Chapter 3 Methodology

Student's First Name, Middle Initial(s), Last Name

Institutional Affiliation

Course Number and Name

Instructor's Name and Title

Assignment Due Date

 Chapter 3 Methodology

Bandura’s (1986) Social Learning Theory identified self-efficacy as an individual’s

beliefs of their skills needed for accomplishing a goal that is expected. The environment

attributes to behavior. School culture is vital in education. Establishing a positive rapport

with students produces an environment where students feel safe, a sense of trust towards

their teachers to address their needs, and reduces classroom behavioral concerns (McPhee

et al., 2017). When a school has a positive culture, then students are less likely to be truant

or experience behavior problems (Reno et al., 2017). Sugai & Horner (2002) concluded

that implementing a systemic framework that addresses a student’s social and academic

outcomes will prevent behavior problems. The purpose of this qualitative descriptive study

is to explore the perceptions of teachers on the impact of SW-PBIS on high school

students’ behavior influencing academic outcomes in a school district in Georgia. With the

focus on teacher’s perceptions, this research details how the perceptions contribute to high

school students’ academic and behavioral outcomes.

Chapter 3 will begin with an overview of the study’s purpose, the problem, and the

research question. Next, this chapter will address the rationale for selecting this research

methodology and research design. The sample population and demographics will be

discussed. As an integral part of this chapter, the sources of data used to assist in the data

collection will be detailed. The trustworthiness of the research will be outlined. As an

additional component of this chapter, the data collection, data analysis, ethical

considerations will be included, followed by the limitations and delimitations of the study.
 Statement of the Problem

It is not known how the SW-PBIS affects high school student’s behavior influencing

academic outcomes from the perspective of teachers, who are the most important agents in

the implementation of SW-PBIS and are responsible for both the implementation of SW-

PBIS as well as student outcomes. Teachers are the most important agents in the

implementation of SW-PBIS and are responsible for both the implementation of SW-PBIS as

well as student outcomes (Menzies, Lane, Royer, Common, & Buckman, 2019).

The research literature shows that there is a connection between behavioral outcomes and

academic outcomes indicating that academic outcomes have improved` since implementing

PBIS with fidelity (Freeman, Kern, Gambino, Lombardi, & Kowitt (2019). The effects of

implementing PBIS tended to be geared toward elementary-age students (Freeman et al.,

2019). Researchers have claimed that it takes longer for high schools to reach fidelity with

implementation and sustainability compared to schools at the elementary and middle school

level (Freeman et al., 2019; Flannery & Kato, 2017; Pas et al., 2019).
The researcher will develop questions to understand from the teacher’s perception if SW-

PBIS affects high school student’s academic outcomes and behavior. The two research

questions that guides this study and the methods for data collection are:

RQ1: Based on the perceptions of high school teachers, how does the SW-PBIS affect high

school student’s academic outcomes? RQ2: Based on the perceptions of high school teachers,

how does the SW-PBIS affect high school student’s behavior?

The phenomenon studied is the teachers’ implementation of PBIS in their classrooms

and evaluating themselves through their perceptions on whether the SW-PBIS framework

affects student behavior and increases student outcomes. This qualitative descriptive study

will help to understand the behavioral aspects were relevant to academic outcomes, and were

influenced by SW-PBIS; to include decreased punitive, reactive and exclusionary discipline

practices and absenteeism. The research question in this study will be supported with rich

details from the data collection and data analysis revolving around teacher perceptions.

The sources of data that are included in Chapter 2’s Literature Review included peer

reviewed journals from Grand Canyon University’s Library’s databases (EBSCO, Sage
Premier, Education Database, ProQuest, Psychology Database, and Sciences). The focus of

the data included PBIS, SW-PBIS, RtI, teacher perceptions, efficacy, sustainability, fidelity,

implementation, academic outcomes, and behavior. The primary sources included school

district documents, books, and peer-reviewed journals. For Chapter 2, the researcher included

outcomes. The nature of the data sources (which include two types i.e. primary and secondary

sources) that will be recorded on the rubric and collected in this study will provide solutions

to the research questions. Primary sources of data include real time data, surveys, personal

interviews, experiments while secondary sources of fate include past data, government

publications, websites among others. The data sources are two: interviews and focus groups.

Semi-structured interviews are utilized to seek views on a focused topic or, with key

informants, for background information or an institutional perspective (Hammarberg, et al.,

2015). One-hour interviews on Zoom will be recorded for each of 20 participants. A one-hour

focus group will be conducted with 6 of the participants that volunteer first for the focus

group.

The interviews with the teacher will take place on Zoom The participant will be

reminded that the interview will last no more than 60 minutes. The researcher will have pre-

selected questions to ask the participants in the interview. There are ten questions that will be

asked during the interview. In order to answer RQ1, the researcher utilized semi-structured,

pre-selected interview questions 1, 2, 3, and 4. (Appendix E: Part 1). To address RQ2, the

researcher will ask each participant the remaining pre-selected questions 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10.

These questions will pertain to: “How does SW-PBIS affect high school student’s behavior?”

The interviews will be audiotaped and the researcher will take field notes. Once the

interviews were complete, the researcher will analyze the data. At the conclusion of the

interview, the researcher will thank the participant for their time and feedback. To gather
saturation for this study, the researcher will ask if the participant is willing to participate in a

focus group that will take place at another time.

A week later, the final phase of the qualitative methods will take place. The researcher

will set up a date and time to conduct the next phase of the study and will send the

participants an email to inform them about the date and requesting them to R.S.V.P. The

group in this phase will comprise of 6 participants that volunteered either from the semi-

structured interview or participants that were remaining but did not participate in a semi-

structured interview. For this study, a focus group will be conducted for the

researcher to understand and gain a comprehensive perspective from multiple

participants relating to the central phenomenon of the study. According to Creswell &

Guetterman (2018), focus groups are beneficial in qualitative studies considering the

interaction amongst the participants and comparing their experiences. Focus groups tend to

be more efficient than personal interviews (Durdella, 2019). The researcher will have a set of

prepared questions for the group, and will be focusing on the responses given by the

participants, the group, and how the group interacts (Nyumba, Wilson, Derrick, &

Mukherjee, 2018). The purpose of the focus group is to get more feedback stemming from

the two research questions by asking more probing questions to ensure that the participants

will elaborate on the question and will allow the researcher to understand the perceptions and

feelings from the participants. In addition, the researcher will be able to observe to see if the

participants will elicit dialogue on the topics presented (Appendix F). The focus group

discussion will be audiotaped and the researcher will transcribe using field notes. The

researcher will ask more probing questions to ensure that the participants will elaborate on

the question and will allow the researcher to understand the perceptions and feelings from the

participants.
 Research Methodology

Methodology is the philosophical approach towards inquiry. Qualitative research

involves the study of people’s experiences and how these experiences are relevant in the

world. Qualitative research is discovery-oriented research and is premised on findings that

are not predetermined (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In qualitative research studies, the

researcher develops the research questions first. The research questions in qualitative research

narrows and focuses on the purpose of the research study and it is also aligned with existing

and current literature (Yin, 2016). Qualitative research differs from quantitative research
because quantitative research focuses on trends and analyzing the relationships among

variables (Creswell & Guetterman, 2018). Quantitative research questions begin with “how,”

“what,” or “why;” whereas qualitative research questions are open-ended questions that the

researcher seeks while conducting the study. This research study will explore the central

phenomenon of teacher’s perception of SW-PBIS and high school graduation rates.

Qualitative research involves exploring and understanding people and the behavioral

relations with life events that people encounter daily. To identify the phenomenon of a study,

the researcher must connect with the participant’s experiences (Creswell & Guetterman,

2018). The research methodology for this study is a qualitative descriptive study. A

qualitative descriptive approach is appropriate for studies that aim to remain close to

participants’ descriptions of their experiences, rather than being overly theoretical (Baillie,

2020). Qualitative researchers seek to answer “how” and why” the phenomena occur; unlike

quantitative research. Quantitative research is more conclusive and addresses questions as

“what,” “when,” and “where.” This research study is not seeking an explanation or causation,

but instead, the purpose of this qualitative descriptive study is to explore the perceptions of

teachers on the impact of SW-PBIS on high school students’ behavior influencing academic

outcomes in a school district in Georgia. Since teachers are the focus in this study, no other

school official can provide and report on the day-to-day experiences of how the SW-PBIS

instructional strategies affects their students’ behavior and academic outcomes in their

classroom other than these participants. The participants are able to provide observational and

data from statewide assessments and behavior data. Furthermore, qualitative researchers

provide rich, detailed insights of the phenomena. Unlike qualitative research, quantitative

research is based on empirically scientific inquiry. Where qualitative research is subjective

and focuses on understanding human and social sciences, quantitative research is objective

and focuses on statistical and deductive reasoning (Zyphur & Pierides, 2020).
 Qualitative, quantitative, and a mixed-method approach were taken in consideration

for this research study. Since the data collected was not going to be statistically analyzed nor

were causal relationships being determined, a quantitative or mixed-methods methodology

was not a consideration factor. The researcher employed a qualitative research methodology

to gain insight into the perceptions of teachers of the affect that SW-PBIS has student

academic outcomes and behavior. This study is guided by teacher’s perceptions of SW-PBIS

and the affect that the implementation of the framework has on student’s academic outcomes

and behavior. A qualitative inquiry means we can only know what we experience by

attending to perceptions and meanings (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) A qualitative approach

involves conducting research in a real-life, natural setting. This approach allows researchers

to understand the truth based on people’s own understanding of their world, experiences,

interactions, and the circumstances of their lives (Bhattacharya, 2017). The rationale to use a

qualitative approach for the research methodology was to address the research questions on

academic outcomes and behavior from the perceptions of the teachers. Qualitative research

conduct studies to either understand, interrogate, or generalize (Bhattacharya, 2017). A

qualitative study was appropriate for this research because the researcher is trying to

understand and interpret the experiences of high school teachers. Qualitative research

involves the collection of narrative data. The researcher collects the rich data in order to

better understand the context of the events that are being researched (Yin, 2016). Qualitative

methods will be used to reveal insights based on the experience of teachers which is lacking

in the majority of the quantitative research on the topic. This study is intended to explore the

perceptions of teachers on how SW-PBIS affects high school student’s behavior that may be

relevant to academic outcomes in the State of Georgia.

 The research questions for this study honed in on the perceptions of the participants

and their career experiences in order to answer the research questions. Studies involving SW-

PBIS were quantitative, however, there is little research involving teachers and how they

perceive the framework and if the framework is effective. Quantitative research predicts a

trend over a broader sample size whereas qualitative research conducts research with a

smaller sample size (Bhattacharya, 2017) and it will not yield the results as outlined in the

research questions. In existing studies, the effectiveness has been measured through the

number of office discipline referrals (Houchens et al., 2017; Betters-Bubon et al., 2016; Gage

et al, 2020), high school drop-out rate (Flannery et al., 2017), and truancy (Bickelhaupt,

2011) and involved quantifying the results. In addition, existing literature show that students

have been the focus of the researchers. Studies that have been focused on teachers were about

the effectiveness of PBIS with respect to student’s academic success in elementary school

(Miller, 2016). In contrast, this study will focus on academic outcomes and behavior using

qualitative methods in order to document the perceptions of the participants.

Research Design

There are many qualitative methods to include grounded theory, phenomenology, and

ethnography, however, these designs are not suitable for this study since this study will

involve taking a close look at the participants’ experiences. The research questions for this

study coincide with the qualitative descriptive research design. This qualitative descriptive

study research design offers an explanatory understanding of the influence of SW-PBIS on

high school student’s behavior and in influencing academic outcomes Although qualitative

and descriptive research are used interchangeably because they both involve naturalistic data
(Nassaji, 2015), the descriptive research outlines the nature of the phenomenon. According to

Vat, Ryan, & Etchegary (2017), descriptions depend on the perceptions, inclinations,

sensitivities, and sensibilities of the participant. The researcher will explore the perceptions of

teachers from a Georgia high school; therefore, making a descriptive design applicable to this

qualitative study. Vat et al., 2017, described a descriptive design as a form of naturalistic

inquiry that presents the data in a language of participants, without aiming to interpret the

data in theoretical ways.

The descriptive research involves an in-depth look at individuals as to how they b have,

perceive, as well as their experiences (Nassaji, 2015)As teachers are the most important

agents in the implementation of SW-PBIS and are responsible for both the implementation of

SW-PBIS as well as student outcomes, the focus of this study on the perceptions of teachers

may reveal insights that may be derived from their personal experience as a teacher, which

may not be possible to access through the experiences of students or school administrators. In

this study, the teachers are summarizing in interviews or in focus groups their perceptions of

SW-PBIS as it relates to high school student’s behavior and academic outcomes. A

qualitative descriptive research design was the best option for this study because the

researcher wants to know the who, what, and where of events (Silverman, 2019). In this

descriptive design, the researcher will answer the who questions (the participants), the what

(perceptions of SW-PBIS as it relates to high-school student’s behavior and academic

outcomes); and where (a high school in Atlanta, Georgia, that is implementing PBIS in the

school. Other than qualitative descriptive study research design, phenomenological research

design and qualitative ethnographic research design were also considered. and not deemed

suitable for the current study because they tend to explain phenomena (Cypress, 2017) and

are not in the descriptive domain (Yin, 2016).The phenomenological design would have been
appropriate for the study if the goal was to only understand the lived experiences without a

data-rich framework. However, given the lack of qualitative research on SW-PWIS, the data-

rich framework of qualitative descriptive study was deemed more appropriate. Ethnographic

research design was not selected for this study as the goal of this study is not to focus on the

culture of a group and the interaction between its members.(Yin, 2016). Lastly, a case study

research was not chosen for this because the research is not interested in one particular case

such as a school (Yin, 2014). A qualitative descriptive study would benefit this research

because the researcher will seek rich-detailed, straight descriptions of teachers’ perceptions of

SW-PBIS as it relates to student behavior and academic outcomes.

The data collection in a qualitative study involves an inductive exploration of the data

to identify themes and patterns, and then the data will be interpreted (Nassaji, 2015). In

qualitative research, the unit of analysis begins with the first interview, first observation, and

the first document read (Merrian & Tisdell, 2016; Yin, 2016). In the study, the individual

interviews and focus group were conducted to understand how teacher’s perceptions of the

implementation of SW-PBIS improved students’ academic outcomes and how SW-PBIS

improved students behaviorally.

 Population and Sample Selection

The population of interest for this study are classroom teachers that are employed in

Title I high schools that implement SW-PBIS in the State of Georgia. In 2018-2019, there

were 116,065 classroom teachers employed in Georgia (GADOE, 2020). According to the
2019 Georgia K-12 Teacher and Leader and Workforce Executive Summary (Pelfrey, 2020),

38.53% of the teacher workforce had 10 or less years of experience working in Georgia

public schools, 35% of teacher between 11 to 20 years of experience working in a Georgia

public schools, and lastly, there are more black teachers employed at Title 1 schools

compared to white teachers. 71% of the teacher workforce are white, 26.43% are black, and

2.51% are Hispanic (Pelfrey, 2020).

The target population for this study are classroom teachers that are employed in a

Title I high school located in Southeast Georgia. The identified school district is the 7th

largest school district in Georgia. The school district has a total of 91 schools and programs,

22 high schools, employed 5,294 teachers (3,217 traditional and 2,077 non-traditional), and

in 2018, APS had a 79.9% graduation rate (2019-2020 District Facts, 2020). The school

district currently has 2 high schools that implement SW-PBIS (GADOE, 2020). Georgia’s

Department of Education has recognized one of these schools as an Emerging PBIS school

and the other is considered and Operational PBIS school.

For the purpose of this study, the study sample consists of high school classroom

teachers employed at a Title I school within a large, urban school district. The targeted school

that implements SW-PBIS consists of 6 administrators, 78 classroom teachers and

approximately 1,205 students in grades 9-12 are enrolled at the school. According to the 2020

State Rankings, this school has 91% minority population and 100% of the students are

economically disadvantaged. The population of interest is ranked 7,210 in national rankings

and is ranked 165 in the state.

The study sample will comprise of 20 high school, classroom teachers who have been

employed with the school district for a minimum of one year and have been employed at

sample school for a minimum of one year. For the purposes of this qualitative research study,
the participants must have experience with the SW-PBIS implementation at the identified

school for at least one year. The teachers that participate in this study must be a classroom

teacher that teaches a core subject, be familiar and proficient in the tier-level process,

implement the PBIS strategies in their classroom, and receive direct support for academics

and behavior from the school’s administration. Prior to conducting the study at the

participating high school, the researcher will complete the Authorization to Conduct Research

Form (Appendix A). The researcher will provide the school administration with site

authorization and approval to conduct the study and request to meet with the school’s

principal to seek permission to conduct the study at the school and provide details about the

research study (Appendix B). The researcher will receive documentation for school site

authorization and permission to conduct research using DocuSign over email.

This study will aim to identify high school teachers will share their perceptions of

SW-PBIS and how it affects academic and behavior outcomes as it relates to graduation rates.

The researcher will use purposive sampling and maximum variation for this study. Purposive

sampling is when the researcher selects the population and the site in which the research will

study the central phenomenon (Kalu, 2019) The goal for this sampling is to get rich and

detailed data (Ames, Glenton & Lewin (2019) from teachers who have experience with

teaching and with the implementation of SW-PBIS. Maximum variation sampling is used to

seek diverse perspectives of a topic (Hammarberg et al., 2015). Maximum variation will be

used for this study to purposefully select teachers with various years of classroom teaching

experience. The process for recruiting the sampling group will include heterogeneous group

of certified, high school classroom teachers that teach the core subjects. The participants must

have at least 1 year of teaching experience in the school district and at least one-year

experience at the site.

 Information about the study will be shared by emailing a flyer and informed consent

form to the potential teachers by asking the school staff member to forward the email to the

school mailing list. The researcher will never have access to the mailing list. They will also

send out three reminders, one per week forwarded from the researcher. To protect the identity

of the participants and the school, the participants will be known by the fake name that is

listed on the authorization form. This identifies the participant to the researcher.

In qualitative research, the appropriate sample size is 15 – 20 participants.

Researchers concur that the larger the sample size, the more unwieldy and will yield

superficial perspectives (Creswell & Roth, 2018). Twenty participants will be selected for the

study and this selection will ensure that the sample size guidelines were met. Sample sizes of

20 – 40 were required to achieve data saturation (Vasileiou, Barnett, Thorpe, & Young,

2018); however, other researchers involved in various types of research methodologies have

used a different approach. Some researchers rely on the process of saturation. Saturation is

satisfaction of data in simple terms. The researcher arrives at a point at which no new

information from additional data is collected. In qualitative study, the saturation point defines

the sample size since it means that sufficient data were obtained for detailed analysis.

During the recruitment, the researcher will provide the prospective participants with

an explanation about the study, when the study will take place, compensation for their

participation, the confidentiality of their participation, and their option to opt-out if

withdrawal from the study was considered. The researcher will invite 20 for semi-structured

individual interviews. The interviews will allow the researcher to speak with the staff without

being interrupted or persuaded by others regarding their perceptions. The participants will

receive a $10 Amazon electronic gift card that will be emailed directly to them. Lastly, the

researcher will explain to the participants how their feedback will be valuable to the nature of

the study.
 The researcher will contact the same participants from the face-to-face interviews to

participate in a focus group. The purpose of the researcher employing a focus group is to

collect data from multiple individuals simultaneously in a more social environment.

Focus groups are less threatening and it allows the participants to express themselves more

freely with their perceptions, ideas, and opinions (Onwuegbuzie, 2018). The participants for

the focus group will sign another numbered authorization form. This number assigned

protects their confidentiality of their feedback and for the researcher, it identifies the

participant during the research. The authorization form gives permission for the participant to

be interviewed by the researcher in a focus group setting, the type of questions that will be

asked, information on confidentiality and their ability to opt-ut of their participation without

any questions or explanation, and information about compensation for their participation. To

account for attrition from the focus group, the researcher will use minimum number of six

participants to be in compliance with the sample size requirements. The focus group will take

place after school inside a meeting room. The participants will be informed that the focus

group will last no more than sixty minutes. The focus group will be semi-structured and pre-

made questions will be asked. The researcher will take field notes on observations, the

feedback from the teachers individually, and how the participants of the focus group responds

to their colleagues.

Sources of Data

For the study, the researcher will employ two sources of data: semi-structured, face-

to-face interviews and a focus group. The research questions will guide the level of

questioning from the sources of data. The researcher will develop a total of ten open-ended

questions for the interview that will answer both research questions. The interview questions

will consist of five questions pertaining to academic outcomes and five questions relating to
behavior outcomes. The researcher will develop five open-ended questions to pose to the

participants in the focus group. The open-ended questions that will be asked in the focus

group will answer both research questions and will provide more insight on teacher’s

perceptions on a collaborative outlook.

The focus group will take place a week after all of the individual face-to-face

interviews have been conducted. The purpose of the focus group is to give the researcher time

to readdress some questions from the interviews and have the participants to expound on the

question individually and as a group. The focus group will last approximately ninety minutes.

The researcher has constructed 5 pre-made open-ended questions (Appendix F) that will be

associated with some questions that would’ve been asked during the individual interviews.

Two questions will be asked in a round-robin format; where everyone will have to answer the

questions. These questions will focus on academic outcomes. The last 3 questions, will focus

on behavioral outcomes and will be semi-structured, but the participants will be able to

comment on their colleagues’ feedback through discussions .

 Population and Sample Selection

In the State of Georgia there are 19 high schools that offer services from grade 9 to

12 (GADOE, 2020). The population of the sample size used include the school principal, 5

assistant administrators, 97 classroom teachers, and approximately 1,403 students enrolled in

the school. Each grade level is assigned to an administrator. The total enrollment is 1,403

students. The school’s demographics include: 0.1% American Indian/Alaskan Native, 0.9%

Asian/Pacific Islander, 78.4% African-American, 6.0% Hispanic, 2.8 % Multi-Racial, 11.9%

Caucasian, 2.0% English Learners, 100% economically disadvantaged, and 15.2% are

students with disabilities.

The population of interest the study will be generalized are teachers from a high

school, in the State of Georgia that implements SW-PBIS. According to George et al., (2018),

district and school-level personnel are striving to address challenging behavior and high rates

of disciplinary incidents. In 2019, this school district that is comprised of 53, 376 students

had a total of 14, 268 incidents (Governor’s Office of Student Achievement, 2020). Of these

incidents, 7,247 students were involved in the incidents that resulted in 16.8% in-school

suspensions (ISS), 51.8% out-of-school suspension (OSS), and 0.2% of incidents resulting in

expulsion (Governor’s Office of Student Achievement, 2020). SW-PBIS is a component of

the school improvement’s plan. To monitor the effectiveness of SW-PBIS, data is gathered

and analyzed by the School Climate Star Rating. The Star Rating is a tool that measures the

following: (a) student, teacher, and parent perceptions of a school’s climate, (b)student

discipline, (c) a safe and substance-free learning environment, and (d) school-wide

attendance (GADOEa, 2019). A survey was given to the parents, students, faculty and staff

regarding the school climate. According to the 2019 College and Career Ready Performance

Index (CCRPI), the findings from the survey reported that the suspension rate was 77.41%

and the school scored 82.39% on the Safe and Substance-Free Learning Environment. Under

the safe and substance-free learning environment are subheadings to include data from the

surveys that were distributed. The data under this subheading reflects student drug-related

incidents, violent incidents, and bullying and harassment incidents (GADOE, 2019).

Furthermore, it is the teacher support that is required from district and school

personnel to influence implementation with fidelity and student outcomes (George et al.,

2018). This study focuses on one high school in the Southeastern United States. The unit of

study are certified teachers, hired through the State of Georgia, teaching grades 9-12 in a high
school in a school district in Metro Atlanta and has experience with the implementation of

SW-PBIS. The study sample are comprised of 15-20 teachers who volunteered to participate

in this research study on basis that the sample size would be too large and would take longer

for the exercise to be complete. The teachers are teaching students ranging from grade 9-12th

grade in a school located in the southeast district of Atlanta, Georgia, and that the school is

implementing PBIS school-wide. For the interviews and focus group, the researcher will use

a purposive sampling to recruit a heterogeneous group of teachers as participants in this

study. The head of the school will be approached in order to get permission to perform this

exercise. The goal for this sampling is to get rich and detailed data (Ames, Glenton & Lewin

(2019) from teachers who have experience with teaching and with the implementation of

SW-PBIS. This sampling group will include certified, high school classroom teachers that

teach the core subjects. The participants must have at least 1 year of teaching experience.

Prior to conducting the study, the researcher will complete the Authorization to Conduct

Research form (Appendix A). The researcher will receive documentation for school site

authorization and permission to conduct research at the site afterschool. The researcher then

screens the psrticipants based on their age (knowing that most student teachers are young)

and voluntary options. The researcher will ask each participant to sign an agreement for their

participation, that will be numbered and will have the principal to sign a data-use agreement.

Once the signatures are gathered, the researcher will begin the data collection process.

To recruit participants information about the study will be shared electronically on

weekly basis by the researcher. The information requested recruitment for volunteers who

were certified, classroom teachers. Interested teachers will contact the researcher via email.

Initial recruitment contacts will be made. After the initial deadline, the researcher will send

another reminder email through the staff member for a follow-up contact to participate in the

study. During the recruitment, the researcher will provide the prospective participants with an
explanation about the study, when the study will take place, compensation for their

participation, the confidentiality of their participation, and their option to opt-out if

withdrawal from the study was considered. The researcher will invite 10 – 20 for semi-

structured individual interviews. The interviews will allow the researcher to speak with the

staff without being interrupted or persuaded by others regarding their perceptions. To account

for attrition, a replacement teacher or teachers will be recruited to complete the study. The

participants will be informed that they will be compensated for their participation following

the interview. The participants will receive a $10 Amazon electronic gift card that will be

emailed directly to them. Lastly, the researcher explained to the participants how their

feedback will be valuable to the nature of the study.

The researcher will contact the same participants from the face-to-face interviews to

participate in a focus group. The participants for the focus group will sign another

authorization form that is numbered. This number identifies the participant for the researcher.

The authorization form gives permission for the participant to be interviewed by the

researcher in a focus group setting, the type of questions that will be asked, information on

confidentiality and their ability to opt-put of their participation without any questions or

explanation, and information about compensation for their participation. A copy of the

numbered authorization form is given to the participants. To account for attrition from the

focus group, the researcher will use minimum number of participants to be in compliance

with the sample size requirements. The focus group will take place after school inside a

meeting room. The participants will be informed that the focus group will last no more than

an hour and half. The focus group will be semi-structured and pre-made questions will be

asked. The researcher will take field notes on observations, the feedback from the teachers

individually, and how the participants of the focus group responds to their colleagues.
 In qualitative research, the appropriate sample size is 15 – 20 participants.

Researchers concur that the larger the sample size, the more unwieldy and will yield

superficial perspectives (Creswell & Roth, 2018). The researcher is seeking at least 20

participants for the study. Out of total of 20 participants, twelve participants will be selected

for the study and this selection will ensure that the sample size guidelines were met.

Data Analysis Procedures

It is not known how the SW-PBIS affects high school student’s behavior influencing

academic outcomes from the perspective of teachers. To help understand this problem, the

following research questions were developed:

RQ1: Based on the perceptions of high school teachers, how does the SW-PBIS affect

high school student’s academic outcome?

RQ2: Based on the perceptions of high school teachers, how does the SW-PBIS affect

high school students’ behavior?

This qualitative descriptive design was deemed appropriate for this study. The data

analysis in this qualitative, descriptive study research will involve face-to-face, semi-

structured interviews and a focus group. The researcher will conduct 12 face-to-face, semi-

structured interviews with 12 participants. In order to answer research question 1, the

researcher will pose questions 1, 2, 3, and 4 (Appendix E) relating to academic outcomes.

The researcher will use field notes and audio recording to record the responses from the

participants. The researcher will transcribe the data from the recording and enter the data

collected on the computer from each interview within 72 hours of obtaining. For this study,

the researcher will implement an inductive approach. Yin (2016) delineates inductive as an

approach that allows the data to lead up to the emergence of the concepts. Because the

researcher is the primary instrument of data collection and analysis, the researcher will
provide a rich description of the data, making the analysis inductive (Merriam & Tinsdell,

2016). The data will be stored on a portable hard-drive that will be secured in a lockbox in

the researcher’s home.

R2: Based on the perceptions of high school teachers, how does the SW-PBIS affect

high school students’ behavior?

In order to answer research question 2, the researcher will continue to interview the

same participants by using the pre-selected questions 1-9 on student behavior (Appendix E).

The researcher will use field notes (Appendix F) and recordings to analyze the data. The

participants will be categorized by a number to protect their identity. The researcher will

analyze the data gathered and will revise to formulate more in-depth questions for the focus

group.

A week after the 12 individual, face-to-face interviews are conducted, the researcher

will conduct a focus group with the same teachers who volunteered to participate in the

interviews. The researcher will use field notes and recordings to analyze the data. The

researcher will use a computerized software (Yin, 2016) to transcribe and code the data. The

transcriptions will be coded on a line by line basis to ensure that there won’t be any new

codes. Themes will be developed from codes that were associated from the findings. To

analyze the transcribed data from the interviews and focus group, the researcher will use a

thematic analysis. A thematic analysis is appropriate for this research study. Thematic

analysis is an analytical approach to explore the subject’s views (Hambraeus et al., 2020).

The rationale for selecting a thematic analysis approach is based on our experiences and

background knowledge. Thematic analysis (TA) is a method of identifying, analyzing, and

reporting patterns (themes) within the data (Castleberry & Nolen, 2018). Incorporating the

TA will allow the researcher to discover themes in the data regarding the teacher’s

perceptions on the effect that SW-PBIS has on high school students as it relates to academic
and behavioral outcomes. The thematic analysis steps includes; FAMILIARIZATION,

CODING, generating themes,reviewing themes, defining and naming themes and lastly a

writeup.

To ensure that the researcher isn’t missing any critical information from the

participant or need clarification in something that was stated on the transcript, the researcher

will elect to use member checking. Member checking is making corrections and changes to

the data that will increase the credibility of the study (Yin, 2016). To address data saturation,

the researcher may need to conduct a follow-up interview.

Ethical Considerations

When conducting qualitative research, it is important to consider ethical

considerations that involves human participants (Fleming & Zegwaard, 2018). As a part of

the Grand Canyon University guidelines, the researcher must complete the Collaborative

Institutional Training Initiative (CITI) for Human Subjects Research before seeing the

Institutional Review Board’s (IRB) approval. In conjunction with the Department of

Education and Development (DED) and the Office for Human Research Protection (OHRP),

the two organizations are designed to protect the rights and wellbeing of human subjects

participating on research studies (Office for Human Research Protections, 2019). In

accordance with the Belmont Report, this research will benefit from the three ethical

principles for research with human subjects: respect for persons, beneficence, and justice

(Harris, 2011).

The persons in this study will voluntarily participate in the research and their time is

valued. The participants in this study will be treated with beneficence. In the Hippocratic

Oath, learning in what will in fact benefit may require exposing a person to risk (Harris,

2011); however, if there are any unforeseen risks, the researcher will be addressed according
to the Belmont Report guidelines. Finally, the participants in this research study will all be

treated equally and fairly.

GCU IRB approval and school board approvals were granted to the researcher before

any data was sought and collected. Respondents for this study will come from a high school

in Metro Atlanta in the State of Georgia and will be interviewed to explore the perceptions of

SW-PBIS and high school graduation rates. Teachers interested in partaking in this

qualitative study research will be recruited using random sampling. The criteria used for

selection will include the following: (1) teachers must be employed within the selected high

school with a direct experience of implementing SW-PBIS in the classroom.

An informed consent document will be reviewed with the participants for their

voluntary participation and the nature of the research study. The benefits and risks of the

research will be explained to the participants and According to Yin (2016) a planned study

needs to be presented in a straight-forward manner so that participants can understand what

they are agreeing to do, so that they are truly being informed. The participants were also

informed about opting out from the study at any time. Lastly, the participants’ signatures will

be obtained.

To protect confidentiality, no identifying information may be kept with the measures.

The names of the participants will be removed from all documents to protect the students’

confidentiality. The student will be coded based on ethnicity, gender, office discipline

referrals. I will maintain this information on a flash drive that will be stored in a locked file

box for the privacy and security of all respondents. All respondents will be notified if results

from the study will be made public.

 IRB Alert

Please be aware that GCU doctoral learners may not screen, recruit, or collect any data
until they receive Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval and obtain a signed D-50
form. IRB review occurs after the proposal is approved by AQR and the proposal
defense is completed. Learners are responsible for knowing, understanding, and
following the IRB submission and review processes. Screening, recruiting participants,
and collecting data in advance of IRB approval is a serious research ethical violation,
with legal and federal regulatory implications to the University. If a learner chooses to
screen or recruit study participants, or collects data in advance of obtaining IRB
approval (IRB approval letter and D-50 form), s/he will be subject to serious academic
disciplinary action by the Institutional Review Board and Code of Conduct committee.
This may include collecting new data or requiring the learner to start over with a new
research study. In addition, the Code of Conduct committee will issue a disciplinary
action that may include warning, suspension, or dismissal from the program.

Note: Learners should NEVER proceed with any aspect of participant screening,
recruiting, interacting with participants, or collecting data in advance of receiving the
IRB approval letter and the signed D-50 form. The chairs and committee members are
trained on these requirements; however, the learner is ultimately responsible for
understanding and adhering to all IRBrequirements as outlined in the University Policy
Handbook and Dissertation Milestone Guide.

Limitations and Delimitations

There will always be limitations and delimitations in a research study (Theofanidis &

Fountouki (2018). The limitations, and delimitations were prevalent and supported the

validity to this qualitative study. Limitations are the variables in the study that researchers
cannot control. Delimitations are factors that the researcher is in control of. Limitations and

delimitations were both present when the study was conducted at the high school and may

affect the findings from the study. The following limitations and delimitations were present in

this research study:

Limitations

This study had a small sample size. This is a limitation because the study was only

collected at one high school within the school district and the context of the study was to

collect rich, descriptive data. This study is not a representation of a larger population. There

is a lack of research and data on SW-PBIS in high schools. SW-PBIS was very new to the

high school. The school has only been implementing SW-PBIS for 2 years. The staff is not

familiar with the components to the framework. The teachers are not implementing the

schoolwide initiative with fidelity. There may have been an impact if the PBIS was

implemented throughout the school. The last limitation for this study is the rigidity of the

data. The data is based on teacher’s perceptions; therefore, their perspectives are difficult to

prove on the data collected.

Delimitation

The participants in the study were delimited due to the research taken place in the

Southeast region of the United States. The study will take place at a high school in , Georgia.

The interviews of high school teachers teaching grades 9th – 12th were delimited to only one

high school in one county within a Metro area , limiting the demographic sample. The

purpose of this research study is to assess and evaluate the perceptions of teachers on the

efficacy of the SW-PBIS program to improve the behavior and academic outcomes.

Another delimitation to the study is the data collection. Not all participants of the study will

complete all parts of the data collection. 20 teachers will receive the face-to-face, semi-

structured interviews and 6 teachers will participate in the focus group.

 This research study was not without limitations and delimitations. The limitations in

the study were unavoidable because they could not be controlled by the researcher. The

researcher collected and analyzed the data on the teachers’ perceptions of SW-PBIS and the

impact it has on behavior and academic outcomes.

Summary

Chapter 3 will provide a detailed description of a qualitative descriptive research

study that will use face-to-face semi-structured interviews and focus groups to attain the

purpose of this study: to evaluate the perceptions of teachers on the efficacy of the School-

wide Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports (SW-PBIS) framework that is implemented

with high school students. An effort was made in this chapter to demonstrate alignment

around the basic premise of teachers’ perceptions of SW-PBIS and how students’ academic

outcomes and behavior. Previous studies have addressed SW-PBIS in regards to facilitation

(Evanoch & Scott, 2016), implementation (Malloy, Bohanan, & Francoeur, 2018; Betters-

Bubon, Brunner, & Kansteiner, 2016), and efficacy (McIntosh & Goodman, 2016); mainly in

the elementary and middle school settings.

There is little research addressing SW-PBIS in the high school setting and looking at

teacher’s perceptions. This study will address the gap in the existing literature regarding

teacher’s perceptions on the impact of the implementation of SW-PBIS has on academic and

behavior outcomes. This study will include a population sample of 20 high-school teachers

from a Title I school in southeast Georgia. This research will be a unique attempt to address

the research questions: Based on the perceptions of high school teachers, how does the SW-

PBIS affect high school student’s academic and behavioral outcomes? The phenomenon

studied is the teachers’ implementation of PBIS in their classrooms and evaluating

themselves through their perceptions on whether the SW-PBIS framework affects student

behavior and increases student outcomes.

This research study will rely on qualitative methodology. According to Mohajan (2018),

qualitative researchers are interested in people’s belief, experience, and meaning systems

from the perspective of the people. For the purpose of this study, a descriptive research

design was employed and deemed appropriate. A qualitative descriptive design may be

deemed most appropriate as it recognizes the subjective nature of the problem, the different

experiences participants have and will present the findings in a way that directly reflects or

closely resembles the terminology used in the initial research question (Doyle et al., 2020).

For the purposes of the study, the design will allow the researcher to generate data from semi-

structured face-to-face interviews, a focus group, and later, the researcher will conduct a

follow-up focus group to seek clarity or expansion on questions that will be asked to the

participants. The data will be analyzed by employing content and thematic analysis. The

researcher will transcribe and sort the data, assign codes from the interviews and focus

groups, and will make notes for a follow-up focus group.

Trustworthiness refers to the credibility of the researcher (Rose & Johnson, 2020).

To ensure that trustworthiness took place in this study, the researcher transcribed the

interviews and focus groups, coded and conducted a thematic analysis with the data.

Thematic analysis is an approach the participants’ view (Hambraeus, Hambraeus, & Sahlen,

2020). To address credibility, the researcher transcribed, coded, used themes and conducted

member checks. Ethical considerations that are relevant to this study were then presented.

Issues that were discussed in this section including gaining IRB approval and confidentiality.

This section was also used to note that the study would be conducted in an unbiased manner,

although such an achievement is technically impossible in qualitative research, where

interpretative or subjective bias is critical to the data analytic process.

 The ethical considerations section was then also used to reiterate the sampling

method, participant eligibility requirements, and general procedures. It is mentioned in this

section that participants for this study will be sampled randomly, which contrasts with the

steps outlined in the sampling section and would be quite unusual for a qualitative study

where just a limited number of participants are required. Additional points that warrant

further consideration in this section may include the protection of basic rights of human

subjects in a scientific study, informed consent, the right to withdraw at any time, protecting

vulnerable population members, and whether or not incentives were used to solicit

participation. Finally, limitations and delimitations were discussed.

While Chapter 3 provided the steps to implement the foundation for educational

research, Chapter 4 will allow the researcher to analyze and interpret the data along with

reporting the findings and evaluating the research from this study. The findings will be

discussed in Chapter 4 and will be presented in an organize and strategic manner. The

researcher will reintroduce the problem and purpose of the study, with a brief description of

the research methodology, the research questions and the hypotheses. This chapter will

provide details regarding the data analysis procedure, will identify all sources of error, if any,

and their impact on the study.

 References

Akinyode, B. F., & Khan, T. H. (2018). Step by step approach for qualitative data

analysis. International Journal of Built Environment and Sustainability, 5(30, 163-174.

doi:10.11113/ijbes.v5.n3.267.

Alter, P. & Haydon, T. (2017). Characteristics of effective classroom rules: A review

of the literature. Teacher Education and Special Education, 40(2), 114-127.

doi:10.1177/0888406417700962.

Ames, H., Glenton, C., & Lewin, S. (2019). Purposive sampling in a qualitative

evidence synthesis: A worked example from a synthesis on parental pereceptions of

vaccination communication. BMC Medical Research Methodology,19(26), 1-9.

doi:10.1186/s12874-019-0665-4.

Amin, M. E. K., Norgaard, L. S., Cavaco, A. M., Wiltry, M. J., Hillman, L., Cernasev,

A., & Desselle, S. P. (2020). Establishing trustworthiness and authenticity in qualitative

pharmacy research. Science Direct, 16(10), 1472-1482.

doi:org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2020.02.005.

Atlanta Public Schools (2020). APS strategic plan. Retrieved it from

https://www.atlantapublicschools.us/cms/lib/GA01000924/Centricity/Domain/9278/2020 -

2025%20Strategic%20Plan_Final.pdf

Atkins, L., Francis, J., Islam, R., O’Connor, D., Patey, A., Ivers, N., & Michie, S.

(2017). A guide to using the Theoretical Domains Framwork of behavious change to

investigate implementation problems. Implementation Science, 12, 1-19. doi:10.1186/s13012-

017-