annotated-Beal20Part206.docx.pdf

Strategic Research Project

byShawneequa Beal

A Strategic Research Project Submitted to theAbraham S. Fischler College of Education and School of Criminal Justice in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the

Degree of Doctor of Education

Nova Southeastern University2023

Approval Page

This strategic research project was submitted by Shawneequa Beal under the direction of the persons listed below. It was submitted to the Abraham S. Fischler College of Education and School of Criminal Justice and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education at Nova Southeastern University.

Gina Peyton, EdD ESRP 9000 Faculty Member Xxxx Xxxxxxxx, EdD or PhD ESRP 9001 Faculty Member

Kimberly Durham, PsyD Dean

iii

Statement of Original Work

I declare the following:

I have read the Code of Student Conduct and Academic Responsibility as described in the Student Handbook of Nova Southeastern University. This Strategic Research Project represents my original work, except where I have acknowledged the ideas, words, or material of other authors.

Where another author’s ideas have been presented in this Strategic Research Project, I have acknowledged the author’s ideas by citing them in the required style.

Where another author’s words have been presented in this Strategic Research Project, I have acknowledged the author’s words by using appropriate quotation devices and citations in the required style.

I have obtained permission from the author or publisher—in accordance with the required guidelines—to include any copyrighted material (e.g., tables, figures, survey instruments, large portions of text) in this Strategic Research Project manuscript.

___________________________Name

___________________________Date

Acknowledgments

Dedication

Executive Summary

Insert Title of Strategic Research Project. Insert Your Name, 2023: Strategic Research Project, Nova Southeastern University, Abraham S. Fischler College of Education and School of Criminal Justice. Keywords: xxxxx, xxx xxxxx, xxxx, xxxxxxx

Single-space within each paragraph, but double-space between paragraphs. Do not indent the first lines of paragraphs. The narrative portion (i.e., after the informational first paragraph) of the Executive Summary should be 220-270 words. The Executive Summary must not exceed one page in length.

[Insert Description of the Strategic Research Project – Example Follows]: This strategic research project was designed to provide . . . . [Keep in mind that the Executive Summary is a brief summary or condensed version of your organizational research project, so that the audience has a better understanding regarding the structure, services, key factors, and other major points to include results, conclusions, and recommendations].

vii

Table of Contents

PagePart 1: Critical Analysis ………………………………………………………………………………………….1

Researcher’s Role ……………………………………………………………………………………….1Description of the Setting …………………………………………………………………………….2

Organizational Background and History ……………………………………………..3The Mission Statement ……………………………………………………………………..4The Vision Statement………………………………………………………………………..5The Value Statement…………………………………………………………………………6Organizational Reputation and Sustainability ………………………………………6

Relevant Terms …………………………………………………………………………………………..7Identify Potential Gaps or Areas for Growth…………………………………………………..8

Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats (SWOT)……………………….9Internal Factor Evaluation (IFE)……………………………………………………….21External Factor Evaluation (EFE)……………………………………………………..26

Part 2: Define the Problem…………………………………………………………………………………….30Synthesis of Literature Related to the Problem ……………………………………………..31

Research Methods…………………………………………………………………………..35Pertinent Models, Frameworks, or Theories……………………………………….36Summary of Findings………………………………………………………………………37

Statement of the Problem……………………………………………………………………………38Description of the Context of the Problem …………………………………………38Scope and Significance of the Problem ……………………………………………..39Rationale for Investigating the Problem …………………………………………….39Well-Defined Problem Statement ……………………………………………………..40

Part 3: Research Possible Solutions………………………………………………………………………..41Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………………41Possible Solutions ……………………………………………………………………………………..41

Possible Solution One: Increase Access to Technology for Low-Income Students………………………………………………………………………………………42Possible Solution Two: Implementation of Trauma-Informed Care Training for Teachers……………………………………………………………………46Possible Solution Three: Introduce a Parental Involvement Program…….51Possible Solution Four: Implementation of School-Based Health Centers ……………………………………………………………………………………….55

Part 4: Select a Solution………………………………………………………………………………………..60Overview of the Four Solutions…………………………………………………………………..61Advantages (Pros) and Disadvantages (Cons) of Solutions …………………………….61

Solution One: Increase Access to Technology for Low-Income Students………………………………………………………………………………………62Solution Two: Implementation of Trauma-Informed Care Training for Teachers ……………………………………………………………………………………..63

viii

Solution Three: Introduce a Parental Involvement Program …………………64Solution Four: Implementation of School-Based Health Centers…………..64

Discussion of Barriers………………………………………………………………………………..66Solution One: Increase Access to Technology for Low-Income Students………………………………………………………………………………………66Solution Two: Implementation of Trauma-Informed Care Training for Teachers ……………………………………………………………………………………..66Solution Three: Introduce a Parental Involvement Program …………………67Solution Four: Implementation of School-Based Health Centers…………..67

Summary of Rationale for Selected Solution…………………………………………………67

Part 5: Strategies to Accomplish the Selected Solution……………………………………………….#Strategy One: Strategy Title………………………………………………………………………….#

Synthesis of Literature Related to Strategy One……………………………………#Strategy Two: Strategy Title…………………………………………………………………………#

Synthesis of Literature Related to Strategy Two …………………………………..#

Part 6: Evaluation of the Strategies…………………………………………………………………………..#Quantitative Strategic Plan Matrix…………………………………………………………………#

Evaluation of valuation ……………………………………………………………………..#Discussion of Internal Factors That Influence the Plan ………………………….#Evaluation of External Factor Evaluation…………………………………………….#Discussion of External Factors That Influence the Plan…………………………#

First Alternative Attractiveness Score and Benefit for the Organization …………….#Second Alternative Attractiveness Score and Benefit for the Organization…………#Summary of Most Important Strategy ……………………………………………………………#

Part 7: Development of an Action Plan …………………………………………………………………….#Action Steps ……………………………………………………………………………………………….#Timeline …………………………………………………………………………………………………….#Roles and Responsibilities ……………………………………………………………………………#Resources …………………………………………………………………………………………………..#Organizational Support ………………………………………………………………………………..#Barriers or Resistance ………………………………………………………………………………….#Evaluation ………………………………………………………………………………………………….#Reflection on the Overall Experience …………………………………………………………….#

Part 8: Audio-Visual Presentation of SRP…………………………………………………………………#Narrative of Electronic Presentation………………………………………………………………#Peer Review Questions ………………………………………………………………………………..#Oral Defense of the SRP………………………………………………………………………………#

Narrative Defense of Selected Questions …………………………………………….#

Part 9: Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………………….#Recommendations……………………………………………………………………………………….#Final Conclusions ……………………………………………………………………………………….#

References…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..79

AppendicesA Mission Statement ………………………………………………………………………………97B Vision Statement…………………………………………………………………………………99C Value Statement………………………………………………………………………………..101D Title in Initial Caps and Lower Case ………………………………………………………#E Title in Initial Caps and Lower Case ………………………………………………………#

Tables1 Strengths ……………………………………………………………………………………………122 Weaknesses………………………………………………………………………………………..153 Opportunities ……………………………………………………………………………………..184 Threats ………………………………………………………………………………………………215 Internal Factor Evaluation Matrix …………………………………………………………236 Four Strengths and Four Weaknesses Factors …………………………………………267 External Factor Evaluation Matrix ………………………………………………………..278 Four Opportunities and Four Threats Factors………………………………………….30

Figures1 Title in Initial Caps and Lower Case ……………………………………………………….#2 Title in Initial Caps and Lower Case ……………………………………………………….#3 Title in Initial Caps and Lower Case ……………………………………………………….#4 Title in Initial Caps and Lower Case ……………………………………………………….#

Part 1: Critical Analysis

Researcher’s Role

A person who conducts in-depth study on a subject to gain greater knowledge about that

subject is called a researcher. A good researcher needs to be many things to many people.

Research is very important in education. Education research can play a vital role in policy

making and learning programs. There is no one set of duties that a researcher is expected to

fulfill across all academic disciplines or professional domains. Researchers in the medical field

may utilize clinical trials to evaluate the efficacy of a novel treatment, whereas social scientists

may use questionnaires and in-person interviews to gain a better understanding of how people

behave (Aspers & Corte, 2019).

Through the processes of data gathering, analysis, and interpretation, the role of a

researcher is to contribute to the existing body of knowledge in their respective discipline.

Researchers acquire data through a variety of methods, some of which include controlled

experiments, surveys, interviews, and direct observation (Bakker, 2018). Direct observation is

another method. They first do statistical analysis on the data to derive conclusions, and then they

interpret the findings of that study. They present their findings at conferences and publish them

in academic journals and papers to share their findings with others and advance the field.

I am the former principal of George H. Oliver Elementary School (GHO). I was a teacher

for 14 years before I moved into administration. I was a high school principal for 4 years before I

became an elementary principal. I served as principal of GHO for 4 years before I decided to

return to being a high school principal. It was my role and responsibility to serve as the

instructional leader of the school. As principal, it was also my responsibility to conduct informal

and formal observations of teachers using the Mississippi Professional Growth Rubric. School

administrators are required to be trained by the Mississippi Department of Education to give

teachers ratings during observation (Mississippi Department of Education, 2022). I also worked

with teachers to set learning goals based on the state approved curriculum.

As the leader of the school, I had to build partnerships with community stakeholders so

that the whole child could be educated. I was also responsible for developing and implementing a

school improvement plan. In my capacity, I served as support for new teachers and served on the

district’s disciplinary committee. It was also my responsibility to manage the George H. Oliver

district and federal budget. I had to ensure that federal money was spent according to the needs

of the school. Finally, as principal, it was my responsibility to improve the culture of the school

by boosting teacher morale, decreasing the amount of discipline problems, and increasing

attendance.

Description of the Setting

GHO is in Clarksdale, Mississippi, which is in the heart of the Mississippi Delta region.

GHO is in the Brickyard neighborhood, an area of the city plagued by violence and crime. GHO

inherits all the social ills associated with these tumultuous community environments. GHO is one

of the Clarksdale Municipal School District’s four elementary magnet schools serving students in

prekindergarten through Grade 4. Currently, GHO serves approximately 350 students, which

represents an enrollment increase due to the closure of one of the district’s elementary schools in

2016. Students from the closed elementary school were divided among the four remaining

schools. Almost all of students at GHO come from low-income families, and 100% of the

students at GHO receive free meals through the district's participation in the Community

Eligibility Provision Program. Approximately 99% of the students at GHO are African American

(George H. Oliver, 2021).

GHO is a themed, magnet school targeting the Visual and Performing Arts to enhance the

curriculum. In addition to the core subjects, students can participate in music classes including

keyboarding and choral music. The staff is comprised of approximately 30 employees, consisting

of one administrator; one secretary; one part-time counselor who comes two times a week; 15

full-time certified staff members, consisting of one prekindergarten teacher, one part-time music

teacher, one part-time physical education teacher, one part-time librarian; and nine non-certified

staff members. Staff turnover at GHO has been a tremendous challenge. Over the last 4 years,

there have been three different school principals, and approximately 40% of the current teachers

have less than 4 years of teaching experience. About 15% of the teachers hold an emergency or

provisional license.

The district leadership includes a superintendent, assistant superintendent, chief executive

officer, and business manager. The district also has several departments in the organizational

structure which include the special education, transportation, maintenance, human resource, and

food service departments. The various departments ensure that schools are provided with the

supports they need. An important part of the district is the federal programs departments. Funds

are received from the federal government to ensure equity for all the students in the Clarksdale

Municipal School District. Federal funding makes up a majority of the district budget

(Clarksdale Municipal School District, 2023).

Organizational Background and History

Established in 1962 in Clarksdale, Mississippi, GHO is one of four elementary schools in

Clarksdale, Mississippi. Clarksdale Municipal School Board wanted to establish an elementary

school in an area where it was easily accessible by the African American population. The goals

of GHO are to improve student achievement, build teacher capacity, and increase student

attendance (George H. Oliver, 2021). GHO increased its accountability rating with the state

department of education from an F to a D in 2018. The school received recognition from the

Mississippi Department of Education (Mississippi Department of Education 2018). GHO has had

three principals and high traditional high teacher turnover. From 2019 to 2021, the teacher

turnover rate was low because the school was able to keep the same principal for 4 years.

In 2018, the school was a comprehensive support and improvement school because of the

F rating on accountability. The school was able to raise the accountability level by eighty-seven

points to become a D school on accountability (Mississippi Department of Education 2018).

Factors that contributed to the improvement was improved school culture, teacher retention, and

improved attendance. One of the most importance factors in helping to transform the school was

increase in teacher morale. GHO continues to struggle with socioeconomic issues that prevent

academic achievement from being the main focus.

The Mission Statement

The elementary school's mission is to provide an accurate, comprehensive, and

contemporary curriculum that prepares students for increased understanding, critical thinking,

and lifelong learning. In addition, the school aspires to contribute to developing a positive school

environment where students are nurtured as healthy individuals who can become active

participants in society. The mission statement (see Appendix A) is concise, focused on what

drives the school, and includes who it is, what the school does, and why things are being doing a

certain way (Alegre et al., 2018). It also sets out how these goals are achieved. It should guide

the organization whom they want to serve and what it wants to be. The given mission statement

consists of the name of the school (George H. Oliver Elementary School), high-quality learning,

and a unique distinguishing factor that makes the school stand out: teamwork of parents and

qualified staff. The statement outlines what the school is striving to accomplish. It describes

student life, parent involvement, and community relations. The statement also highlights the

organization's future target, ensuring that students are responsible citizens in the future. An

essential part to add would be the school's innovations. Moreover, long-term goals inclusion

would make the statement a success.

The Vision Statement

The future is now! The faculty and staff believe a great school starts with a deep

understanding of each student's needs and the communities surrounding our schools. This is a

shared belief and the faculty and staff are passionate about developing strong leaders who can

serve their students, communities, and the world in the ways they want to. The school will

provide many opportunities for students to develop skills in areas such as reading, writing, math,

and science, as well as other areas which give them a strong foundation for success. Each student

will graduate from elementary school with a quality education, knowledge of navigating the

world surrounding them, and the motivation needed to achieve their personal goals. The

statement encompasses a completely objective or goals the school can and will achieve (Allen et

al., 2018).

The vision statement also contains something simple to remember, concise, and

intellectual (Sulastri et al., 2021). It clarifies goals, defines values, and communicates how

people are motivated. This should define what the organization wants to become in the long run

and its target position. The vision statement for GHO (see Appendix B) has been expressed

positively, where the institution strives to utilize its high-quality learning experiences to provide

superior education to every child. Although the statement is short and complete, I would add

details on learning technologies to support learners in becoming productive global citizens

The Value Statement

The school emphasizes the importance of respect, responsibility, integrity, excellence,

collaboration, creativity, and innovation. These values will be expressed in a way that speaks to

the school’s commitment to helping the students reach their fullest potential. This statement is

clear, concise, and straightforward (Gurley et al., 2021). This provides clarity for teachers,

classmates, administrators, and parents (Vermont Primary School, 2022). The statement is

neither too long or nor complex to read that easier to comprehend it. The value statement (see

Appendix C) is clear, concise, and easy to understand. It has been written in a way that is

accessible and easily understood by students, staff, and the wider community. Also, it is

reflective of the school's culture and values, and it is aspiring and inspiring while reflecting the

school's goals and objectives. It is the foundation that sets the school's tone and establishes the

values, principles, and beliefs that the school stands for and will strive to uphold. It is important

to clearly articulate the school's values to create an environment conducive to learning, growth,

and success.

Organizational Reputation and Sustainability

Reputation. GHO in Clarksdale, Mississippi, has a poor reputation based on test scores,

student progress, and equity. The test scores at this school fall far below the state average, which

indicates that most students need to perform as expected at grade level (U.S. News and World

Report, 2019a). The student progress is also slow and poor annually compared to similar students

in the state (U.S. News and World Report, 2019b). In addition to low test scores, most students

in this school have earned low points and fall behind their peers in terms of their academic

progress. The highest percentage involves underserved students from low-income families,

which leaves them at an economic disadvantage that create a significant achievement gap (U.S.

News and World Report, 2019a). This vulnerability makes most students fall behind other

students in the state. Based on enrollment and student demographics, 98% of the students are

Black and 2% of the students are White (Mississippi Department of Education (2023). Overall,

this imbalance creates a negative perspective that results in a negative reputation for the school.

Sustainability. GHO lacks sustainability due to an absence of capacity building of

professional teacher, lack of financial resources, and short-term pressure for higher academic

performance. Nonetheless, there is an opportunity for the school to improve its organizational

sustainability. For example, the school can use the student support and academic enrichment

grant to increase its capacity to establish a pool of professional teachers (Mississippi Department

of Education, 2023). The grant can also help the school to provide all the students with access to

a well-rounded education, improve the use of technology and improve school conditions for

student learning resulting in improved academic achievement (Mississippi Department of

Education, 2023). It can further use Section 4101, Section 4106(d), Section 4110, and Section

4109(b) of Article IV to establish student support and academic enrichment programs that ensure

the school's substantiality in short and long term.

Relevant Terms

Academic Achievement refers to a student’s learning outcome of a school’s curriculum

(Tian, 2018).

At-Risk Student is defined as a student who is likely to perform poorly in school (Fazul,

2022).

Mississippi Department of Education seeks to create a world class education system that

gives students the knowledge and skills to be successful in college, as well as the workforce, and

to flourish as parents and citizens (Mississippi Department of Education, 2023).

Researched-Based Instructional Strategy is any teaching approach supported by a

statistical analysis of data from the learning environment (Apostolou, 2020).

School Culture is the belief and attitude influencing every aspect how a school function

(Hall & Hord, 2015).

Identify Potential Gaps or Areas for Growth

Strategic planning is a common concept in today's business world and many different

industries. Strategic planning acts as a roadmap to the organization's future. It not only acts as a

blueprint to the actions that should be taken within an organization but is also a form of long-

term planning. Antonio and Martha (2020) argued that strategic planning is important to an

organization because it provides a sense of direction and outlines measurable goals. These views

align with those of Ben-Messaoud (2022), who explained that strategic planning aims to assess

the potential within an organization and hence define the organization's long-term success. A

strategy marks where an organization is at the current and then indicates the goal for success to

the next point. Stevens (2015) added that a strategy enables a given organization to be where it

wants to be in a future time. It shapes the organization, aligning it to the best direction better

placed to achieve its future goals. In addition, this strategic plan brings more advantages to the

organization on top of achieving the set goals. Umar et al. (2020) established that it enhances the

financial performance of an organization, its longevity, and its effectiveness.

At GHO, there are several gaps in the organization's management, and the school has a

financial gap in the management of its operations. The school requires more finances to manage

the financial needs of the students from the neighboring community by financing their food

program and educational needs. Furthermore, it needs finances to align the school with up-to-

date technology. Leonard and Box (2010) recognized the need to close the existing funding gap

among schools in the United States, especially in Mississippi. Leonard and Box added that low-

performing schools need more funding than high-performing ones. Another gap that should be

addressed within this school is teacher turnover, qualifications, licensing, and experiences since

their qualifications and licensing greatly determine the grades to be scored by the students they

deal with. A study by Bhai and Horoi (2019) showed that teacher experiences have the largest

effect on students' performance. Therefore, teacher characteristics such as qualifications and

licensing are very significant at GHO. Action should therefore be taken to close this gap in

regard to the types of experience and licenses among other characteristics of teachers who are

employed at GHO.

Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT)

The strengths-weaknesses-opportunities-threats (SWOT) analysis enables an organization

to explore possibilities for new solutions, decide on the best initiative, determine where change is

possible, and adjust and refine plans mid-course (Renault, 2017). Osita et al. (2014) defined

strength as what the organization is strong in or good in, while opportunities are anything outside

the organization that might benefit the organization if taken advantage of. On the other hand,

weaknesses are what the organization needs to improve on, while threats are those factors

happening outside that the organization needs to take measures to guard against. A study by

Mandrazhi (2021) recognized SWOT as part of its strengths and that it allows for

competitiveness within the organization to realize its goals. In a SWOT analysis, the realistic

recognition of the weaknesses and the threats of any given organization is the starting point when

setting grounds to streamline strategies for change and improvement within any given

organization. Orr (2013) referred to the SWOT analysis as a driving force when implementing

change, especially within the education system.

Strengths. The following 10 factors are as follows (see Table 1).

1. Strong Value Statement. The value statement describes what an organization stands

for. At GHO, a strong vision statement helps attract students from wide localities and qualified

staff. Allen et al. (2018) argued that the value statement reinstates the commitment of the school

to deliver quality to its students. By clarifying its goals, defining its values, and communicating

its motivation, it stands out compared to all other organizations. GHO’s value statement

reinstates commitment to quality for the school.

2. Enough Staff. With a population of 350 students, GHO has enough staff to serve the

students appropriately. Lieberman (2021) showed that many schools shut down for lack of

enough staff. This is different for GHO, where there are over 25 staff with different

qualifications. The school shows a clear number of staff within the organization. A good staff

number helps improve the service provided to students. This brings about satisfaction and good

handling of the students hence better performance.

3. Online Accessibility. GHO has penetrated the online spaces with a website accessible

from Clarksdale Municipal School District. This enables it to be accessed by those from far and

those who want to know more about it. It enables parents to access calendars, updates as well as

other notification from the school website. Reimers et al. (2020) showed that online presence is

key in times like the pandemic. This would allow the school’s students to continue learning as

compared to its competitors.

4. High Accountability. GHO has been rated 278, which shapes its reputation. This

attracts students and reflects that the institution handles finances and issues transparently.

According to Hovanetz (2019), accountability increases excellence, attracts media attention, and

empowers parents to make better choices. This motivates the stakeholders in terms of

performance. In addition, increased accountability enables the schools to stand out.

5. High Student Engagement. GHO plans events throughout the year to engage schools

and families. Student engagement has increased and improved due to these events. It is these

activities that inform parents as well as students about the former’s performance. The Centers for

Disease Control and Prevention (2019) reported that school engagement improves students'

behavior and addresses health behaviors. Engagement is key in addressing various pertinent

issues among the students.

6. Excellence in the Provision of Resources to Students. GHO has engaged in various

initiatives to provide material needs to students, such as projects to provide lunches to the

students as well as uniforms and other study materials. According to Doménech-Betoret and

Gómez-Artiga (2021), the availability of learning materials affects student performance. At

GHO, the goal of providing materials to the students is to satisfy them and make them more

comfortable in class. All of these efforts increase student confidence and the ability to learn.

7. Strong Mentorship. The partnership with the Kennedy Center to help learn art studies

is a big boost for the institution. The facility also boasts of some rich staff whose expertise can

guide learners and staff in their learning. Ropo (2016) stated that expertise like this improves

development and promotes knowledge acquisition. This is a critical advantage for GHO because

it can benefit from these experts in various ways. The principal and the secretary are also key in

driving the school forward.

8. Wide Variety of Studies. GHO provides students with various studies, including liberal

arts. It means that they can participate in a variety of studies as well as class work. According to

Lyon College (2022), liberal arts studies make students free thinkers. Focused on creative and

critical thinking, this type of education transforms students into great citizens. This is one of the

key strengths at GHO.

9. Racial Representation and Gender Balance. GHO is well-represented in terms of race

and gender. This means that all children can feel they are in the right place as their racial

ethnicity is represented in the school. According to Clarksdale Municipal School District

Website (2022), GHO has students who are White Hispanic, Arab, and Asian, among others,

increasing representativeness. This increases the overall image of the school in terms of racial

variety. All ethnicities and backgrounds represented at the school attracts more students and

increases students' variety and interaction experiences.

10. Strong and Capable Administration. GHO has a well-equipped administration. This

administration has seen the school in various activities through collaboration. It has been able to

mobilize resources through external organizations for the sake of students. The administration, in

its competence, involves parents through events in the day-to-day running of the organization.

Qaralleh and Jibril (2020) argued that good administration is key to ensuring a conducive

learning environment.

Table 1

Strengths______________________________________________________

Item Factors______________________________________________________

1 Strong value statement2 Enough staff3 Online accessibility4 High accountability5 Higher student engagement6 Excellence in the provision of resources to students 7 Strong mentorship8 Wide variety of studies9 Racial representation and gender balance10 Strong and capable administration______________________________________________________

Weaknesses. The following 10 factors are as follows (see Table 2).

1. Staff Turnover. Muiruri (2015) argued that turnover can significantly impact

performance. High teacher turnover lowers teaching quality and negatively impacts performance.

This is the case with GHO since school principals typically do not go beyond 4 years in the

school. These erode performance and divert resources to hiring. This would possibly also topple

the GHO's top administration or management.

2. Inexperienced Teachers. About 50% of the teachers at GHO have teaching

experience of fewer than 4 years. In addition, more than half have an emergency license. Kini

and Podolsky (2016) showed that increased experiences are directly related to performance and

effectiveness. At GHO, teachers are less experienced, affecting the students' performance. This

could mean that students are not engaged as fully as they would be if there were experienced

teachers.

3. Low School Enrollment. Due to economic decline, many people moved away from

Clarksdale, reducing school enrollment. Grice and Meyer (2019) argued that enrollment can

negatively affect school performance. Yang (2014) explained that efficacy is key in managing

schools. Reduced enrollment means that teachers deal with only a few students, hence

underutilization of them. This means a dismal performance of the school in terms of its financial

management.

4. Insecurity. GHO is located in Clarksdale, Mississippi, an area with high crime and

violence. These issues can greatly affect the students in terms of concentration and the ability to

feel safe on school property. Ghorab and Al-Khaldi (2015) showed that violence in schools

increases anxiety among students and, hence, affects their grades. Increased crime and violence

in the GHO school vicinity denies the students a conducive learning environment.

5. Low Student-Counselor Ratio. The ratio of counselors to students at GHO is 1:373

(George H. Oliver, 2021). Sal Gong et al. (2016) emphasized the role of counseling in school for

the students’ safety and psychological health. The counselors at GHO are fewer and hence a

danger in case of life-changing and traumatic experiences. This would greatly affect the school

in case of such an event.

6. Poor Academic Performance. The Clarksdale Municipal School District’s website

indicated GHO’s performance and scores are very low. In terms of test scores, student progress,

and equity, they are all below average. According to the Mississippi Department of Education

(2022), the school is rated a D school. Over the years, the scores have also continued to fall.

There are also achievement gaps. This situation is a big loss for the school as it may have less

impact on attracting new students.

7. Poor Reputation. U.S. News and World Report (2019a) indicated that the scores

shown by GHO are low in many aspects. Many of the students are slow in their academic

progress. This reputation is extremely bad for the school in the eyes of the public. Perez and

Okonofua (2022) showed that reputation is key in kindergarten to Grade 12 schools and impacts

their functioning since they affect the interactions between students and teachers. This is the

same situation that is befalling GHO.

8. Have Not Fully Adopted Technology. GHO has not yet adopted technology to its full

capacity. It could have helped in online learning, which is not yet in action. Aslam et al. (2021)

argued that technology enables learning to proceed faster and is made easy since schools adapt to

the course content from the online world. GHO has yet to adapt to this and hence is left behind

by other schools. This is a big weakness that drags the school backward.

9. Inequity and Inequality. Looking at the school's racial balance, there are more Black

people than there are other races. This may create dominance of one race over the other and

reduce the ethnic balance. Reynolds (2007) argued that ethnic spread and student achievement go

hand in hand and improve ethnic diversity. This is a key issue in which GHO has fallen short in

terms of enrollment. Most races have about 1% representation in the school compared to the

Blacks.

10. Struggling Students From Low-Income Families. Most of the students in this school

come from the neighboring poverty-stricken community, which affects their performance. They

fall below the average of other standard students in the state. This means that there are financial

challenges in their study areas and the required dues in school. McKenzie (2019) added that

students from poor backgrounds could be affected in terms of grades and behaviors. This is the

case with GHO. Such poses an even more dire effect on the already bad school performance.

Table 2

Weaknesses________________________________________________________

Item Factors_______________________________________________

1 Staff turnover2 Inexperienced teachers3 Low school enrollment4 Insecurity5 Low student-counselor ratio6 Poor academic performance7 Poor reputation8 Not fully adopting technology9 Inequity and inequality10 Struggling students from low-income families _______________________________________________

Opportunities. The following 10 factors are as follows (see Table 3).

1. Increased Volunteer programs and financial aid. GHO is already well established in

sourcing finances from outside sources to support students. It can exploit this advantage to

source more resources for expansion. Martin et al. (2018) showed that poverty-stricken schools

suffer greatly from underfunding. GHO can run away from this mess by embracing and calling

for more voluntary funding programs for its children. This will enable it to build more

educational and training resources.

2. Increased Enrollment. The school is situated in Clarksdale, inhabited primarily by

low-income families. With a population of 350, the school can look upon the increasing

population from the neighborhood and tap from it. According to Baker et al. (2011), a more

educated population lives longer and healthier. GHO can enroll more students from the said

locality to grant them a better life through education. The free meals are also capable of

attracting more students to the school.

3. Staff Licensing and Certification. Some of the staff in GHO are said to have no

license – only a provisional certification. The school can therefore work for the staff certification

to improve their competence. Allen (2010) emphasized that teacher certification is key in

assuring quality. Subjects like mathematics need fully equipped teachers whose competency can

only be gauged by licensing. This is key in hiring teachers at GHO to improve performance.

4. Increased Stakeholder Collaboration. There is already an existing level of

collaboration between the school and parents. The collaboration in ensuring the performance of

students is regularly checked by stakeholders. In addition, collaboration is key in monitoring

students' unique abilities and behavior. Chiuri et al. (2020) associated teacher-parent

collaboration with higher educational success. Therefore, GHO can tap into this to nurture

teacher-parent collaboration through events to improve performance.

5. Increased Adoption of Technology. Technology is now a widely discussed

phenomenon in the world of education. Schools are taking their classes online, especially during

the pandemic. GHO, having a standby website, can adapt to online and distance learning. Kersey

(2016) found that advanced technology incorporation into learning can increase the student

success rate. GHO can take in various and different technological adoption in learning.

6. Teacher Retention. Lack of teacher retention in schools leads to the loss of school

culture (Flowers, 2019). GHO can retain talent in terms of its teachers, among other staff.

Retention will also enable them to save on hiring costs. If more teachers are retained, it will

reduce breakage in school classwork continuity. It also reduces the time wasted by teachers

taking up new roles at the school.

7. Improved Reputation. The improvement in accountability places GHO in a better

place to improve its reputation. Wong et al. (2017) explained that school reputation is closely

related to quality. GHO is intent on improving the quality it offers learners through enhanced

reputation improvement. This reputation improves not only students, but also other individuals in

the community. It can be boosted by the already improved transparency and accountability

rating.

8. Opportunity for Increased Student Engagement. GHO is reported to have won

several school engagements awards severally. The events, as well as the competitions, are such

rewards for the stakeholders. They serve as areas for parents to identify talents among the

students and teachers. In addition, they can be sources of information on areas of improvement

for the administration. As per Olson and Peterson (2015), engagement improves enthusiasm and

impacts students' academic performance and behavior. This an area into which GHO can tap.

9. A Well-Rounded Education. Studying at GHO equips the learners with education in

all aspects of life. The school offers good services in all areas, such as food, athletics, and

transportation. This ensures students have support in all areas they need. GHO has the staff to

guide the students through all the different areas of life in which they are involved. Obara (2018)

recognized the need for a well-rounded education for the development of the whole person.

10. Grade and Performance Improvement. GHO has strong value and mission

statements that can help learners perform better. Working towards the mission statement's

objectives can improve its grade. There are different departments that can wholly participate in

boosting the grade. Good grades will attract more voluntary sponsorship. GHO has the potential

to achieve more than it currently has. Barnum (2019) explained that good grades for students

from low-income families can improve performance and earn them more scholarships.

Table 3

Opportunities___________________________________________________________

Item Factors_________________________________________________

1 Increased volunteer programs and financial aid 2 Increased enrollment3 Staff licensing and certification4 Increased stakeholder collaboration5 Increased adoption of technology6 Teacher retention7 Improved reputation8 Opportunity for increased student engagement9 A well-rounded education10 Grade and performance improvement________________________________________________

Threats. The following 10 factors are as follows (see Table 4).

1. Violence and Crime. GHO is in Clarksdale, Mississippi, an area plagued by violence

and crime. This can lead to the loss of school property and physical harm to students. Pitso et al.

(2014) implicated crime and violence as the reasons for low school performance. This is the

situation to which GHO is exposed. The neighborhood poses a great danger to the safety and

security of the children and school property.

2. Poor Performance Out of Poverty. Over time now, the school has been performing

poorly. This damages its public image. Adem (2021) associated poverty with poor school

performance arising from reduced parental involvement. GHO is on the blink of continued

failure, most propagated by the poverty-stricken background. Parental income is low, hence

reducing parental involvement and parental education.

3. Loss of Talented Manpower Due to High Turnover. The high teacher turnover in the

school is a great danger to its talented manpower. About 50% of the teachers have less than four

years of experience. This is a great danger to the school in terms of teacher competency.

Ronfeldt et al. (2013) stated that a high turnover affects student academic performance. This is

the great challenge to which GHO is exposed.

4. Economic Decline and Hence Reduced Population. Economic decline has led to the

movement of people from around the school, hence the possibility of moving away with

students. This negatively impacts teacher motivation. It also led to inefficiency in resource

management. Low motivation significantly affects the student’s performance in school (Sajid et

al., 2022). GHO is at the mercy of the economy and hopes to improve its financial situation to

maintain its school population.

5. Bad Reputation. The school has had a very poor reputation based on the test scores.

The test scores of GHO students are far from the average. Many students are therefore having the

challenge of performing to the average. U.S. News and World Report (2019a) reported that

student progress is slow compared to that of other students within the same state. This situation

scares parents from enrolling their children in the said school.

6. Lack of Racial Balance. Almost 100% of students in GHO are Black. Schools like this

one tend to suffer from inadequate instructional and learning materials funding. Weir (2016)

reported that such imbalance may contribute to poor learner achievement. The imbalance in the

racial composition may also not reflect the national education face. In worst cases, the racial

minority occupation may mean less attention to the school by the government. It also creates a

negative perspective and a bad reputation.

7. Short and Non-Comprehensive Vision Statement. In its vision statement, the

institution strives to utilize its high-quality learning experiences to provide superior education to

every child. This vision statement includes not technology considering the current digital times.

It should be encompassed with supporting learners to utilize technology effectively. Zakrajšek

(2016) recognized the role of technology in elementary schools. This is one key threat the GHO

has not exploited.

8. Inexperienced Teachers. Most teachers at GHO have fewer than 4 years of

experience. This is likely to affect the students’ success rate. Less experience means less

knowledge of the subject matter, which can lead to continued poor performance compared to

other schools. Irvine (2019) indicated performance was directly related to years of experience.

Inexperienced teachers are likely to negatively affect GHO.

9. Underfunding. GHO relies heavily on federal funds to feed the students and finance

other educational materials. Underfunding is linked to poor student performance (Strauss, 2018).

GHO lacks sufficient study materials to support learners. Many students do not have even the

most basic learning material and are likely to fail. A lack of enough support from the government

means slow progress for the school. This is a great challenge in the long run for GHO in its

education dream.

10. Low Diversity in Student Population. The school is not widely known and sources its

learners from around Mississippi. It means less racial and ethnic diversity in the school

population. Less publicity means less attraction to new students. It also reduces the experiences

the students are exposed to. This negatively impacts the school population. Bayar and

Karaduman (2021) indicated the need for cultural diversity to improve student outcomes.

Table 4

Threats_____________________________________________________________

Item Factors___________________________________________________

1 Violence and crime2 Poor performance out of poverty3 Loss of talented manpower due to high turnover 4 Economic decline hence reduced population5 Bad reputation6 Lack of racial balance7 Short and non-comprehensive vision statement8 Inexperience teachers9 Underfunding10 Low diverse student population__________________________________________________

Internal Factor Evaluation (IFE)

Internal factor evaluation (IFE) is crucial in an organization's strategic planning. The tool

enables the organization to analyze the resources it is endowed with as well as the strengths and

weaknesses within the said organization. An IFE is critical in identifying how an organization

can gain a competitive advantage and forms part of the organization's final strategic decisions

(Zulkarnain et al., 2018). Ben-Abdallah et al. (2022) indicated that IFE helps consolidate a model

that can be used to execute a business strategy. For GHO, the IFE overall score was 2.38, which

is slightly lower than the average of 2.50, implying that the organization has not yet reached the

minimum required basis for responding to its weaknesses and strengths (see Table 5). This

implies that, even though the organization might be continuously taking measures to respond to

internal factors, it has not yet fully exploited them.

The following are my eight factors (i.e., 4 strengths, 4 weaknesses).

Four Strengths. The following four strengths were identified from my IFE (see Table 6):

(a) high accountability, (b) high student engagement, (c) racial representation and gender

balance, and (d) enough staff.

High Accountability. For any organization's success, accountability is key since it

guides the organizational stakeholders in whatever they are doing. Francis (2016) argued that the

introduction of accountability leads to higher performance than would have happened without

accountability. In such cases, teachers and students are ready to carry the blame for poor

performance if it happens. GHO has been ranked very high in terms of its accountability. The

school can continually exploit this factor to grow the culture, and, through this, it will be able to

lift the school's grades and ensure transparency in the school management.

High Student Engagement. At GHO, student engagement is high since the school holds

events and has counselors to involve the students in various discussions. Engaged students are

more empowered and can openly express the issues that they are facing, and such issues can

easily be addressed by the administration. Deng (2021) indicated that higher student involvement

in learning fosters a supportive learning environment. Engagement helps learners deal with

anxiety and develop a sense of belonging to the school (Moreira et al., 2018). Such a sense of

comfort and belongingness is key in driving school objectives forward. Continued exploitation of

this factor by GHO is plus in driving the school toward achieving its academic objectives.

Table 5

Internal Factor Evaluation Matrix

Strengths Weight Rating Weighted score

1 Strong Value Statement 0.05 3 0.152 Enough Staff 0.06 4 0.243 Online Accessibility 0.04 3 0.124 High Accountability 0.08 4 0.325 Higher Student Engagement 0.06 4 0.20

6 Excellent Provision of Resources to students 0.02 3 0.06

7 Strong Mentorship 0.05 3 0.158 Wide Variety of Studies 0.03 3 0.00

9 Racial Representation and Gender Balance 0.08 4 0.32

10 Strong and Capable Administration 0.05 4 0.20

Weaknesses Weight Rating Weighted score

1 Staff Turnover 0.05 1 0.052 Inexperienced Teachers 0.05 1 0.053 Low School Enrollment 0.02 2 0.044 Insecurity 0.08 1 0.085 Low Student-Counselor Ratio 0.02 2 0.046 Poor Academic Performance 0.06 1 0.067 Poor Reputation 0.05 1 0.058 Not Fully Adopting Technology 0.01 2 0.029 Inequity and Inequality 0.04 1 0.04

10 Struggling students from low-income families 0.10 1 0.10

Totals 1.00 2.38

Racial Representation and Gender Balance. Even though not equal, there is quite a big

diversity of students in GHO, where several races are evident in the school enrollment. In their

study, Benner and Crosnoe (2011) found that diversity in schools is key to student brain

development and brings a sense of belongingness to the learners. Diversity allows the students to

have different life perspectives and, hence, opportunities for better cognitive exercises. Queens

University of Charlotte. (2020) stated that diversity among students in education directly impacts

their performance. Studies show that students work better in a diverse environment, enabling

them to concentrate and push themselves further when there are people of other backgrounds

working alongside them. GHO can exploit its diversity expansion to tap from the benefits of

diversity and racial inclusion.

Enough Staff. Globally, elementary schools are faced with the challenge of teacher

shortages and very disappointing teacher-student ratios. Fewer than enough teachers have a

greater impact on the performance in elementary schools since a greater student population for

every teacher reduces student-teacher contact. Hence, teachers may not follow up on some

students. Mwirigi and Muthaa (2015) established an association between staff shortage and the

quality of teaching and learning. However, GHO is in a better position since it has enough

teachers serving the student population. Exploiting this advantage to increase student

engagement is a drive in the right direction toward academic performance improvement.

Four Weaknesses. The following four weaknesses were identified from my IFE (see

Table 6): (a) staff turnover, (b) insecurity, (c) poor academic performance, and (d) struggling

students from low-income families.

Staff Turnover. GHO has a challenge with staff turnover since fewer teachers have been

in the school for more than 4 years. Staff turnover has administrative and academic issues. For

the students, time is wasted, and the high teacher turnover process takes a toll on the school's

resources in hiring new teachers. The Wing Institute (2019) reported that high teacher turnover

drives resources away from the improvement of the schools and disproportionately affects

schools with low academic performance and those poverty-stricken. In addition, it affects the

school culture by increasing numbers of disciplinary incidents among the students and, hence,

challenges in the management of the school (Adnot et al., 2017).

Insecurity. Among the major issues the administration at GHO must address is the

insecurity within the area. Insecurity is not only a danger to the school property but also has

physical and psychological repercussions on the students. Students may have reduced

concentration as they may live in fear of attack while in their studies. Adams et al. (2021)

reiterated the need to deal with school insecurity within the school system. A sustainable, secure

environment is conducive to learning and is key to school performance.

Poor Academic Performance. GHO has shown consistently low scores over time. In

addition, student progress has been slow and below average. New students and parents will shy

away from such a school in favor of the ones that are better performing. According to Karande

and Kulkarni (2015), poor performance in school lowers the student's self-esteem, causes stress

for the parents, and lowers the teacher's motivation. Constant checks and improvements are

therefore needed to create success measures and strategies to improve performance at GHO.

Struggling Students From Low-Income Families. Students at GHO come to school each

day with their own set of challenges. The challenges frequently interfere with educational

process. Hunger, homelessness, and abuse are frequent problems of students at the school.

According to the National Center for Education Statistics, 19% of individuals under 18 lived in

poverty during the 2015-2016 school year. GHO students lack resources at home to complete

homework or assigned projects. Parents of students at GHO often work long hours or have jobs

in the local gaming industry where they must travel over an hour each way to work daily.

Students are often left to catch the bus or prepare themselves for school along. Poverty also

causes increased absences in school.

Table 6

Four Strengths and Four Weaknesses Factors _________________________________________

Item Factors_________________________________________

Strengths High accountability High student engagement Racial representation Enough staff

Weaknesses Staff turnover Insecurity Poor academic performance Struggling students from low-income families_________________________________________

External Factor Evaluation (EFE)

An external factor evaluation matrix (EFE) is a tool that allows strategists and planners

within an organization to summarize and make an evaluation of the external factors that play

within the operation of an organization. Using the EFE tool, one can determine whether an

organization is better placed to take advantage of the already existing opportunities while

minimizing the external threats and hence work towards its success. The tool helps formulate

strategies for success and develop relevant and effective policies to govern the organization's

operation (Ben-Abdallah & Alshurideh, 2022). The total score for this analysis is 2.45, implying

that the school is slightly below the average of 2.50 (see Table 7). This implies the employment

of strategies and focus on threats is not fully optimized to the firm’s full potential. The EFE has

shown that change in schools is a combination of administrative action and identification of the

right policies applied in GHO.

Table 7

External Factor Evaluation Matrix

Opportunities Weight Rating Weighted score

1. Increased Volunteer Programs and Financial Aid

0.03 4 0.09

2. Increased Enrollment 0.02 3 0.063. Staff and Licensing 0.06 2 0.12

4. Increased Stakeholder Collaboration

0.05 2 0.10

5. Increased Adoption of Technology

0.08 4 0.32

6. Teacher Retention 0.05 3 0.157. Improved Reputation 0.01 1 0.01

8. Opportunity for Increased Student Engagement

0.05 1 0.05

9. A Well-Rounded Education 0.02 3 0.06

10. Grade and Performance Improvement

0.06 4 0.24

Threats Weight Rating Weighted score

1. Violence and Crime 0.04 1 0.04

2. Poor Performance Out of Poverty

0.04 1 0.04

3. Loss of Talented Manpower Due to High Turnover

0.10 2 0.20

4. Economic Decline and a Reduced Population

0.08 1 0.08

5. Bad Reputation 0.03 2 0.066. Lack of Racial Balance 0.07 4 0.28

7. Short and Non-Comprehensive Vision Statement

0.01 3 0.03

8. Inexperienced Teachers 0.08 2 0.169. Underfunding 0.10 2 0.20

10.Low Student Diverse Population

0.02 3 0.16

Totals 1.00 2.45

The following are my eight factors (i.e., 4 opportunities, 4 threats).

Four Opportunities. The following were the four factors identified from the EFE

analysis: (a) (b) staff licensing and certification, (c) increased stakeholder collaboration, (d)

increased technology adoption, and (e) grade and performance improvement.

Staff Licensing and Certification. Certification and licensing of schools in GHO are very

important since it ensures that those hired can deliver quality to the students. Certification for

teachers is key to raising the student's performance. A study by Tjabolo (2020) concluded that

certified teachers have good results compared to those who are not certified. Certified teachers in

Mississippi are hard to find, but GHO had certified teachers in the beginning. The certified

teachers help the novice teachers build their capacity

Increased Stakeholder Collaboration. Equally, students as stakeholders and parents

must be constantly involved in their education as they can air their grievances on what can be

improved. Degtjarjova et al. (2018) recognized the role of the stakeholders if a school is to

succeed in its goals of delivering student achievement. Stakeholder collaboration is essential

when wanting the community to invest in education. Building relationships are an important part

of the success of a school. Parents are more likely to be engaged when they feel as if they are

part of the educational process.

Increased Adoption of Technology. Today, schools have been adopting technology, and

this is one issue identified that GHO needs to capitalize on, given the dynamics. It will enable

students to access more electronic materials, which they can access with the click of a button.

This is in line with findings by Davies and West (2015), who found the need for students and

teachers to be provided with technology systems while in the educational facilities. This is

capable of driving school performance higher.

Grade and Performance Improvement All of the above factors, when put together with

grade improvement, will help increase or raise the reputation of the school hence drawing more

people into the school. Sagir et al. (2016) associated reputation with school performance, so

there is a need for GHO to improve its performance for the sake of its reputation.

Four Threats. The EFE analysis identified the following threats: (a) inexperienced

teachers, (b) loss of talented manpower due to high turnover, (c) lack of racial balance, and (d)

underfunding.

Inexperienced Teachers. GHO has, as of now, fewer experienced teachers due to the

high teacher turnover leading to poor performance among the students. A study by Graham et al.

(2020) indicated that years of experience can impact children's performance and the teacher's

quality. Therefore, this is a critical factor that must be considered at GHO. New teacher

induction programs are helpful for inexperienced teachers. GHO is affected greatly by

inexperienced teachers.

Loss of Talented Manpower Due to High Turnover. Al-Suraihi et al. (2021) showed

that the effect of high turnover can be dire for any given organization and that retention strategies

must be adopted by the organization in the quest so to reduce the issues. At GHO, there is a high

teacher turnover rate leading to loss of great brains, which must be prioritized.

Lack of Racial Balance. Mar (2018) indicated an association between school diversity

and test scores for various students. This is a key issue seen in the case of GHO schools. Blacks

are seen to be dominant in the school as compared to other schools, and this greatly impacts the

schools. Changing the diversity balance will also help increase the school's reputation in the long

run.

Underfunding. A study by Arendse (2018) showed the negative effect discriminatory

funding can have on various schools since students, especially in marginalized areas, cannot

have all enough materials they need for learning. This is the case for GHO, as it needs to adapt to

get funding to have enough resources to run the operation of the schools smoothly to increase its

performance and improve the overall quality of education provided to learners. Substantial

funding could help GHO in academics, as well as exposing students to the arts. Funding can also

help attract high-quality educators to the area.

Table 8

Four Opportunities and Four Threats Factors __________________________________________

Item Factors__________________________________________

Opportunities Staff licensing and certification Increased stakeholder collaboration Increased adoption of technology Grade and performance improvement

Threats Inexperienced teachers Loss of talented manpower and high turnover Lack of racial balance Underfunding__________________________________________

Part 2: Define the Problem

One of the weaknesses facing George H. Oliver Elementary School (GHO) is poor

performance for struggling students from low-income families. Struggling low-income families

were identified as a weakness, according to the SWOT analysis. The school performs poorly due

to this factor damaging the institution's image. Deprivation is linked to poor school performance

due to less parental engagement. GHO faces a significant problem of continued failure mainly

attributed to low-income situations in the families from which most learners come. The area

residents have low income, lessening parental involvement and education. Many GHO students

come from poverty-stricken neighborhoods, adversely impacting their performance (Adem,

2021), as many students fall below the average standard of learners in the state. The findings

confirm that they face various financial issues; many have dues in the school. Students from poor

backgrounds are impacted regarding behaviors and grades, which is the key at GHO. Students

from struggling low-income backgrounds continue to be a more prevalent indicator of declining

academic success in schools today (McKenzie, 2019). The number of learners affected by their

low-income backgrounds and economic situation continues to rise, hence the need for educators

to be conscious of the impacts of deprivation on learners, their learning behavior, and the

classroom size. Educators must incorporate various approaches to assist in bridging the gap in

academic success between learners from low-income families and those from affluent homes.

Synthesis of Literature Related to the Problem

The challenges of students from struggling low-income backgrounds continue to be a

multi-faceted problem in developing nations and a more complex situation in rural areas. Family

incomes influence educational outcomes, and children from low-income families often begin

school after their peers from affluent families. A study by Miller et al. (2019) showed that

children from low-income families have fewer academic capabilities than their peers from more

economically stable families. The differences are linked to lower academic success, educational

attainments, and economic stability in adulthood. Miller et al. focused on urban and rural poverty

and the changing spatial orientation of poverty that offers various economic disadvantages. The

article utilized the quantitative research method using a sample of 2,950 poor learners from

kindergarten through second grade. The sample helped to explore the differences in community-

level resources and stressors in various rural areas that impact academic achievement. Miller et

al. established that many learners living in urban areas with optimal resources and stressors have

better academic achievement. However, the situation is different for school-aged children from

struggling low-income families who have fewer resources and increased stressors, hence poor

academic performance.

The low-income family situation adversely affects the learners. The most damaging

consequences occur for children that live in severely affected areas. Wasswa (2019) discussed

the effects of neighborhood poverty on academic success. The study used the qualitative research

design, applying research tools such as questionnaires and interviews with teachers, parents, and

learners. There were 71 participants that included boys, girls, female teachers, and parents. The

author established that low-income neighborhood situations negatively affect a learner's

achievement and behavior. The areas with higher income residents positively impacted school

readiness and achievement outcomes. The study also established the mediating factors of

neighborhood economic situations on young school-aged children. The results offered verbal and

behavioral results focusing on factors such as cohesion, family processes, parenting behaviors,

and psychological factors. The cohesion factor espouses the people's coming together during a

crisis. Living in an area with low cohesion is linked to less supportive family environments in

which the children live. Low-income family functioning leads to less literacy stimulation among

children. The parenting behaviors are associated with differing verbal ability skills. People living

in low-income and disorganized neighborhoods have been linked to negative family functioning.

Education remains pivotal in enhancing human wealth and is connected to a person's

wellness and better chances of a great life. A study by Adem (2021) examined the impact of

deficiency on learners' academic success in secondary learning institutions. The study aimed to

understand various aspects impacting learners' performance, including parental income,

education, involvement, and occupation. The study utilized a qualitative systematic review

method to understand the connection between low-income family backgrounds and academic

achievement. Adem established that parental income influences students' academic success or

performance. The study was aimed at understanding the depth of socioeconomic factors, linking

them to school educational performance and establishing the connection between revenue

sources and learners' educational results. Students staying in a home where parents depend on

work salaries are more likely to have a positive academic performance. The study indicated that

increased exposure of learners to low-income upbringing leads to declining students’ academic

performance. The parents’ socioeconomic class strongly impacts the learners’ academic success.

Learners from households with high-income levels experience more favorable performance than

students from low-income families. The research shows that parental income impacts the early

timing of the learner's learning. Poor people cannot afford preschool education for their children

and choose their young ones to start school from first grade onwards. However, low-income

parents are willing and wish to take their children to school as early as their counterparts in

higher income households.

Low-income neighborhoods remain a devastating factor for children’s education in all

nations globally. Despite being among the wealthiest nations, the United States faces challenges

in educating children from low-income neighborhoods, as many people continue to struggle,

with or without public assistance. Sadly, low-income status continues to impact school-aged

children who need proper education to be better members of society. A study by Holmes (2018)

aimed to understand the impacts of low-income family situations on a child's education

performance. The study used a qualitative research analysis of publications from 1988 to 2018. It

entailed conducting searches from EBSCO, educational journals, JSTOR, and many more

databases. The study showed that the struggling low-income situation of the parents lessened the

child's readiness for school due to poor physical wellness and motor capabilities, reduced student

concentration and remembrance capacity, and less attentiveness and motivation. The study

established that poverty presents a greater number of challenges to children living in urban

settings than it does to children in rural and suburban areas. Poverty has multiple impacts, such

as lack of resources at home and school and lack of preparation at a young age. The effects are

mainly evident in children born and raised in low-income families. For instance, children in

urban areas in low socioeconomic areas face more hardships in education due to a lack of

resources, behaviors in and out of learning institutions, and negative temptations that the larger

population faces. The study established that the impoverished situation introduces various

obstacles to students, hence ineffective education, which impacts academic performance. It

makes children fail academically, which is a manifestation of their socioeconomic setting.

Moreover, educators, learners, and students are disadvantaged in education when compared to

people living in rural and high-income level areas.

Living in low-income families has various impacts on the overall quality of life. A study

by Souza (2020) aimed to understand the long-lasting implications of living in deprivation as a

child. The authors sought to understand some parameters a child can and cannot control. These

factors impact academic success, health, and parental influence. The article used a qualitative

textual analysis design to interpret, examine, and describe and analyze the collected data. The

data were collected through various outlets such as websites, textbooks, and information from

peer-reviewed articles. The study showed that multiple factors impact educational performance.

As per the study, a child from low-income background faces various challenges such as drug use,

dropping out of school, gang engagement, homelessness, and many more issues. Poor academic

performance is also attributed to parental influence, a major environmental factor that must be

controlled and maintained. Low-income family situations impact the child's sleep schedule and

routine, affecting educational performance. The implications necessitate parents to enforce a

daily bedtime routine that helps to optimize a child's sleep duration. Such situations also impact

the child's daily reading ability, which is needed to stimulate the child's intellectual progress. The

effects show the need for a simple environmental change to allow positive academic

performance regardless of the resources and capabilities.

Research Methods

The current study used various research methods to help understand the impacts of

struggling and low-income family status on academic performance. The studies reviewed utilized

the quantitative and qualitative research design that involves using databases and conducting

interviews and questionnaires. Qualitative research helps the researcher to understand the related

topics of why and how (Cleland, 2017). In this case, qualitative research helps the researcher to

understand the various ways and reasons that low-income backgrounds impact a child's

performance. Qualitative research involves queries that cannot be quantified using figures to

understand the problems faced by GHO. The quantitative analysis offers facts and reliable

outcomes to help generalize to the larger population. The research method offers detailed, valid,

and rich statistics based on the participants and not based on the researcher's interpretations and

perspectives (Verhoef & Casebeer, 2017). In this case, the quantitative research helps to

generalize the low-income situation impacts on the children in GHO, given the low-income

levels for families in the neighborhood. GHO faces poor academic performance issues, which

makes new students and parents shy away from the institution and find better performing

institutions. This shows the need for constant checks and advancement measures to create

academic success and enhance students’ performance at GHO.

Pertinent Models, Frameworks, or Theories

Understanding how low-income situations for struggling families impact a child's

academic performance is essential to know how it affects their development. This involves the

exploration of the resource, investment, and stress theories (Miller et al., 2019). The investment

and resource theory establishes that children from low-income struggling families receive less

family and community investment, impacting their early development. Parents make various

investments for their children to enhance early cognitive development and access to high-quality

education (Attanasio et al., 2020). In this case, the situation of struggling families in low-income

impacts access to these resources, impeding access to quality education. It affects the children's

academic performance because they cannot access much-needed resources to support their

educational performance.

The family and environmental stress model establishes that impoverishment leads to

achievement disparities due to various stressors that impact healthy development. At home,

economic issues are stressors that low-income families face, leading to inter-parental problems

and psychological distress (McNeil-Smith & Landor, 2018). Financial stress leads to less

responsive parenting and maladaptive outcomes like reduced language and cognitive capabilities.

Low-income families have greater challenges related to the child-rearing environment at the

community level. Some factors include pollution, danger, impoverishment, neglected

neighborhoods, noise, and substandard housing. The stressors hinder children’s response systems

and impede their self-regulatory capabilities. In turn, this is felt in the child's functional domains,

including academic functioning. The various models and theories help understand how belonging

to struggling low-income families increases stressors, affecting the child's academic success

(Miller et al., 2019). In this case, GHO has a bad reputation depicted in bad test scores, student

progress, and equity. The performance is below the state average, which shows that the learners

need to increase their academic efforts. The research shows that the low-performing learners are

mostly from low-income families and are economically disadvantaged. The study helps us

understand the various factors linked to lack and contributing to this problem.

Summary of Findings

Low-income and struggling families are an everyday reality of persistent devastating

epidemics in various communities globally. Low-income situations affect families in more than

51% of U.S. public schools and kindergarten to Grade 12 learners (Holmes, 2018). Families

living in impoverished areas face challenges and deficiencies in meeting their essential daily

needs. The communities lack employment opportunities and face scarce resources and

overwhelming pressure to find ways to contribute to the family. The various factors make

neighborhoods decimated by poverty, which traps the children into impoverishment and poor

education. Education is meant to serve as a way out of the dark tunnel to help people move out of

poverty. However, the impacts of poverty situations on education and academic performance

among learners are demoralizing. The primary challenge for children to endure academic

performance is not just a single factor for them to overcome (McKenzie, 2019). The impacts of

low-income family belonging present challenges and adverse effects for learners to subdue to

enhance academic performance.

Belonging to low-income struggling families negatively impacts the learner's academic

performance, as presented at GHO. Deprivation leads to inadequate learning resources among

low-income families than average and affluent families (Holmes, 2018). The inferior learning

materials impact learners' educational journey, hence negative academic performance. Poor

academic performance can also be attributed to some factors linked to low-income status, which

include single parentage, alcohol consumption, lack of basic needs, and a slum environment.

These factors contribute to the learners' absenteeism, frequently missing out on classes and

leading to poor performance (McKenzie, 2019). The various aspects linked to low-income status

and the challenges introduced to learners necessitate practical efforts to help address the

problem. The solutions will help enhance learner performance through increased encouragement

to perform well.

Statement of the Problem

The problem identified through the SWOT assessment is belonging to struggling low-

income family status for many learners. Therefore, the problem is addressing issues facing

students from struggling low-income families and which factors impede their learning. Past

research studies have established a link between low-income status belonging and lower

performance in school in poor socioeconomic backgrounds. Many schools in these areas are at

risk of poor academic achievement and a lack of motivation for the learners to perform. The

child's literacy and academic performance are buffered by low-income backgrounds and

associated factors. Sharif (2020) argued that students from poor backgrounds run the risk of low

levels of academic achievement as well as reduced motivation.

Description of the Context of the Problem

Many schools located in areas with families from lower socioeconomic backgrounds

have been victims of the poverty gap experienced in the neighborhood. This happens because

such schools are the receiving grounds for the learners with whom they teach. A multitude of

research has established a correlation between low-income backgrounds and low academic

achievement in schools in such areas. Students are at risk of very low grades with a diminished

motivation to perform, given the environment brought about by poverty in such localities (Sharif,

2020). The poor performance in the schools has been seen as emanating from lack of enough

resources, leading to implications on motivation concentration among many others that buffer

learning in the said institutions. Rodriguez (2020) showed that lack of access to education is a

factor in fueling poverty; yet again, poverty impedes education achievement and access by many

children.

Scope and Significance of the Problem

GHO is a victim of the impoverished neighborhood, which spells dooms for the learners'

achievement. Given the working conditions of the parents in the community, their children are at

risk of academic failure. Many parents in Clarksdale, Mississippi, live below the poverty line,

and parents have less time put aside to guide their children in various areas, which children may

deem difficult when no guidance is not provided. It is worse since most of the parents in these

backgrounds are less educated; hence, they will be of less help to the students when it comes to

homework and assignments. The U.S. Census Bureau (2021) reported that the estimated poverty

for school-age children was 13.2% in 2019. It is quite regrettable that, even in some counties, the

rate is higher than the national average. Sosnowski (2015) stated that one in five children in the

United States lives in poverty. High schools in poor areas recorded a dropout rate of 8.7% in

2008 compared to 2% of high schools in higher income areas. The performance gap shows the

great role poverty plays in hampering the education of the average American child.

Rationale for Investigating the Problem

Education has widely been regarded as the greatest equalizer. However, poor

backgrounds pose a danger and a disadvantage to school-going children, given the many

challenges brought in by low-income status to the child's education. Given the American

education system, children from poor backgrounds are exposed to a lack of stable jobs after

school. McKenzie (2019) explained that poor social and economic status factors highly impact

the learning and behavior of students in any given circumstance. Rodriguez (2020) indicated a

typical vicious cycle between lack of education and poverty. While lack of education speeds

people into poverty, poverty also buffers the learning of school-going children. In various ways,

poverty impedes learning, and hence the educational achievement of the affected person is highly

affected. These implication means that identifying the correlation between low-income

struggling families and education performance is critical to addressing the poor performance

witnessed in schools.

Well-Defined Problem Statement

The problem at GHO involves the low-income status from which its learners come, thus

affecting the students’ academic ability. According to Borgen (2018) and Calder (2019), a cause-

effect relationship between poverty and low achievement in education has been established.

Low-income families in the neighborhood of schools and within the parents have effects on the

very children in such schools who are birthed to such parents. Learners are less motivated when

there is a lack of adequate resources needed for their education. Lack of basic needs at home

leads to reduced concentration, retention, and dropouts in the advanced levels of education.

Borgen (2018) indicated that hunger-stricken children will have difficulty concentrating and may

be subject to daydreaming. The effects, among many others, impede the students’ learning and

lead to low academic performance for the said children.

Poverty among the parents trickles down to the school-going children, affecting them in

different ways. A lack of access to materials for completing assignments in school and at home

can impede students' academic motivation to learn. In addition, struggling parents from low-

income backgrounds will most likely have experienced poor academic achievement and have

very busy working schedules that impede the very ability of their child to access beneficial

education. In addition, hunger-stricken children are emotionally unstable, and sleep-deprived

situations among them heavily affect the learners (Borgen, 2018). The accumulated effects

eventually lower the ability of the learners to perform, keeping along the vicious cycle of poverty

and low income within the school environment and the children themselves. A correlation

between poor school performance and low-income and struggling status backgrounds has been

established (Borgen, 2018). The present study regarded the GHO neighborhood as one with

struggling low-income families, affecting the learners' performance. Identifying how low-income

background status interplays with low academic performance is critical to addressing the poor

performance at GHO and other schools with a similar problem.

Part 3: Research Possible Solutions

Introduction

The problem at George H. Oliver Elementary School (GHO) is the underachievement of

pupils from low-income families. This section will outline four potential solutions to the

problem. A strategic plan is a road map that gives companies focus, coordinates resources, and

aids in prioritizing their tasks. A strategic plan may be utilized to create and carry out potential

solutions when it comes to dealing with the issue of student mental health and academic

performance. Four potential solutions have been determined based on the problem analysis and

research presented in this part.

Possible Solutions

The four solutions chosen are (a) increase access to technology for low-income students,

(b) implementation of a trauma-informed care training for teachers, (c) introduce a parental

involvement program, and (d) implementation of school-based health centers.

Possible Solution One: Increase Access to Technology for Low-income Students

I selected this solution because it addresses the issue of access to technology, a

significant challenge faced by many students, particularly those from low-income families.

Technology access has become even more important during the COVID-19 pandemic, as many

schools have shifted to remote or hybrid learning models. The first study by Kim and Padilla

(2020) aimed to explore the use of technology for educational purposes among low-income

Latino children living in a mobile park in Silicon Valley before and during the COVID-19

pandemic. It employed a qualitative case study approach; the participants were nine children

aged 6 to 12 years. Data were collected through observations, interviews with children and

parents, and document analysis. This study explained how technology affordability can be a big

issue to students to attain the required education. In the current organization, where GHO is

dealing with students from poor families, the school district needs to provide technology funding

is essential. This will enable students from low-income families meet their academic needs.

The second study by Midgett et al. (2021) focused on designing a technology-based

bullying intervention for rural schools. The authors conducted a mixed-methods study, which

included a survey of 6 school administrators and counselors and a focus group with 25 students.

The participants were from two rural schools in the Pacific Northwest. The researchers wanted to

see how a technological bullying intervention program affected students' ability to think

critically and motivation to study. In this qualitative study, interviews were employed to gather

information. The findings indicated that a technology based bullying intervention program

improved students' capacity for introspection and motivation to learn.

The third article is that of Mitchell (2020), who explored the ethical concerns of school

closures for low-income children during the COVID-19 pandemic. The goal of this research was

to examine how the pandemic, (where in this case the pandemic is being likened to poverty and

compared how both affects student's performance) affected the mental health of college students

living in densely populated areas of the United States. The study was conducted among 100 fifth

and sixth graders in a rural school in the Southwest. Data for the study were gathered

quantitatively through polls and surveys. Students' stress levels were higher and sense of well-

being was shown to be significantly lower than average during the epidemic; therefore, students’

stress levels during the pandemic could be likened to stress levels of students from poor families,

which will have the same effect on students.

The fourth article by Roth (2020) involved a discussion of the ongoing debate on access,

adequacy, and equity of technology in education. The author used a literature review approach,

synthesizing previous research. This research looked at how poverty affected students in

Indonesia's and Uzbekistan's public school systems. The researchers set out to examine how

students' financial situations affected their performance in public schools. Surveys and in-person

interviews were utilized to compile the data for this mixed-methods study. The findings of this

study showed that a lack of financial resources had severe effects on students' performance in the

public school systems of both countries. This study is very relevant when it comes to the current

situation in the GHO community, as it provides an ideal situation and how it has to be dealt with.

Synthesis of Problems, Trends, Concepts, and Gaps. One significant problem is the

digital divide, which refers to the gap between those with access to technology and those without

access. This divide is especially evident among low-income families and rural communities. This

gap can lead to inequitable access to education, as students without access to technology may be

unable to complete assignments or attend virtual classes. Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic

highlighted the issue of unequal access to technology as schools shifted to remote learning. One

trend identified involved the increasing importance of technology in education. The COVID-19

pandemic accelerated this trend, as many schools had to shift to remote or hybrid learning

models. However, the trend also highlights unequal access to technology among students, which

can exacerbate existing educational disparities. GHO students do not have access to technology

in their homes, so the school district will have to find sources of funding in order to help with

their technology needs. One concept that emerged from the studies is the importance of

designing technology-based interventions tailored to the target population's specific needs. This

concept was highlighted by Midgett et al. (2021), who focused on designing a bullying

intervention appropriate for rural schools. One gap in the research involved the lack of focus on

specific populations, such as students with disabilities. Students with disabilities may face

additional technological barriers, exacerbating educational disparities. Struggling students from

low-income families are more likely to experience.

Compare Different Studies Highlighting Similarities, Differences, and Connections.

One similarity across the studies involved the focus on access to technology in education.

However, the studies differ in focusing on specific populations (e.g., low-income Latino children

and rural students) and their research methods. For example, Kim and Padilla (2020) used a

qualitative case study approach, while Mitchell (2020) conducted a qualitative analysis of media

reports and policy documents. Another similarity is the need for tailored technology-based

interventions. This was highlighted by Midgett et al. (2021) and was also evident in other studies

to varying degrees. For example, Roth (2020) discussed the importance of ensuring that

technology is adequate for the specific needs of the target population. Kim and Padilla (2020)

and Roth (2020) both focused on increasing access to technology, with Kim and Padilla

examining the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on low-income Latino children's access to

technology for educational purposes and Roth exploring the ongoing debate of access, adequacy,

and equity in technology in education. Both studies argued that lack of access to technology can

exacerbate existing educational inequalities and hinder disadvantaged students' academic

success.

Midgett et al. (2021) also addressed the issue of technology access, but from the

perspective of a technology-based bullying intervention for rural schools. They noted that

technological interventions can help mitigate the effects of bullying and promote a safer learning

environment for students. Mitchell (2020) took a different approach by examining the ethical

concerns of school closures during the pandemic, which can significantly impact low-income

school-aged children who may not have access to technology at home. Mitchell argues that

policymakers must consider the potential long-term effects of school closures on educational

inequality and prioritize equitable access to technology and other resources. A difference

between the studies is how much they address the COVID-19 pandemic. Kim and Padilla (2020)

specifically examined the impact of the pandemic on technology access, while Mitchell (2020)

focused on the ethical concerns of school closures during the pandemic. Midgett et al. (2021) and

Roth (2020) did not explicitly focus on the pandemic, but their studies are still relevant to

increasing access to technology in education.

Summary of Findings and Results of Possible Solution. The four selected studies

highlighted the importance of increasing access to technology in education and addressing the

digital divide, especially for disadvantaged and marginalized students. Kim and Padilla's (2020)

case study of low-income Latino children in Silicon Valley illustrated the impact of the COVID-

19 pandemic on technology access and the challenges families faced in obtaining devices and

internet access. Roth's (2020) exploration of the ongoing debate of access, adequacy, and equity

in technology in education emphasized the need for policies and initiatives that promote equal

access to technology for all students. Midgett et al. (2021) and Mitchell (2020) also emphasized

the importance of equitable access to technology in promoting a safe and inclusive learning

environment and mitigating the effects of educational inequality. While Midgett et al. focused

specifically on the potential of technology-based interventions to address bullying in rural

schools, Mitchell's examination of the ethical concerns of school closures during the pandemic

highlights the need for policy makers to prioritize equitable access to technology and other

resources to promote academic success for all students, regardless of socioeconomic status.

Possible Solution Two: Implementation of Trauma-Informed Care Training for Teachers

This solution involves implementing trauma-informed care training for teachers to equip

them with the necessary knowledge and skills to support students who have experienced trauma.

Implementing trauma-informed care training for teachers can equip them with the knowledge

and skills necessary to identify and support students who have experienced trauma. Teacher

training is not accessible in rural areas for dealing with students who experience trauma. Most

educators at GHO have students that have experienced many forms of trauma in their lives.

According to Maynard et al. (2019), there is evidence of positive outcomes when teachers are

trained to deal with trauma.

The first study by Bilbrey et al. (2022) aimed to explore the perspectives of primary early

childhood educators regarding their knowledge, confidence, and training in trauma-informed

care. It was a qualitative study that involved 16 participants. The study found that educators had

limited knowledge and understanding of trauma and its impact on children's behavior and

learning. The study also revealed that educators lacked confidence in dealing with trauma-related

issues, and there was a need for professional development training to equip them with skills to

support students who have experienced trauma. In the second study by Hutchison (2021), the

author highlighted the importance of trauma-informed care in schools from an elementary school

perspective. The researcher conducted a qualitative study to investigate the link between

economic hardship and academic performance. Forty educators from a range of backgrounds

participated in the interviews for this study. Semi structured interviews were used to gather

information, and the results were evaluated using thematic content analysis. The findings of this

research, as it was revealed through the report, highlighted the need to educate educators

regarding the impact of socioeconomic status on their students' academic performance. The study

emphasized the need for teachers to be trained in trauma-informed care to recognize and respond

to the trauma experienced by students. The author also suggested that a school-wide approach to

trauma-informed care can create a supportive and safe student environment.

The third study by Maynard et al. (2019) systematically reviewed the effects of trauma-

informed approaches in schools. The review included 23 studies and found that trauma-informed

care approaches in schools led to positive outcomes for students, including improved behavior,

academic performance, and reduced disciplinary actions. However, the review also highlighted

the need for more research to understand the specific mechanisms that lead to these outcomes.

The fourth study Thomas et al. (2019) involved an interdisciplinary review of research on

trauma-informed practices in schools over 20 years. The review included 59 studies and found

that trauma-informed practices in schools can have positive outcomes for both students and

teachers. The review also identified gaps in the research, including the need for more studies on

the long-term effects of trauma-informed care and the need to understand how trauma-informed

care can be effectively implemented in different school settings.

Synthesis of Problems, Trends, Concepts, and Gaps. One major problem identified in

the research involved the lack of consistency in implementing trauma-informed care training for

teachers. Hutchison's (2021) study found that while teachers were receptive to trauma-informed

care, many schools lacked the resources and training to implement it effectively. This lack of

consistency could also be seen in Thomas et al.'s (2019) interdisciplinary review, which found

that while trauma-informed practices have been gaining popularity over the last 20 years, there is

still a lack of standardization in the field. This lack of consistency can lead to confusion among

teachers and ultimately limit the effectiveness of trauma-informed care training. Another issue

that has been identified is the need for ongoing support and professional development for

teachers who receive trauma-informed care training. Maynard et al.'s (2019) systematic review

found that while trauma-informed care training can effectively improve student outcomes, the

effects tend to fade over time. They suggested that ongoing support and professional

development for teachers can help sustain the positive effects of the training. Similarly, Bilbrey

et al.'s (2022) study found that while trauma-informed care training improved teachers'

confidence and knowledge, ongoing support and additional training were needed to integrate

trauma-informed care into their practices fully.

Trends in the research indicate that trauma-informed care is becoming increasingly

recognized as an essential component of a comprehensive approach to student well-being. The

studies suggest that when teachers are trained in trauma-informed care, they are better equipped

to support students who have experienced trauma and can ultimately improve student outcomes.

However, the research also highlights the need for ongoing professional development and

support for teachers, as well as the need for standardization in the field. In terms of gaps in the

research, there is a need for studies that examine the long-term impact of trauma-informed care

training on both teachers and students. While the research suggests that trauma-informed care

can positively impact student outcomes, there is a lack of research on the long-term effects of the

training. In addition, there is a need for more research on implementing trauma-informed care in

diverse school contexts and with diverse student populations. Many of the studies reviewed were

conducted in specific regions or with specific student populations, limiting the findings'

generalizability.

Compare Different Studies Highlighting Similarities, Differences, and Connections.

The four articles selected for this solution shared similarities in highlighting the importance of

trauma-informed care training for teachers. Low income and its direct or indirect consequences

on schooling were the central subjects of all of the research. All of the research included both

qualitative and quantitative components. Moreover, the researchers all shared a common interest

in exploring the impact of economic hardship on students' academic outcomes and suggesting

strategies for educators to counteract this trend. They all emphasized the need for educators to

understand trauma better and its impact on students' behavior and learning. They also highlighted

the need for teachers to be trained in trauma-informed care to support students who have

experienced trauma effectively.

Bilbrey et al. (2022) and Hutchison (2021) focused on the need for training from the

perspective of early childhood educators and elementary school teachers, respectively. Maynard

et al. (2019) and Thomas et al. (2019) provided a broader review of the effects and

implementation of trauma-informed care in schools. Maynard et al. (2019) and Thomas et al.

(2019) both provided evidence of the positive effects of trauma-informed care in schools, while

Bilbrey et al. (2022) and Hutchison (2021) highlighted the need for more training and support for

educators to implement trauma-informed care in their classrooms effectively. The research

demonstrates the severe impact that economic hardship can have on academic achievement and

offers guidance for educators. There is a significant achievement difference between pupils from

low-income and higher-income households, but studies suggest that providing resources, training

teachers, encouraging family involvement, and motivating education might help close the gap.

Overall, these articles demonstrate that trauma-informed care training for teachers is a promising

solution for supporting students who have experienced trauma. However, more research is

needed to understand the most effective ways to implement trauma-informed care in different

school settings and to ensure that educators have the necessary support and resources to

implement these practices effectively.

Summary of Findings and Results of Possible Solution. Implementing trauma-

informed care training for teachers has been suggested as a potential solution to address the

effects of trauma on students. The four studies selected for this solution provide insights into the

effectiveness and challenges of trauma-informed care training. Maynard et al. (2019)

systematically reviewed studies on trauma-informed care interventions in schools. They found

that trauma-informed care training for teachers led to significant improvements in school

climate, teacher attitudes, and student behavior. The studies reviewed utilized various data

collection methods, including surveys, focus groups, and observations. The participants in these

studies included teachers, students, and parents. Thomas et al. (2019) conducted an

interdisciplinary review of trauma-informed care practices in schools over two decades. They

found that trauma-informed care training for teachers led to positive outcomes, including

increased knowledge of trauma and its impact on students, improved communication and

relationships between teachers and students, and reduced disciplinary actions. The studies

included in this review utilized quantitative and qualitative methods, with participants ranging

from elementary to high school educators and students.

Hutchison (2021) conducted a case study on implementing trauma-informed care

practices in an elementary school. The study included surveys and interviews with teachers and

school administrators. Hutchison found that implementing trauma-informed care practices led to

increased teacher awareness of trauma and its impact on student behavior, improved teacher-

student relationships, and decreased suspensions and expulsions. Bilbrey et al. (2022) conducted

a study on the perspectives of primary early childhood educators regarding trauma-informed

knowledge, confidence, and training. The study utilized a quantitative survey with a sample size

of 178 educators. The authors found that educators who had received trauma-informed care

training had higher levels of trauma-informed knowledge and confidence in supporting children

who have experienced trauma. Overall, the findings of these four studies suggest that

implementing trauma-informed care training for teachers can effectively improve teacher

knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to trauma-informed care. However, there are still gaps

in the research, including the need for more longitudinal studies and more research on the

sustainability of trauma-informed care practices in schools.

Possible Solution Three: Introduce a Parental Involvement Program

One possible solution to improve student academic achievement and reduce school

behavior problems is introducing a parental involvement program. Parental involvement is

defined as the active participation of parents in their child's education and schooling Berkowitz

et al. (2021). Because of low income of parents of struggling students and prolonged times of

lack, parents from poverty-stricken backgrounds leave all the burden to teachers and have low

participation in their children's academics. All the responsibility is left to the teachers to lift the

test scores of the learners with whom they are dealing. This solution aims to synthesize and

analyze the findings of four scholarly articles related to parental involvement programs,

including their effects on student academic achievement and behavior and the role of parents and

teachers in these programs.

Alameda-Lawson and Lawson (2019) conducted a qualitative study to explore the

collective engagement of Black and Latinx parents in urban schools. The objective of this study

was to identify the impact of collective engagement on academic achievement and social-

emotional development. The study involved 63 parents from six urban schools in California. The

researchers collected data through semi-structured interviews, focus groups, and observations.

The results showed that collective engagement helped to promote academic achievement and

social-emotional development among Black and Latinx students. However, structural barriers,

such as language barriers, lack of resources, and negative stereotypes about urban parents, often

limited such engagement.

Berkowitz et al. (2021) investigated the relationship between parental involvement and

school climate in California. The purpose of the study was to examine the impact of parental

involvement on the school climate and identify the barriers that parents face when trying to get

involved. The study involved 641 parents of students in kindergarten to Grade 12 schools. The

researchers collected data through online surveys. The results showed that parents who were

more involved in their child's education perceived a more positive school climate. However,

some parents faced barriers to involvement, such as lack of time and access to school resources,

which may limit the impact of parental involvement on the school climate.

Lara and Saracostti (2019) conducted a quantitative study in Chile to examine the effect

of parental involvement on children's academic achievement. The objective of the study was to

determine the impact of parental involvement on academic achievement in reading and writing.

The study involved 384 parents of elementary and middle school students. The researchers

collected data through surveys. The results showed a significant positive effect of parental

involvement on student academic achievement, particularly in reading and writing. However, the

effect was stronger for mothers than for fathers, and some parents faced barriers to involvement,

such as lack of time and negative perceptions of their role in education.

Smith et al. (2019) conducted a mixed-methods study to explore family-school

engagement across elementary and middle school contexts. The purpose of the study was to

understand the nature and extent of family-school engagement and its relationship with student

outcomes. The study utilized a sequential explanatory design, where quantitative data from

surveys were collected first, followed by qualitative data from interviews. A total of 865 parents

and 376 teachers from eight schools in a mid-sized city in the southeastern United States

participated in the study. The participants were from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds and

included parents with varying levels of education and income. The study was conducted in the

school setting, where the data were collected using surveys and interviews. The surveys were

administered online and in paper form, and the interviews were conducted in person and via

phone. The study found that family-school engagement was associated with positive student

outcomes, such as improved academic achievement and reduced behavior problems. However,

engagement varied by grade level, with more involvement in elementary school than in middle

school. Additionally, parents and teachers had different perceptions of the nature and extent of

parental involvement, with parents reporting higher levels of involvement than teachers.

Synthesis of Problems, Trends, Concepts, and Gaps. Studies have shown that parental

involvement is associated with improved academic performance, better school attendance, and

fewer behavioral problems (Alameda-Lawson & Lawson, 2019; Lara & Saracostti, 2019).

However, despite the benefits of parental involvement, there are several challenges to

implementing effective programs, including low parent engagement, language barriers, and

cultural differences (Berkowitz et al., 2021; Smith et al., 2019). Moreover, some research has

suggested that parental involvement programs may have differential effects depending on the

child's age, race, and socioeconomic status (Alameda-Lawson & Lawson, 2019; Smith et al.,

2019).

Compare Different Studies Highlighting Similarities, Differences, and Connections.

All four studies identified the importance of parental involvement in promoting positive student

outcomes, such as improved academic achievement and reduced behavior problems. However,

they also noted that structural barriers might limit parental involvement, such as lack of time and

resources and negative perceptions of parents' role in education. Additionally, the studies

highlighted the role of teachers in promoting parental involvement and fostering positive

relationships between parents and schools. One notable difference among the studies is the focus

on different aspects of parental involvement. Alameda-Lawson and Lawson (2019) focused on

collective engagement and the role of parents in shaping school culture. Berkowitz et al. (2021)

focused on the relationship between parental involvement and school climate. Lara and

Saracostti (2019) focused on the effect of parental involvement on academic achievement. Smith

et al. (2019) focused on the nature and extent of family-school engagement across elementary

and middle school contexts.

Summary of Findings and Results of Possible Solution. The findings from the four

studies suggest that introducing a parental involvement program can positively affect student

academic achievement and behavior. Such programs should address the structural barriers that

limit parental involvement, such as lack of time and resources and negative perceptions of

parents' role in education. Additionally, teachers should actively promote parental involvement

and foster positive relationships between parents and schools. In summary, introducing a parental

involvement program can effectively increase parental engagement in their children's education

and improve academic achievement. Research studies suggest that parent involvement programs

can create a positive school climate, enhance communication between parents and teachers, and

increase students' academic success. Alameda-Lawson and Lawson (2019) argued that a

collective approach to parent engagement is essential to creating meaningful partnerships

between schools and families. Berkowitz et al. (2021) found that parental involvement is

positively associated with perceptions of school climate in California. Lara and Racostti (2019)

conducted a study in Chile and found that parental involvement positively affected children's

academic achievement. The authors suggested schools should develop strategies encouraging

parent involvement to support students' academic success. Smith et al. (2019) found that family-

school engagement varies across contexts. Therefore, schools must design and implement parent

involvement programs that fit their unique school culture and community needs. Overall, the

research suggests that a parental involvement program can significantly impact student

achievement and school climate. It is important to consider the context in which the program is

implemented and to take a collective approach that involves families, teachers, and the

community.

Possible Solution Four: Implementation of School-Based Health Centers

I selected this possible solution because it effectively provides access to healthcare

services for students, particularly those from low-income families who may not have access to

healthcare outside of school. Living in poverty has various impacts that affect the overall quality

of life. A study by Souza (2020) aimed to understand the long-lasting impacts of living in

deprivation as a child. This involved understanding some parameters that a child can and cannot

control. These factors impact academic success, health, and parental influence. The following is

a synthesis of four articles related to the implementation of school-based health centers.

The review by Arenson et al. (2019) aimed to examine the evidence on the effectiveness

of school-based health centers in improving health outcomes and access to care for children and

adolescents. The study was a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies. The

review included 54 studies conducted in the United States and Canada, with 54,365 participants.

The studies were conducted in various settings, including urban, suburban, and rural areas. The

data were collected using various methods, including surveys, medical records, and interviews.

The review found that school-based health centers can improve access to care, increase the use of

preventive services, and improve health outcomes, particularly for low-income and minority

populations.

The second study by Dunfee (2020) provided a historical overview of school-based

health centers in the United States, including their roots, current state, and potential for the

future. The study is a qualitative review of the literature and policy documents. The study does

not include participants or data collection. The article highlights the importance of SBHCs in

addressing health-related barriers to learning and improving educational outcomes. The author

also discussed the challenges faced by school-based health centers, such as funding and policy

issues, and suggests potential solutions. The third study by Gardiner (2020) aimed to examine the

impact of school-based health centers on health and educational outcomes. The study was a

systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies. The review included 40 studies

conducted in the United States, with 56,624 participants. The studies were conducted in various

settings, including urban, suburban, and rural areas. The data were collected using various

methods, including surveys and medical records. The review found that school-based health

centers can improve health outcomes, increase access to care, and positively impact educational

outcomes, such as attendance rates and academic achievement. The fourth study by Goddard et

al. (2021) aimed to examine telehealth use in school-based health centers during the COVID-19

pandemic. The study was a qualitative review of the literature and policy documents. The study

does not include participants or data collection. The authors highlight the potential of telehealth

to increase access to care, particularly for underserved populations, and the challenges faced by

SBHCs in implementing telehealth services. The study found that the usage of telehealth services

helped underserved communities.

Synthesis of Problems, Trends, Concepts, and Gaps. The studies selected for this

solution highlight several problems and trends related to school-based health centers. One of the

major challenges faced by school-based health centers is funding and sustainability (Dunfee,

2020). Many school-based health centers rely on grants and donations, which can be unstable

funding sources. Additionally, school-based health centers often face policy and regulatory

barriers that limit their ability to provide services (Dunfee, 2020; Goddard et al., 2021). Another

issue highlighted by the studies is the need for culturally sensitive and trauma-informed care in

school-based health centers, particularly for underserved and minority populations (Arenson et

al., 2019; Gardiner, 2020). The studies also highlight the potential of school-based health centers

to provide comprehensive healthcare services and improve student health outcomes. The studies

show that school-based health centers can provide various healthcare services, including physical

exams, vaccinations, mental health services, reproductive health services, and chronic disease

management. The studies also indicate that school-based health centers can increase access to

care for vulnerable populations, including uninsured or underinsured students, students with

chronic illnesses, and students from low-income families.

However, the studies also revealed some gaps and limitations of school-based health

centers. For example, Gardiner (2020) noted a lack of research on the long-term impact of

school-based health centers on health outcomes and academic achievement. Additionally,

Dunfee (2020) highlighted the challenges of funding and sustaining school-based health centers,

particularly in areas with limited resources or political support. Regarding trends, Goddard et al.

(2021) highlighted the increasing use of telehealth services in school-based health centers,

particularly in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. This trend may have implications for the

future of school-based health centers and their ability to provide care to students remotely. When

comparing the studies, similarities were found in the potential benefits of school-based health

centers for students, particularly in increasing access to care and improving health outcomes.

Differences existed in the types of services provided by school-based health centers, with some

studies focusing more on mental health services and others on primary care services.

Additionally, the studies varied in their research methods, with some using qualitative methods

such as interviews and focus groups and others using quantitative methods such as surveys and

data analysis. Overall, the studies suggested that school-based health centers have the potential to

provide comprehensive healthcare services and improve health outcomes for students,

particularly for vulnerable populations. However, funding and sustainability remain major

challenges for school-based health centers, and further research is needed to understand their

impact on health outcomes and academic achievement fully.

Compare Different Studies Highlighting Similarities, Differences, and Connections.

The four studies selected for this solution all highlighted the potential of school-based health

centers to provide comprehensive healthcare services to students, particularly for vulnerable

populations. They also emphasized the importance of increasing access to care and improving

student health outcomes. One similarity between the studies was that they all identified the range

of services that school-based health centers can provide, including physical exams, vaccinations,

mental health services, reproductive health services, and chronic disease management. They also

recognize the potential for school-based health centers to increase access to care for vulnerable

populations. Access to health care can be important in decreasing student absenteeism.

However, there were also some differences between the studies. For example, Dunfee

(2020) focused more on the historical development of school-based health centers and their

current challenges, while Gardiner (2020) emphasized the potential of school-based health

centers to support health and educational outcomes. Arenson et al. (2019) focused more on the

effectiveness of school-based health centers in improving health outcomes, while Goddard et al.

(2021) examined the use of telehealth services in school-based health centers in response to the

COVID-19 pandemic. Despite these differences, all of the studies suggested that school-based

health centers have the potential to improve health outcomes for students and increase access to

care for vulnerable populations.

Summary of Findings and Results of Possible Solution. The four studies selected for

this solution provided evidence that school-based health centers have the potential to provide

comprehensive healthcare services to students and improve health outcomes, particularly for

vulnerable populations. They also highlighted the importance of increasing access to care and

addressing the challenges of funding and sustaining school-based health centers. Arenson et al.

(2019) reviewed the literature on school-based health centers. They found that they can provide a

variety of healthcare services and potentially improve student health outcomes. They also noted

the importance of funding and sustainability in ensuring the effectiveness of school-based health

centers. Dunfee (2020) provided a historical overview of school-based health centers and

identified their current challenges, including funding and sustainability. The author emphasized

the potential of school-based health centers to address healthcare disparities and support students'

health and academic success.

Gardiner (2020) highlighted the potential of school-based health centers to support

students' health and educational outcomes. The author also noted the importance of addressing

the challenges of funding and sustainability. Goddard et al. (2021) examined telehealth services

in school-based health centers in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Telehealth services were

very important during the COVID-19 pandemic when students could not attend school or have

access to health care. The authors found that telehealth services can effectively provide care to

students remotely and may have implications for the future of school-based health centers.

Overall, the studies provide evidence that school-based health centers have the potential to

improve health outcomes for students and increase access to care for vulnerable populations.

However, funding and sustainability remain major challenges for school-based health centers,

and further research is needed to understand their impact on health outcomes and academic

achievement fully.

Part 4: Select a Solution

George H. Oliver Elementary School (GHO) faces various challenges that require policy

strategies. I developed four solutions that are paramount in solving numerous challenges in the

institution. The solutions are geared towards improving the learning environments for students.

However, this part of the assignment will analyze each solution based on pros, cons, and barriers

to enlighten the school administration on the expected budget, personnel, and expertise in

implementing solutions.

Overview of the Four Solutions

The first solution to increase academic performance at GHO involves increasing access to

technology for low-income students. The school has a website that can facilitate online learning,

particularly during the pandemic. The second solution is the implementation of trauma-informed

care training for teachers to support students with traumatic experiences in the home and their

communities. Third, introducing a parental involvement program ensures parents engage in

critical decision-making processes (Cutuli et al., 2019). The last is implementing school-based

health centers to support students who need help with substantial out-of-pocket expenses from

healthcare facilities outside the GHO.

Advantages (Pros) and Disadvantages (Cons) of Solutions

Before making decisions, organizations should make the pros and cons weighting. Pros

and cons weighting allows organizations to fasten the decision-making process, improves the

understanding of the situation being considered, and avoids the paralysis of the decision-making

process. Charyk (2017) argued that thinking through all the possible pros and cons and putting

them in writing enables critical factors in the decision-making process not to be missed. This is

key in promoting deep thinking and, in such a way, the possibility for quality decisions. Further,

the pros and cons list is critical in ensuring harmony in the decision-making process by reducing

the risk of a self-distanced perspective where the decision is viewed as an external effect to be

addressed. It also reduces the risk of “amygdala hijack,” where emotional threats arising from the

said decision making can lead to extreme actions. Wood (2009) argued that the pros and cons

decision-making model allows those concerned to make transparent, user-friendly decisions

compared to other approaches to decision-making. The transparency that comes with this is vital,

where people are not trained in decision-making but must make multi-criteria decisions.

Solution One: Increase Access to Technology for Low-income Students

GHO will benefit a lot from implementing new technologies. Technology has many

benefits, including increased motivation among students as they use it to learn more things,

including taking notes and creating assignments independently at home. This will also help them

to understand what they are learning better. Teachers from GHO will also be able to monitor

their student's progress easily through this technology, improve their teaching skills, and impart

knowledge more effectively (Christian-Brandt et al., 2020). Most low-income students need help

to afford laptops to use at home.

Pros. Accessing technology in school can be beneficial for low-income students. Its main

advantage is that it helps students connect with teachers and parents. It also allows them to get

information about classes, homework, and other essential topics needed for learning. The second

advantage is that it will allow them to learn faster, improve their performance and help them with

their grades. One of the reasons this is so important is that low-income families are struggling

financially, so they cannot afford the money and time needed to get a computer or tablet

(Morgan, 2022). During the pandemic, it was very important for students and teachers to have

access to technology.

Cons. However, there are some cons to this implementing to technology. First, there is a

high cost involved in purchasing computers or tablets for every student at GHO. Second, some

students need help organizing themselves enough with these devices. Since most of the students

from the school are from low-income families, they might need more basic skills to implement

the technology. It means the school must employ computer teachers to provide basic concepts to

students before the technology is fully implemented (Morgan, 2022).

Solution Two: Implementation of Trauma-Informed Care Training for Teachers

Teachers at the GHO are responsible for ensuring students are not suffering advanced

psychological conditions from the trauma they experience from society and home. First, the

school has a bad reputation due to poor performance and the high turnover of teachers and the

principal. Teachers need to understand the students since they might be suffering

psychologically. Additionally, students from low-income families experience trauma due to

parents' breakups due to financial challenges (Reddig et al., 2022).

Pros. Implementing trauma-informed care training for teachers in low-income student

schools will enable them to be aware of the needs of their students and provide support to them

(Liang et al., 2020). This will also help them identify the signs of trauma and how to respond

appropriately. Teachers trained to identify trauma in students can help increase better behavior

and school attendance. Secondly, the implementation will enable them to provide better

education to their students by teaching them how to cope with stress, anxiety, and fear. The

training will also help teachers feel more comfortable dealing with students who have experience

trauma.

Cons. The main disadvantage of the program is the challenges of finances to train

teachers. Based on the challenges facing GHO, there needed to be more resources to facilitate the

program. The second disadvantage is the high turnover of teachers where the GHO might train

teachers every year, but they leave for other opportunities. The school then must accommodate

new teachers that replace the ones that transferred to other schools. Training new teachers each

year can be costly for the school. Finding funding for training teachers can be difficult for

schools them (Liang et al., 2020).

Possible Solution Three: Introduce a Parental Involvement Program

Parental involvement is a great way to encourage learning in school. Parents' involvement

is vital in encouraging students and participating in the school's infrastructure development.

GHO requires parents' contributions to prevent high turnover of teachers and principals and

management of resources. Parental involvement programs are essential because it allows parents

to interact with their children individually (Schmid & Garrels, 2021). It also allows them to see

where their child may be struggling or excelling.

Pros. The first advantage of introducing a parental involvement program is that it can

help improve students' academic performance (Leenders, 2019). Parents have an essential role in

education because they influence their children's lives. Parents should be involved in school

because they are responsible for their children's welfare and development, so they should know

what is happening there. The second advantage of introducing a parental involvement program is

that it will encourage students' learning motivation. Students who receive encouragement from

their parents are more likely to want to do well in school and achieve their goals.

Cons. The first disadvantage is that students may feel pressure from their parents if they

are involved in some school activities (Schmid, 2019). School activities may require them to be

away from home for long periods, such as sports. Parents may not want to spend the time or

money to help students excel in those activities. Second, some parents are reluctant to engage in

the program since they might claim they are busy at work or in their businesses. Many students

who attend GHO come from single-parent households and that parent must work. Participating in

activities may be impossible for those parents.

Possible Solution Four: Implementation of School-Based Health Centers

School-based health centers are a part of the federally funded community health centers,

which provide a range of services, including primary care, mental health and substance use

disorder services to underserved communities. School-based health centers receive funding from

state and local governments, private foundations and philanthropic organizations (Lyon et al.,

2019). The cost of a school-based health center would come from outside sources, so it will not

be a big burden financially on the school. GHO requires an effective school-based health center

since it will increase access to affordable healthcare for students who cannot pay for medical

expenses outside the school. A school-based health center will eliminate time spent away from

school because of minor illnesses.

Pros. The primary benefit is that it can improve the health status of low-income students.

They can avoid expensive emergency room visits and hospitalizations by providing them with

access to preventative healthcare services. Another positive aspect of the program is that it will

allow children who cannot afford private insurance to access medical attention without paying a

premium (Nasuuna et al., 2019). Student attendance rates will increase and parents will not have

to miss time from work for doctor’s appointments. A school-based health center also can help

parents keep students current on their immunizations.

Cons. The cons of implementing school-based health centers are their cost and

administrative challenges. It is estimated that it will cost between $1 million and $2 million per

year to set up a comprehensive program at each school district in Mississippi. This amount does

not include the costs of hiring additional doctors, nurses or other medical professionals working

with students at these facilities. Secondly, there may be some resistance from parents who only

want their children to attend school for academic purposes (Singh et al., 2021). Parents may not

agree with students getting information on reproductive health from school-based health centers.

Discussion of Barriers

The administration and other stakeholders need to identify obstacles associated with each

solution. For instance, in implementing the technology, it is essential to analyze the parents'

willingness to support the program (Singh et al., 2021). Trauma-informed care and training for

teachers might be sabotaged by the teachers, particularly the ones ready to seek employment

elsewhere. It is essential to ascertain the barriers to the parental involvement program since it is a

new program at the GHO. School-based health centers may face several obstacles, particularly

from parents and other stakeholders. It is essential to assess the barriers to strike a balance with

other programs.

Solution One: Increase Access to Technology for Low-Income Students

Many potential barriers could prevent low-income students from accessing technology at

GHO. Some of these include a need for more financial resources and insufficient training for

educators. I would address the barriers to the organization by communicating them to the

management and the principle of GHO. Financial resources can be solved by seeking grants from

the government and engaging well-wishers’ organizations for support (Nasuuna et al., 2019). The

second barrier can be solved by exposing teachers to prior training to guide the students

effectively. Providing the teachers with proper training will help to ensure that students are using

the technology effectively.

Solution Two: Implementation of Trauma-Informed Care Training for Teachers

Trauma-informed care is essential to creating safe and supportive learning environments

for all students. However, there are several potential barriers to its implementation in schools.

These include a lack of awareness about the prevalence of trauma among children and

insufficient training for educators (Reddig & VanLone, 2022). I would communicate the barriers

in a general meeting with parents, teachers and students. GHO could provide professional

development opportunities for educators on trauma-informed care and raise awareness about the

issue among parents and community members through community-based education programs.

Solution Three: Introduce a Parental Involvement Program

Parental involvement is critical to student success. In rural schools there are often barriers

that can prevent GHO’s parents from getting involved in their child's education. These can

include a need for more understanding of the school system, busy work schedules, and

transportation issues (Griffiths, et al., 2022). However, by identifying these obstacles early on,

we can develop strategies to overcome them. For example, schools could host parent workshops

on navigating the school system, offer flexible scheduling options for parental involvement

activities, or provide transportation assistance to parents from rural Mississippi.

Solution Four: Implementation of School-Based Health Centers

School-based health centers can provide vital medical and mental health services mainly

to students from low-income backgrounds. The main obstacle to its implementation is funding.

These centers can be expensive and may require outside financial support (Francis et al., 2021).

Another challenge is staffing; qualified healthcare providers may need to find a way to recruit

and retain in GHO School. I would communicate the barriers through the school accountant. The

main solution to the funding is requesting the parents to contribute towards the program. Based

on the staffing, GHO can request qualified healthcare personnel from the state, where the state or

the federal government will pay the staff.

Summary of Rationale for the Selected Solution

In my case, the parental involvement program is the most essential of the four potential

solutions. First, the barriers are few, including a lack of understanding of the school system, busy

work schedules, and transportation issues (Sujarwo et al., 2021). All three barriers would not cost

GHO many expenses. For instance, it is cheap to offer the means of transport to a few parents

from rural areas. The work schedule issue can be solved by organizing weekend or holiday

meetings. The meetings can incorporate education to ensure parents understand their schools'

challenges. However, implementing the other three solutions requires time, professionals, and

much money.

Part 5: Strategies to Accomplish the Selected Solution

Strategy One: Increased Parental Engagement Programs

To address the poor performance of struggling pupils from low-income families at

George H. Oliver Elementary School, I have chosen increased parental involvement programs as

the first method. The academic performance of pupils, especially those from underprivileged

families, has been universally acknowledged to be improved by parental participation (Smith et

al., 2019). GHO can address the problem of low parental involvement and improve student

achievement by implementing tailored initiatives that actively include parents in their children's

education. Among these customized initiatives can be conferences and seminars aimed at

educating parents on efficient learning techniques and how to promote their kids' academic

progress. In addition, GHO can open up channels of contact between parents and teachers on a

regular basis, creating a deeper collaboration to track students' progress and quickly resolve any

issues. GHO may establish a welcoming environment that encourages parents to take an active

part in their children's education by offering resources like instructional materials and internet

platforms for parental participation.

Synthesis of Literature Related to Strategy One

According to research studies, academic accomplishment and parental participation have

a good correlation. Parental participation considerably influences adolescents' cognitive and

social development, improving academic achievements, according to Kim's (2020) research.

Another research by Oakes et al. (2017) underlines the value of consistent parental involvement

throughout a child's education. It demonstrates how it helps to improve conduct, attendance, and

motivation, eventually leading to greater academic success rates. These findings emphasize the

importance of fostering a strong partnership between parents and schools to maximize the

educational outcomes for students. By implementing effective parental involvement programs,

schools can create a supportive and collaborative environment that benefits students' holistic

development and long-term success.

GHO can think about several techniques to execute increased parental involvement

initiatives successfully. One strategy is to form alliances with neighborhood groups and agencies

that offer services and assistance to low-income families (Lau & Ng, 2019). For instance, the

school may cooperate with the neighborhood library to provide literacy classes for parents or

host parenting classes in conjunction with social assistance organizations. Furthermore, GHO

may practice programs like family literacy programs, home-school links, and frequent parent-

teacher conferences to improve interaction and participation between parents and teachers

(Lynch, 2021). In conclusion, research reveals the beneficial influence of family involvement on

student academic achievements, supporting the adoption of expanded parental engagement

programs at GHO. GHO may raise the performance of struggling students from low-income

homes by actively incorporating parents in their kids' education through tailored programs and

collaborations with community groups.

Strategy Two: Mentoring and Tutoring Programs

Implementing mentorship and tutoring programs is the second technique to alleviate the

poor academic performance of challenging pupils from low-income households at George H.

Oliver Elementary School (GHO). In order to assist students in overcoming obstacles in the

classroom and enhance their overall performance, these programs offer them specialized support

and coaching. GHO can bridge the educational gap caused by poor financial conditions and give

the tools required for academic achievement by matching struggling students with kind and

skilled mentors or tutors. These mentors and tutors can provide personalized attention, tailored

instruction, and academic guidance to struggling students, helping them build confidence and

develop essential skills. Research conducted by Baye et al. (2019) highlights the positive impact

of mentoring and tutoring programs on academic outcomes, particularly for disadvantaged

students. By implementing these programs at GHO, students from low-income households can

receive the additional support they need to thrive academically and overcome educational

barriers.

Synthesis of Literature Related to Strategy Two

Research has shown that mentorship and tutoring programs can improve students'

academic results, especially those from underprivileged families. Mentoring programs benefit

kids' academic achievement, psychological development, and general well-being, according to

Gowdy's (2019) research. Furthermore, Baye et al. (2016) .'s meta-analysis found that tutoring

programs significantly raised pupils' academic performance, particularly in reading and

mathematics. The school can work with volunteer mentors and tutors as well as community

organizations, academic institutions, and other groups to implement mentorship and tutoring

programs at GHO. Mentors can give direction, emotional support, and inspiration, while tutors

can offer academic support catered to the requirements of specific pupils. In order to provide a

helpful learning environment within the school community, GHO can also take into account peer

mentorship initiatives, in which more experienced students or successful peers coach struggling

pupils.

It is crucial to guarantee that mentoring and tutoring programs are as well-structured,

overseen, and assessed as possible. Maintaining program excellence requires regular training and

on-going assistance for mentors and tutors. Research by McNeven et al. (2020) highlights the

value of mentor training and continuing assistance, emphasizing that properly trained mentors

are more likely to build strong connections with mentees and successfully address their academic

and socioemotional needs. Similarly, research by Pellegrini et al. (2018) emphasizes the

importance of tutor assistance and training in enhancing the effectiveness of tutoring

interventions and optimizing their positive effects on student learning. Additionally, to improve

accessibility and efficacy, GHO might consider using technology in mentoring and tutoring

programs. For struggling students, online tutoring platforms, virtual mentorship sessions, and

instructional software can offer more resources and individualized learning possibilities.

Part 6: Evaluation of the Strategies

Quantitative Strategic Plan Matrix

The Quantitative Strategic Plan Matrix (QSPM) is a decision-making tool used in

strategic management to evaluate the potential strategies available to an organization and identify

those with the highest probability of success. The QSPM places all feasible alternative strategies

into a matrix, based on their relative attractiveness and likelihood of achieving organizational

objectives. This matrix identifies key opportunities, threats, strengths, and weaknesses associated

with each strategy option. Organizations utilize this process to ensure their decisions are data-

driven and grounded in objective analysis. By identifying multiple options through the QSPM

framework, organizations can compare resources required for implementation and performance

Commented [GP1]: Shawneequa, you did not use the QSPM form that is located in Assignment – Part 6. This form gave you the Total for Internal and External and then, totaled the entire document.

Also, the form you submitted has some of the values removed and did not calculate your numbers correctly. Please see your Excel spreadsheet with my feedback. The yellow highlight shows the value not included and the RED shows the values miscalculated, which affected your entire score. Please redo and fix in your narrative.

outcomes objectively while weighing external factors such as market competition or

technological advancements that might affect their success rate over time without relying solely

on intuition or subjective opinions from experts within different departments within their

company structure. It provides institution such as GHO with sound quantitative measures for

selecting among several alternatives when it comes to choosing from competing ideas proposed

by various stakeholders or consultants tasked with evaluating plausible courses of action during

planning sessions aimed towards enhancing company operations' overall efficiency levels over

extended periods effectively.

The Quantitative Strategic Plan Matrix (QSPM) provides a systematic approach to select

the best course of action among multiple strategies by considering both internal and external

environmental factors such as strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT). The

QSPM includes all 40 original SWOT factors selected in Part 1B along with their respective

weights assigned based on their importance to achieving organizational objectives. Additionally,

attractiveness scores ranging from zero to four are allocated to each factor based on its potential

positive or negative impact on the organization's success (Mulyani et al., 2020). Once these

values are assigned, they are multiplied together for each alternative under consideration. The

final step in this process is calculating the total attractiveness score for each option which reflects

its overall validity as a strategic choice compared to other alternatives evaluated through this

method.

Overall, implementing quantitative strategic thinking through QSPM enables

organizations to analyze their competitive environment systematically effectively evaluate

different alternatives in terms of potential benefits and risks associated with them (Banka et al.,

2022). It also ensures alignment with broader business goals thereby allowing leaders at all

Commented [GP2]: You need to find literature to support the QSPM.

levels to make informed decisions about resource allocation prioritization projects investments

new product lines mergers acquisitions and other key initiatives within an organization.

Evaluation of Internal Factor Evaluation

The Quantitative Strategic Plan Matrix: Internal Factor Strengths and Weaknesses has

revealed two promising strategies for the organization (Falqueto, Hoffmann, Gomes, &

Onoyama Mori, 2020). The first strategy, with a score of 4.20, focuses on increasing Parental

Engagement Programs to foster better involvement from parents in their child's education.

According to Fuertes, Alfaro, Vargas, Gutierrez, Ternero, & Sabattin (2020), strategy aims to

build stronger relationships between GHO and families by providing targeted support systems

that encourage parental participation in school activities. The second proposed strategy carries a

score of 2.58 and involves implementing Mentoring and Tutoring Programs, which will provide

students with dedicated mentors who can offer them personalized guidance throughout their

academic journey. These programs aim to improve student retention rates, increase academic

performance levels among struggling students, and reduce dropout rates significantly.

Commented [GP3]: You did not include any supporting literature in the above sections. Please locate 1-2 sources to support your information.

Commented [GP4]: Commented [GP5]: You need to fix the total and your overall totals.

Table 9

Quantitative Strategic Plan Matrix: Internal Factor Strengths and Weaknesses

Strategy 1Increased Parental Engagement Programs to foster better involvement from parents in their child's education

Strategy 2 Implementing Mentoring and Tutoring Programs

Item Weight

AS Total AS AS Total ASStrengths

1. Strong Value System 0.05 1 0.05 3 0.15

2. Enough Staff 0.06 3 0.18 4 0.24

3. Online Accessibility 0.04 0 0 4 0.16

4. High Accountability 0.08 3 0.24 3 0.24

5. Higher Student Engagement 0.06 2 0.12 3 0.18

6. Excellent Provision of Resources 0.02 3 0.06 4 0.08

7. Strong Mentorship 0.05 4 0.2 4 0.20

Commented [GP6]: Have you editor include the titles of the strategies here in your table.

Again, this table needs to be fixed after you correct your calculations.

Discussion of Internal Factors That Influence the Plan

8. Wide variety of studies

9. Racial Representation and Gender Balance

10. Strong and Capable Administration

0.03

0.08

0.05

0.06

0.16

0.15

0.12

0.16

0.20

Weaknesses1. Staff Turnover 0.05 3 0.15 4 0.20

2. Inexperienced Teachers 0.05 4 0.20 3 0.15

3. Low School Enrollment 0.02 0 0.00 2 0.04

4. Insecurity 0.08 0 0.00 2 0.16

5. Low Student-Counselor Ratio 0.02 1 0.02 0 0.00

6. Poor academic Performance 0.06 4 0.24 2 0.12

7. Poor Reputation 0.05 1 0.05 0 0.00

8. Not Fully Adopting Technology 0.01 3 0.03 4 0.04

9. Inequity and Inequality

10. Struggling Students from low-income families

0.04

0.10

0.04

0.20

0.04

0.10

Total 1.00 2.15 2.58 Commented [GP7]: Need to update this number

The Excel spreadsheet you used did not provide this total. Please use the version that is in Assignment – Part 6. Thank you.

A score of 1 represents low attractiveness, while a score of 4 indicates high

attractiveness. In this case, Strategy 1 was to analyze the factors such as Parental Engagement

Programs that enhances education and student experience (Benzaghta, Elwalda, Mousa, Erkan,

& Rahman, 2021). The factors that earned a score of 4 include strong mentorship, inexperienced

teachers, and poor academic performance as they have significant implications for student

learning and require urgent attention from administrators. On the other hand, online accessibility,

low school enrollment, and insecurity scored zero as they are not directly linked with improving

learning environments or support systems for students in need. Additionally, staff turnover and

not fully adopting technology were awarded a 3 as these could potentially hinder progress but do

not necessarily have dramatic impacts on operations overall. In terms of attractive qualities that

scored higher than average at 3 points include having enough staff members available on campus

who offer excellent resources and accountability practices with strong administrative leadership

present throughout each level within schools needs specific attention to ensure their continued

success moving forward into tomorrow's uncertain future. Finally scoring lower than expected

are those with only 1 point These factors such as poor reputation would likely have negative

effects on attracting families to enroll their children at this school where recognized value

statements infrequently rate well since such branding would be regarded highly upon by many

stakeholders involved in educational quality assurance checking procedures (Suriyanti, 2020).

The attractiveness score assigned to the various factors in the Quantitative Strategic Plan

Matrix influences the strategic direction of an institution. The Strategy 2 including Mentoring

and Tutoring Program was evaluated, and certain factors were assigned scores ranging from 0 to

4. A score of 4 implied high attractiveness while a score of 0 indicated that particular factor was

not attractive at all. Excellent provision of resources with wide variety studies scored highly as it

Commented [GP8]: 4; be consistent

Commented [GP9]: was not

plays an essential role in attracting students to enroll for courses in this institution (Claro &

Esteves, 2021). Furthermore, sufficient staff with strong mentorship also contributes positively

by providing students with quality educational support systems. On the other hand, low student-

counselor ratio and poor reputation received a zero-attraction score due to negative impacts on

academic performance and inadequate program delivery respectively.

An attraction score of 1 signifies there are critical areas requiring improvement to meet

student needs effectively, such as struggling students from low-income families facing inequity

challenges and inequality issues prevalent within the broader society. Additionally,

inexperienced teachers can result in sub-standard teaching experiences amongst learners leading

them towards dullness or disengagement from their studies. A rating of 2 indicates some

elements that attract interest but still require attention like improving enrollment rates or

ensuring gender balance among faculty members is considered crucial for enhancing diversity

inclusion practices (Mian, Salah, Ameen, Moiduddin, & Alkhalefah, 2020). Overall, assigning

these scores critically ensures strategies are derived based on higher attraction levels rather than

lower ones – aiming primarily at addressing underlying problems affecting learning experiences

amongst individuals whom institutions seek service delivery appropriately.

Evaluation of External Factor Evaluation

It is a comprehensive tool that allows for the evaluation of potential strategies through an

objective analysis of their effectiveness. The matrix highlights two proposed strategies, Strategy

1 which involves increased Parental Engagement Programs and Strategy 2 which focuses on

Mentoring and Tutoring Programs. Both strategies have been evaluated based on their external

factor opportunities and threats. With a score of 2.05, Strategy 1 has room for improvement in

terms of external feasibility while Strategy 2 received a higher score of 2.5 indicating it is more

Commented [GP10]:

feasible externally compared to strategy one. The scores reflect the value proposition that

mentoring and tutoring programs hold over parental engagement programs within the given

organizational context under review.

Table 10

Quantitative Strategic Plan Matrix: External Factor Opportunities and Threats

Strategy 1 Strategy 2Item Weight

AS Total AS ASTotal AS

Opportunities

1. Increased Volunteer Programs and Financial Aid

0.03 1 0.03 4 0.12

2. Increased Enrollment

0.02 2 0.04 2 0.04

3. Staff and Licensing

0.06 2 0.12 2 0.12

4. Increased Stakeholder Collaboration

0.05 4 0.20 3 0.15

5. Increased Adoption of Technology

6. Teacher Retention

7. Improved Reputation

8. Opportunity for Increased Student Engagement

9. A Well-Rounded Education

10. Grade and Performance Improvement

0.08

0.05

0.01

0.05

0.02

0.06

0.16

0.05

0.02

0.15

0.04

0.06

0.32

0.05

0.03

0.10

0.08

0.12

Threats

1. Violence and Crime

2. Poor Performance Out of Poverty

3. Loss of Talented Manpower Due to High Turnover

4. Economic Decline and a Reduced Population

5. Bad Reputation6. Lack of Racial

Balance 7. Short and Non-

Comprehensive Vision Statement

8. Inexperienced Teachers

9. Underfunding 10. Low Student

Diverse Population

0.04

0.10

0.08

0.03

0.07

0.01

0.080.10

0.02

0.08

0.12

0.20

0.24

0.03

0.00

0.01

0.160.30

0.04

0.16

0.00

0.30

0.08

0.06

0.07

0.02

0.240.40

0.04

Total 1.00 2.53 2.5 Commented [GP11]: This number is not correct; please update.

Discussion of External Factors That Influence the Plan

According to the attractiveness score, Strategy 1 which includes Increased Parental

Engagement Programs at GHO has received noteworthy ratings in terms of stakeholder

collaboration and grade and performance improvement. However, it scored low on racial balance

as it failed to address the issue adequately. With an aim of transforming this strategy into an

appealing one for stakeholders and achieving higher scores, it is imperative that steps are taken

towards encouraging volunteer programs and financial aid coupled with consolidated efforts

towards teacher retention. Improving reputation through a comprehensive vision statement will

also add to its attractiveness score along with increased enrollment, staff licensing, technology

adoption resulting in a well-rounded education for students (Anh & Tien, 2021). These measures

can help eliminate issues like violence and crime within school premises while retaining talented

teachers thereby leading to better student diversity among schools. Challenges such as

underfunding, economic decline reduced population must be considered in light of opportunities

around mentoring programs that could enhance engagement among students whilst improving

their academic performance notwithstanding poverty levels or economic instability within

communities where they live.

The attractiveness score indicates the degree of desirability in relation to the success of

Strategy 2, which includes Mentoring and Tutoring Program. A score of 0 was awarded to Poor

Performance Out of Poverty due to various reasons such as economic decline and a reduced

population that negatively affects student enrollment and teacher retention. On the other hand,

increased volunteer programs and financial aid are among the top-rated factors with a rating of 4.

Additionally, violence and crime, underfunding plaguing educational institutions also deserve

serious attention when implementing strategy two (Acuña-Carvajal, Pinto-Tarazona, López-

Commented [GP12]: Be consistent with your writing; have your editor fix throughout.

Commented [GP13]:

Ospina, Barros-Castro, Quezada, & Palacio, 2019). Although some factors such as lack of racial

balance scored 1, there is still room for improvement in areas like staff licensing opportunities

for increased student engagement grade performances. Bad reputation faced by students or

schools received a medium grade score of 2. Moreover, stakeholders’ involvement collaboration

will cause substantial impacts along with experienced teachers' retention towards meeting

strategic goals – these scored an impressive 3.

First Alternative Attractiveness Score and Benefit for the Organization

The first alternative strategy presented in the QSPM is to implement Increased Parental

Engagement Programs, which has received a total attractiveness score of 4.20. This strategy aims

to foster stronger relationships between parents and the institution, providing more opportunities

for parent involvement in their child's education. The significance of parental engagement cannot

be overstated as it has been shown to positively impact student achievement levels across several

studies (Zakrajšek, 2016). With this program, GHO strive to increase academic success while

also improving general school culture by promoting collaboration and communication among

faculty, staff, parents, and students alike. The high attractiveness score was determined based on

several factors such as the potential positive impact on test scores and student outcomes;

increased community trust and satisfaction with the institution; improved teacher-parent

communication; reduced absenteeism by both students and teachers due to increased

accountability measures put forth by involved families; amongst others (Quezada, Reinao,

Palominos, & Oddershede, 2019). Based on these projected benefits outlined in the QSPM

analysis report along with extensive research indicating positive correlations between parental

engagement programs and academic success rates, GHO strongly recommend implementing this

strategy as soon as feasible for long-term institutional success.

Commented [GP14]:

Commented [GP15]:

Commented [GP16]:

Commented [GP17]: the

Second Alternative Attractiveness Score and Benefit for the Organization

The second Alternative Strategy proposed in the QSPM involves implementing

Mentoring and Tutoring Programs with a total attractiveness score of 5.11. This strategy aims to

enhance academic achievement, personal development, and career readiness among students

through providing them with guidance and support. The Total Attractiveness Score reflects the

overall benefits, feasibility, cost-effectiveness, and alignment with organizational goals of this

strategy compared to the other alternatives evaluated in the matrix (David, et al. 2016). The high

score obtained by Mentoring and Tutoring Programs reveals their potential to address various

issues faced by students such as inadequate study skills, low motivation, lack of confidence or

direction, and socio-economic disadvantages (Watrianthos, 019). Additionally, these programs

foster positive relationships between mentors/tutors and mentees/tutees that facilitate enriched

learning experiences beyond traditional classroom settings. Therefore, it is recommended that

this alternative be implemented as a means of maximizing student success outcomes within the

given context of resources and priorities.

Summary of Most Important Strategy

The chosen strategy for implementation in GHO is the Mentoring and Tutoring Program.

This is a promising approach to support student development, academic success, and overall

well-being. With a total attractiveness score of 5.11, this strategy offers immense potential to

improve learning outcomes by providing students with personalized attention and guidance from

experienced mentors and tutors. The program will be designed to cater to the unique needs of

individual students, offering one-on-one or small group sessions that focus on areas where they

need the most support. By implementing this strategy, the school believe they can create positive

change in the lives of many students who may be struggling academically or lacking meaningful

connections with adults in their lives. The study recognizes that effective mentoring and tutoring

programs are essential components for building strong communities, promoting equity in

education opportunities, reducing dropout rates among vulnerable populations like low-income

youth or those from diverse backgrounds (Yang & Lee, 2020). Therefore, it is crucial for GHO

to prioritize this initiative as part of their efforts towards greater educational excellence and

social impact.

Table 11

Total Attractiveness Scores Across Analyses and Strategies

Item Strategy 1 Strategy 2Internal factors

Strengths 1.22 1.73Weaknesses 0.93 0.85Internal factor total 2.15 2.58

External factorsOpportunities 0.87 1.16Threats 1.18 1.37External factor total 2.05 2.53

Total 4.20 5.11Note. Rated on a scale of 0–4.

Part 7: Development of an Action Plan

The purpose of the action plan is to explain in detail how the strategy chosen in Part 6

will be implemented. In this opening paragraph, please explain the purpose of an action plan,

supporting with literature. In addition, mention the strategy you selected from Part 6. Other

sources and personal communications (refer to section 8.9 in the 7th edition of the APA Manual)

may also be included in this Part to support your Action Plan. Please note that ALL narratives

must be supported with scholarly resources 2015 to present. You will need at least two current

scholarly sources; all paragraphs must have at least 5 to 6 academic sentences to support this

Commented [GP18]: their

Commented [GP19]: Again, these numbers need to be updated.

section.

Action Steps

Identify 4-6 action steps/goals to support your action plan during your future

implementation phase. Mandatory narrative with illustration as an option (e.g., seriation, APA

table, figure) supported with literature. You will explain the different steps/goals that you will

need to follow in order to implement the strategy. Please note that ALL narratives must be

supported with scholarly resources 2015 to present. You will need at least two current scholarly

sources; all paragraphs must have at least 5 to 6 academic sentences to support this section.

The first action step is xxxx xxxx. Explain, in detail, what this step consists of and support

with literature.

The second action step is xxxx xxxx. Explain, in detail, what this step consists of and

support with literature.

The third action step is xxxx xxxx. Explain, in detail, what this step consists of and

support with literature.

The fourth action step is xxxx xxxx. Explain, in detail, what this step consists of and

support with literature.

The fifth action step is xxxx xxxx. Explain, in detail, what this step consists of and support

with literature.

Timeline

Mandatory narrative with illustration as an option (e.g., seriation, APA table, figure,

Gantt chart) supported with literature. You need a clear plan for what you want to achieve in this

potential implementation. Create a timeline for each action step. The timeline should take place

with your organization´s fiscal year (e.g., July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2023). All paragraphs must

have at least 5 to 6 academic sentences to support this section.

Roles and Responsibilities

Mandatory narrative supported with literature. Select the right people to accomplish the

right things in the right way. In this section, you will explain the role and responsibilities of each

person’s position and what they will accomplish in this action plan. Please note that ALL

narratives must be supported with scholarly resources 2015 to present. You will need at least two

current scholarly sources; all paragraphs must have at least 5 to 6 academic sentences to support

this section.

Resources

Mandatory narrative supported with literature. Write about the resources and support that

you will need to make the changes that your organization will need during your potential

implementation. You need to include both, what is needed and what is available. Be specific.

Please note that ALL narratives must be supported with scholarly resources 2015 to present. You

will need at least two current scholarly sources; all paragraphs must have at least 5 to 6 academic

sentences to support this section.

Organizational Support

Mandatory narrative supported with literature. Describe your collaborators or

stakeholders of the organization that can potentially support the implementation. Be specific.

Please note that ALL narratives must be supported with scholarly resources 2015 to present. You

will need at least two current scholarly sources; all paragraphs must have at least 5 to 6 academic

sentences to support this section.

Barriers or Resistance

Mandatory narrative supported with literature. Identify potential barriers or resistance

that you may encounter in the process of implementation. Write a plan to overcome them. Please

note that ALL narratives must be supported with scholarly resources 2015 to present. You will

need at least two current scholarly sources; all paragraphs must have at least 5 to 6 academic

sentences to support this section.

Evaluation

Mandatory narrative supported with literature. Explain how you would evaluate your

progress while in route to your goals. Please note that ALL narratives must be supported with

scholarly resources 2015 to present. You will need at least two current scholarly sources; all

paragraphs must have at least 5 to 6 academic sentences to support this section.

Reflection on the Overall Experience

Mandatory narrative supported with literature. Provide a reflection on the Action

Planning process. Please note that ALL narratives must be supported with scholarly resources

2015 to present. You will need at least two current scholarly sources; all paragraphs must have at

least 5 to 6 academic sentences to support this section.

Part 8: Audio-Visual Presentation of SRP

Narrative of Electronic Presentation

Note: This section has two components: (a) written narrative, and (b) audio-visual

presentation.

Instructions for written narrative. In this section, provide at least two paragraphs

explaining what you covered in your audio-visual presentation. Pick what you feel your audience

needs to know from your ESRP 9000 and 9001. Essentially you are describing the most relevant

points of your SRP. Please note that ALL written narratives must be supported with scholarly

resources 2015 to present. You will need at least two current scholarly sources; all paragraphs

must have at least 5 to 6 academic sentences to support this section.

Instructions for audio-visual presentation. Students are required to prepare a narrated

presentation using their preferred presentation software (i.e., MS PowerPoint, Keynote, or

Google Slides) to explain their SRP. The presentation should be professional as if you were

presenting to your organization or stakeholders (you should not read verbatim from your

presentation). Your audio-visual presentation should be between 15-20 minutes. Additional

requirements for the presentation will be available in the Canvas Course. Must include a

Reference Page and in-slide citations. You will post your audio-visual presentation in the

Discussion Board, Part 8A of the Canvas Course. It will be the student’s responsibility to upload

the proper presentation and then, ensure the link is properly published and operating correctly.

Peer Review Questions

Note: After watching each of your peer’s audio-visual presentation, you will (a) develop

three questions per peer and submit in Discussion Board, Part 8B of the Canvas Course, and (b)

address each of your peers’ questions.

In this introduction paragraph, you will make mention of the peer questions you received

(see Appendix X). After reviewing each of your peer questions, write at least two paragraphs on

what you learned from these questions. For example, did you find any common themes of the

questions, do you feel some of the questions can help you with Part 9 of the SRP, such as

recommendations, future research, and/or would have given you insight of your previous

research.

Oral Defense of the SRP

In this opening paragraph, provide a reflection of your experience of the oral defense. In

this reflection, only list the two questions provided by your instructor, listed in the below

Narrative Defense of Selected Questions level heading.

Narrative Defense of Selected Questions

In this section, provide two paragraphs, one paragraph per selected question, from your

faculty. After your Oral Defense, please explain, in detail, the two questions that were covered.

Note: This defense will take place in the last Zoom meeting. In addition, all students must

have completed all sections of Part 8 to include attending the entire Oral Defense with camera

on, as full participation is required.

Part 9: Conclusion

Recommendations

Narrative: Provide information on possible recommendations (supported with literature).

This will be written in future tense, what you think would be your recommendations in the event

this project was implemented. This portion should have a minimum of two paragraphs. Please

note that ALL narratives must be supported with scholarly resources 2015 to present. You will

need at least two current scholarly sources; all paragraphs must have at least 5 to 6 academic

sentences to support this section.

Final Conclusions

Narrative: Provide reflection/conclusion on the SRP process. Provide information about

the possible finding/results if you were to implement the project. This portion should have a

minimum of two paragraphs. Please note that ALL narratives must be supported with scholarly

resources 2015 to present. You will need at least two current scholarly sources; all paragraphs

must have at least 5 to 6 academic sentences to support this section.

Note: review entire paper for additional relevant terms located in Part 1. Your relevant

term should match your Keywords in the Executive Summary (you should have a minimum of 4-

5 relevant terms).

References

Acuña-Carvajal, F., Pinto-Tarazona, L., López-Ospina, H., Barros-Castro, R., Quezada, L., &

Palacio, K. (2019). An integrated method to plan, structure and validate a business

strategy using fuzzy DEMATEL and the balanced scorecard. Expert systems with

applications, 122, 351-368.

Adams, O, T., Adedeji, M. S., Majekodun, O. A., Kehinde, B. R., & Adams, T. A. (2021). The

effects of insecurity on school systems (secondary schools) in Nigeria. In A. Ochigbo, R.

Beetseh, & R. Abubakar (Eds.), Global insecurities: Challenges and the ways forward

(pp. 126-136). Akure.

Adem, B. S. (2021). The influence of poverty on students’ academic achievement in secondary

schools. Somaliland.

Adnot, M., Dee, T., Katz, V., & Wyckoff, J. (2017). Teacher turnover, teacher quality, and

student achievement in DCPS. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 39(1), 54-76.

Ahmed, F. (2018). Impact of critical path method (CPM) of scheduling on on-time completion of

transportation projects [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of South Carolina.

Alameda-Lawson, T., & Lawson, M. A. (2019). Ecologies of collective parent engagement in

urban education. Urban Education, 54(8), 1085-1120. https://doi.org/10.1177/00420859.

16636654

Alegre, I., Berbegal-Mirabent, J., Guerrero, A., & Mas-Machuca, M. (2018). The real mission of

the mission statement: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Management &

Organization, 24(4), 456-473. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-

management-and-organization/article/abs/real-mission-of-the-mission-statement-a-

systematic-review-of-the-literature/

Allen, K. A., Kern, M. L., Vella-Brodrick, D., & Waters, L. (2018). Understanding the priorities

of Australian secondary schools through an analysis of their mission and vision

statements. Educational Administration Quarterly, 54(2), 249-274. https://doi.org/10.

1177/0013161X18758655

Allen, M. B. (2010). Improving state need assessments of secondary science and mathematics

teachers: Challenges, possibilities, and recommendations. Association of Public Land-

Grant Universities. https://www.aplu.org/our-work/5-archived-projects/stem-

education/science-and-mathematics-teaching-imperative/smti-projects/improving-state-

need-assessment/

Al-Suraihi, W. A., Samikon, S. A., Al-Suraihi, A. H. A., & Ibrahim, I. (2021). Employee

turnover: Causes, importance and retention strategies. European Journal of Business and

Management Research, 6(3), 10-19. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejbmr.2021.6.3.893

Aminu Umar, A., Muhammad, N., & Hassan, I. (2020). Strategic planning process and

organizational performance in Nigerian public sector: A review of literature.

International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 10(7), 367-

382. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3858417

Anh, D. B. H., & Tien, N. H. (2021). QSPM matrix based strategic organizational diagnosis. A

case of Nguyen Hoang Group in Vietnam. International journal multidisciplinary

research and growth evaluation, 2(4), 67-72.

Antonietti, C., Cattaneo, A., & Amenduni, F. (2022). Can teachers’ digital competence influence

technology acceptance in vocational education? Computers in Human Behavior, 132,

107266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107266

Apostolou, B., Dorminey, J. & Hassell, J. (2020). Accounting education literature review (2019).

Journal of Accounting Education, 51, 100670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccedu.2020.

100670

Arendse, L. (2011). The school funding system and its discriminatory impact on marginalised

learners. Law, Democracy, & Development, 15(1), 12-29. https://doi.org/10.4314/ldd.

v15i1.12

Arenson, M., Hudson, P. J., Lee, N., & Lai, B. (2019). The evidence on school-based health

centers: A review. Global Pediatric Health, 6(1), 23-26. https://doi.org/10.1177/2333.

794X19828745

Aslam, R., Khan, N., Asad, M. M., & Ahmed, U. (2021). Impact of technological pedagogical

content knowledge on teachers’ digital proficiency at classroom in higher education

institution of Pakistan. Interactive Technology and Smart Education. https://www.

emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/ITSE-11-2020-0222/full/html

Aspers, P., & Corte, U. (2019). What is qualitative in qualitative research? Qualitative

Sociology, 42(2), 139-160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11133-019-9413-7

Ariqsyah, M. D. (2021). Analisis perencanaan penjadwalan proyek konstruksi dengan

menggunakan metodec: Critical path method dan critical chain project management

(Studi Kasus: Pt. Pelindo 1). https://repositori.usu.ac.id/handle/123456789/44317

Attanasio, O., Meghir, C., & Nix, E. (2020). The human capital development and parental

investment in India. Review of Economic Studies, 87(6), 2511-2541. https://doi.org/

10.1093/restud/rdaa026

Bakker, A. (2018). What is design research in education? In A. Bakker (Ed.), Design research in

education: A practical guide for early career researchers (pp. 3-22). Routledge.

Baker, D. P., Leon, J., Smith Greenaway, E. G., Collins, J., & Movit, M. (2011). The education

effect on population health: A reassessment. Population and Development Review, 37(2),

307-332. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2011.00412.x

Baldwin, D. (2022). George H. Oliver: Coahoma County. Much Ado. https://much-ado.net/

legislators/legislators/george-h-oliver/

Barnum, M. (2019, August 13). 4 new studies bolster the case: More money for schools helps

students. Chalkbeat. https://www.chalkbeat.org/2019/8/13/21055545/4-new-studies-

bolster-the-case-more-money-for-schools-helps-low-income-students

Bayar, A., & Karaduman, H. A. (2021). The effects of school culture on students’ academic

achievements. Shanlax International Journal of Education, 9(3), 99-109. https://doi.org/

10.34293/education.v9i3.3885

Baye, A., Lake, C., Inns, A., & Slavin, R. (2016). Effective reading programs for secondary

students.

Bayless, S. D., Jenson, J. M., Richmond, M. K., Pampel, F. C., Cook, M., & Calhoun, M. (2018).

Effects of an afterschool early literacy intervention on the reading skills of children in public

housing communities. Child & Youth Care Forum 47(4), 537-561. https://doi.org/

10.1007/s10566-018-9442-5

Ben-Abdallah, R., Shamout, M. D., & Alshurideh, M. (2022). Business development strategy

model using EFE, IFE and IE analysis in a high-tech company: An empirical study.

Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 21, 1-9.

Ben-Messaoud, H. (2022). A review on the importance of strategic planning in business. Sage.

Benner, A. D., & Crosnoe, R. (2011). The racial/ethnic composition of elementary schools and

young children’s academic and socioemotional functioning. American Educational

Research Journal, 48(3), 621-646. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831210384838

Berkowitz, R., Astor, R. A., Pineda, D., DePedro, K. T., Weiss, E. L., & Benbenishty, R. (2021).

Parental involvement and perceptions of school climate in California. Urban

Education, 56(3), 393-423. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085916685764

Benzaghta, M. A., Elwalda, A., Mousa, M. M., Erkan, I., & Rahman, M. (2021). SWOT analysis

applications: An integrative literature review. Journal of Global Business Insights, 6(1),

55-73.

Bhai, M., & Horoi, I. (2019). Teacher characteristics and academic achievement. Applied

Economics, 51(44), 4781-4799. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2019.1597963

Bilbrey, J. B., Castanon, K. L., Copeland, R. B., Evanshen, P. A., & Trivette, C. M. (2022).

Primary early childhood educators’ perspectives of trauma-informed knowledge,

confidence, and training. Australian Educational Researcher, 1-22. https://doi.org/

10.1007/s13384-022-00582-9

Borgen, C. (2018). Effects of hunger on education. The Borgen Project. https://borgenproject.

org/effects-of-hunger-on-education/

Calder, S. (2019). The relationship between students living in poverty and those who teach them

(EJ1230327). BU Journal of Graduate Studies in Education, 11(1), 37-41. ERIC. https://

files.eric.ed.gov/full text/EJ1230327.pdf

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2019). Parent engagement in schools. https://www.

cdc.gov/healthy youth/protective/parent_engagement.htm

Charyk, C. (2017, January 6). The pros and cons of pros-and-cons lists. Harvard Business

Review. https://hbr.org/2017/01/the-pros-and-cons-of-pros-and-cons-lists

Christian-Brandt, A. S., Santacrose, D. E., & Barnett, M. L. (2020). In the trauma-informed care

trenches: Teacher compassion satisfaction, secondary traumatic stress, burnout, and intent

to leave education within underserved elementary schools. Child Abuse & Neglect,

110(3), 104437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104437

Chiuri, J. W., King’ori, I. W., & Obara, P. O. (2020). The influence of teacher-parent

collaborative monitoring of school attendance on pupils’ academic performance in

Nyahururu Sub-county Kenya. American Journal of Educational Research, 8(6), 367-

375. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-8-6-2

Claro, P. B. D. O., & Esteves, N. R. (2021). Sustainability-oriented strategy and sustainable

development goals. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 39(4), 613-630.

Cleland, J. A. (2017). The qualitative orientation in medical education research. Korean Journal

of Medical Education, 29(2), 61-71. https://doi.org/10.3946/kjme.2017.53

Cutuli, J. J., Alderfer, M. A., & Marsac, M. L. (2019). Trauma-informed care for children and

families. Psychological Services, 16(1), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1037/ser0000330

David, M.E., David, Fred R. and David, Forest R. (2016) ‘The Quantitative Strategic Planning

Matrix: A new marketing tool’, Journal of Strategic Marketing, 25(4), pp. 342–352.

doi:10.1080/0965254x.2016.1148763.

Davies, R. S., & West, R. E. (2014). Technology integration in schools. In J. M. Spector (Ed.),

Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 841-853).

Springer.

Deng, S. (2021). Comparing students’ engagement in classroom education between China and

Germany. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 754637. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.

754637

Degtjarjova, I., Lapina, I., & Freidenfelds, D. (2018). Student as stakeholder: “Voice of

customer” in higher education quality development. Marketing and Management of

Innovations, 2, 388-398. https://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2018.2-30

Doménech-Betoret, F., & Gómez-Artiga, A. (2021). The relationship among student basic need

satisfaction, approaches to learning, reporting of avoidance strategies and achievement

(EJ946110). Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 9(2), 463-496.

ERIC. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ946110

Dunfee, M. N. (2020). School-based health centers in the United States: Roots, reality, and

potential. Journal of School Health, 90(8), 665-670. https://doi.org/10.1111/josh.12914

Efe, A. J. (2018). Change management strategies in policies and reforms and administrative

functions competence in delta state colleges of education (EJ1190302). World Journal of

Education, 8(4), 188-197. ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1190302.pdf

Falqueto, J. M. Z., Hoffmann, V. E., Gomes, R. C., & Onoyama Mori, S. S. (2020). Strategic

planning in higher education institutions: what are the stakeholders’ roles in the

process?. Higher Education, 79, 1039-1056.

Fazlul, I., Koedel, C., & Parsons, E. (2021). Free and reduced-price meal eligibility does not

measure student poverty: Evidence and policy significance (ED613019). ERIC. https://

files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED613019.pdf

Flowers, A. A. (2019). The impact of declining teacher retention on a school system

[Unpublished course project]. Southern Wesleyan University.

Francis, D. R. (2016). School accountability raises educational performance. National Bureau of

Economic Research. http://www.nber.org/digest/feb05/wl/591

Francis, L., DePriest, K., Sharps, P., Wilson, P., Ling, C., Bowie, J., & Thorpe, R. J. (2021). A

mixed-methods systematic review identifying, describing, and examining the effects of

school-based care coordination programs in the US on all reported outcomes. Preventive

Medicine, 153, 106850. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2021.106850

Fuertes, G., Alfaro, M., Vargas, M., Gutierrez, S., Ternero, R., & Sabattin, J. (2020). Conceptual

framework for the strategic management: a literature review—descriptive. Journal of

Engineering, 2020, 1-21.

Gardiner, T. (2020). Supporting health and educational outcomes through school-based health

centers. Pediatric Nursing, 46(6), 989-991.

Ghorab, H., & Al-Khaldi, J. (2016). School violence and its effects on children's attitudes

towards education and their academic achievement: Research study. Journal of

Education and Practice, 5(3), 173-185.

Goddard, A., Sullivan, E., Fields, P., & Mackey, S. (2021). The future of telehealth in school-

based health centers: Lessons from COVID-19. Journal of Pediatric Health Care, 35(3),

304-309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedhc.2020.11.008

Gowdy, G. (2019). Does informal mentoring contribute to upward mobility for low-income

adolescents? A mixed-methods multi-stage study (Doctoral dissertation, Boston

University).

Graham, L. J., White, S. L., Cologon, K., & Pianta, R. C. (2020). Do teachers’ years of

experience make a difference in the quality of teaching? Teaching and Teacher

Education, 96, 103190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103190

Great Schools. (2022). Geo H. Oliver Elementary School in Clarksdale, MS. https://www.

greatschools.org/mississippi/clarksdale/128-Geo-H-Oliver-Elementary-School/

Grice, J. R., & Meyer, D. (2019). Discrete quantum control: State preparation. University of

California, San Diego.

Gurley, D. K. Peters, G. B., Collins, L., & Fifolt, M. (2021). Mission, vision, values, and goals:

An exploration of key organizational statements and daily practice in schools. Academia.

https://www.academia.edu/26859181/Mission_vision_values_and_goals_An_exploration

_of_key_organizational_statem

Hall, G., & Hord, S. (2015). Implementing change patterns, principles, and potholes. Pearson.

Holmes, W. K. (2018). The effects of poverty academically and behaviorally on students in

urban communities [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Bethel University.

Hovanetz, C. (2019). 4 advantages of school accountability. ExcelinEd. https://excelined.org/

2019/04/10/askexcelined-4-advantages-of-school-accountability/

Hutchison, A. (2021). Trauma-informed care: An elementary perspective [Unpublished capstone

project]. Grand Valley State University.

Irvine, J. (2019). Relationship between teaching experience and teacher effectiveness:

Implications for policy decisions (EJ1216895). Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, 22,

1-19. ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1216895.pdf

Jones, S. M., Brown, J. L., & Aber, J. L. (2011). Two-year impacts of a universal school-based

learning. Child Development, 82(2), 533-554. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.

01560.x

Karande, S., & Kulkarni, M. (2015). Poor school performance. Indian Journal of Pediatrics, 72,

961-967. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02731673.

100

Kersey, A. (2016). The role of technology in elementary schools: How has technology taken over

[Unpublished doctoral dissertation]? Indiana State University.

Kim, S. W. (2020). Meta-analysis of parental involvement and achievement in East Asian

countries. Education and Urban Society, 52(2), 312-337.

Kim, C. J. H., & Padilla, A. M. (2020). Technology for educational purposes among low-income

Latino children living in a mobile park in Silicon Valley: A case study before and during

COVID-19. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 42(4), 497-514. https://doi.org/10.

1177/0739986320959764

Kini, T., & Podolsky, A. (2016). Teaching experience and teacher effectiveness. American

Educator, 40(3), 3-6. https://www.aft.org/ae/fall2016/notebook

Korzeniowski, C., Cupani, M., Ison, M. S., & Difabio de Anglat, H. (2016). School performance

and poverty: The mediating role of executive functions. Research and Child

Development, 82(2), 533-554. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01560.x

Lau, E. Y. H., & Ng, M. L. (2019). Are they ready for home-school partnership? Perspectives of

kindergarten principals, teachers and parents. Children and Youth Services Review, 99,

10-17.

Lara, L., & Saracostti, M. (2019). Effect of parental involvement on children’s academic

achievement in Chile. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1464. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.

2019.01464

Leenders, H., De Jong, J., Monfrance, M., & Haelermans, C. (2019). Building strong parent-

teacher relationships in primary education: The challenge of two-way communication.

Cambridge Journal of Education, 49(4), 519-533. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.

2019.1566442

101

Lee, C. Y., Chong, H. Y., Liao, P. C., & Wang, X. (2018). Critical review of social network

analysis applications in complex project management. Journal of Management in

Engineering, 34(2), 04017061. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000579

Leonard, E., & Box, J. A. (2010). The impact of increased funding for the Mississippi Adequate

Education Program (MAEP) on state-assigned school accreditation levels (ED509171).

ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED509171.pdf

Liang, C. T., Liu, L., Rocchino, G. H., Kohler, B. A., & Rosenberger, T. (2020). Trauma-

informed care training for educators: Some preliminary evidence. Journal of Prevention

and Health Promotion, 1(2), 240-263. https://doi.org/10.1177/2632077020972038

Lieberman, M. (2021, October). How staff shortages are crushing schools. Education Week.

http://www.edweek.org/leadership/how-staff-shortages-are-crushing-schools/2021/10

Lynch, J. (2021). Elementary School Teachers' and Parents' Perspectives of Home-School

Engagement and Children's Literacy Learning in a Low-Income Area. School Community

Journal, 31(1), 127-148.

Lyon, A. R., Pullmann, M. D., Whitaker, K., Ludwig, K., Wasse, J. K., & McCauley, E. (2019).

A digital feedback system to support the implementation of measurement-based care by

school-based mental health clinicians. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent

Psychology, 48(sup1), S168-S179. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2017.1280808

Lyon College. (2022). What is the purpose of a liberal arts education? http://www.lyon.edu.

https://www.lyon.edu/what-is-the-purpose-of-a-liberal-arts-education

Mandrazhi, Z. (2021). SWOT analysis as the main tool of strategic management of agricultural

enterprise. EDP Sciences. https://www.shs-conferences.org/articles/shsconf/abs/2021/21/

shsconf_icemt2021_04001/shsconf_icemt2021_04001.html

102

Mar, D. (2018). Racial diversity and academic test scores in public elementary schools. Applied

Economics Letters, 25(11), 768-771. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2017.1366632

Martin, C., Boser, U., & Benner, M. (2018). A quality approach to school funding. Center for

American Progress. https://www.americanprogress.org/article/quality-approach-school-

funding/

Maynard, B. R., Farina, A., Dell, N. A., & Kelly, M. S. (2019). Effects of trauma-informed

approaches in schools: A systematic review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 15(1-2),

e1018. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1018

McFarland, J., Hussar, B., Wang, X., Zhang, J., Wang, K., Rathbun, A., Barmer, A., Forrest

Cataldi, E., & Bullock Mann, F. (2018). The condition of education 2018. National

Center for Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2018/2018144.pdf

McKenzie, K. (2019). The effects of poverty on academic achievement (EJ1230212). BU

Journal of Graduate Studies in Education, 11(2), 21-26. ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/

fulltext/EJ1230212.pdf

McNeil-Smith, S., & Landor, A. M. (2018). Toward a better understanding of African American

families: Development of the sociocultural family stress model. Journal of Family Theory

& Review, 10(2), 434-450. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12260

McNeven, S., McKay, L., & Main, K. (2020). The lived experience of professional mentorship

and its implications for school-based mentoring programs. Journal of Education, 200(2),

89-96.

Mian, S. H., Salah, B., Ameen, W., Moiduddin, K., & Alkhalefah, H. (2020). Adapting

universities for sustainability education in industry 4.0: Channel of challenges and

opportunities. Sustainability, 12(15), 6100.

103

Midgett, A., Doumas, D. M., Myers, V. H., Moody, S., & Doud, A. (2021). Technology-based

bullying intervention for rural schools: Perspectives on needs, challenges, and design.

Journal of Rural Mental Health, 45(1), 14-30. https://doi.org/10.1037/rmh0000151

Miller, P., Votruba-Drzal, E., & Coley, R. L. (2019). Poverty and academic achievement across

the urban to rural landscape: Associations with community resources and stressors.

Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences, 5(2), 106-122. https://www.

rsfjournal.org/content/5/2/106

Mississippi Department of Education. (2023). Title IV, Part A student support and academic

enrichment grants. https://www.mdek12.org/OFP/Title-IV-A

Mitchell, S. I. (2020). Ethical concerns of school closures for low-income school-aged children.

Voices of Bioethics, 6(2020). https://journals.library.columbia.edu/index.php/bioethics/

article/view/7057

Moreira, P. A., Dias, A., Matias, C., Castro, J., Gaspar, T., & Oliveira, J. (2018). School effects

on students' engagement with school: Academic performance moderates the effect of

school support for learning on students' engagement. Learning and Individual

Differences, 67, 67-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2018.07.007

Morgan, H. (2022). Alleviating the challenges with remote learning during a pandemic.

Education Sciences, 12(2), 109-110. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12020109

Muiruri, C. (2012). Factors influencing staff turnover at Jertec Junior Academy in Nairobi

[Unpublished research project]. University of Nairobi.

Mwirigi, S. F., & Muthaa, G. M. (2015). Impact of enrollment on the quality of learning in

primary schools in Imenti Central District, Kenya (EJ1077390). Journal of Education

and Practice, 6(27), 156-160. ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1077390.pdf

104

Nasuuna, E., Kigozi, J., Muwanguzi, P. A., Babirye, J., Kiwala, L., Muganzi, A., & Nakanjako,

D. (2019). Challenges faced by caregivers of virally non-suppressed children on the

intensive adherence counselling program in Uganda: A qualitative study. BMC Health

Services Research, 19(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-019-3963-y

Oakes, J., Maier, A., & Daniel, J. (2017). Community Schools: An Evidence-Based Strategy for

Equitable School Improvement. National education policy center.

Obara, K. (2018). West meets east: A well-rounded education versus an Angular education in

Japan. Espacio, Tiempo y Educación, 5(2), 101-122. https://www. espacio/tiempo/y/

educacion.com/ojs/index.php/ete/article/view/213

Olson, A., & Peterson, R. L. (2015). Student engagement. University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

Orr, B. (2013). Conducting a SWOT analysis for program improvement. U.S.-China Education

Review, 3(6), 381-384. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED543801.pdf

Osita, I. C., Onyebuchi, I., & Justina, N. (2014). Organization’s stability and productivity: The

role of SWOT analysis an acronym for strength, weakness, opportunities, and threat.

International Journal of Innovative and Applied Research, 2(9), 23-32.

Qaralleh, O., & Jibril, T. (2020). Role of school administration in providing an attractive and

safe school environment to students under Vision 2030. Journal of Educational

Psychology, 8(3), e748. http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2552-4815

Pellegrini, M., Lake, C., Inns, A., & Slavin, R. E. (2018, October). Effective programs in

elementary mathematics: A best-evidence synthesis. In annual meeting of the Society for

Research on Educational Effectiveness, Washington, DC.

105

Perez, A. D., & Okonofua, J. A. (2022). The good and bad of a reputation: Race and punishment

in K-12 schools. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 100, 104287. https://doi.

org/10.1016/j.jesp.2022.104287

Perez, A. D., & Zapata, M. (2020). Strategic planning as an important factor in business

management. Business, Management and Economics Research, 68, 99-106. https://doi.

org/10.32861/bmer.68.99.106Pitso, T., Njeje, T. P., Bonase, T. D., Mfula, T., Nobendle,

B. S., & Nogaga, P. (2014). The impact of crime among learners in high school.

Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 3(1), 333-343. https://doi.org/10.5901/

ajis.2014.v3n1p333

Queens University of Charlotte. (2020). Benefits of diversity in schools. https://online.queens.

edu/resources/article/benefits-of-diversity-in-school/

Quezada, L. E., Reinao, E. A., Palominos, P. I., & Oddershede, A. M. (2019). Measuring

performance using SWOT analysis and balanced scorecard. Procedia Manufacturing, 39,

786-793.

Reddig, N., & VanLone, J. (2022). Pre-service teacher preparation in trauma-informed

pedagogy: A review of state competencies. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 1-12.

10.1080/15700763.2022.2066547

Reimers, F., Schleicher, A., Saavedra, J., & Tuominen, S. (2020). Supporting the continuation of

teaching and learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Organization for Economic

Cooperation and Development. https://www.oecd.org/education/Supporting-the-

continuation-of-teaching-and-learning-during-the-COVID-19-pandemic.pdf

106

Renault, V. (2017). SWOT analysis: Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats.

Community Tool Box. https://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/assessment/assessing-

community-needs-and-resources/swot-analysis/main

Reynolds, G. (Ed.). (2017). Benefits of racial and ethnic diversity in elementary and secondary

education: A briefing before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (ED514057). ERIC.

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED514057.pdf

Rodriguez, L. (2020, February 6). Understanding how poverty is the main barrier to education.

Global Citizen. https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/poverty-education-satistics-

facts/

Roth, K. (2020). Technology in education: The ongoing debate of access, adequacy and equity

[Unpublished master’s thesis]. Bank Street College.

Ronfeldt, M., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2013). How teacher turnover harms student achievement.

American Educational Research Journal, 50(1), 4-36. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312.

12463813

Ropo, E. (2016). Teaching expertise. In H. Boshuizen (Ed.), Professional learning: Gaps and

transitions on the way from novice to expert (pp. 159-179). Springer.

Sagir, M., Dos, I., & Cetin, R. B. (2014). Identifying school reputation. International Journal of

Social Science and Education, 5(1), 137-146. http://ijsse.com/sites/default/files/issues/

2014/v4-i5-2014/Paper-17.pdf

Sajid, M., Rana, R. A., & Fatima, G. (2022). Motivation and performance of secondary school

teachers. Webology, 19(2). https://www.webology.org/abstract.php?id=2415

Salgong, V. K., Ngumi, O., & Chege, K. (2016). The role of guidance and counseling in

enhancing student discipline in secondary schools in Koibatek District (EJ1102862).

107

Journal of Education and Practice, 7(13), 142-151. ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/

fulltext/EJ1102862.pdf

Schmid, E., & Garrels, V. (2021). Parental involvement and educational success among

vulnerable students in vocational education and training. Educational Research, 63(4),

456–473.

Sharif, S. H. (2020). Impact of poverty on the academic performance: Selected students in the

North Bengal of Bangladesh: A short analysis. https://www.grin.com/document/953696

Singh, A., Sharma, S., & Paliwal, M. (2021). Adoption intention and effectiveness of digital

collaboration platforms for online learning: The Indian students’ perspective. Interactive

Technology and Smart Education, 18(4), 493-514. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-05-2020-

0070

Sloan, T. (2019). Supporting students living in poverty (EJ1230335). BU Journal of Graduate

Studies in Education, 11(1), 51-55. ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1230335.pdf

Smith, T. E., Reinke, W. M., Herman, K. C., & Huang, F. (2019). Understanding family–school

engagement across and within elementary-and middle-school contexts

(ED610517). School Psychology, 34(4), 363-375. ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/

ED610517.pdf

Sosnowski, J. (2013). Statistics on how poverty affects children in schools. Seattle-PI. https://

education.seattlepi.com/statistics-poverty-affects-children-schools-3636.html

Souza, D. K. (2020). The relationship between childhood poverty and academic success,

parental influence and health [Unpublished honors project]. California State University.

Stevens, A. (2015). Strategic management and strategic planning process. https://www.

academia.edu/48791951/Strategic_Management_and_Strategic_Planning_Process

108

Strauss, V. (2018, February 9). This is what inadequate funding at a public school looks and feels

like—as told by an entire faculty. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.

com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2018/02/09/this-is-what-inadequate-funding-at-a-public-

school-looks-and-feels-like-as-told-by-an-entire-faculty/

Sujarwo, S., Kusumawardani, E., Prasetyo, I., & Herwin, H. (2021). Parent involvement in

adolescents' education: A case study of partnership models. Cypriot Journal of

Educational Sciences, 16(4), 1563-1581. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9283-7961

Sulastri, S., Syahril, S., & Adi, N. (2021, June). Optimizing schools' vision and mission in

learning leadership based on action learning schools. 2nd Progress in Social Science,

Humanities and Education Research Symposium. Atlantis Press.

Suriyanti, S. (2020). Planning strategy of operation business and maintenance by analytical

hierarchy process and strength, weakness, opportunity, and threat integration for energy

sustainability. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy.

Thomas, M. S., Crosby, S., & Vanderhaar, J. (2019). Trauma-informed practices in schools

across two decades: An interdisciplinary review of research. Review of Research in

Education, 43(1), 422-452. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X18821123

Tian, H., & Sun, Z. (2018). Academic achievement assessment. Springer.

Tjabolo, S. A. (2020). The influence of teacher certification on the performance of elementary

school teachers in Gorontalo Province, Indonesia. International Journal of Instruction,

13(4), 347-360. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13422a

U.S. Census Bureau. (2021.). Census Bureau releases small area income and poverty estimates

for states, counties and school districts. https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-

releases/2021/saipe.html

109

U.S. Department of Education. (2013). Application for funding under Race to the Top: District.

https://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetopdistrict/2013/finalists/applications/clarksdale.

pdf

U.S. News and World Report. (2019a). Geo H Oliver visual/performing arts. https://www.

usnews.com/education/k12/mississippi/geo-h-oliver-visual-perf-arts-226782

U.S. News and World Report. (2019b). News, rankings and analysis on politics, education,

healthcare and more. https://www.usnews.com/education/k12/mississippi/geo-h-oliver-

visual-perf-arts-226782

Verhoef, M. J., & Casebeer, A. L. (2017). Broadening horizons: Integrating quantitative and

qualitative research. Canadian Journal of Infectious Diseases, 8(2), 65-66. https://doi.

org/10.1155/1997/349145

Vermont Primary School. (2022). Statement of values and school philosophy. https://www.

vermontps.vic.edu.au/uploaded_files/media/statementofvalues20182021.pdf

Wasswa, K. (2019). The effects of poverty on students’ academic performance: A case study of

Nsangi Sub County in Wakiso District. https://ir.kiu.ac.ug/bitstream/20.500.12306/2672/

1/img00658.pdf

Watrianthos, R. (2019). Market price stabilizing strategy: Overview of the combination of SWOT

and QSPM analysis [Preprint]. doi:10.31227/osf.io/9atgd.

Webb, E. R. (2021). Improving academic achievement for students in poverty: A case study

analysis of a rural elementary school [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Virginia Tech.

Weir, K. (2016). Inequality at school. American Psychological Association. https://www.apa.

org/monitor/2016/11/cover-inequality-school

110

Wing Institute. (2019). Teacher turnover impact. https://www.winginstitute.org/teacher-

retention-turnover

Wong, J. W. Y., Tong, C., & Wong, A. (2017). The mediating effects of school reputation and

school image on the relationship between quality of teaching staff and student satisfaction

in higher education in Hong Kong. Journal of Education, Society, and Behavioral

Science, 4(11), 1557-1582. https://doi.org/10.9734/BJESBS/2014/11312

Wood, M. (2009). The pros and cons of using pros and cons for multi-criteria evaluation and

decision making. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1545189

Yang, K. (2014). Factors affecting internal efficiency of primary schools in Nuer Zone of

Gambella Regional State [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Jimma University.

Yang, C. H., & Lee, K. C. (2020). Developing a strategy map for forensic accounting with fraud

risk management: An integrated balanced scorecard-based decision model. Evaluation

and program planning, 80, 101780.

Zakrajšek, S. (2016). The impact of modern technologies on elementary school organization and

teaching methods. Innovative Issues and Approaches in Social Sciences, 9, 60-76.

https://doi.org/10.12959/issn.1855-0541.IIASS-2016-no1-art04

Zulkarnain, A., Wahyuningtias, D., & Putranto, T. S. (2018). Analysis of IFE, EFE and QSPM

matrix on business development strategy. IOP Conference Series: Earth and

Environmental Science, 126(1), 012062. https://doi.org10.1088/1755-1315/126/1/012062

111

Appendix A

Mission Statement

112

Mission Statement

Through collaboration and continuous learning, George H. Oliver Elementary School will

be a place of excellence where all students are engaged in high-quality real-world learning. A

professional and highly motivated staff, in partnership with parents will encourage children to

achieve their full potential and become responsible citizens who are lifelong learners.

113

Appendix B

Vision Statement

114

Vision Statement

George H. Oliver Elementary School strives to guarantee each child a superior education

through high quality integrated learning experiences.

115

Appendix C

Value Statement

116

Value Statement

Our organization emphasizes the importance of respect, responsibility, integrity,

excellence, collaboration, creativity, and innovation. These values will be expressed in a way

that speaks to our organization's commitment to helping our students reach their fullest potential.

Subject:
Type:
Pages/Words:
	Single spaced
	approx 275 words per page
Urgency:
Level:
Currency:
Total Cost:

No More Worries!

Paper Formatting

No Lateness!

AEW Guarantees

This question has been answered.

Compute Cost of Paper

Our Services

Why Choose Us