Rural and Small Community Educator Responses to State Academic Standards

Rural and small town schools are in the midst of revising curriculum to meet state and national mandates. This article presents information gained from a two-year grant funded training program for rural teachers focusing on the Indiana state-mandated curriculum change. The context in which teachers teach and their prevailing attitudes and beliefs about students and learning shape how they respond to the state standards in their classrooms. Teachers respond to state standards through a customized approach based on personal philosophical orientations to teaching and learning.

Indiana has consistently set rigorous expectations for student learning (Indiana Department of Education, 2010). Integrating state standards into already established local school curriculum is a complex endeavor that brings added dimensions to the work of rural and small school teachers. While there is ample rhetoric regarding the value of standards-based curriculum, there is less understanding regarding rural and small community practitioner attitudes and beliefs as they modify teaching practices in response to these mandated standards. This study explored rural and small school teachers responses and adaptations to state-mandated student standards.

Literature Review
The concept of rurality has been engrained in American culture for centuries. The term conjures images of farms, towns, and small spaces. However, no one definition clearly divides rural and urban entities: Many different definitions exist developed by different agencies and organizations (Rural Assistance Center, 2010). These multiple definitions involve boundaries, land-use, and shifts in populations, reflecting the multidimensionality of the term (Cromartie & Bucholtz, 2008). For example, the National Center for Education Statistics (2010) differentiates towns and rural areas on the basis of their proximity to larger urban centers, while the Rural Housing Program delineates rural eligibility as areas with populations of less than 20,000 people (Cromartie & Bucholtz, 2008). Approximately 19% of the total number of students enrolled in US public schools attends very small schools located in rural areas. Meeting the educational needs of rural children is a challenge. In Indiana alone, nearly four of ten Indiana public schools are located in rural areas (Johnson & Strange, 2009).

Changing Value of Smallness
Much of the twentieth century, rural, small community, educational reform movement concentrated on redesigning small and rural schools to resemble their urban counterparts (Kannapel & DeYoung, 1999;Kliebard, 2002). Generally, these initiatives resulted in school consolidations (DeYoung, 1995). However, in more recent years, the trend has changed to support smallness. Larger schools are increasingly being reorganized to resemble small community schools in efforts to connect with students and provide more individual attention (Learn, 2006;Meier, 1995). The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation recently dedicated over $200 million to reducing the size of U.S. high schools (Wasley, 2002).
Research on rural schools indicates high levels of overall satisfaction by teachers (Huysman, 2008), better connections between teachers and students (Blum, 2002), more opportunities for students (Mitchell, 2000), and lower violence, misbehavior, tardiness, and class cutting (Dinkes, Kemp, Baum, & Snyder, 2009). Conditions traditionally associated with rural and small schools, such as poor educational conditions and limited economic development (Roscigno & Crowley, 2001), higher dropout rates, lower percentages of adults with degrees (National Center for Education Statistics, 2007), and high rates of child poverty (Farmer et al., 2006;Johnson & Strange, 2007), have become acceptable trade-offs to the public for the perceived advantages.

Mandates for School Change
The No Child Left Behind Act (2001) has mandated school changes that have impacted rural and small school educational decision-making in varying ways. A broad range of academic performance has been associated with geographical differences and populations of students served (Eppley, 2009;Farmer et al., 2006;McCabe, 2006). The needs of rural communities reflect unique circumstances, and under these mandates, rural schools and communities lose their opportunity to define educational quality in ways that meet local needs (Eppley, 2009). Rural districts face challenges with regard to the cultivation of a teaching force that possesses subject matter expertise, willingness to undertake difficult professional work at the local level, and attentiveness to rural practices and meaning (Howley & Howley, 2005, p. 4 (Reigeluth, 1997 (1986). Together, participants joined as critical friends in professional support of one another, in equal status relationships between participants and the facilitators.
A follow-up study involving 18 of the original participants was conducted at the end of the two-year training period. Participants in the follow-up included 4 elementary teachers (including 2 special educators), 5 middle school teachers (including 2 special educators), 7 high school teachers (including 1 special educator), and 2 secondary building level administrators. Five participants were male and 13 were female. Their teaching experience ranged from 1-30 years. Three participants were identified as novice, in their first two years of teaching.

Data Collection
The grant director served as the primary researcher for the project. Various data sources were collected in two  Stage 2. At the conclusion of the training, a final Likert-type survey was mailed to the 18 participants who agreed to take part in the follow-up study. Surveys were returned by 16 of the 18 participants (89% return rate), five of whom indicated they had participated in the grant for less than two years. Three participants were identified as novices, in their first two years of teaching. The final survey included responses about integrating standards, the impact of standards on student learning, understanding standards, the value and importance of collegiality, the value of using a range of instructional strategies, student motivation and parental knowledge.

Data Analysis
A grounded theory approach to data analysis was chosen, in which theory emerges from the data gathered through ongoing inductive processes; emerging insights are re-analyzed for additional insights (Corbin & Strauss, 2008;Glasser & Strauss, 1967). Data were collected, compared and analyzed throughout stage 1 by the grant director. Data sources were triangulated, compared and cross-checked for consistency of information (Patton, 1990). All data, including interview transcripts, field notes, and documents were subjected to qualitative analysis, which included categorizing and seeking patterns and themes. Through constant comparative analysis of categories, themes, and tentative explanations, a set of questions developed to offer insight into this exploratory study.
The limitations to the study included the small sample size, the movement of participants in and out of the study, and the lack of attendance by participants at training sessions. However, the findings discussed below are believed to add to the body of literature on rural and small school teaching within the mandated standards mOVement.

Findings
The first question addressed in this study was the consistency of implementation of standards-based instruction. The second explored the degree to which participants placed value on standards-based instruction.
Other areas investigated were the degree of collegiality needed to align standards, initiatives towards differentiating instruction, motivating learners towards the new standards, and parent knowledge and understanding of the mandates.
How Consistent is the Implementation of Standards Based Instruction?
Year One training goals/objectives focused on understanding English language arts and mathematics standards. Grant participants collaborated with English and math content faculty to review and analyze student standards, engage in curriculum alignments, and back map teaching activities to standards.
Although there was a presumption that teachers in the same building would have a similar familiarity with state standards, some participants had previously chaired school improvement teams or worked in state study groups. This resulted in variations in the knowledge level of participants about state mandated standards as they began the training.
While prior to the grant project several participating schools had already established instructional planning and learning communities, school planning times for working on horizontal and vertical curriculum mapping, and initiated specific standards-based professional development activities, other schools within the same districts were less advanced. All participants reported growth in knowledge of standards at the end of year one with the exception of one teacher who indicated she realized she was less knowledgeable than she first thought herself to be. Grant participants consistently valued collegial activities, indicated by interview statements such as: The critical friend activity should be one of the more valuable tools helping in the nuts and bolts of teaching. I think it's really brought schools together, especially within our county.
Before, I didn't know any teachers from any other schools so it has been nice to go to [school name removed] and be able to see different people. It was extremely beneficial to work amongst a group of seasoned educators who are dedicated to becoming more proficient in their fields. Sharing rubrics from other schools made me realize our school is on the right path in generating useful rubrics. Collegiality is not a given in rural and small school settings, but is highly valued by these educators. Curriculum integration across content areas was stressed in both years of training. While cross-disciplinary teaching was widely used by elementary and some middle school participants, secondary teachers were clearly more reluctant to prepare integrated curriculum.

What Impacts Educators Readiness for Instructional
Several secondary participants indicated their resistance was due to the fact that they lacked an understanding of content standards outside of their fields. The separateness of subject area standards (math, English, science) contributed to the lack of importance placed on secondary curriculum integration. These participants also noted that the sheer number of competencies to be covered was also a barrier. On the mail-back survey, 91% agreed or strongly agreed that test preparation has become the defacto curriculum in many schools, suggesting that there is little perceived time to teach differentially.
Participants also believed that differentiating instruction required appropriate materials. The grant supported the purchase of over $1000 for materials for each participant, including the administrators. Some participants ordered grant materials for their own classrooms while others pooled their resources and ordered materials that benefited several classrooms in their buildings. Participants ordered multiple copies of children s literature, math games and manipulatives to support standards-based teaching. On the mail-back survey, 82% of responders agreed or strongly agreed with the statement, A drawback to the standards movement is the lack of funds for appropriate teaching materials needed to adequately teach standards.

Motivating Students towards High Stakes Testing
If students are to achieve learning objectives they must be motivated. Establishing classroom practices and positive student behaviors are key factors in creating an effective learning environment. Behavior management in this project was addressed through several special education consultant presentations. Evaluation of current practices was based on observations, prepared descriptions of behavior management logs and reporting procedures. There was wide variability in how teachers and schools utilized behavior management to promote effective student learning. Some schools had well developed policies and procedures whereas others did not.
It was interesting to note that management strategies described by participants at the beginning of the second year of training rarely acknowledged that curriculum changes could impact classroom management.
Participants described strategies such as contacting parents, and proximity to students as strategies to manage and motivate students, giving little attention to strategies such as cooperative learning and flexible grouping, providing students with more time to meet the standard, developing or revising instructional units, finding ways to integrate the content into another subject area, or engaging students in self-assessment to share responsibility for learning.
The lack of student motivation to do well on high stakes tests continued to be cited as a major concern for a number of participants throughout the grant period. The mail-back survey indicated that 100% agreed or strongly agreed that, Motivation is more complex than telling students they must pass a high stakes exam. Only a few participants indicated they addressed student motivation by focusing on teaching students how to live well, actively, and fully in their communities.
How Knowledgeable Are Parents about the Standards Movement?
The importance of role of parents in their children's education is widely recognized. However, parents are frequently unaware or have little understanding of new educational initiatives or of the role they can play in educational outcomes. Consequently parental engagement was a major objective in the first year of training. Participants read extensively about involvement of parents and community. They prepared and conducted a parent survey to determine parent understanding of student standards and utilized technology applications to report their findings. Groups comments included It was noted that not only do the majority of the parents not understand state standards, they do not understand the ISTEP. This is a major problem when the school needs the understanding and support of parents," and The outcome of our discussion included ways in which to inform the parents and be certain of their understanding.
Participants believed in the importance of parental involvement but acknowledged that many parents were still unaware of the significance of standards and that their schools were grappling with this issue. On the mail back survey, while 82% of responders agreed or strongly agreed that state testing provides parents and teachers with information about patterns of strengths and weaknesses of their students, 82% also disagreed or strongly disagreed that parents are knowledgeable and well informed about state standards and their child s performance levels. Study participants often seemed at a loss regarding how to better communicate standards to parents, especially to those parents who are dealing with life issues that often interfere with parenting responsibilities related to schooling.

Discussion
Teachers in rural and small school settings hold attitudes and beliefs about the mandated standards movement. There is wide variability with respect to their understandings and experiences with state mandated standards within and across building-level learning communities, the degree of acceptance of these standards by those involved, and individual responses to these mandates.
While test preparation has become a crucial aspect of curriculum, educators in this study often responded with customized approaches based on their personal attitudes and beliefs about teaching and learning, similar to the findings of Reigeluth (1997). Practitioners interpreted standards through their own beliefs and practices, resulting in variability within school settings for individually preferred teaching approaches and strategies.
Teacher participants believed that ongoing professional development was needed and that administrators were key to motivating teachers to adhere to standards-based curriculum. Accountability measures require more from principals regarding school-wide professional development (Chance & Segura, 2009). However, administrators in this study thought that teachers, as content area experts, should also assume stronger leadership to support the standards movement.
Huysman (2008) also suggested that active roles in professional development by teachers could increase their status and significance.
In this study, the availability of teaching materials needed to effectively teach standards, the specific needs and motivations of individual learners in these settings, and how knowledgeable practitioners and parents were about mandated standards in general varied from school to school. Uniqueness found in small and rural context settings has also been reported by others (Howley & Howley, 2005;Starr & White).

Conclusion
Rural and small school educators are experiencing increased pressure to achieve student proficiency. The NCLB act (2001) has contributed to an oversimplified assumption that state standards and high stakes testing automatically increase student motivation and improve teaching practice. One size fits all professional development for the rural and small school setting does not take into account the wide variability found in these settings and the stronghold that previous successes in teaching within these contexts holds for practitioners.