EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 1

Effective Interventions and Academic Support for Junior High Students Action Research
Joy E. Vigil
University of Colorado, Denver
Fall 2013

EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 2

Table of Contents
Introduction and Problem Statement
Purpose and Intended Audience
Research Questions
Context of Study
Literature Review
Literature Review Questions
Literature Search Procedures
Literature Review Findings
Quality of Literature
Gap in Literature
Summary of Literature Review
Methods
Site Selection and Sampling
Ethical Procedures
Data Collection Methods
Data Analysis Methods
Schedule
Checks for Rigor
Findings
Academic Support Trends
R.O.A.R. Trends
Comparison of Research to the Literature Review
Limitations
Implications of Practice
Impact (Negative and Positive)
Summary of Research
References
Appendices



EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 3

Introduction and Problem Statement
Currently I am a Junior High and High School teacher in a suburban charter school in Colorado.
I have taught for five years and am a lead team member of the Junior High staff. Additionally,
after a lot of staff turnover in the previous school year, it has been up to the lead team members
and administration to retain the cultural traditions of the school as well as promote the various
forms of programs available to the students.
As students transition from the different educational expectations in elementary to Junior High,
many students struggle with keeping up on all of their work. Students now have eight different
teachers, transitioning from class to class, as well as being in 90-minute block class periods.
Currently we have two forms of interventions to support the academic needs of 7
th
and 8
th
grade
students. One intervention is called R.O.A.R., which stands for Reinforcement of Academic
Responsibility, and the other is called Academic Support. They both essentially provide the same
support. R.O.A.R. occurs after school with limited participation and is optional. Academic
Support occurs during school and is required for students with Ds and Fs with high
participation. So I conducted research to find out which intervention fits the needs of the Junior
High students best?
Purpose and Intended Audience
Allocating and distributing time appropriately within the teaching profession is challenging and
essential to being a successful teacher. Therefore to fully establish if a particular program is
effective, this researcher wanted to observe student behavior and participation in both R.O.A.R.
and Academic Support. In doing so, it would allow the lead team and administration to
determine where teachers time would best be used for the betterment of the students academic
success.
This information was shared with our Parent-lead Board of Directors which would thereby make
the research public for parents and students who were interested. The Board meetings are public
and their notes are posted on our school website.
Additionally, the information was shared with the students and instructor of the INTE 6720
Action Research class at the University of Colorado, Denver.
Research Questions
By observing students participation in both R.O.A.R. and Academic Support, the lead team and
administration of the Junior High program could better understand how the intervention
programs were affecting the achievement of students. Using data to observe trends in student
achievement is an important step to identifying possible causes of failures, successes, and areas
of effectiveness.
To determine which program best supports students needs along with the most efficient use of
teachers time, the questions this researcher delved into include:
To what extent are the current academic interventions offered at The Academy
effective for the student population?
EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 4
Is providing Academic Support an effective intervention for 7th and 8th
grade students? By observing grade point averages of students attending
Academic Support, I checked for improvement of students grades. I checked if
grades improved for students who are mandated to attend. How did students feel
about being assigned Academic Support? Did it encourage them to not have a D
or F? Did missing out on lunch with their friends and advisory (called Pride Time)
recess also ensure they had passing grades?
Is providing optional R.O.A.R. an effective intervention for seventh and
eighth grade students? Similarly to Academic Support, the effectiveness of
R.O.A.R. was tracked by observing grade point averages and surveying teachers,
parents, and students.
Do parents find one form of intervention better than the other? It is important
to understand the potential buy-in of parents because they can potentially
influence the students participation and opinion of the interventions. Both take a
considerable amount of effort and manpower to run each week, so it is vital to
determine if they were both appropriate forms of interventions. Also, if there was
little buy-in from parents (who provided the students with a ride from R.O.A.R.),
it may not be highly attended.
In the end, I changed the research questions and excluded the eighth graders. This was due to the
among of data available from just one grade. There were also some complications in obtaining
Grade Point Averages which will be discussed later.
Context of Study
The research was conducted in a charter school that has two facilities housing Pre-K through 12
th

grade. This school is a part of a local school district and will have been open for 20 years at the
end of the 2013-2014 school year. The charter school has a high involvement of parents with a
parent board coordinating with the administrators and executive director to make decisions for
the school. Within the district, the student population sits at 56.88% White, 33.16% Hispanic,
5.15% Asian, 2.32% African-American, 0.68% Native American, 0.15% Native
Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and 1.65% two or more ethnicities. Within the charter school, the
student population is 71% White, 25% Hispanic, 3% Asian, 1% African-American, 0% Native
American, 0% Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and 1% two or more ethnicities. The school is a
commuter school with no bus service available to families. There is a 16% of students who are
eligible for the free or reduced-price lunch program.

During the 2012-2013 school year, Academic Support was implemented as a form of in-school
intervention for all students in 7th and 8th grade who have a D or an F in any given class. Each
week, teachers would assign a student Academic Support on Tuesday. Then on Wednesday, the
students Pride Time (homeroom) teacher would give him/her a pass to Academic Support for
Thursday. The pass listed the class and the assignment(s) that the student must work on. The
student then had the opportunity to get the missing assignments turned in up to the point of
Academic Support on Thursday. If he/she is unable to turn in all of the assignments, he/she
would bring lunch to the classroom to work on the missing assignments. On Thursdays, we also
had recess during Pride Time. The students assigned to Academic Support missed out on both
lunch in the cafeteria and recess.
EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 5
The program Reinforcement of Academic Responsibility, also known as R.O.A.R., was
implemented during the 2007-2008 school year. The intention of the Tuesday after-school study
hall was to have all of the Junior High teachers in a localized spot to help students with their
schoolwork. Students could come on a voluntary basis and were encouraged to attend by all
teachers. If a student had an after school practice, coaches knew that students may have had to
attend R.O.A.R. in order to be eligible to play that week. Students may not play in their sport if
they have two or more Fs in a class. However, not many students took advantage of the
R.O.A.R. program possibly because they did not have a ride after school.
It was important to understand how students approached academic interventions both at this
school as well as at other schools. So, aside from observing and surveying the seventh graders of
the charter school, I needed to conduct a literature review for a solid research base.
Literature Review
By completing a literature review, I was able to find evidence of educators using intervention
programs to encourage positive academic achievement. I would have to, check a variety of
studies because single studies often provide inadequate evidence upon which to make
judgments (Stringer, p. 121). I would also seek to define how educators determine if an
academic program should be maintained based on its effectiveness among students.
Literature Review Questions
How do educators deem an academic intervention program successful and effective?
What forms of interventions have shown academic success among Junior High students?
What role do parents play in supporting an intervention program?
Literature Search Procedures
During my research, I used the Auraria Library using the Database List. From the Database List,
I selected the Education Subject. From there, I chose the Educational Resources Information
Center (ERIC) Database. From there, I used the keywords: interventions and Junior High School,
as well as academic achievement to find articles on my subject. I also kept my research dated
from the year 2008 to the present year, 2013.
From that search, I found articles from the School Community Journal, the Child Youth Care
Forum, the Psychology in Schools Journal, the Research in Education Journal, the European
Journal of Psychology of Education, the Journal Of Educational Research, and Behavior Analyst
Today.
Literature Review Findings
During Junior High, students undergo some of the most drastic changes physically, emotionally,
and academically. The junior high school age is oftentimes viewed as a transition time from
childhood to adulthood, yet many junior high school students are increasingly finding themselves
disconnected from the world around them (Nelson, McMahan, and Torres, 2012, p. 142). This
transitional period is crucial to a students future outlook on education, and by providing a
positive community that fosters encouraging participation in a schools community, Nelson,
EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 6
McMahan, and Torres (2012) concluded that focusing solely on academics depletes a students
desire to achieve in an academic setting. The issues of high-stakes testing becoming the sole
focus of school was also echoed amongst other auxiliary school personnel: While the push for
academics is important, it is also very important for our students to like coming to school, feeling
connected and balanced in school, and motivated to achieve success in more ways than just a
test (Nelson, McMahan, and Torres, 2012, p. 138). Furthermore, by involving other outside
community members in the schools community and spirit, students begin to see value in being a
civically-minded member of society. Community involvement is a continual trend within the
literature found in this study. As Sullivan, Long, and Kucera (2011) describe with respect to
School Wide Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (SWPBIS), Effective
implementation of SWPBIS relies on guidance from a leadership team comprising of the school
community who develop and implement relevant policies and practices, train staff, and provide
ongoing support and leadership for implementation effort throughout the school. Along with
administrators, general and special educators, support staff, and parents, school psychologists are
often key members of this team (Sullivan, Long, and Kucera, 2011, p. 973). Additional factors
such as staff buy-in and staff commitment to consistent practices also contribute to successful
interventions within a junior high school. These things all require a supportive community to
encourage positive change within the school. When students feel supported, they have a
considerably larger likelihood of going to school and staying in school which increases academic
achievement and lowers discipline issues. In the French study by Regner, Loose, and Dumas
(2009), students were observed to determine if academic monitoring versus academic support by
both teachers and parents influenced their achievement. The study measured academic
achievement through several factors: perceptions of parent and teacher academic involvement,
perceived competence, academic grades, and achievement goals. Academic monitoring is
defined in this study as controlling student academic behaviors such as whether they do
homework, and supervising if a student is doing his/her best. Academic support is defined as
encouraging, helping, and supporting a students academic behaviors and outcomes. The adult
would help with homework, support the student in his/her academic decisions, and supporting
them in their academic difficulties (Regner, Loose, and Dumas, 2009, p. 264). As McNeal (2012)
found, there is little evidence to support a negative reactive hypothesis in parental involvement
for student achievement, meaning that if a student is struggling with school, their parents will
become more involved in their academic monitoring. Parent involvement in a students academic
support and monitoring shows positive academic achievement.

In addition to students feeling supported by the community, if they feel successful, research
suggests that they will achieve well academically even if their perceived success is
manufactured. In Mori and Uchidas (2009) study on contrived success affecting self-efficacy
among Junior High School students, there is a correlation drawn between how good a student
feels about their academic success with their actual academic success. Interestingly enough, this
feeling seems to increase achievement as measured by test scores with no other encouragement
other than giving the student potential hope in his/her capabilities. That being said, Johnson and
Street (2012) show how a students full understanding of achievement (or lack there of) help
generate self-aware, self-advocating students who process their shortcomings through data
analysis. The Morningside Academy practices continual assessment on a daily basis (micro),
standardized testing (meta), and summative end of the unit/term basis (macro) (Johnson and
Street, 2012). When students know exactly where they are achieving based on the standards and
EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 7
skills evaluation, they can understand whether they need more direct instruction, more practice,
and/or further day-to-day application of the concepts. This better equips them for knowing what
to study and even how to study. Their success is not manufactured as in Mori and Uchidas
(2009) study. Students (and their teachers, of course) know exactly how they succeeded.

While academic success is influenced by a variety of factors, motivation plays a huge role in a
students achievement. Reiss (2009) developed a School Motivation Profile (RSMP) Assessment
for 13 of the 16 Life Motives. Three of the Life Motives were deleted to avoid controversies of
asking adolescents about romance (sex), saving (money), and eating. By determining the
motivational factors among Junior High and High School students through the RMP, the team
established six reasons for low performance among students. The six reasons for low
performance in school were: fear of failure (high need for acceptance), incuriosity (low need for
cognition), lack of ambition (low need for power), spontaneity (low need for order), lack of
responsibility (low need for honor), and combativeness (high need for vengeance) (Reiss, 2009,
p. 221). When motivational factors are determined (or lack thereof), an intervention plan can be
established to promote student academic achievement.
Quality of Literature
In order to be fully reliable, I would like to see further studies conducted on Mori and Uchidas
(2009) self-efficacy research. Although their findings appear to be sound, they also appear basic
at best. They conducted their study using a graphics-based test which helped targeted students
feel positive about their manufactured achievement. Adding an additional data collection point
such as a Likert scale of success would be helpful. Their original findings appear to be more
common sense than proof that self-efficacy increases student achievement.
Although the study of students perceptions of parent and teacher academic involvement is an
important area to research, I would examine if the results of Regner, Loose, and Dumas French
study (2009) can be applied to students situations in the United States. I am unfamiliar with the
academic expectations of a French public school as compared to those in the United States.
By contrast, Reiss study (2009) on Life Motives among students has been developed as a
continuation and improvement on research that has been conducted since the 1920s. Reiss was
able to key on psychological indicators to prove on a quantitative scale when a student is
motivated to succeed in school. Within this study, I would like to see a sampling of questions
used in the RSMP survey given to students. Furthermore, I would like to see the additional
research on what types of interventions work best for the six areas of low motivation among
students.
Within the Sullivan, Long, and Kucera (2011) article, a detailed self-critique of possible
limitations gives this research strong reliability. They were able to point-out areas that may have
influenced the quantitative data presented in the study. This critical evaluation of possible
limitations really help the reader understand how to interpret their findings.
By using both a control population with similar demographics and their school population of
interest, Nelson, McMahan, and Torres (2012) are able to compare their original results with
another population to verify data, highlight outliers in their study, and understand if their
findings were supported by findings from a similar school.
EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 8
The level of research and detail that has gone into the Morningside Academys success is
tremendous (Johnson and Street, 2012). They have triangulated their data to determine students
success along with step-by-step evaluation of each process of learning. Their original drive and
mission is to help students who have not been success in traditional school settings because of a
variety of factors, but that does not hold them back in finding academic success. This in-depth
evaluation of the learning process is something that all schools should consider in order to
enhance teaching methods. As a private school, their model must be successful in order to
remain open as a school, and by keeping a constant vigilant eye on student data, they have an
advantage to place students where they need to be to be successful.
As McNeal (2012) researched the influence of parental involvement on a students academic
success, the study did not look at older students achievements. There are plenty of indicators
and correlations between elementary students academic success and parent involvement, but the
involvement seems to taper off as a student gets older. It is hard to say if McNeals research
thoroughly researches this facet.
Gap in Literature
Overall, it was difficult to find literature on the efficacy of after-school tutoring programs.
Initially I suppose this is because often teachers help students more on a one-on-one basis after
school rather than tracking involvement and improvement of students in after-school programs
with all teachers working in one space such as during R.O.A.R (a large scale evaluation). It was
essential to see how our mandatory intervention program (Academic Support) during school
compares with the effectiveness of the optional after-school tutoring program (R.O.A.R.).
Additionally, determining which school population is being served by these said programs helps
make the efficacy clearer. These are school-specific questions that are being answered by the
research, but they could have an impact on other schools decisions on intervention programs.
Additionally, it was important to study if possible parental involvement in and support of the
academic programs either help or hinder student achievement. Having this data for an older
selection of students is currently missing from the current available literature.
Summary of Literature Review
I was thoroughly satisfied with the variety of research available on how students are motivated
by different factors to achieve well in school. The literature also helped determine the definition
of student achievement and effectiveness of a program. Another aspect that was studied even
further was be parental involvement and support in the intervention programs. Through this
literature review, I have seen the importance of looking at this in more detail than I originally
anticipated.
Methods
Site Selection and Sampling
To determine the overall efficacy of the two intervention support programs, observations were
made on the number of students participating in both programs; as well as surveys were given to
students, parents, teachers, and the Junior High principal. Additionally, data was collected on
students grade achievements (percentages of passing grades versus Ds and Fs).
EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 9
All parents received the participation consent form and surveys via email for both parents and
students via our school newsletter, which was the official form of communication for the school
(Appendix A). It was posted on the schools website for easy access.
No students were targeted for recruitment. The R.O.A.R. Program was totally voluntary after
school on Tuesdays. The students who attended Academic Support had a D or F in a class and
were assigned to attend by the teachers. This program was required regardless of the research
being conducted. The students attended during lunch and homeroom for the week they were
assigned. They could avoid being assigned to this mandatory study hall by getting their missing
assignments turned in between Wednesday, when they are assigned, and Thursday when it
occurred.
During this study, I worked with students in seventh and eighth grade at the charter school. I
collected their data regarding participation in the intervention programs on a weekly basis.
Additionally, I surveyed the students by posting the Google Doc survey online via the school
website (Appendix B). I sent out a separate Google Doc survey online via email and the school
website for parents to give feedback on the two programs offered (Appendix C). I collected data
from teachers by seeing who assigned mandatory attendance for students to Academic Support
(Appendix G) as well as offered a survey to the teachers via a Google Doc (Appendix D). I
monitored the R.O.A.R. attendance list (Appendix H) to see who came each week and what
subject they were working on. Although I collected data from and surveyed the eighth graders, I
did not evaluate this data. I worked closely with the Junior High principal of the school to get
feedback on the research being conducted. Everyone who participated in the research was sought
out intentionally for feedback. I was surprised that no teachers responded to the survey offered
despite multiple attempts for feedback.
Ethical Procedures
To ensure ethical procedures were being followed, a written consent document was issued out to
all Junior High students and parents indicating that they could refuse to participate, withdraw
from the study at any time, data regarding the study was to be shared with them, there was no
sharing of specific information (including name and grades) within the study, and all private
information was kept secured so that no one else may view it (Stringer, 2014, p. 89).
To ensure credibility, I examined data that was already collected by the institution (including
grades and intervention program attendance). Moreover, to enhance credibility, using a survey in
addition to the institutional data collected is a third source of information to provide Stringers,
Triangulation concept (p. 93). This study could be replicated in any school setting based on the
information provided to ensure dependability. There is a trail of data collected, instrument used
to, confirm the veracity of the study, providing another means for ensuring that the research is
trustworthy (p. 94).
Data Collection Methods
Research Question Data Collection Method(s) Participant(s)
1. Is providing Academic
Support an effective
intervention for 7th grade
Document grades of students the
week they are assigned to Academic
Support (Friday-Wednesday).
-Researcher, JH teachers, JH
students, JH administrator
EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 10
students? Document grades of students after
they attend Academic Support
(Thursday).
Document number of students with
failing grades (weekly).
Document number of students
attending Academic Support and for
which course (weekly).
Survey participants to determine
effectiveness of the program.
2. Is providing optional
R.O.A.R. an effective
intervention for 7th grade
students?
Document number of students
attending R.O.A.R. and for which
course.
Document number of students with
failing grades who attended R.O.A.R.
versus students with passing grades.
Survey participants to determine
effectiveness of the program.
-Researcher, JH students, JH
teachers
3. Do parents find one form
of intervention better than
the other?
Survey parents (online) to determine
the effectiveness of each program.
-Researcher, JH student
parents

R.O.A.R. Attendance Students used a Google Doc Spreadsheet to sign into R.O.A.R.
each week (Appendix H).
Academic Support Teachers used a collaborative Google Doc Spreadsheet to assign
students to Academic Support each week (Appendix G).
Students were signed up whenever they had a failing grade
and/or missing assignments. Attendance was also tracked on this
document.
Grade Reports Student grades were exported from the database (Infinite
Campus) into Excel files weekly. I then calculated the grades
manually to find each students grade point average.
Grade Comparisons All data was then compiled into the final document (Appendix
I).
Opinions of Stakeholders Student Survey (Appendix B)
Parent Survey (Appendix C)
Teacher Survey (Appendix D)

EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 11
Data Analysis Methods
To analyze my research questions, I gathered both qualitative and quantitative data from Junior
High students, their parents, teachers who participated in both academic programs, as well as the
Junior High principal. This information was collected through a series of surveys (Appendix B
and C).
Qualitative data reviewed was how students felt about each program, how students felt when
they were mandated to attend Academic Support, what prompted students to attend R.O.A.R.,
and how much more likely a student was to attend R.O.A.R. versus Academic Support.
Quantitative data reviewed was the number of students who attended both programs each week,
repeated student attendance (week-to-week), students assigned to Academic Support by multiple
teachers, grade fluctuation, and classes that students are in need of additional support (Appendix
G).
Initially, I wanted to sample both seventh and eighth grade data for this action research; however
there were several obstacles in collecting data that prevented me from collecting that much
information. As a result, I only processed data from the seventh graders leaving out the eighth
graders from my study. Our school database, Infinite Campus, was not able to provide grade
point averages (GPAs) for the students on a weekly basis. Each week, teachers posted progress
grades but the students GPAs were not calculated due to an unknown error in our gradebook set-
up. Therefore, I had a list of all of the 157 seventh graders grades for each week in a spreadsheet
(Appendix D). I sorted the list by grades and created a separate column with the number of
points assigned for each grade (A=4 points, B=3 points, C=2 points, D=1 points, and F=0
points). Then I resorted the worksheet by each student. I found the sum of each student's grade
points along with another column adding the number of classes each student attended. I then
divided the sum of grade points by the number of classes they took. Another complication to the
collection of data stemmed from the fact that the number of classes fluctuated for each student
This difference in classes was caused due to a number of reasons.
First of all, not all teachers had access to using Infinite Campus due to their paperwork being
held up by the school districts central office. If the teacher was hired later in the summer, they
were not given access to add grades to the grade book until even as late as the first week of
October. Secondly, if a teacher forgot to post progress grades for that week, the students were
not given a grade for that class. Finally, students were not given a grade for special education
courses such as Resource. The number of classes can not be universally calculated (8 classes for
each student) but rather had to be individually calculated.
Once the GPAs were calculated, for each week, I labeled whether the grade GPA went up, down,
or stayed the same from the previous time a grade was calculated. For example, I took the
average of their trimester GPAs from sixth grade and compared them to the GPAs from 9/13/13.
I color coded the GPA green if it went up, red if it went down, and black if the GPA didnt
change. I labeled the proceeding columns with a +1 if the GPA went up, with a -1 if the GPA
went down and a +1 if the GPA stayed the same. This allowed me to find the trends of GPAs on
a weekly basis (Appendix K, Table 1). I could also calculated the overall +/- GPA improvements
(Appendix K, Table 2).
Next, I documented whether a student attended R.O.A.R. for each week with a +1 column.
EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 12
Similarly, I documented if a student was assigned Academic Support and either turned in their
missing assignments before Thursdays mandatory intervention session or attended the session
itself. These categories of students both received a +1 in a different column because if they were
prompted to get their missing assignments in before Thursdays Academic Support session, then
being assigned the session was effective. It forced the students to turn in missing work and/or
gave them the time to complete the assignments during the session. I highlighted the names of
students who attended at least one form of intervention a light pink color. This allowed me to
create a final column calculating the number of students, out of the entire seventh grade, who
attended some form of intervention.
Specific data and grade comparisons could then be made for students who attended R.O.A.R. and
Academic Support (Appendix K, Tables 3-6).
Qualitative data was collected in the form of surveys to the stakeholders of this study including
students, parents, and teachers. The information was distributed through a Google Form and the
responses were compiled in a Google Spreadsheet. The responses were counted in a similar
fashion as the GPA data finding the sums of certain responses, averaging the opinions given on
likert scales, and reading for any types of trends.
Schedule
September 13th Grade sampling collected
September 17
th
ROAR sampling collected
September 19
th
Academic Support sampling collected
September 20
th
Grade sampling collected
September 24
th
ROAR sampling collected
September 26
th
Academic Support sampling collected
September 27
th
Grade sampling collected
October 1
st
ROAR sampling collected
October 3
rd
Academic Support sampling collected
October 4
th
Grade sampling collected
October 8
th
ROAR sampling collected
Draft Literature Review
October 10
th
Academic Support sampling collected
October 11
th
Grade sampling collected
October 12
th
Final Literature Review
October 15
th
ROAR sampling collected
EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 13
October 17
th
Academic Support sampling collected
October 18
th
Grade sampling collected
October 21
st
Parent and Student surveys distributed online
October 31
st
Parent and student surveys collected.
November 5
th
Draft Research Findings
November 9
th
Final Research Findings
November 21
st
Presentation on Report
December 3
rd
Draft Final Action Research Report
December 7
th
Final Action Research Report

Checks for Rigor
By including a variety of perspectives and evaluative tools for all stakeholders in this research,
the findings of this research was credible (Stringer, 2014, p. 92-93). Students were observed with
data being collected from a triangulated method (surveying students, teachers, and parents on the
topic. Participants were also be debriefed and data shared with all immediate stakeholders
(students, parents, teachers, and administration) as well as with the Parent Board and school
community.
Finding ways to provide interventions is a common issue among educators (especially with
mandated programs such as Response to Interventions). Although the programs run in this
particular charter school were specific, teacher-created interventions, it is plausible that other
educators would find this research transferable to programs in place at their educational
institutions (Stringer, p. 94).
The findings of this study are outlined along with specific means of data collection, procedures,
and systematic research processes conducted to ensure dependability (Stringer, p. 94).
The artifacts collected during this action research are available to the public to verify
confirmability (Stringer, p. 94).
Findings
Among the 157 seventh graders, 57.3% of the students attended one or more session of an
intervention; either the mandatory Academic Support or elective R.O.A.R. (Appendix H). There
were 101 Academic Support passes written between 9/13/13 and 10/18/13, which includes
duplicate student attendance week by week. On the other hand, there were 68 R.O.A.R. attendees
between the same span of time also including duplicate students from week to week. Through
informal discussion, it was hypothesized by Junior High teachers and the Junior High Principal
that the GPA for students who are assigned Academic Support would be lower compared to
EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 14
those who attend R.O.A.R. willingly. In this study, that hypothesis was found to be true with the
average GPA of R.O.A.R. students at 3.70 compared to Academic Support students at 2.97.
Students who attended both programs averaged a slightly higher GPA of 3.10 than Academic
Support students (Appendix H, Table 7).
Overall, students averaged a 3.38 GPA over the span of this study. One week showed a
substantial outlier. There was a tremendous dip in grades the week of 10/4/13. When looking at
the grades, I observed that a core subject teacher was not posting grades prior to the this week
due to not having access to the grade book. When the teacher did post grades, many students
were failing just that class. The cohort was able to recover pretty quickly and went back to their
typical GPAs the following week. As time passed, teachers became more consistent with posting
grades with fewer gaps in grades being posted.
When a students GPA went up, I assigned a +1 as well as a +1 for students who maintained
their GPA for the week. If a students GPA went down, I assigned a -1 point. In general, the
student body saw a +152 increase in GPA performance. These numbers are indicative of the
entire cohort population including students who did not attend any form of intervention.
Academic Support Trends
Students who were mandated to attend Academic Support due to a D and/or F in any given class
saw an increase in GPAs after attending. Of the 100 students, 52 of them saw an increase in
GPAs. This number includes repeating students from one week to the next. Only 3 of 100
students GPAs stayed the same while 45 students saw a decrease in GPA post-Academic
Support. There were more students who participated in the Academic Support program than
R.O.A.R.
R.O.A.R. Trends
Students who attended the option R.O.A.R. sessions also saw an increase in GPAs after
attending. Of the 68 students, 41 of them saw an increase in GPAs. This number also includes
repeating students from one week to the next. There were 12 of 68 students whose GPA stayed
the same while 15 students saw a decrease in GPA post-R.O.A.R.
EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 15
Table 8. GPA movement after attending an intervention session.
Among the 27 students who took the survey, 18 of them had attended R.O.A.R. and the majority
of them, 17, said they attended as needed. Nearly all of them said they liked the option of having
R.O.A.R. available if needed with 24 responses. Having other activities and responsibilities after
school seems to be the major reasons students do not attend with 16 responses.

Both programs had a positive effect on GPAs because the number of GPAs that went up
outnumbered the GPAs that went down. R.O.A.R. had a higher impact of GPA betterment than
Academic Support. However, as mentioned earlier (Appendix K, Table 7), the GPAs of
R.O.A.R. participants is on average much higher than Academic Support attendees. This data
helps me to classify the types of students that are participating in each program. Students are
only assigned to attend Academic Support if they have a D or an F; therefore they will have a
lower GPA due to any low grades already. Students who only attended R.O.A.R. do so with the
support of their parents as it meets after school. These students tend to do better with their
classwork strictly based on GPA. Clearly, these two forms of intervention serve two different
populations within the school.

Comparison of Research to the Literature Review
Finding similar themes in effective interventions among Junior High students and the literature
reviewed was challenging; however the most consistent theme in both arenas was motivation. In
Mori and Uchidas (2009) study on contrived success affecting self-efficacy among Junior High
School students, there is a correlation drawn between how good a student feels about their
academic success with their actual academic success. The students observed in this study also
showed they continued to succeed in their academics when they felt invited to do well. Since
EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 16
students who attended the optional intervention, R.O.A.R, had better initial GPAs, they showed
motivation to succeed and used the forms of additional support provided to continue their
success. On the other hand, students who attended Academic Support were required to attend and
had the lowest GPAs in students observed. It would be interesting to give these students the same
motivational survey as conducted by Reiss (2009). He developed a School Motivation Profile
(RSMP) Assessment for 13 of the 16 Life Motives. I would like to see if the students who attend
Academic Support regular share the same motivational struggles as in Reiss study: fear of
failure (high need for acceptance), incuriosity (low need for cognition), lack of ambition (low
need for power), spontaneity (low need for order), lack of responsibility (low need for honor),
and combativeness (high need for vengeance) (Reiss, 2009, p. 221).

Another area of interest would be in parental involvement. Parents were offered the opportunity
to respond to a survey regarding both programs. Only three of the eleven parents who
participated in the survey had seventh grade students. The overall opinion of the parents of both
programs was positive with gratitude that both programs existed for their students. One parent
stated, I think it is nice to have a time when the kids can get more help if needed, especially for
seventh graders. Buy-in of the two intervention programs among these surveyed parents was
high; however there were very few participants to offer a thorough overarching opinion. The
students who struggle with academics did not necessarily have parental involvement in the
survey, so as research suggests, when parental involvement is high both in a students academic
support and monitoring shows positive academic achievement (McNeal, 2012).

Limitations
As with any form of research being conducted, there are limitations to the study. Initially, there
is the source of error possibility in grade point average (GPA) calculation. The schools student
database and grade book system, Infinite Campus, was not able to produce a weekly GPA for
each student. It would only provide grades for each course. Most students have an eight class
schedule with the standard A-F grading system for each class. However, some students who
require additional support through an IEP, 504, or other Special Education class may not have an
eight period schedule. So there was no standard way of calculating GPAs; it was done manually
with the help of spreadsheet software. For the end of the quarter grades, students (with the help
of their teachers) calculated their own GPAs during Pride Time (Appendix I). I went back and
double checked each students GPA in my own Pride Time and found mathematical errors by the
students. To avoid such an issue, having an automated program to handle GPA calculation would
be ideal.
Another form of limitation during this study was ensuring that all students were tracked
accurately. These academic interventions can be a little hectic at times, and it is impossible to
ensure that all students signed in (attendance) during each session. Students are learning how to
use things such as cloud-based documents that allow multiple people to work at once. So, it was
necessary to check and make sure that no ones names were deleted while another student signed
in on another computer. If they were not signed in, it was not documented that they attended the
intervention session and their GPA was not monitored for improvement.
Although this research is specific to a particular charter school, the after school programs
described in this research are similar to those offered at other junior highs. Therefore this
information and research can be translated to other schools and programs. The findings can help
EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 17
the future of this particular schools programs and efficiency of programs. By describing the
efficacy of these programs, other educators and administrators can understand what has been
done and how it worked in the past among seventh and eighth graders.
Implications of Practice
As a result, the efficacy of both Academic Support and R.O.A.R. are beneficial for students of
the Junior High at this charter school in Westminster, Colorado. Although attendees of R.O.A.R.
showed a greater increase in GPAs, there was still an increase in GPAs among students who
attended the mandated Academic Support. Both programs serve different student populations of
the school and allow for an opportunity to get additional support outside of the traditional
classroom setting. During a time when organization and transition is difficult, these interventions
seem to have a positive outcome among the students. As a student responded, I think that both
options are great for the students. First, R.O.A.R gives you the opportunity to meet with all
teachers. This is a positive. The negative is that it is after-school so difficult for those in clubs or
sports. That is why Academic Support is great to have available when the after-school choice is
not an option.

These findings lead me to the conclusion that both programs should be retained while explaining
to parents and students that the efficacy of R.O.A.R. seems to be higher. This suggests that
because it requires parental buy-in in order for students to stay after school, parental support is
another key element to a students overall success in school. It also suggests that student self-
motivation is an important factor in academic success.
Impact (Negative and Positive)
A positive impact of this research was to find the most effective form(s) of interventions to better
serve the students in their needs. We could also increase the amount of passing students (fewer
Ds and Fs). Lastly, we could focus our limited resources on the most effective interventions,
which may be a continuation of both programs. A negative impact of this research could have
been that students feel like they were being targeted for questioning based on their grades.
However, I made every effort to assure students of their anonymity, and explain that their
feedback was being used to help make the study hall programs better for them and future
students. Doing this research rather than another form of research may not have been beneficial
and may have taken away time and energy from looking into another area of study.
Summary of Research
The overall focus of this research was to help determine which intervention programs were most
effective and needed for students at the Junior High level of a charter school in Colorado. By
determining which program helped students most (better grades, better study habits, self-
advocacy developed), teachers and administration could determine where to use manpower most
efficiently.
It is quite possible that both interventions were necessary within this particular school
environment, because R.O.A.R. tends to attract good students while Academic Support is a
mandatory program for failing students. Each provided the same assistance for different
populations of students. However, with both qualitative and quantitative data collected, this
outcome can be confirmed or denied. Also, it could be observed if students were more likely to
EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 18
succeed in Junior High if they attend R.O.A.R. regularly as opposed to Academic Support. This
coincided with the schools Strategic Plan goal of having 80% of students achieving a 3.0 GPA
this year.


EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 19

References
Johnson, K., and Street, E. M. (2012). From the laboratory to the field and back again:
Morningside Academy's 32 years of improving students' academic performance.
Behavior Analyst Today, 13(1), 20-40.
McNeal, R. r. (2012). Checking in or checking out? Investigating the parent involvement
reactive hypothesis. Journal Of Educational Research,105(2), 79-89.
Mori, K., and Uchida, A. (2009). Can contrived success affect self-efficacy among junior
high school students? Research In Education, 82(1), 60-68.
Nelson, L. P., McMahan, S. K., and Torres, T. (2012). The impact of a junior high school
community intervention project: Moving beyond the testing juggernaut and into a
community of creative learners. School Community Journal, 22(1), 125-144.
Regner, I., Loose, F., and Dumas, F. (2009). Students' perceptions of parental and teacher
academic involvement: Consequences on achievement goals. European Journal Of
Psychology Of Education, 24(2), 263-277.
Reiss, S. (2009). Six motivational reasons for low school achievement. Child and Youth
Care Forum, 38(4), 219-225.
Stringer, E. (2014). Action research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications,
Inc.
Sullivan, A. L., Long, L., and Kucera, M. (2011). A survey of school psychologists'
preparation, participation, and perceptions related to positive behavior interventions and
supports. Psychology in the Schools, 48(10), 971-985.

EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 20

Appendices
A. Participation Consent Form

Dear Academy Junior High Community,

I am conducting some action research on the two study hall programs offered at the Junior High
levelAcademic Support, which is offered during school and Reinforcement of Academic
Responsibility (a.k.a. R.O.A.R.), which is offered after school. I am researching the effectiveness
of each study hall program with respect to student grades. It is a requirement for one of the
graduate courses in which I have enrolled at the University of Colorado, Denver. I am enrolled in
this course and conducting this research so I can continue to refine my practice and provide my
students with the best possible teaching.

If you decide to participate in this study, you will be asked to complete an online survey that will
take around 15 minutes. There are no right or wrong answers. Your individual answers to the
questions will not be identified or published. You may discontinue your participation in this
study at any time without penalty.

Answering and completing these online questionnaires indicate your willingness to participate in
this study. Findings will be reported back to the community via the school newsletter, The
Wildcat Pause as well as on the schools website. Clicking below indicates that you have read
and understood the description of the study and you agree to participate.

If you have any further questions you may contact me, the Principal Investigator, via email at
joy.vigil@theacademyk12.org or by phone at 303.289.8088 x 138 or my instructor, Jennifer
VanBerschot, at jennifer.vanberschot@ucdenver.edu.


Thank you for your time,


Joy E. Vigil
Secondary Visual Arts Teacher







EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 21

B. Student Survey
C. Parent Survey
D. Teacher Survey
E. Literature Log Review
Date of
Search
Database Keyword
Search
Journal + Article
Name
Summary
10/02/13 ERIC interventions
junior high
school
School Community
Journal, 2012, Vol.
22, No. 1
The Impact of a
Junior High School
Community
Intervention Project:
Moving Beyond the
Testing Juggernaut
and Into a
Community of
Creative Learners
By implementing a community
intervention project, this study
tracked social support,
responsibility among students,
school climate, self efficacy, and
optimism of students. The
community, parents, and students
were encouraged to be active
participants in the school for two
years. Results of this research
found that when the schools
focus was solely on high-stakes
test scores, student engagement
and participation went down. On
the other hand, when community
development was encouraged,
those items being tracked
increased positively.
10/02/13 ERIC interventions
junior high
school
Child Youth Care
Forum (2009) 38
Six Motivational
Reasons for Low
School Achievement
Motivation is a huge element in
student success and this research
studies six reasons for low
motivation among Junior High
and High School students. The
motivational factors include,
fear of failure (high need for
acceptance), incuriosity (low
need for cognition), lack of
ambition (low need for power),
spontaneity (low need for order),
lack of responsibility (low need
for honor), and combativeness
(high need for vengeance) (p.
221). With further evaluation of
EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 22
these factors, appropriate
interventions can be established
and implemented to help
students achieve academically.
10/02/13 ERIC interventions
junior high
school
Psychology in the
Schools, Vol. 48(10),
2011
A Survey of School
Psychologists
Preparation,
Participation, and
Perceptions Related
to Positive Behavior
Interventions and
Supports
This research studies the use of
a School Wide Positive Behavior
Interventions and Supports
(SWPBIS) and its impact on
various factors: disruptive
behaviors, school climate, staff
job satisfaction, and academic
interventions. The study
highlights the keys to an
effective intervention [defining
effective].
Study never official defines what
SWPBIS are and expect survey
participants to understand what
this model is with no further
explanation.
10/08/13 ERIC academic
success
junior high
school
Research in
Education, v82 n1
Can Contrived
Success Affect Self-
Efficacy among
Junior High School
Students?
Using the fMORI technique to
test students, this study
determines how a Junior High
student can predict their success
based on their perceived ability.
When a student experienced an
enhanced sense of capability,
they performed noticeably better
than other students who did not
experience this success.
10/08/13 ERIC academic
success
junior high
school
European Journal of
Psychology of
Education
2009. Vol. XXIV. n'2
Students' perceptions
of parental
and teacher
academic
involvement:
Consequences on
This research shows that a
students perceived involvement
of parents and teachers has a
direct correlation to engagement
and success in academic tasks.
Whether an adult is engaged in
academic support or academic
monitoring, students see how the
adult values education and
develops this idea in his/her own
EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 23
achievement goals academic career.
10/12/13 ERIC academic
achievement
junior high
Journal Of
Educational
Research,105(2), 79-
89
Checking in or
checking out?
Investigating the
parent involvement
reactive hypothesis
Parental involvement (or lack
thereof) directly and indirectly
impacts how social class
advantages (or disadvantages)
pass from one generation to the
next. Theres both positive and
negative research indicating how
parent involvement influences
student achievement. Parental
involvement can have a negative
impact when the involvement is
reactionary to the student already
having problems in school.
10/12/13 ERIC academic
achievement
junior high
Behavior Analyst
Today, 13(1)
From the laboratory
to the field and back
again: Morningside
Academy's 32 years
of improving
students' academic
performance
The Morningside Academy uses
a continual evaluative process
while educating Elementary and
Junior High students. They
research best practices in
education to determine which
methods would be best to
implement in teaching. Overall,
the students embark on a three
phase process of learning:
instruction, practice, and
application. Students are
assessed in three ways: macro,
meta, and mirco. Each test
provides data to better
understand the students needs
for instruction. Additionally
important, students are taught to
self-evaluate to encourage self-
awareness of needs and
advocacy.

F. Grade Comparison Document
G. Academic Support Worksheet Example
H. R.O.A.R. Attendance Worksheet Example
EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 24
I. GPA Calculation Worksheet
J. Data Collection

G.P.A. Criteria 7th Grade 3.0 and Above
9/13/13 125
9/20/13 118
9/27/13 116
10/4/13 91
10/11/13 113
10/18/13 113


R.O.A.R. Attendance 7th Grade
9/17/13 6
9/24/13 7
10/1/13 13
10/8/13 23
10/15/13 19

Academic Support Attendance 7th Grade
9/19/13 34
9/26/13 9
10/3/13 25
10/10/13 29
10/17/13 4


Average
G.P.A.
7th Grade
R.O.A.R.
7th Grade
Academic
EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 25
Support
Week 1 3.52 3.08
Week 2 3.58 3.11
Week 3 3.34 3.05
Week 4 3.02 2.37
Week 5 3.48 2.24

K. Tables of Findings

Table 1. Measures the GPA of seventh graders on a weekly basis starting with their overall GPA
from sixth grade as a starting point.
EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 26

Table 2. Measures the overall +/- of GPAs per week.

Table 3. Measures the average GPA for students who attended R.O.A.R.

EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 27

Table 4. Measures the average GPA for students who attended Academic Support.


Table 5. Measures the number of GPAs that either go up, go down, or stay the same each week
after attending R.O.A.R.
EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 28

Table 6. Measures the number of GPAs that either go up, go down, or stay the same each week
after attending Academic Support.

Table 7. Measures the average GPAs of students who attended interventions.
EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR JUNIOR HIGH STUDENTS 29

Table 8. GPA movement after attending an intervention session.