School-Based Reform: Lessons from a National Study draws on lessons learned from the national study of effective schools programs, which Congress mandated to examine the Chapter 2 effective schools set-aside created under the 1988 Hawkins-Stafford Amendments. Conducted by SRI International for the Planning and Evaluation Service, Office of the Under Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education, the study examined the extent and nature of effective schools programs and other school-based reform efforts nationwide. Although the findings are drawn from programs that predate the 1994 reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act programs, they provide valuable lessons for current reform efforts. A separate report and summary volume, Improving Schools from the Bottom Up: From Effective Schools to Restructuring, present findings from the study and describe the research methods used.
The guide provides practical advice for school reform teams on implementing effective schools programs and other school-based reform initiatives. It draws its lessons from examples of school change supported through Chapter 1, Chapter 2, and state reform efforts. The guide also offers guidance on the kinds of support needed from districts. It concludes with an annotated bibliography of research publications and other resources on educational reform.
The guide provides practical advice and specific examples, based on findings from the study that three key features characterized many of the successful school-based reform efforts:
(1) Successful school-based reform uses challenging curricula and enriching instruction for all students.
Low scores on a new state test made staff at one Chapter 1 elementary school realize that they needed to shift their focus from remedial to higher-level skills. With technical assistance from the state, the school set higher expectations, replaced its basal readers with high-quality literature for children, and ended its tracking system in reading. The effect was dramatic: the proportion of students performing above the remedial level rose from 53 percent to 100 percent in only three years.
In another school, teachers concluded that the most important change they had experienced was a reaffirmation that all students could learn. Now, if a student is having difficulty in class, these teachers take the responsibility to adapt their instructional practices to help the student succeed. Moreover, the teachers eliminated most tracking in their high school after reviewing relevant research and visiting schools that used heterogeneous grouping of students.
The guide explains that successful school-based reform efforts developed a challenging curriculum that stressed depth over breadth, often using an integrated approach and interdisciplinary teams. At one middle school visited during the study, a team of math, science, language arts, and social studies teachers developed an integrated unit on the Renaissance for seventh-graders. The team supplemented the history text with a computer simulation of the Black Death, filmstrips and videos on the Middle Ages, castles, and cathedrals. Students performed plays and skits, read poetry and short stories about the period, prepared research reports, developed time-lines, and made crafts. Students constructed castles to scale for math. For science, they studied both health and contagious diseases, comparing the spread of AIDS today to the Black Death centuries ago.
(2) Successful school-based reform builds a school culture that nurtures collaboration among teachers and greater teacher participation in decision-making.
The guide describes schools' efforts to create ways for teachers and school administrators to work together to bring about significant changes. Roles are changed to give school staff greater participation in decision-making. Allocation of staff, resources, time, and space is reconfigured to promote collaboration.
In one elementary school, the principal expanded the authority of a staff team originally established to address effective schools matters. The team took responsibility for scheduling and budgetary functions, and interviewed candidates for paraprofessional and non-teaching positions in the school. As the district granted schools more authority, the team increased its involvement in hiring teachers. In addition, most teachers served on the district committees that made curriculum decisions. At the classroom-level, the school created an innovative system of "quads" to implement the curriculum. Four teachers worked with 100 students; two classrooms in each quad were used for the integrated science curriculum, and two served as science and technology labs.
In another school, teachers, support staff, and parents took part in a retreat to develop a common vision of reform and to build consensus on reform initiatives, using a grant from a private corporation to fund the retreat. Teachers at the school also played an active role in curriculum initiatives. For example, teachers formed a team to pilot an alternative science curriculum. With support from the district, these teachers participated in two weeks of summer training, as well as two to three days of training and coaching each month during the school year. By the third year, a majority of the faculty was participating in the program.
(3) Successful school-based reform provides meaningful opportunities for professional growth.
The study found that schools successful in their reform efforts had identified the types of staff development needed to support their reform goals. Staff then developed multi-year plans for a sustained program of professional development, often including formal sessions to explore related topics in depth, follow-up support from expert coaches, and time for collaboration among teachers.
New approaches were used to build staff knowledge and skills instead of relying on disconnected, one-shot workshops. Teachers shared with the rest of the staff what they had learned through outside training and visited other schools to observe innovations firsthand. For example, teachers at one of the high schools in the study received training from a variety of sources: the Coalition of Essential Schools, a local university, and the district's professional development academy, supported with foundation funding. The scheduling of a common planning period for teams of teachers facilitated collaboration. Another school set up a system of giving two-teacher teams responsibility for serving as resources for each program and providing training for the rest of the staff. Teachers used bi-weekly meetings to coordinate programs and consider new initiatives.
The guide also discusses ways in which districts have successfully supported school-based reform. First, school districts supported professional development, by offering training directly, acting as liaisons to universities or other sources of expertise, or providing funding. Second, districts allowed schools flexibility and authority over key decisions, for example, by defining requirements in terms of student learning goals and allowing each school to determine how they would meet these goals. Third, districts played a mediation role with external forces that extended beyond the scope of an individual school, such as teachers' unions and the state government. Fourth, school districts created special programs, helped schools obtain grants, and contributed additional resources to support school-based reform efforts.
Copies of the guide, as well as the full report and summary volume for the study, Improving Schools from the Bottom Up: From Effective Schools to Restructuring, can be obtained from the Planning and Evaluation Service, Office of the Under Secretary, U.S. Department of Education, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Room 4162, Washington, DC 20202-8240.
-###-
Return to Elementary and Secondary Education Page
mail to esed@ed.gov
Last update September 1996 (swz).