soon as she got off the chair and walked out into the bright sunlight outside, another girl immediately came in and took her place. Tessa and I, with the help of some of the local teachers, launched into a dental hygiene demonstration, complete with posters in Cambodian and larger than life false teeth and a tooth brush we used to demonstrate proper brushing techniques. For the next several hours, the 80 or so kids sitting in the dusty playground of their school paid her the utmost attention and never once took their eyes off of her to hit each other or talk to their neighbor; a level of


The Wren's Nest discipline almost unheard of in American elementary schools. After the demonstration, toothbrushes and toothpaste were supplied to everyone, even the teachers and local villagers. These dental hygiene products were donated by charitable organizations in the United States, and in many cases this was the first time they had ever been used in the villages. During a short break in the busy day, I had a talk with the director of the Baptist Outreach Program in Cambodia. He told me about some other programs that were currently underway in this area. These programs included digging wells in 15 villages to provide 8,000 people with clean water, donating wheelchairs to local hospitals, and handing out eye glasses, in addition to their mobile dental clinic, which is always on the move, week after week, going to poor rural village after village. Most of the children in rural parts of Cambodia have never brushed their teeth in their lives. The children who came in to get their teeth pulled today never knew who paid for it. They never knew that donations to a church in the United States paid for the tools that helped pull their teeth and fill their cavities. The education these children received would prevent them from following in their parents’ footsteps and eating with cavity-stricken teeth for most of their adult lives.

About the author Cameron R. Nelson is an MBA student in the Mason School of Business.


The William & Mary Educational Review

Rethinking Financial Aid Policy Tehmina Khwaja Executive Summary In the face of competition from other nations, higher education in the United States has slipped from the status it has enjoyed over the years. With the economic downturn and changing demographics, new challenges have emerged that necessitate reevaluation of higher education policies. One consistent trend in recent years has been the steady increase in college tuition rates which has put higher education out of reach for many capable aspiring students. The lack of accessibility of higher education is detrimental to the economic growth of the country since a vast number of talented students who cannot afford to go to, or stay in, college are not able to enter the job market as trained professionals. Financial aid policies can go a long way in addressing these issues. Redistributive policies geared toward capacity building are recommended to enhance accessibility of higher education. The short term outcomes of such policies will be an increase in equality of opportunity and diversity on college campuses, while in the long run such policy change will lead to economic prosperity of the country and uplift of the communities of the individuals who benefit from these policies. Introduction The Virginia Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2011 also known as the Top Jobs Act states: The objective of this chapter is to fuel strong economic growth in the Commonwealth and prepare Virginians for the top job opportunities in the knowledge-driven economy of the 21st century by establishing a long-term commitment, policy, and framework for sustained investment and innovation that will enable the Commonwealth to build upon the strengths of its excellent higher education system and achieve national and international leadership in college degree attainment and personal income, and that will ensure these educational and economic opportunities are accessible and affordable for all capable and committed Virginia students. To achieve this worthy objective, and as noted in the Act, it is imperative to make higher education accessible and affordable to all citizens. In the

current climate of economic uncertainty, many capable individuals who wish and/or need to obtain a college education are unable to realize their dreams because they do not possess the financial means to do so. For such aspiring students, financial aid and assistance can facilitate college attendance and completion. The current situation of higher education accessibility and affordability leaves much to be desired. Davies (2006) documented worrying statistics of how the United States measures up against other nations with the country slipping in terms of rates of the young population’s higher education attainment. Davies (2006) demonstrated as well how the states fare in terms of affordability with almost all states, including Virginia, scoring an F on the affordability report card. With rising tuition costs, increasing numbers of students rely on financial aid to attend comprehensive universities (Hemelt & Marcotte, 2011). Financial Aid and Student Persistence The positive link between needs-based financial aid and low income students’ college persistence is well supported in the literature (Alon, 2011; Curs & Harper, 2012; GeorgeJackson, Rincon, Martinez, & Hillman, 2012; Lassila, 2011; Novak, McKinney, & Baum, 2011; Singell, 2004). This link between financial aid and low income student retention is even more significant by racial groups as decreasing levels of financial aid exacerbate racial inequalities (Kim, 2004; St. John, Paulsen, & Carter, 2005). Students from wealthy backgrounds often receive institutional and state grants, but their persistence is not dependent on these grants (Alon, 2011). When aid is available to low income students in response to legislative mandates, it is not always sufficient to aid low income students’ persistence; for instance, the initial financial aid for students in Science Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) fields, meant to offset high tuition rates in these fields, does not keep pace with rising tuition costs over time (George-

The Wren's Nest Jackson, Rincon, Martinez, & Hillman, 2012). George-Jackson et al. (2012) observed that these increasing costs particularly impact low income students, and suggested a reevaluation of the differential tuition and aid policies in STEM fields. Since lack of, or fluctuation in, financial aid impacts low income students more than high income students (Alon, 2011), the financial aid that is currently being given to students from more prosperous homes should be diverted to those who belong to low socioeconomic status (SES). The framework recommended for this policy change is Lowi’s redistributive technique (Fowler, 2009). A redistributive policy is “one that shifts resources or power from one social group to another” (Fowler, 2009, p. 243). Within this framework, students from low SES homes will be given more financial aid opportunities than those that are from high SES homes. McDonnell and Elmore’s (1987) policy instrument of capacity building, defined as an investment in “material, intellectual or human resources” (p. 134), is the main intent of this redistribution. Other policy instruments recommended by McDonnell and Elmore (1987), including mandates, defined as rules “governing the actions of individuals and agencies” (p. 138); inducements, the allocation of financial or in-kind resources in exchange for “production of value” (p. 138); and hortatory policies, defined as policies that are meant to persuade through symbolism and imagery (Fowler, 2009), can be used in combination with capacity building to ensure implementation of the redistributive policy. The impact of such policy change will be far reaching. If more students from low SES backgrounds gain access to higher education, and if they are able to persist with financial support, they will, in turn, be able to augment their socioeconomic status with greater economic opportunities. An outcome of this individual prosperity will be the economic uplift of their communities. Thus, this investment in human resources will have considerable implications as students, their communities, and, eventually, the nation as a whole will benefit from this investment. Many students miss out on financial aid opportunities that are available to them because they are either unaware that such opportunities exist (Lassila, 2011) or find the system too complex to comprehend (Melguizo & Chung, 2012).

23 The Politics of Financial Aid Since most higher education policy making occurs at the state level in the United States (Cheslock & Hughes, 2011), the politically driven nature of higher education policy at the state level merits attention for effective advocacy. Doyle (2012), for example found that liberal ideology of state policy actors is not related to increase in financial aid; however, legislative professionalism and higher levels of financial aid are correlated. Doyle (2012) also observed that financial aid is driven by the relative strength of private institutions of higher education in a state. Support for the high percentage of financial aid offerings by private, selective institutions can also be found in Melguizo & Chung (2012). Tandberg (2010) found a correlation between liberal ideology and state spending on higher education and concurred with Doyle (2012) that state legislative professionalism and higher education spending are correlated. The correlation between legislative professionalism and support of higher education comes as no surprise, as more professionalized legislatures are comprised of highly educated legislators who are sympathetic to higher education (Tandberg, 2010). Tandberg (2010) also found that a state’s higher interest group ratio has a significant and positive influence on spending on higher education. If institutions pool resources and approach the powers that be with knowledge and tact, they can achieve their policy goals. In the loosely coupled system (Birnbaum, 1988; Weick, 2000) of education, an incremental approach which "emphasizes mobilized interest groups which negotiate solutions to problems in an environment of limited knowledge," rather than a rational approach which "explains policy change as the result of mobilizing coherent solutions to problems on the basis of knowledge and authoritative consensus" (Leslie & Berdahl, 2008, p. 310) might be more effective. Thus, advocates of increasing spending on higher education financial aid can use the system to their advantage. Conclusion Promotion of postsecondary education is essential to economic prosperity and its longterm benefits to individuals, society, and the nation as a whole cannot be denied. Access of low income students to a college education must


The William & Mary Educational Review

not fall prey to a political system based on selfinterest and profit. Diversion of financial aid from high income students to low income students is strongly recommended, as this policy change will pay dividends in the long run. Not only will it lead to economic prosperity for the individuals, but also their communities. The beneficiaries of financial aid can contribute greatly to uplifting their communities, thus achieving the policy objective of capacity building. Implications and Recommendations In light of the significance of financial aid for retention of students in general, and low income students in particular, it is important to note and remedy the current situation in which students from more affluent families are beneficiaries of financial aid that could enable students from low SES homes to attend and persist in college. Policymakers at both the state and institutional levels should also ensure clear communication about financial aid opportunities to make sure that students do not miss out on opportunities that are available to them.

References Birnbaum, R. (1988). How colleges work: The cybernetics of academic organization and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Cheslock, J. J., & Hughes, R. P. (2011). Differences across states in higher education finance policy. Journal of Education Finance, 36(4), 369–393. doi:10.1353/jef.2011.0009 Curs, B. R., & Harper, C. E. (2012). Financial aid and first-year collegiate gpa: A regression discontinuity approach. The Review of Higher Education, 35(4), 627–649. doi:10.1353/rhe.2012.0040 Davies, G. K. (2006). Setting a public agenda for higher education in the states: Lessons learned from the national collaborative for higher education policy. Denver, CO: The Education Commission of the States. Doyle, W. R. (2012). The politics of public college tuition and state financial aid. The Journal of Higher Education, 83(5), 617–647. doi:10.1353/jhe.2012.0033

Fowler, F. (2009). Policy studies for educational leaders: An introduction (3rd Ed.). Boston, MA: Prentice Hall. George-Jackson, B. C. E., Rincon, B., Martinez, M. G., & Hillman, N. W. (2012). Lowincome engineering students: Considering financial aid and differential tuition associate editor. Journal of Student Financial Aid, 42(2), 4–24. Retrieved from /Journal_of_Student_Financial_Aid__Current_Issue.aspx Hemelt, S. W., & Marcotte, D. E. (2011). The qimpact of tuition increases on enrollment at public colleges and universities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33(4), 435–457. Retrieved from 3102/0162373711415261 Kim, D. (2004). The effect of financial aid on students’ college choice: Differences by racial groups. Research in Higher Education, 45(1), 43–70. doi:10.1023/B:RIHE.0000010046.57 597.43 Leslie, D. W., & Berdahl, R. O. (2008). The politics of restructuring higher education in Virginia: A case study. The Review of Higher Education, 31(3), 309-328. McDonnell, L. M., & Elmore, R. F. (1987). Getting the job done: Alternative policy instruments. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9(2), 133–152. Melguizo, T., & Chung, A. (2012). College aid policy and competition for diversity. The Review of Higher Education, 35(3), 403–430. doi:10.1353/rhe.2012.0021 Novak, B. H., Mckinney, L., & Baum, S. (2011). The consequences of leaving money on the table: Examining persistence among students who do not file a FAFSA . Journal of Student Financial Aid, 41(3), 5–24. Retrieved from Journal/Journal_of_Student_Financial_ Aid.aspx Singell Jr., L. D. (2004). Come and stay a while: Does financial aid effect retention conditioned on enrollment at a large public university? Economics of Education Review, 23(5), 459–471.


The Wren's Nest doi:10.1016/j.econedurev.2003.10.006 St. John, E. P., Paulsen, M. B., & Carter, D. F. (2005). Diversity, college costs, and postsecondary opportunity: An examination of the financial nexus between college choice and persistence for african americans and whites. The Journal of Higher Education, 76(5), 545–569. doi:10.1353/jhe.2005.0035 Tandberg, D. (2010). Interest groups and governmental institutions: The politics of state funding of public higher education. Educational Policy, 24(5), 735778. Virginia Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2011. Chapter 869, § 23-38.87:10. (April 6, 2011). Retrieved from

Weick, K. E. (2000). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. In M. C. Brown, II (Ed.), Organization & Governance in Higher Education (5th Ed.) (pp. 36-49). Boston, MA: Pearson Custom Publishing.

About the author Tehmina Khwaja is a PhD student in the Educational Policy, Planning, and Leadership program, focusing on Higher Education.


The William & Mary Educational Review

English Language Learners and Their Families: Paradigm Shifts Alexis Harvey Schools play an integral role in helping to educate students about more than just material required to pass assessments and meet federal and state mandates. School can act as a vehicle to encourage learning about other cultures that may be represented in population of the school. Students from other countries bring with them their own cultures, values, and traditions that may enhance the educational experience for their age peers. This may lead to greater awareness of and exposure to cultural differences which could positively impact school climate and break down barriers that divide individuals. This process of breaking down barriers and building cultural competence can occur in any level of instruction, but in the early elementary grades this process may not be as difficult as young children may not have been exposed to attitudes that develop biases. It is important for educators and school administrators to foster positive relationships with the parents of all students regardless of their ethnic background. Policies should be created by school localities and states that make relationship building with families of English Language Learners (ELL) more of a priority, especially in the formative early years of a students’ educational experience as home life is an overriding factor in the lives of early elementary students. Current mandates, both federal and state, require that certain content is taught in order to facilitate learning that will meet the requirements of a particular mandate. These required content materials may not be aligned with the needs of ELLs or honor their cultural heritage. Spencer, Falchi, and Ghiso (2011) stated, “… mandates delineate the types of literacy that “count” in academic settings and also forward powerful messages about which cultural and linguistic identities are valued and which are excluded” (p. 121). Different states have different mandates for what are considered to be acceptable cultural or linguistic groups. Very often this determination is made, in part, due to the level of diversity in particular state or locality and the number of students in need of ELL services. In states such as New York, Florida, or California, the

volume and mixtures of diversity are higher than many other states. States and school localities with high numbers of ELL families may include curricula that explore the aspects of community diversity and tolerance building, to the extent the curricula also meets state standards of learning which may not be compatible with conflicting community values and beliefs. This may lead to policies that may have a negative impact on young learners and ELLs. Spencer Falchi, and Ghiso (2011) concluded, “Early literacy policies have the potential to alienate and continue to disenfranchise those students are already most vulnerable in the educational system, and to drive from the profession teachers who attempt to mitigate the mandates” (p. 122). Parents, students, and teachers need to feel that they are in an environment that allows them to explore and embrace other cultures without being judged or ostracized for their beliefs. This may require time and positive exposure to other cultures in order to move beyond their misconceptions and distrust. Administrators and teachers in diverse schools may need to look beyond the traditional notions and actives that build parent- school relationships and express a willingness to open the school to a more democratic form of engagement with families. Policies, at the present time, do not include provisions for fostering and building relationships with ELL families, as academic concerns are given priority. However, school districts across the country, particularly those that are located in areas where diversity abounds, are continually challenged to address both the academic and social needs of students, which can include attempts to generate greater parental involvement. Norgurea (2009) advised: Theoretically at least, education should serve as a means for immigrant children to escape poverty. For this to happen, education must serve as a source of opportunity and a pathway to a better life just as it has for other groups in the past. For this to happen school must not treat immigrant children as though their

The Wren's Nest inability to speak fluent English is a sign of cognitive or cultural deficit. They must reach out to their parents and work with them, and they must find partners who can provide and support their children’s needs. (Para. 29) When working to create policies that support families for whom English is not their first language or who arrive from other English speaking countries with different cultural values, it is important to make these individuals feel as though they will be accepted and respected in their role in the school environment. Students also need to be reassured that their language and culture will not become barriers to building positive relationships with teachers and other students. Those who generate and write policies in school districts and state departments of education must not be only concerned about communicating the tenants of a policy using political rhetoric and accepted policy language, but must be written in generally understandable terms that can be easily translated into multiple languages that are represented throughout a district or state. This will provide inclusiveness for all who wish to become part of the greater discussion. There is an additional underlying message being given to ELL parents, that their culture and language may not be accepted or appreciated. Spencer, Falchi, and Ghiso (2011) state, Language is inextricably linked to identity. As such, the policies are not just a matter of linguistic bias; they communicate to children that their very cultural beings may not be fully realized in schools (p. 121). The role of parents needs to be viewed as an essential and important part of the learning process, particularly for young children as they are greatly impacted by their home life. It is the task of state departments of education and school districts to promote policies that make building parent- school relationships as important as building student academic knowledge. This could have a positive effect on drop- out rates, literacy development, efficacy building, and strengthening of communities. The approach and attitudes about ELL families should change, and they should be given an opportunity to participate in the process of policymaking. As Pushor (2011) advises, A more honoring and respectful approach is to start with our work with families and communities by looking in a different direction – inward. The only

27 thing we truly have is ourselves. When we examine how our beliefs and assumptions shape our practices in reaching out to families and communities, what new possibilities do we see? Educational policymakers have to be cognizant of not only the values and cultural dynamics of ELL families, but the values and ideologies that exist within the greater community. Fowler (2009) argues, “… today’s school leaders must have a general understanding of the political idea that that swirl around them in order to think intelligently about education policy” (p. 106). This includes awareness of competing values, conflicts, ideologies, and beliefs about ELL families and policies that seek to be more inclusive of diversity. In many parts of the country, there exists tension and distrust about families and individuals that come to the United States. Some of this tension could stem from the popular media, political advertisements and campaigns, and simple misunderstandings bought about by a seeming lack of cultural competence. Schools are in a unique position to foster positive change and increase acceptance of those who come to this country seeking a better life or refuge from political or social oppression. Policies should include provisions for supporting ELL families and students in fair and inclusive ways that can begin to build trust and greater efficacy.


The William & Mary Educational Review References

National center for educational statistics. (2011). Retrieved from p?id=96 Noguera, P. (2009). Getting ready for the new majority: How schools can respond to immigration and demographic change. In motion, Retrieved from r/pn_newmaj09.html Pushor, D. (2011). Looking out, looking in: A partnership approach respects the strengths and knowledge of students' families. Educational leadership, 69(1), 65-68. Spencer, T. G., Falchi, L., & Ghiso, M. P. (2011). Linguistically diverse children and educators (re)forming early literacy policy. Early childhood education journal, 39(2), 115-123.

About the author Alexis Harvey is a PhD student in the Educational Policy, Planning, and Leadership program, focusing on K-12 General Administration.


The Wren's Nest

China Study Abroad Trip Jess Hench In the Spring semester of 2013, students from our Higher Education and Counseling programs spent 12 days in China exploring teaching and learning at some of China's top universities, visiting Beijing, Xi'an, and Shanghai. Dr. Jim Barber, Assistant Professor in the Higher Education Program, led the course, EDUC 500: Global Studies – Teaching and Learning in China, for which students received three credits and a lifetime of memories. Representatives from the Counseling program included doctoral student, Richelle Joe, and masters students, Alicia Frederickson and Katharine Sperandio. Higher Education program representatives included doctoral students, Sean Bates, Leslie Bohon, Debi Butler, and Jess Hench; and masters student, Meredith Allred. Upon their return, the students created multi-media projects to showcase their learning from this unique experience. These photographs depict some of the highlights of the trip as seen through the lens of each participant.

Meredith Allred M.Ed. Student, Higher Education Program Chinese people light incense and pray at a Buddhist temple in Shanghai. Skyscrapers surround the temple that provides a haven in the middle of the bustling city. Location: Jade Buddha Temple, Shanghai

Jim Barber Faculty, Higher Education Program The lights of central Shanghai’s business district reflect on the Huangpu River. Pictured in the center is the iconic Oriental Pearl Radio and TV Tower. Location: Pudong District, Shanghai


The William & Mary Educational Review

Sean Bates Ed.D. Student, Higher Education Program Overhead sculpture in the lobby of the Museum of the Terracotta Warriors and Horses of Qin Shi Huang, China’s first emperor. Location: Xi’an, Shaanxi Province

Jess Hench Ph.D. Student, Higher Education Program Texting Monk: The Intersection of Tradition and Technology. Location: Big Wild Goose Pagoda, Xi’an

Leslie Bohon Ph.D. Student, Higher Education Program Some things are universal. Place: Anywhere, everywhere Physical Location: Temple of Heaven, Beijing Winner of the School of Education Photo Contest

The Wren's Nest

Richelle Joe Ph.D. Student, Counselor Education Program Flower at the Yuyuan Garden in Shanghai, China. Location: Yuyuan Garden, Shanghai

Debra-Ann Butler Ph.D. Student, Higher Education Program A bridge exiting the Summer Palace, an imperial garden in Beijing, is surrounded by ice. Location: Summer Palace, Beijing

Katharine Sperandio M.Ed. Student, Community & Addictions Counseling Program A cemetery fit for an emperor. Location: Museum of the Terracotta Warriors, Xi’an



The William & Mary Educational Review

How Parenting Style Influences Children: A Review of Controlling, Guiding, and Permitting Parenting Styles on Children’s Behavior, RiskTaking, Mental Health, and Academic Achievement Clare Merlin Justine Okerson Philip Hess Abstract Across cultures, parenting styles fall into three categories based on levels of demandingness and responsiveness. This literature review examines three categories of parenting styles and their influence on children’s behavior, risk-taking, mental health, and academic achievement. Controlling parents are high on demandingness and low on responsiveness (Baumrind, 1991; Kim, in press). Guiding parents are high on demandingness and high on responsiveness (Baumrind, 1991; Kim, in press). Permitting parents are low on demandingness and low on responsiveness (Baumrind, 1991; Kim, in press). Based on positive and negative effects of each parenting style, this review concludes that the guiding parenting style is the most effective for children. Implications for parents include recognizing the need to provide both support and structure for children. Keywords: authoritarian parenting, authoritative parenting, controlling parenting, guiding parenting, parenting styles, permissive parenting

Recently a renewed interest regarding parenting styles has stimulated discussion over the best methods of parenting across all cultures (Taub, 2008). Headlines regarding “helicopter parents” (those who hover over their children) and “snow plow parents” (those who push obstacles out of their children’s way) highlight this renewed conversation on how best to parent. What journalists and writers may have forgotten is that more than four decades worth of research on parenting styles demonstrates the effects each style has on outcomes for children (Baumrind, 1971; Taub, 2008). At a time when parents are seeking the most effective ways to be involved in the education of their children, examining their parenting styles and promoting guiding parenting is warranted. Parenting styles affect children in the areas of behavior, risk-taking, mental health, and

academic achievement (Baumrind, 1971; Chen, Dong, & Zhou, 1997; Ishak, Low, & Lau, 2012; Trinkner, Cohn, Rebellon, & Van Gundy, 2012). Baumrind (1971) introduced three parenting styles as patterns of parental authority: authoritarian, authoritative, and permissive parenting. These parenting styles are differentiated from one another based on their levels of demandingness and responsiveness to children (Baumrind, 1991; Martinez & Garcia, 2008; Ishak et al., 2012). Demandingness is the extent to which parents exert control, power, and supervision over their children, as well as set limits on their children (Baumrind, 1991; Martinez & Garcia, 2008). Responsiveness is the extent to which parents show their children affective warmth and acceptance, give support, and reason with them (Baumrind, 1991; Martinez & Garcia, 2008). For the purposes of this study, the parenting styles will be called controlling (authoritarian),


Influence of Parenting Styles punishments that result from controlling parenting make it potentially damaging for children.

Figure 1. Parenting styles differentiated by level of demandingness and responsiveness.

guiding (authoritative), and permitting (permissive) (Kim, in press). Controlling parents are high on demandingness and low on responsiveness, guiding parents are high on demandingness and high on responsiveness, and permitting parents are low on demandingness and low on responsiveness (Baumrind, 1991; Martinez & Garcia, 2008). These differences are illustrated in Figure 1. Although past studies have indicated the guiding parenting style is the most effective parenting style, research has neglected to describe where the line is drawn between controlling parenting and guiding parenting, and between guiding parenting and permitting parenting (Baumrind, 1971; Baumrind, 1991; Ishak et al., 2012; Maccoby & Martin, 1983; Milevsky, Schlechter, Netter, & Keehn, 2007). Controlling Parenting Controlling parenting, also known as authoritarian parenting, is characterized by a high level of demandingness and a low level of responsiveness (Baumrind, 1991; Ishak et al., 2012; Kim, in press; Luyckx et al., 2011; Miller, Lambert, & Speirs Neumeister, 2012). Controlling parents are strict with their children and emphasize discipline over nurturing (Miller et al., 2012), but are detached and unreceptive to their children’s needs (Trinkner et al., 2012). They assert high levels of control, set rules and restrictions (Baumrind, 1971; Chen et al., 1997; Greening, Stoppelbein, & Leubbe, 2010; Miller et al., 2012), have high demands (Greening et al., 2010), and are rejecting of their children (Chen et al., 1997). Controlling parents enforce a structured environment with punitive and prohibitive discipline (Baumrind, 1971; Chen et al., 1997; Ishak et al., 2012; Kang & Moore, 2011; McKinney, Milone, & Renk, 2011) and punishment (Chan & Chan, 2005). The harsh and often unwarranted

Guiding Parenting Guiding parenting, also known as authoritative parenting, is characterized by a high level of demandingness and a high level of responsiveness (Baumrind, 1991; Ishak et al., 2012; Kim, in press; Luyckx et al., 2011; Miller et al., 2012). Guiding parenting uses a mixture of controlling – but not restrictive – practices, with positive encouragement for autonomy and independence towards children (Baumrind, 1971). Guiding parents recognize and nurture the uniqueness of their children (Ishak et al., 2012) and are accepting of their children (Bronte-Tinkew, Moore, & Carrano, 2006; Miller et al., 2012). Guiding parents discourage emotional dependency and infantile behavior (Baumrind, 1971). They provide rewards for positive behaviors and use discipline without physical punishment to curb delinquent behavior (Hoeve et al., 2008; Bronte-Tinkew et al., 2006). Although controlling parents also assert direction over their children’s behavior, guiding parents acknowledge their children’s feelings and explain the reasons for their directing behavior, such as setting rules and expectations; controlling parents do not (Baumrind, 1971). Permitting Parenting Permitting parenting, also known as permissive parenting, is characterized by low levels of demandingness as well as low levels of responsiveness (Baumrind, 1991; Ishak et al., 2012; Kim, in press; Luyckx et al., 2011; Miller et al., 2012; Robinson, Mandleco, Olsen, & Hart, 1995). Permitting parenting is noncontrolling, non-demanding, and warm (Baumrind, 1971). Permitting parents are responsive to their children but not demanding; they behave in a non-punitive and affirmative manner toward their children (Baumrind, 1971; McKinney et al., 2011). Although permitting parents are accepting of their children, they exhibit little control over their children’s behavior (Baumrind, 1971; Robinson, et al., 1995) and give freedom to their children’s impulses, desires, and actions (Baumrind, 1971; Miller et al., 2012).

34 Although permitting parents give considerable support to their children, the permitting parents’ lack of control of their children negates the benefits of their responsiveness. Research sometimes differentiates between two types of permitting parenting: indulging parenting, when parents exhibit low levels of demandingness with high levels of responsiveness, and neglecting parenting, when parents engage in low levels of demandingness and low levels of responsiveness (Baumrind, 1991; Maccoby & Martin, 1983; Milevsky et al., 2007). Indulging Parenting Indulging parents are tolerant, warm, and accepting; they exercise little authority, make few demands behaviorally, and allow considerable self-regulation by their children (Glasgow, Dornbusch, Troyer, Steinberg, & Ritter, 1997; Maccoby & Martin, 1983). Indulging parents offer support to their children with the absence of strict control (Huver, Otten, de Vries, & Engels, 2010). They avoid confrontation and regard issues as belonging to their children’s personal domain (Jutengren & Palmerus, 2006). The indulging parenting style, although the more positive of the two permitting parenting styles, is too focused on creating an amiable rapport between parents and their children, and lacks the guidelines and enforcement necessary for effective parenting. Neglecting Parenting In a further extension of the Baumrind (1971) model, Maccoby and Martin (1983) added the neglecting parenting style as a subtype of permitting parenting, sometimes referred to as rejecting parenting (Baumrind, 1971). Also known as uninvolved parenting, neglecting parenting represents a style of parenting that is low on both control and affiliation, with low levels of demandingness and responsiveness (Baumrind, 1991; Glasgow et al., 1997; Maccoby & Martin, 1983; Rhee et al., 2006; Speirs Neumiester & Finch, 2006). Neglecting parents let their children have their way because they do not want to get involved (Jutengren & Palmerus, 2006), nor do they monitor, guide, or support their children (Adalbjarnardottir & Hafsteinsson, 2001). Whereas indulging parents are committed to

The William & Mary Educational Review their children, neglecting parents are preoccupied with their own problems and are disengaged from parental responsibilities (Glasgow et al., 1997). The neglecting parenting style disadvantages children by not offering them support or boundaries, while the guiding parenting style offers both. Influence of Controlling Parents on Children Controlling parenting results in unfavorable outcomes for children in the areas of behavior, risktaking, mental health, and academic achievement. Behavior Controlling parenting is related to less positive adjustment for children (McKinney et al., 2011). Children of controlling parents lack independence compared to children with parents of other styles (Baumrind, 1971). Children with controlling parents lack self-reliance and rely on authority figures to make their decisions for them, as children of controlling parents are accustomed to having their parents make most of their decisions (Chan & Chan, 2005; Kang & Moore, 2011). As a result, children with controlling parents are less likely to engage in exploratory behaviors or those that challenge them as compared to children with parents of other styles (Chan & Chan, 2005). Controlling parenting is also negatively associated with peer acceptance (Chan & Chan, 2005), and sociability competence in children – the ability to use social skills appropriately (Chen et al., 1997). Moreover, children with controlling parents are associated with lower sociability in general (Porter et al., 2005). In situations with a controlling context (such as the military), children with controlling parents experience poorer adjustment and have lower levels of coping ability adjusting to the controlling context (Mayseless, Scharf, & Sholt, 2003). Children with controlling parents are positively associated with more frequent behavior problems than children with parents of other styles (Chen et al., 1997; Greening et al., 2010; Tan, Camras, Deng, Zhang, & Lu, 2012). Controlling parenting is associated with increasing both externalizing and internalizing problems in children compared to other parenting styles (Gunnoe, Hetherington, & Reiss, 2006; Luyckx et al., 2011; Rinaldi & Howe, 2012). Externalizing behaviors are those dealing with aggression, attention problems, and hyperactivity, whereas internalizing behaviors concern depression, withdrawal, and anxiety (Kang & Moore, 2011; Rinaldi & Howe, 2012). This increased aggression, decreased self-esteem, and decreased sociability found in children of controlling

Influence of Parenting Styles parents provides conclusive evidence of the harmfulness of the controlling parenting style. Risk-taking The controlling parenting style also has negative effects on the level of risk-taking found in children. Children with controlling parents are less likely to view their parents as legitimate sources of authority and are more likely to resist their parents’ attempts at socializing with them (Trinkner et al., 2012). Children with controlling parents are positively associated with delinquency, behavior violating public laws (Trinkner et al., 2012), and with increased substance use (Greening et al., 2010). Controlling parenting also predicts lower levels of social responsibility in children (Baumrind, 1971; Gunnoe et al., 2006). Mental health Controlling parenting has been correlated detrimentally with several dimensions of mental health in children (Greening et al., 2010; Gunnoe et al., 2006; McKinney et al., 2011; Nguyen, 2008). Psychopathology is one of the dimensions positively correlated with controlling parenting (Gunnoe et al., 2006). Children with controlling parents are also associated with lower self-esteem than children with parents of other styles (Martinez & Garcia, 2008; Nguyen, 2008). Additionally, children with controlling parents are more likely to have depression than children with guiding parents (Nguyen, 2008). Suicidal ideation and suicidal behavior is also increased in children with controlling parents (Greening et al., 2010). Poorer emotional adjustment, which includes self-esteem, depression, and anxiety, is more common in children with controlling parents (McKinney et al., 2011), and negative emotionality (negative features of temperament) is higher in children with controlling parents (Porter et al., 2005). Controlling parenting exacerbates the negative features of children’s temperaments because demanding parenting elicits negative emotions in children over time (Porter et al., 2005). Children with controlling parents are more discontent, withdrawn, and distrustful than children of other parenting styles (Baumrind, 1971). Perfectionism – having excessively high standards – is also positively correlated with having controlling parents (Miller et al., 2012). Psychological flexibility, the ability to adapt to situational demands, shift perspectives, balance competing needs, and change or maintain behavior

35 when appropriate, is negatively correlated with children with controlling parents (Williams, Ciarrochi, & Heaven, 2012). Children with controlling parents are less capable of regulating their emotions, thoughts, and behaviors by appropriately applying regulatory strategies (Williams et al., 2012). Their self-control and self-regulation is worse than children with guiding parents, which can lead to distress and psychopathology (Williams et al., 2012). Academic Achievement There is conflicting research on the association between academic achievement and children with controlling parents (Chen et al., 1997; Greening et al., 2010; Ishak et al., 2012; Kang & Moore, 2011). Multiple studies found that children with controlling parents are more likely to be successful in school than children with parents of other styles (Chen et al., 1997; Ishak et al., 2012; Kang & Moore, 2011). Specifically, children with controlling parents score higher in core courses than children with parents of other parenting styles (Kang & Moore, 2011). Additionally, the controlling parenting style has been found to moderate the effect of academic self-concept (the attributes, abilities, attitudes and values believed to define oneself) on academic achievement in children (Ishak et al., 2012). Children with controlling parents are also more decisive when making career decisions than children with parents of other styles (Cenkseven-Önder et al., 2010). This may be because controlling parents make their children’s career decisions for them (Cenkseven-Önder et al., 2010). Other studies found that children of controlling parents do less well academically (Steinberg, Lamborn, Darling, Mounts, & Dornbusch, 1994). Baumrind (1971) found female children of controlling parents (though not male children of controlling parents) are less likely to be achievement oriented than female children of guiding parents, but are not associated with high or low levels of competence. The controlling parenting style has also been correlated with home environments less conducive to creativity because controlling parents are restrictive and reduce the independence of children (Miller et al., 2012). Although there is conflicting research on the effects of controlling parenting on children’s academic achievement, the existence of research

36 pointing to the negative consequences still suggests that controlling parenting may be damaging to children in the context of academic achievement. Children with controlling parents are also more extrinsically motivated than intrinsically motivated when learning, meaning they are more motivated by external rewards than internal gratification (Chan & Chan, 2005; Kang & Moore, 2011). Similarly, children of controlling parents are associated with a focus on performance goals (demonstrating their abilities by outperforming others) more than learning goals (developing competence on a task) (Chan & Chan, 2005). When children of guiding parents are extrinsically motivated, they are less likely to be successful and driven throughout their lives than students who are intrinsically motivated (Ghazi, Ali, Shahzad, & Khan, 2010). Influence of Guiding Parents on Children Guiding parenting results in more positive outcomes than other parenting styles (Baumrind, 1971; Trinkner et al., 2012). These positive outcomes are evident in behavior, risk-taking, mental health, and academic achievement. Behavior Guiding parenting has the most advantageous effect on children’s behavior, compared to other parenting styles. Guiding parenting is negatively correlated with behavioral problems in children (Kaufmann et al., 2000). In particular, guiding parents’ children are negatively correlated with externalizing problems, such as aggression, attention problems, and hyperactivity (Rinaldi & Howe, 2012; Tan et al., 2012). Children of guiding parents are self-reliant and selfcontrolled, which helps them avoid making impulsive decisions resulting in negative behaviors (Baumrind, 1971; Trinkner et al., 2012). Children with guiding parents are also described as more adventurous than children from other parenting styles (Baumrind, 1971; Chan & Chan, 2005). Chen et al. (1997) found that guiding parenting is related to social adjustment of children, such as a positive association between guiding parenting and children’s peer acceptance and social competence, and a negative association between guiding parenting

The William & Mary Educational Review and social difficulties (Chen et al., 1997). Guiding parents’ warmth and encouragement are linked to children’s confidence and positive world outlook, which lead to positive behaviors with their peers and positive peer interactions (Chen et al., 1997). Children of guiding parents also have more adaptive behaviors than children of controlling parents, such as better social skills and adaptability to situations (Rinaldi & Howe, 2012). Risk-taking Children with guiding parents are less likely to participate in risky behaviors than children with parents from other parenting styles (BronteTinkew et al., 2006). Children with guiding parents are also less likely to engage in substance abuse than children with controlling parents (BronteTinkew et al., 2006). Specifically, research showed a connection between children’s first time substance abuse and fathers’ monitoring and awareness (Bronte-Tinkew et al., 2006). Father’s monitoring and supervision are examples of the types of strict behaviors associated with those of guiding parenting and contribute to the low levels of risk-taking behavior found in children with guiding parents (Baumrind, 1971; Bronte-Tinkew et al., 2006). This monitoring of children’s behavior is one example of why children of guiding parents engage in less risk-taking than the children of other parenting styles. Mental Health Nguyen (2008) found that children with guiding parents demonstrate high levels of self-esteem, sense of self, independence, and confidence. Additionally, guiding parenting is not associated with children’s suicidal ideation or behavior (Greening et al., 2010). The more parents invest in being involved with their children, granting autonomy and creating structure, the more positively children perceive their own mental health and psychological development (Gray & Steinberg, 1999). Children who are accepting of their parents and psychologically mature are more receptive to their parents’ expectations (Gray & Steinberg, 1999). Children of guiding parents demonstrate more positive mental health behaviors than children of other parenting styles. Academic Achievement Despite conflicting research regarding the effects of controlling parents on academic achievement, research conclusively demonstrates the positive effects of guiding parents on academic


Influence of Parenting Styles achievement. Children with guiding parents perform better academically than children of other parenting styles (Dornbusch, Ritter, Leiderman, Roberts, & Fraleigh, 1987; Steinberg, Emen, & Mounts, 1989; Steinberg et al., 1994; Walker, 2008). Guiding parents have a more positive impact on children’s academic achievement than permitting or controlling parents (Dornbusch et al., 1987; Steinberg, Elmen, & Mounts, 1989; Steinberg & Lamborn, 1992; Walker, 2008). Guiding parenting improves academic self-concept, which influences academic achievement in children (Ishak et al., 2012). Steinberg et al. (1989) found children with guiding parents are more successful academically due to guiding parents’ acceptance, psychological autonomy, and behavioral control. These students are more engaged and, consequently, more successful in school as a result of their parents’ involvement in their education (Steinberg & Lamborn, 1992). Guiding parents maintain a balance of involvement and granting autonomy in their children’s lives, which creates an environment where children with guiding parents develop strong self-image and perform better academically than children of other parenting styles (Gray & Steinberg, 1999). Lastly, children with guiding parents are more intrinsically motivated than extrinsically motivated (Chan & Chan, 2005; Kang & Moore, 2011). Children with guiding parents are more motivated by internal gratification than external rewards (Chan & Chan, 2005). When children of guiding parents are internally motivated, these children see goals as attainable and as a result are more likely to be successful and driven throughout their lives than students who are only extrinsically motivated (Ghazi et al., 2010). Influence of Permitting Parenting on Children Although permitting parents are not as detrimental to children as controlling parents, permitting parents are not as beneficial as guiding parents (Trinkner et al., 2012). Positive and negative effects result from permitting parents’ influence on children in behavior, risk-taking, mental health, and academic achievement (Baumrind, 1971; Rhee et al., 2006; Rinaldi & Howe, 2012).

Behavior Male children with permitting parents score high on behavioral tendencies including hostility, resistance, and dominance (Baumrind, 1971). Male children with permitting parents lack social responsibility and independence relative to male children of controlling parents (Baumrind, 1971). Female children with permitting parents are more resistive and less independent than female children of guiding parents (Baumrind, 1971). In addition, children of permitting parents exhibit negative behavioral outcomes including internalizing, externalizing, and attention problems and disorders (Rinaldi & Howe, 2012). Children of permitting parents are twice as likely to be overweight compared with children of guiding parents (Rhee et al., 2006). The permitting parenting style has negative effects on the behavior of children, including resistance, hostility, and lack of social responsibility, that is not found with the guiding parenting style (Baumrind, 1971; Rhee et al., 2006; Rinaldi & Howe, 2012). Risk-taking Having a parent with an uninvolved or permissive parenting style is associated with the risk of initial delinquent activity across a variety of delinquent behaviors (Bronte-Tinkew et al., 2006). Children with permitting parents are more likely to engage in risk-taking behaviors including sexual risk-taking and alcohol or drug experimentation (Adalbjarnardottir & Hafsteinsson, 2001; Huebner & Howell, 2003; Patock-Peckham, & MorganLopez, 2006). The permitting parenting style increases impulsiveness, decreases personal control, and increases both alcohol use and alcohol-related problems for children, which is not found in the guiding parenting style (Patock-Peckham, & Morgan-Lopez, 2006). Mental Health The permitting parenting style also has negative effects on the mental health of children of permitting parents compared to children of other parenting styles. Children with permitting parents are self-confident but show lower levels of selfcontrol, high aggression, and independence (McClun & Merrell, 1998; Rhee et al., 2006). Although there is limited research investigating links between suicidal behavior and the permitting parenting style, because the children of permitting parents struggle with self-control and poor impulse control, children of permitting parents are more at

38 risk for self-destructive behavior (Greening et al., 2010). Academic Achievement Baumrind (1971) found that children with permitting parents are less achievementoriented than children of other parenting styles. According to reports from permitting parents and their children, those children score lower on their core courses than the children of guiding parents (Kang & Moore, 2011). In addition, children of permitting parents tend to score low in social and cognitive competence and score high on measures that demonstrate immaturity, lack of impulse control, and self-reliance (Dornbusch et al., 1987; Jutengren & Palmerus, 2006). Children with permitting parents may have lower academic performances than children with parents of other styles, as children with permitting parents struggle with high frustration and low persistence with difficult tasks (Kang & Moore, 2011). Miller et al. (2012), however, found that children with permitting parents tend to have a high connection with creativity, because parents who utilize the permitting parenting style demonstrate higher creativity levels than guiding or controlling parents. It may be that the high degree of responsiveness found in permitting parenting is what is most important for nurturing creativity (Baumrind, 1991; Miller et al., 2012). Influence of Indulging Parents on Children Children of indulging parents differ slightly from children of permitting parents, as children with indulging parents are disengaged from school and show a higher frequency of involvement in deviant behaviors (McClun & Merrell, 1998; Rhee et al., 2006). Children who describe their parents as indulging score higher than those whose parents are neglecting on the measures of perceived competence and work orientation and lower on the index of psychological symptoms (Lamborn et al., 1991). Children from indulging and neglecting homes do not differ with respect to problem behaviors and school performance (Lamborn et al., 1991). Although children from indulging families report higher levels of experimentation with drinking and smoking

The William & Mary Educational Review than their peers with controlling and guiding parents, it appears children from indulging parents are more protected from experimentation with substances than their peers with neglecting parents (Adalbjarnardottir & Hafsteinsson, 2001). Children from indulging families score higher than children from controlling parents on measures of social competence and self-reliance, but lower than children of guiding parents in work orientation and self-perception of academic ability (Glasgow et al., 1997). Influence of Neglecting Parents on Children Neglecting parenting is associated with unfavorable outcomes, such as high rates of depression, high rates of smoking, poor school achievement, and low psychosocial development (Rhee et al., 2006). Neglecting children are twice as likely to be overweight compared with children with parents of other styles (Rhee et al., 2006). Children who characterize their parents as neglecting are more likely to have tried smoking, experimented with underage drinking, and experimented with illicit drug use than children from indulging parents (Adalbjarnardottir & Hafsteinsson, 2001). In a study on sexual risk-taking, respondents who reported their parents never or rarely monitored their whereabouts were more likely to engage in risk-taking behaviors (Huebner & Howell, 2003). Although parenting style did not correlate directly with sexual risk-taking, children who are not closely monitored by their parents are more likely than their peers who are wellmonitored by their parents to demonstrate high sexual risk-taking behaviors (Huebner & Howell, 2003). Compared to children with parents of other styles, children with neglecting parents show the lowest level of psychological and social adjustment, with low levels of self-regulation and cognitive competence (Glasgow et al., 1997). The deleterious effects of neglecting parenting continue to accumulate over time (Glasgow et al., 1997) in comparison with the continued positive effects of the guiding parenting style on children. Summary By analyzing similarities and differences in the parenting styles, conclusions can be made identifying which parenting practices are the most effective. Guiding parenting is more beneficial to children’s behavior, risk-taking, mental health, and academic achievement than controlling or


Influence of Parenting Styles permitting parenting (Baumrind, 1971; BronteTinkew et al., 2006; Chan & Chan 2005; Gray & Steinberg, 1999; Kaufmann et al., 2000; Nguyen, 2008; Trinkner et al., 2012). Both controlling and guiding parents exhibit high levels of demandingness in contrast to permitting parents who have low levels of demandingness (Baumrind, 1991). When controlling parents establish rules, they expect their children to follow the rules without explanation (Baumrind, 1971; Chen et al., 1997; Greening et al., 2010; Ishak et al., 2012; Kang & Moore, 2011; Trinkner et al., 2012). Guiding parents also set rules and limits on their children; however guiding parents differ from controlling parents by taking children’s feelings into consideration and engaging in conversations with their children explaining why rules are important (Baumrind, 1971). Permitting parents also consult with their children about rules and expectations; however permitting parents exert little control over their children’s behavior and do not encourage their children to follow rules (Baumrind 1971; Miller et al., 2012). Neither indulging nor neglecting parents create or enforce rules for their children (Glasgow et al., 1997). Guiding parents exhibit a high level of responsiveness in contrast to both controlling and permitting parents, who exhibit low levels of responsiveness (Baumrind, 1991). Guiding parents show warmth in recognizing their children’s uniqueness and are accepting while showing support and offering encouragement (Baumrind, 1971; Ishak et al., 2012; Miller et al., 2012). Controlling parents are detached and unreceptive to their children’s needs, emphasizing discipline instead (Chen et al., 1997; Ishak et al., 2012; Trinkner et al., 2012). Like guiding parents, permitting parents are accepting of their children; however, permitting parents show no attempts to reason with their children and instead give excessive freedom to their children’s impulses, desires, and actions (Baumrind, 1971; McKinney et al., 2011; Miller et al., 2012). Indulging parents are supportive of their children, but often overlook their children’s needs; neglecting parents, on the other hand are disengaged with their children’s lives (Glasgow et al., 1997). As a result of guiding parents’ warmth, acceptance, and encouragement, children of

guiding parents have better outcomes in the areas of behavior, risk-taking, mental health, and academic achievement than children of other parenting styles (Baumrind, 1971; Bronte-Tinkew et al., 2006, Chan & Chan 2005; Gray & Steinberg, 1999; Kaufmann et al., 2000; Nguyen, 2008; Trinkner et al., 2012). Despite some similarities between how parents from different parenting styles are characterized in terms of demandingness and responsiveness, examining how guiding parents interact with their children explains why their children demonstrate more positive behaviors, participate in less risktaking, have better mental health, and achieve higher academically than children from other parenting styles (Baumrind, 1991; Bronte-Tinkew et al., 2006; Chan & Chan 2005; Gray & Steinberg, 1999; Kaufmann et al., 2000; Nguyen, 2008; Trinkner et al., 2012). Conclusion The main finding of this literature review is that the guiding parenting style produces better outcomes for children than the controlling or permitting parenting styles. By reviewing the evidence in previous literature, it is evident that the guiding parenting style produces better outcomes for children in the areas of behavior, risk-taking, mental health, and academic achievement. Another finding in this literature review is that the line between guiding parents and controlling parents is drawn between high responsiveness and low responsiveness. When a parent has a high level of demandingness and low level of responsiveness, a parent becomes controlling. However, if a parent can maintain high responsiveness and high demandingness the parent will embody the qualities of a guiding parent. Similarly, the line between guiding parents and permitting parents is drawn between high demandingness and low demandingness. When a parent has a high level of responsiveness and low demandingness a parent becomes permitting; however, if a parent can maintain high demandingness and high responsiveness, the parent will embody the qualities of a guiding parent. If a guiding parent veers from high responsiveness or high demandingness he or she risks becoming a controlling or permitting parent and producing detrimental effects on children. Implications The findings of this literature review have

40 implications for parents regarding modeling the ideal parenting style. Controlling and permitting parenting styles have both harmful and beneficial effects on children, whereas the guiding parenting style has only benefits for children. Parents must heed this research knowledge, examine their own parenting styles, and possibly change their parenting styles to ensure the best outcomes for their children. To do so, parents must know how each parenting style looks. Controlling parents lack nurturing qualities towards their children and use physical punishment to enforce their rules. Controlling parents expect their children to obey them without explanation and have no consideration for their children’s wishes. Permitting parents, in contrast, have excessive nurturing qualities and appease their children’s wishes by not setting boundaries. Permitting parents operate without rules and can sometimes enforce harsh punishment after becoming frustrated with their lack of control of their children. Guiding parents, the ideal model for parents to emulate, provide an equal balance between controlling and permitting parents. Guiding parents set clear rules, provide structure, have reasonable expectations, and offer adequate support for their children, while encouraging their independence. Teachers are in a key position to support parents by informing them about the parenting styles and best practices utilized by guiding parents. They can discuss parenting styles during information sessions and parentteacher conferences. Teachers can also distribute literature and brochures highlighting the specific behaviors found in each parenting styles. School counselors, school psychologists, and school administrators can serve as resources for parents to consult with regarding appropriate parenting styles. These educators can collaborate to hold parent workshops on parenting styles, host guest speakers on parenting practices, and pool resources for a parent information library at their school including information on best parenting styles. By providing this information in an accessible and well-publicized manner, educators can inform parents about crucial material that they may not otherwise have been exposed to. Researchers should continue to examine

The William & Mary Educational Review the influences parenting styles have on children. The influence parenting styles have on areas such as college matriculation, children’s future parenting styles, and children’s life satisfaction as adults still needs to be explored. Lastly, as technology, education, and social norms continue to evolve, researchers must investigate how parenting styles should change to best meet the needs of children. References Adalbjarnardottir, S., & Hafsteinsson, L. G. (2001). Adolescent’s perceived parenting styles and their substance use: Concurrent and longitudinal analyses. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 11, 401-423. Baumrind, D. (1968). Authoritarian vs. authoritative parental control. Adolescence, 3, 255-272. Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority. Developmental Psychology Monograph, 4, 1-103. Baumrind, D. (1991). The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence and substance use. Journal of Early Adolescence, 11, 56-95. Bronte-Tinkew, J., Moore, K. A., & Carrano, J. (2006). Father-child relationship, parenting styles, and adolescent risk behaviors in intact families. Journal of Family Issues, 27, 850-881. doi: 10.1177/0192513X05285296 Cenkseven-Önder, F., Kırdök, O., & Iık, E. (2010). High school students’ career decision-making pattern across parenting styles and parental attachment levels. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 8, 263-280. Chan, K., & Chan, S. (2005). Perceived parenting styles and goal orientations: A study of teacher education students in Hong Kong. Research in Education, 74, 9-21. Chen, X., Dong, Q., & Zhou, H. (1997). Authoritative and authoritarian parenting practices and social and school performance in Chinese children. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 21, 855-873. Dornbusch, S. M., Ritter, P. L., Leiderman, P., Roberts, D. F., & Fraleigh, M. J. (1987). The relation of parenting style to adolescent school performance. Child Development, 58,1244-1257.doi:10.1111/14678624.ep8591146 Evans, C. A., Nelson, L. J., Porter, C. L., Nelson, D.


Influence of Parenting Styles A., & Hart, C. H. (2012). Understanding relations among children’s shy and antisocial/aggressive behaviors and mothers’ parenting: The role of maternal beliefs. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 58, 341-374. Ghazi, S., Ali, R., Shahzad, S., & Khan, M. (2010). Parental involvement in children academic motivation. Asian Social Science, 6, 93-99. Glasgow, K. L., Dornbusch, S. M., Troyer, L., Steinberg, L., & Ritter, P. L. (1997). Parenting styles, adolescents’ attributions, and educational outcomes in nine heterogeneous high schools. Child Development, 63, 507-529. Gray, M. R., & Steinberg, L. (1999). Unpacking authoritative parenting: Reassessing a multidimensional construct. Journal of Marriage and Family, 61, 574-587. Greening, L., Stoppelbein, L., & Luebbe, A. (2010). The moderating effects of parenting styles on African-American and Caucasian children’s suicidal behaviors. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 39, 357-369. doi: 10.1007/s10964-009-9459-z Gunnoe, M. L., Hetherington, E. M., & Reiss, D. (2006). Differential impact of fathers’ authoritarian parenting on early adolescent adjustment in conservative Protestant versus other families. Journal of Family Psychology, 20, 589-596. doi: 10.1037/08933200.20.4.589 Hoeve, M., Blokland, A., Dubas, J. S., Loeber, R., Gerris, J. R. M., & van der Laan, P. H. (2008). Trajectories of delinquency and parenting styles. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 36, 223235. doi: 10.1007/s10802-007-9172-x Huebner, A. J., & Howell, L. W. (2003). Examining the relationship between adolescent sexual risk taking and perceptions of monitoring, communication, and parenting styles. Journal of Adolescent Health, 33, 7178. doi: 10.1016/S1054139X(03)00141-1 Huver, R. M., Otten, R., de Vries, H., & Engels, R. C. (2010). Personality and parenting style in

adolescents. Journal of Adolescence, 33, 395-402. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.20 09.07.012 Ishak, Z., Low, S. F., & Lau, P. L. (2012). Parenting style as a moderator for students' academic achievement. Journal of Science Education & Technology, 21, 487-493. doi:10.1007/s10956-011-9340-1 Jutengren, G., & Palmerus, K. (2006). The potential role of conflict resolution schemas in adolescent psychosocial adjustment. Social Indicators Research, 83,25-38.doi:10.1007/s11205-0069066-2 Kang, Y., & Moore, J. (2011). Parenting style and adolescents’ school performance in mainland China. US-China Education Review, 1, 132-137. Kaufmann, D., Gesten, E., Lucia, R., Salcedo, O., Rendina-Gobioff, G., & Gadd, R. (2000). The relationship between parenting style and children's adjustment: The parents' perspective. Journal of Child & Family Studies, 9, 231-245. Kim, K. (in press). Title of manuscript. Manuscript in preparation. Lamborn, S. D., Mounts, N. S., Steinberg, L., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1991). Patterns of competence and adjustment among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulging, and neglecting families.ChildDevelopment,62,10491065. Luyckx, K., Tildesley, E. A., Soenens, B., Andrews, J. A., Hampson, S. E., Peterson, M., & Duriez, B. (2011). Parenting and trajectories of children's maladaptive behaviors: A 12-year prospective community study. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 40, 468-478. doi:10.1080/15374416.2011.563470 Maccoby, E., & Martin, J. (1983). Socialization in the context of the family: Parent-child interaction. In P. H. Mussen (Series Ed.) & E. M. Hetherington (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Socialization, personality, and social development Vol. 4 (1-101). New York, NY: Wiley. Martinez, I., & Garcia, J. F. (2008). Internalization of values and self-esteem among Brazilian teenagers from authoritative, indulgent, authoritarian, and neglectful homes.

42 Adolescence, 43(169), 13-29. Mayseless, O., Scharf, M., & Sholt, M. (2003). From authoritative parenting practices to an authoritarian context: Exploring the person-environment fit. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 13, 427-456. McClun, L. A., & Merrell, K. W. (1998). Relationship or perceived parenting styles, locus of control orientation, and self-concept among junior high age students. Psychology in the Schools, 35, 381-390. McKinney, C., Milone, M. C., & Renk, K. (2011). Parenting and late adolescent emotional adjustment: Mediating effects of discipline and gender. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 42, 463-481. doi: 10.1007/s10578-0110229-2 Milevsky, A., Schlechter, M., Netter, S., & Keehn, D. (2007). Maternal and paternal parenting styles in adolescents: Associations with self-esteem, depression, and life-satisfaction. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 16, 39-47. doi: 10.1007/s10826-0069066-5 Miller, A. L., Lambert, A. D., & Speirs Neumeister, K. L. (2012). Parenting style, perfectionism, and creativity in high-ability and high-achieving young adults. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 35, 344-365. doi:10.1177/0162353212459257 Nguyen, P. V. (2008). Perceptions of Vietnamese fathers’ acculturation levels, parenting styles, and mental health outcomes in Vietnamese American adolescent immigrants. Social Work, 53, 337-346. Patock-Peckham, J. A., & Morgan-Lopez, A. A. (2006). College drinking behaviors: Mediational links between parenting styles, impulse control, and alcoholrelated outcomes. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 20, 117-125. doi: 10.1037/0893-164X.20.2.117 Porter, C. L., Hart, C. H., Yang, C., Robinson, C. C., Olsen, S. F., Zeng, Q., Olsen, J. A., & Jin, S. (2005). A comparative study of child temperament and parenting in Beijing, China and the western United States. International

The William & Mary Educational Review Journal of Behavioral Development, 29, 541-551. doi:10.1080/01650250500147402 Rhee, K. E., Lumeng, J. C., Appugliese, D. P., Kaciroti, N., & Bradley, R. H. (2006). Parenting styles and overweight status in firstgrade.Pediatrics,117,20472054. doi: 10.1542/peds.2005-2259 Rinaldi, C. M., & Howe, N. (2012). Mothers’ and fathers’ parenting styles and associations with toddler’ externalizing, internalizing, and adaptive behaviors. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 27, 266-273. doi: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2011.08.001 Robinson, C. C., Mandleco, B., Olsen, S. F., & Hart, C. H. (1995). Authoritative, authoritarian, and permitting parenting practices: Development of a new measure. Psychological Reports, 77, 819-830. Sabattini, L., & Campbell, L. (2004). The relations between mothers’ and fathers’ parenting styles and their division of labor in the home: Young adults’ retrospective reports. Sex Roles, 50, 217-225. Speirs Neumeister, K. L., & Finch, H. (2006). Perfectionism in high-ability students: Relational precursors and influences on achievement motivation. Gifted Child Quarterly, 50, 238-251. Steinberg, L., Elmen, J. D., & Mounts, N. S. (1989). Guiding parenting, psychosocial maturity, and academic success among adolescents. Child Development, 60, 1424-1436. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.ep9772457 Steinberg, L., & Lamborn, S. D. (1992). Impact of parenting practices on adolescent achievement: Guiding parenting, school involvement, and encouragement to succeed. Child Development,63,12661281.doi:10.1111/14678624.ep9301210142 Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S. D., Darling, N., Mounts, N.S.,&Dornbusch,S.M.(1994).Overtime changes in adjustment and competence among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful families. Child Development, 65, 754-770. Tan, T. X., Camras, L. A., Deng, H., Zhang, M., & Lu, Z. (2012). Family stress, parenting styles, and behavioral adjustment in preschool-age adopted Chinese girls. Early Childhood Research Quarterly,27,128136. doi: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2011.04.002


Influence of Parenting Styles Taub, D. J. (2008). Exploring the impact of parental involvement on student development. New Directions for Student Services, 122, 15-28. doi: 10.1002/ss.272 Trinkner, R., Cohn, E. S., Rebellon, C. J., & Van Gundy, K. (2012). Don’t trust anyone over 30: Parental legitimacy as a mediator between parenting style and changes in delinquent behavior over time. Journal of Adolescence, 35, 119132. doi: 10.1016 /j.adolescence.2011.05.003 Walker, J. T. (2008). Looking at teacher practices through the lens of parenting style. Journal of Experimental Education, 76, 218-240. Williams, K. E., Ciarrochi, J., & Heaven, P. C. L. (2012). Inflexible parents, inflexible kids: A 6-year longitudinal study of parenting style and the development of psychological flexibility in adolescents. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 41, 1053-1066. doi: 10.1007/s10964-012-9744-0

About the authors Clare Merlin is a doctoral student in the School Psychology & Counselor Education program, focusing on Counselor Education. Justine Okerson is a doctoral student in the Educational Policy, Planning, and Leadership program, focusing on Higher Education. Philip Hess is a doctoral student in the Educational Policy, Planning, and Leadership program, focusing on Curriculum Leadership.


The William & Mary Educational Review

Just Say Know: Pros and Cons of Allowing Drug Testing of Students in Public Schools Anna Weigel Thomas Essentials of the Argument Over the past several decades, mandatory random student drug testing (MRSDT) has emerged as a form of genuine high-stakes testing. Embroiled in litigation and controversies, stakeholders have been searching for a balance between ensuring rights and maintaining the safety and wellbeing of students. Historical elements to the question of allowing this testing in public schools are linked to case laws that reviewed due process and protection students have against searches, seizures, and self-incrimination. The Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution are consistently challenged as local education agencies exercise their authorities over actions and behaviors that extend beyond school walls and instructional blocks. Often citing in loco parentis as the justification for conducting the screenings, schools are obtaining potent student information. Controversies related to the selection of participants, the means of obtainment, and the use of the results keep the constitutionality of drug testing in schools a precarious practice. Current Practice of Drug Testing in Public Schools MRSDT is an increasingly present participation requirement for students wanting to partake in competitive extracurricular activities. In 2003, the federal government made available state-level grant funding for promoting MRSDT in the public education setting; testing is encouraged to detect students in the early and later stages of substance addiction and to help deter substance use and abuse (James-Burdumy, Goesling, Deke, and Einspurch, 2010, p. xvii). The U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools (OSDFS) oversees this grant and sponsored the James-Burdumy, et al. (2010) study, in conjunction with the Institute of Education Science. OSDFS has outlined several requirements schools must meet to remain eligible for funding. First, a minimum of 50% of the participating students must be tested annually. The sampling population must consist of students whose eligibility status will span the entire school year. Secondly, a

minimum of five substances must be screened for during the MRSDT. Under OSDFS guidelines, schools must screen for opiates, methamphetamines, cocaine, marijuana, and amphetamines. Additional screenings may be conducted, i.e. for steroids, at the school district’s expense, which is why the Office of National Drug Testing Policy encourages districts looking to introduce MRSDT policies incorporate stakeholders’ input during the planning stages (2000, p. 6). Third, local education agencies must ensure participants’ privacy and the confidentiality of results through formal policy. According the U.S. Department of Education (2011), local education agencies competing for the two and four year OSDFS grants must limit their testing populations to student athletes, students participating in competitive extracurricular programs, and to students of families who volunteer for random drug testing. What is drug testing? According to the National Institute of Health and the National Institute of Drug Abuse (2012), drug testing in schools is only part of the drug prevention and treatment piece currently available. The Office of National Drug Testing (December 2012) defines the practice as the clinical method of determining if a person has used illegal substances. While new technologies allow for sampling to be taken from hair, sweat, and oral fluid, the most common form of collection is urinalysis. Positive results are obtained when tests return information that metabolites, the residual traces of substances, are found in the samples. Regardless of the means, a drug test is a form of searching. Student protection from searches was diminished with the ruling in New Jersey v. T. L. O. (1985), where Fourth Amendment protections are reduced when schools conduct searches that are reasonable and justified. As later case laws indicate, the courts often find the practice of MRSDT constitutional for those exact reasons.

Just Say Know Pros of Student Drug Testing in Public Schools Why are local education agencies compelled to screen for drug use? What motivations and justifications are guiding their decision to implement the contentious practice? According to the National Institute of Health and the National Institute of Drug Abuse (2012), schools conduct MRSDT for a variety of reasons. Above all, the belief that drug testing reduces the number and likelihood that students will use and/or abuse illegal substance (NIH, 2012; James-Burdumy, Goesling, Deke, and Einspurch, 2010). Yacoubain (2001) notes that public officials have extended the frontline of the war on drugs to schools, and the intrusion posed through MRSDT is justifiable given the epidemic-status of drug-use in the nation. Establishing the Scale for Future Rulings. In Veronia School District v. Acton, 515 U.S. 646 (1995), the Supreme Court upheld the district’s practice MRSDT for student athletes for several reasons. Ultimately, the court noted that the district was using its custodial role, per in loco parentis, to use the testing as a means of addressing the growing drug problem within its student body; the cause for testing was probable as drug-use was reaching “epidemic proportions” (Velasquez, 2010, p. 181). Velasquez (2010) notes that this case lead to the adoption of the Veronia Balancing Test, a constitutional scale for comparing student privacy rights to the interests and motives of a local education agency. A similar ruling was made in the Moule v. Paradise Valley Unified School District, 863 F. Supp. 1098 (1994); the local education agency’s drug testing policy was upheld over voiced concerns of Fourth Amendment infringement. As the trend suggests, ruling in favor of schools and drug testing policies often highlight the application of in loco parentis as the overarching justification. Broadening the Scope. The Veronia Balancing Test resurfaced during Board of Education of Independent School District No. 92 of Pottawatomie County v. Earls, 536 U.S. 822 (2002). In this decision, the student rights outlined in the

45 Fourth Amendment were outweighed by the district’s policy for conducting MRSDT to discourage student drug use (Alexander & Alexander, 2009, p. 482). Unlike Veronia that had a documented problem of drug use, Pottawatomie County did not have an overtly evidenced need for testing; thus, the expansion of school authority to continue the practice marks a significant reduction in student rights (Velasquez, 2010, p. 182). In the Pottawatomie County case, the scope of testing extended to include students participating in any extracurricular activities. Justice Thomas, the deliverer of the court’s opinion, noted that the district was only acting to preserve the wellbeing of its students (Alexander & Alexander, 2009, p. 482). Post-Secondary Level Practice of MRSDT. Student health and safety has also been addressed through a recent 2011 case where all applicants to a Missouri community college had to consent to drug testing as part of the acceptance process; failure to consent to the testing denoted a withdraw from school. In Barrett v. Claycomb, 705 F. 3d 315 (2013), the policy was upheld due to the nature of the school’s technical and mechanical course offerings. Though the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has maintained that practice is unconstitutional, all applicants to Linn State Technical College must agree to the testing as contingent on their acceptance (ACLU, n.d.). Cons of Student Drug Testing in Public Schools Cause for concern is appropriate when civil and individual rights are infringed in the Unites States, particularly when the rights belong to juveniles. As the administration and participation in MRSDT programs gain traction, students must navigate the waters of unknown consequences. While programming guides from the U.S. Department of Education and related agencies indicate that positive results are to be used to ensure interventions reach students in need of treatment and support, there exists minimal information related to false-positive results. Additionally, collaborations with law enforcement agencies, per state statutes, have schools further encroaching on due process and protection rights. In Schaill v. Tippecanoe Count School Corporation, 864 F. 2d 1307 (1988), the Seventh Circuit Court ruled that positive test results gleaned from MRSDT could

46 function as evidence of possession, as school officials had been sharing the information with local law enforcement per a pre-existing state statute. The plaintiffs successfully argued that the MRSDT policy has been, in effect, established to find offenders, and drug testing was violating Fourth and Fifth Amendment. An Officer and an Assistant Principal? Although the ruling in Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961) was in favor of the defendant’s actions, caution is warranted as the rights of local education agencies are extended beyond the parameters granted to law enforcement agencies. The court has reduced the procedural safeguards for students when searches are conducted in schools. In Mapp v. Ohio, an assistant principal conducted a search on school premises that could only be replicated by police officers if they had sufficient probable cause and/or a warrant been issued. However, noting that the search was reasonable, the evidence and admission of guilt obtained became admissible evidence. While Mapp v. Ohio is not directly linked to drug testing, it does speak to levels of intrusion schools may take in maintaining order. In this instance, school officials are invested with law enforcement levels of authority, which is in contradiction to the notion of checks and balances our government is founded upon. For Your Eyes Only. The Office of National Drug Testing Policy (2000) stresses that confidentiality be a corner stone for any school system implementing a MRSDT policy. Results from drug tests are not to be shared with parties not concerned with the matter; this also extends to teachers. In light of strict conditions outlined in FERPA and HIPAA, educational and medical records must be treated with the utmost security. In essence, drug test results function as both educational and medical data. The Office of Civil Rights (OCR) oversees HIPAA, and the privacy rules outline in that legislature may serve as beneficial guidelines for local education agencies seeking to establish methods of result sharing and documentation. Implications of MRSDT for Virginia Guidelines regulating MRSDT in the Commonwealth cite several of the aforementioned cases and include additional cases that address issues related to random urine collection, consequences for the refusal of drug testing, and

The William & Mary Educational Review revisiting the controversies associated with school-based policies of drug testing in conjunction with the Fourth Amendment (Board of Education, 2004, p. 2). Student participation in MRSDT is voluntary and contingent of participation of competitive extracurricular activities. Additionally, their participation serves to promote the overall health and wellness of the student population. The Board of Education (2004) maintains that local school divisions must exercise extensive review when establishing a MRSDT policy and policies related to consent, procedure, collection, confidentiality, consequences, and appeal should be unambiguously outlined. Per their 2004 report, the Board of Education limits the punishments of failed drug tests to the rendering students ineligible for participation in extracurricular activities; punishment may not extend to academic consequences. Conclusion In weighing the pros and cons related to MRSDT, local education agencies need to reflect on the relevant case laws, statutes, and existing policies related to student discipline and confidentiality. In situations where the civil and property rights of students are minimized, schools must provide substantial evidence to support the need for limitations on liberty. As Alexander and Alexander (2009) note, schools have less stringent regulations surrounding searches, and conducting a drug test, in essence, constitutes a search. In addition to the testing conducted of students suspected substance use on school grounds, drug testing is used as both preventative and intervention tools. Delving into matters that extend beyond school walls and that are of a highly private nature, policies must be crafted to reflect the legislative delicacy that is inherent making the decision to implement a MRSDT policy. Simply put, the local education agency must be in “the know”. References Alexander, K. & Alexander, M. D. (2009). American public school law (7th edition). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Barrett v. Claycomb, 705 F. 3d 315, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 1961 (2013). Board of Education. (June 2004). Guidelines


Just Say Know concerning student drug testing in Virginia pubic schools. Retrieved from guidance/health/drug_testing_ guidelines.pdf Board of Education of Independent School District No. 92 of Pottawatomie County, Et Al v. Earls, No. 01- 332 , Supreme Court of the United States, 536 U.S. 822; 122 S. Ct. 2559 Drug testing. (n.d.) Retrieved from the American Civil Liberties Union website Health information privacy. (2002) Retrieved from U.S. Department of Health & Human Services website hipaa/faq/smaller_providers_and_ businesses/301.html James-Burdumy, S., Goesling, B., Deke, J., and Einspruch, E. (2010). The Effectiveness of MandatoryRandom Student Drug Testing (NCEE 2010-4025). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from 20104025/pdf/20104025.pdf Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 81 S. Ct. 1684 (1961). Moule v. Paradise Valley Unified School District, 863 F. Supp. 1098 (1994). National Institute of Drug Abuse. (December 2012). Frequently asked questions about drug testing in schools. Retrieved from National Institute of Health website New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325, 105 S. Ct. 733 (1985). Schaill v. Tippecanoe County School Corporation, 864 F. 2d 1309 (7th Cir. 1988). School-based drug testing programs. (2011). Retrieved from the U.S. Department of Education website esting/index.html Velasquez, J. (2010). Drug testing in schools:

A brief review and analysis of recent events. American Journal of Health Education, 41(3), 180-186. Veronia School District 47J v. Acton, 515 U.S. 646, S. Ct. 2386, 132 L. Ed. 2d 564 (1995). What you need to know about drug testing in schools. (2000) Retrieved from Office of National Drug Control Policy website publications/pdf/drug_testing.pdf Yacoubian, G. S. (2001). To pee or not to pee: School drug testing in an era of oral fluid analysis. Pacific Institute for Research Evaluation. Retrieved from /schooldrug.htm

About the author Anna Weigel Thomas is in the Educational Policy, Planning, and Leadership program, focusing on K-12 Administration.


The William & Mary Educational Review

Remaining Globally Competitive: Leadership and the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Paige Hendricks Abstract State and local school systems maintained autonomy of schools, curriculum, classrooms, and instructional practices until roughly the year 2000. The passage of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation in 2001 shifted the educational role of the Federal Government, beginning an increased focus on accountability measures to ensure that the children of the United States remain globally competitive. However, the implementation of NLCB and, more recently, the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) has proven difficult for state and local school leaders. Important leadership skills such as increased communication (to ensure collaboration and capacity-building) and shared decisionmaking will assist leaders with necessary clarity and focus to successfully implement two concurrent educational approaches and ensure high accountability and achievement for all students in a globally competitive marketplace. Keywords: No Child Left Behind, Common Core State Standards, leadership skills

Until roughly the year 2000, the Federal Government remained primarily an overseer of the educational systems in the United States rather than an enforcer of mandates and laws. Individual states and school systems had the autonomy to use a combination of federal and state dollars to determine how their students were educated. As a result of this autonomy, multiple views emerged about how curriculum, classroom, and instructional practices should function. Accountability measures plummeted, and an achievement gap was created between various subgroups of students nationwide (Center for Evaluation and Educational Policy, 2010). This resulted in a fear that the children of the United States were not learning what was necessary to remain competitive in a global marketplace (NCLB, 2001). The passing of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) shifted the educational role of the Federal Government toward an increased focus on accountability as a means to becoming a more competitive society. The Federal Government was no longer just a funding resource in the pursuit of educational reform; rather, it became a fully regulatory operation, seeking to apply rules in a general yet formalized manner to large groups of people, resulting in a reduction of alternatives granted to these individuals (Fowler, 2013). These nationwide standardized educational practices increased the mandates and accountability

measures states used to show student learning and restricted state and local school districts’ funding allocations. NCLB paved the way for the Federal Government to become more of a player in the role of future educational practice. However, NCLB also generated a number of implementation challenges, such as meeting the law’s numerous requirements and developing leadership skills among key educational stakeholders needed to execute these requirements. The implementation of NCLB proved difficult for a variety of reasons, but in particular state and local agencies lacked the capacity (e.g., funding, clear communication about objectives, leadership by relevant stakeholders, etc.) to implement all of the law’s requirements (Sunderman & Orfield, 2007). These same sets of challenges appear in the efforts to implement the Common Core State Standards (CCSS; National Governors Association and Council of Chief State School Officers, 2010). Successfully managing the challenge of implementing the CCSS while moving forward with remaining NCLB requirements necessitates strong leadership skills by state and local school leaders. The most important leadership skills include increasing communication between state and local agencies to ensure collaboration and capacity-building and using shared decision-

Leadership and the Common Core making skills when addressing current and future implementation of both educational mandates. Only when leaders adopt such leadership qualities will NCLB and CCSS have any chance of being successfully implemented in a way that produces accountability and achievement for all students in a globally competitive marketplace. Past efforts to implement NCLB and the requirement for concurrent implementation of CCSS require a new focus on clarity and effective leadership at all levels of the process. Historical Context Over time, the United States has assigned responsibilities and jurisdiction over education and educational practices to the state and local governments. The Elementary and Secondary School Act of 1965 (ESEA) signed by President Lyndon B. Johnson, was one of the first pieces of federal education legislation passed by Congress. ESEA’s goals focused on primary and secondary education, establishing high standards and accountability, and lessening achievement gaps between student groups without adopting a standardized, national curriculum (ESEA, 1965). ESEA granted funding for states and local school districts to implement localized programs to achieve these goals allowing the Federal Government to remain impartial and yield to the states’ educational judgments. After ESEA, Congress passed two additional laws that maintained the Federal Government’s detachment from curriculum, courses, and instructional practices of state and local school divisions. The General Education Provisions Act of 1970 (GEPA) and the Department of Education Organization Act of 1979 (DEOA) were passed following the establishment of the Department of Education (The Pioneer Institute, 2012). Both Acts exclude the Federal Government from “exercising any direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum, program of instruction, administration, or personnel of any educational institution, school, or school system” (GEPA, 1970). As with ESEA, the Department of Education’s main function under both of these new laws was to allocate funds to local school districts nationwide and to allow state school systems to govern their own schools accordingly. While local school systems monitored educational content and curriculum for students, the Department focused on “aid for disadvantaged students, accountability, civil rights, and evaluation”

49 (The Pioneer Institute, 2012, p. 1). Although ESEA was reauthorized every five years, by the year 2000, new visions about the Federal Government’s role in educational practices began to emerge. In 2001, the government shifted its educational focus to the equality of national educational practices through standardized assessment practices. Here, according to NCLB, all states were to use standardized testing to improve education in the United States (Zhao, 2012). NCLB created a common core of academic content in mathematics and language arts connected to ongoing assessments, thereby limiting each state’s ability to determine curricular content, pace, and level of mastery for their diverse student population. It also interfered with the GEPA and DEOA Acts from thirty years prior by allowing government to dictate curricular and instructional practices. Due to its definitive nature, the focus on assessment limited educational practices at the state and local levels, thereby reducing each state’s autonomy of educational practice. In 2009, the Obama Administration signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) providing additional funding for educational practices under a program titled Race to the Top (RTT). RTT funds enabled states to spur innovation in elementary and secondary schools through the use of four government reform components: adopting international education standards and assessments; building data to measure student success; increasing teacher and principal effectiveness within schools; and turning around the lowest-achieving schools (The Pioneer Institute, 2012). A point system was designed to allow state competition for RTT funds. Although not mandated, higher points would be awarded to states that adopted national educational standards, thereby meeting the first component of the RTT program. As a result, the first few states acquiring the RTT funds also adopted the CCSS. A second round of RTT funds was distributed to additional states that quickly followed suit (Hamilton, 2010). To date, 45 states, the District of Columbia, and four U.S. territories have adopted the CCSS (National Governors Association and Council of Chief State School Officers, 2012). General consensus has provided the platform for our government to create a nationalized set of educational standards for all students through implementation of both NCLB and the CCSS (ASCD, 2012; National Governors Association and Council of Chief State School Officers, 2012;

50 Sunderman & Orfield, 2007). The National Governors Association (NGA) and Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSO) oppose this premise. Proponents argue the fact that so many states have adopted the CCSS is an indication that it is an appropriate and effective set of standards (National Governors Association and Council of Chief State School Officers, 2010). The CCSS prescribe language arts and mathematics curricular practices based upon consistent high standards nationwide. The goal is to ensure that all of our students are prepared with the basic skills and knowledge they will need to compete with students around the world, thereby ensuring America maintains its competitive edge (National Governors Association and Council of Chief State School Officers, 2010, FAQs). Leadership and the Common Core The overlaps in implementation of NCLB and the CCSS have resulted in similar challenges facing current school leaders. Arguably, in both instances, implementation challenges prompted school leaders to develop increased leadership qualities, including high-level communication skills and shared decision-making through trust, in order to deal with the challenges. NCLB created an expectation that all state-level education departments would achieve extraordinary educational progress and apply sanctions that would result in significant interventions in thousands of schools (Sunderman & Orfield, 2007). A recent study of the CCSS found many challenges surrounding implementation including an incomplete overall understanding of the standards and uncertainty about how they will be implemented and measured (Center on Education Policy, 2011). For leaders, these are major pitfalls that threaten successful implementation (Center on Education Policy, 2011). Leaders must continue to adopt and foster the development of high-level communication skills to ensure collaboration and capacity-building. They must also utilize shared decision-making skills through trust to become the leaders needed to overcome these obstacles. Communication Skills for Collaboration and Capacity-Building Communication plays a critical role in educational practice as “it underlies or permeates the instructional, interpersonal, organizational, and administrative processes and structures of schools� (Hoy & Miskel, 2013, p. 389). The verbiage of

The William & Mary Educational Review both NCLB and the CCSS must be written in a concise and clear manner to ensure the messages sent through goals, strategies, symbols, as well as verbal and nonverbal cues are received as intended. Leaders must also check for feedback from multiple stakeholders periodically to ensure overall understandings and make necessary corrections when misinterpretations prevail (Hoy & Miskel, 2013). States that adopted the CCSS initially found it difficult to determine how the standards would be interpreted and implemented directly in schools and classrooms. Principals, teachers, school boards, and community members must communicate openly and freely to ensure that all participants have a clear understanding of the standards and can ensure that the standards are used in best practices for student learning. Collaboration and capacity-building surrounding the overall vision (including effective implementation) of both NCLB and the CCSS must occur at several levels: between the Federal Government and states; between states and local schools and districts; and between P-12 schools and colleges and universities with teacher training programs. Building capacity for the vision of NCLB and the CCSS cannot occur without a thorough understanding of the standards through effective speaking and listening strategies between and among all of the relevant stakeholders. School leaders must seek all available information on both NCLB and the CCSS through conferences, webinars, papers, and reports to learn as much as possible about these two educational policies. Ivey and Ivey (1999) explain that, after individually processing this information, leaders should open the communication between their schools and districts, embracing attending, questioning, encouraging, paraphrasing, reflecting, feeling, and summarizing skills (as cited in Hoy & Miskel, 2013). This will guarantee that all stakeholders understand the policy and practice of implementing NCLB and the CCSS in their schools. In addition, school leaders must also open communication lines between their districts and state leaders, as well as with surrounding colleges and universities with teacher training programs. Collaboration with teacher training programs

Leadership and the Common Core will ensure that young teachers coming into a school setting for the first time will have some foundation in both NCLB and CCSS, which will help them manage the transition to full-time teaching. Without collaboration and capacitybuilding through effective communication, these connections will become ineffective and implementing NCLB and the CCSS will remain an elusive process. Shared Decision-Making and Trust Empowering teachers through a shared decision-making process will prove effective when implementing NCLB and the CCSS in schools. Although the mandates originated from an arena outside teacher control, teachers should remain invested in the process to ensure high-quality decisions are made (Hoy & Miskel, 2013). Decisions made at the local school and district levels regarding the implementation of NCLB and the CCSS can remain of high quality when teachers participate in the process of achieving successful learning outcomes for all students through sharing individual viewpoints with others. “Lessons learned by colleagues will help educators learn and develop capacity, as well as avoid pitfalls” (ASCD, 2012, p. 36). For example, Kentucky, one of the first states to implement the CCSS, encourages teachers to share resources, lesson plans, and assessments, increasing knowledge and understanding of the standards (Konz, 2013). Through shared meaning, all stakeholders are open, communicative, and invested in success. The implementation process of NCLB and the CCSS may also be out of the zone of acceptance (Hoy & Miskel, 2013) for most teachers and stakeholders, as these individuals lack expertise on the mandates, but have a personal stake in the implementation process. One such example came after the CCSS assessment rollout, when many states found their technological infrastructure insufficient to maintain and properly support all students simultaneously. One consortium, the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) offered information to leaders and educators on ways to acquire and access higher levels of technology to support the implementation of the CCSS (PARCC, 2012). PARCC also supported involving teachers and support staff in conversations about technological needs in order to become creative in considering additional future computer devices, increased bandwidth, and funding. Leaders should include

51 the extensive involvement of teachers and stakeholders in this process immediately and in an ongoing manner. “The earlier the individuals can be involved in the decision, the better” (Hoy & Miskel, 2013, p. 375). Involving teachers allows increased understanding of the mandates and a higher overall investment in the implementation process. The effective leader will not be successful with the concurrent implementation of NCLB and the CCSS unless he establishes a culture of trust. This leader recognizes that the implementation of two mandates is, and will continue to be, challenging. Fostering a culture of trust allows the stakeholders and leaders to become vulnerable, “based on the confidence that the latter party is benevolent, reliable, competent, honest, and open” (Hoy & Miskel, 2013, p. 194). ASCD, for example, has collected multiple resources to assist teachers and administrators in the implementation process of the CCSS. The resources include books, webinars, conferences, and skill-building handouts generated around a common theme: trust (ASCD, 2013). Collectively these resources engage all stakeholders in high levels of open communication, affording purposeful dialog and trust-building opportunities. These characteristics, in both the stakeholders and the leaders, demonstrate a higher level of connection, which can foster greater and more successful implementation and overall change. The significance of trust in leadership cannot be ignored. Trust as a tool can be used to the advantage of many leaders and afford skills to increase the level of implementation of complex laws and regulations such as NCLB and the CCSS. Conclusion The current educational system practice of equity through accountability has become a process mandated by the Federal Government with the passing into law of NCLB and the adoption of the CCSS. As such, the simultaneous implementation of both mandates remains challenging and requires school leaders to adopt particular leadership qualities to ensure success. These leaders must embrace and adopt high-level communication and shared decision-making skills to ensure full cooperation and collaboration among all stakeholders. High-level communication skills will foster capacity-building within schools and school districts as well as between school districts and states and school districts and universities. Further, employing a shared decision-making


The William & Mary Educational Review

process allows all stakeholders opportunities to learn from each other and move toward successful implementation of both mandates and systemic change. Finally, leaders cannot negate the power of trust when asking stakeholders to work through the process of implementing confusing and often conflicting educational mandates. The implementation of NCLB concurrently with the CCSS requires leaders to prove that student learning and success in a competitive global market is everyone’s ultimate educational goal. References American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), Pub. L. No. 5-11, §123, Stat. 115 (2009). ASCD. (2012). Fulfilling the promise of the common core state standards: Moving from adoption to implementation to sustainability. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Center for Evaluation and Educational Policy. (2010). Mind the (other) gap: The growing excellence gap in K-12 education. Bloomington, IN: Plucker, J. A., Burroughs, N., & Song, R. Center on Education Policy. (2011). Year to of implementing the common core state standards: States’ progress and challenges. Washington, DC: Kober, N., & Retner, D. S. Department of Education Organization Act (DEOA), Pub. L. No. 96-88, § 93 Stat. 668 (1979). Elementary and Secondary School Act of 1965 (ESEA), Pub. L. No. 89-10, § 79 Stat. 27 (1965). Fowler, F. C. (2013). Policy studies for educational leaders: An introduction. (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. General Education Provisions Act (GEPA), Pub. L. No. 91-230, § 20 Stat. 31 (1970). Hamilton, J. (2010, July 27). 18 states and D.C. named as finalists for race to the top. Retrieved from press-releases/18-states-and-dc-namedfinalists-race-top Hoy, W. K., & Miskel, C. G. (2013). Educational administration (9th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, Inc. Konz, A. (2013, September 13). Kentucky a national leader in instituting common core

math and reading lessons in classroom. The Courier-Journal. Retrieved from 0105309120148/Kentucky-nationalleader-instituting-Common-Coremath-reading-lessons classroom?nclick_check=1 National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers (2010). Common core state standards. Washington D.C.: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers (2012). In the states. Washington D.C.: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, § 115, Stat. 1425 (2002). Sunderman, G. L., & Orfield, G. (2007). Do states have the capacity to meet the NCLB mandates?. Phi Delta Kappan, 89(2), 137-139. The Pioneer Institute. (2012). The road to a national curriculum: The legal aspects of the common core standards, race to the top, and conditional waivers. Boston, MA: Eitel, R. S., Talbert, K. D., & Evers, W. M. Zhao, Y. (2012). Mass localism for improving America’s education. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 48, 17-22.

About the author Paige Hendricks is a PhD student in the Educational Policy, Planning, and Leadership program, focusing on K-12 Administration and Gifted Administration.

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ The$College$of$William$and$Mary$ School$of$Education$ 301$Monticello$Avenue,$Williamsburg,$VA$23185$$

The William and Mary Educational Review Volume 2 Issue 1 Fall 2013  
The William and Mary Educational Review Volume 2 Issue 1 Fall 2013  

Volume 2, Issue 1, Fall 2013