A r c h i v e d  I n f o r m a t i o n

Comprehensive School Reform

Model Design and Evaluation Abstracts

The Model Design and Evaluation Contracts fund the development of new, research-based CSR models for middle and high schools, as well as the evaluation of those models. Part of the objective is to help students meet state content standards and national education goals. In 1999, the Office of Educational Research and Improvement awarded contracts to seven organizations to develop and evaluate these models, at a cost of more than $76 million over 5 years.

America's Choice Design Model
AIM at Middle Schools Results Model
Different Ways of Knowing Middle Grades Model
First Things First (FTF) Model
Making Schools Work (MSW) Model
Success For All Middle School Model
Talent Development Model

AMERICA'S CHOICE DESIGN MODEL

Contractor: National Center on Education and the Economy, 1 Thomas Circle NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC 2005
Project Director: Walter Gibson, 202-783-3668, wgibson@ncee.org
Principal Investigator: Marc Tucker, 202-783-3668, mtucker@ncee.org
Total Funding: $10,198,136 over 5 years, beginning September 28, 1999
Population Served: Middle school and lower-division high school students
Primary Objectives:

• Align curriculum standards with admission criteria for postsecondary education in core subjects.
• Provide tools and support systems necessary to effectively implement and/or adapt the model.
• Design to eventually accommodate between 1,000 and 2,000 schools.

Essential Components:

• Small learning environments with teams of teachers that follow between 200 and 400 students.
• Fully aligned instructional system with required courses and pathways from middle to high school.
• Upper-division high school program with several options, including career academies, for students.
• Standards-based curriculum, instructional materials, and assessment tools.
• Parental and community involvement programs.
• Three-layer safety network: 1) special intensive courses for students entering middle school and high school to bring them up to the appropriate level; 2) a tutoring program for students who need extra help; and 3) a dropout recovery program.

Evaluation Activities: Evaluation activities will focus on implementation of the design, effectiveness of support in implementation, and impact on culture, teaching practice, student behavior, and student achievement. Activities will include case studies, surveys, interviews, document review, teacher logs, and professional development observations. These activities are being conducted by the Center for Policy Research in Education.

OERI Contact:Cheryl Kane, (202)219-2195, Cheryl.Kane@ed.gov

AIM AT MIDDLE SCHOOLS RESULTS MODEL

Contractor: Education Development Center, 55 Chapel Street, Newton, MA, 02458
Project Director: Barbara Zeno, 617-618-2171, bzeno@edc.org
Principal Investigator: Nancy Ames, 617-969-7100 x2316
Total Funding: $6,756,833 over 5 years, beginning September 28, 1999
Population Served: Middle schools in both urban and rural settings
Primary Objectives:

• Create learning communities of teachers and other education stakeholders that provide a safe and healthy climate for learning.
• Foster national and regional networks to enhance the success of schools in rural communities.
• Help all middle school students, including those at risk, to master new foundation skills such as the ability to gather, analyze and organize information; solve problems; think critically; and use technology, in addition to traditional literacy skills.
• Establish clear standards and performance benchmarks that set high expectations for all students.
• Provide rigorous, content-rich curriculum and instruction primarily focused on literacy but supportive of other content areas.
• Expand model into 14 new sites by 2002.
• Continuous cycle of analysis, planning, action, and reflection.

Essential Components:

• Rigorous and developmentally responsible curriculum, instruction, and assessment tools.
• Ongoing professional development-both on- and off-site-and stand-alone tools.
• A safe and healthy environment focused on students' development and learning.
• Process for ensuring collaboration among stakeholders.

Evaluation Activities: EDC has contracted with Abt Associates, Inc. (Mary Ann Millsap, Research Director) to evaluate the implementation of the model, the development of small learning communities, and the variation in scaling up the model across sites, as well as the effects of the model. Data will come from principal, teacher, and student interviews, student interviews, student achievement data records, and site visit interviews.

DIFFERENT WAYS OF KNOWING MIDDLE GRADES MODEL

Contractor: The Galef Institute, 5670 Wilshire Blvd., 20th Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90036-5623
Project Director: Susan Galletti, 323-525-0042, gallettis@galef.org
Principal Investigators: Sue Beauregard, 323-525-0042, sue@galef.org; Linda Johannesen, 323-525-0042, linda@galef.org
Total Funding: $13,024,095 over 5 years, beginning September 28, 1999
Population Served: Middle Schools with focus on urban and rural Title 1 schools
Primary Objectives:

• Use "action theory" to promote academic excellence, developmental support for young adolescents, and data-driven decision making.
• Provide professional development and teaching and learning materials to help teachers adopt creative, arts-infused, standards-driven strategies for each academic subject that leads to the integration of their work.
• Focus on curriculum, instruction, assessment, and students' intellectual development, in addition to school climate.

Essential Components:

• Research-based four-phase learning model that is adaptable to local situations.
• Arts-infused, integrated professional development and materials that apply the standards and expand the literacy spectrum helping teachers differentiate instruction across a wide range of learning needs.
• Expansion and promotion of summer school professional development opportunities.
• Systemic professional development focused on the literacy needs of the specific school, organizational structures, family and community interaction, and instructional leadership.

Evaluation Activities: The evaluation will focus on the quality of the model, the level of implementation, and the effect on student achievement and teacher practice with a focus on the added-value component of arts in teaching and learning in core subjects. Instruments include student level data collection, faculty and student surveys, focus groups, interviews, and classroom observations. These activities are being conducted by WestEd (Naida Tushnet, Research Director).

FIRST THINGS FIRST (FTF) MODEL, developed by the Institute for Research and Reform in Education (IRRE)

Contractor: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation (MDRC), 16 E. 34th St., 19th Floor, New York, NY 10016
Project Director: James Connell, IRRE, 215-242-2060, jpcirre@aol.com
Principal Investigator: Fred Doolitte, MDRC, 212-340-8638, fred_doolitte@mdrc.org
Total Funding: $11,143,740 over 5 years, beginning September 28, 1999
Population Served: Grades 7-12, with an emphasis on whole districts of urban and minority students
Primary Objectives:

• Build more longstanding, respectful, and mutually accountable relationships among educational professionals, adolescent students, and their families.
• Implement effective practices in every classroom, every day - practices that emphasize high standards and active, collaborative, and challenging activities (with an initial, intensive focus on literacy).
• Provide policies and resources to make these things happen by helping schools and districts align their policies, resources and expectations toward full implementation of FTF, tracking progress, and making adjustments based on results.
• Scale up to 6 districts with 30 high schools and middle schools by 2004.

Essential Components:

• Small learning environments that consist of lower student to adult ratios (15:1 or less) in core instruction and the same set of teachers, families, and students staying together over a period of time.
• High, clear and fair standards for academics and conduct that clearly define the school's expectations of students.
• Enriched opportunities for students to learn, perform, and be recognized.
• Equipping, empowering, and expecting all teaching staff to build a repertoire of effective instructional strategies to deliver high quality standards-based curriculum.
• Flexibility to redirect resources based on emerging needs of small learning communities.
• Collective responsibility of adults for students outcomes with clear targets for improvement tied to accountability and incentive systems.

Evaluation Activities: MDRC will study FTF's implementation and effects in all the expansion sites plus schools in Kansas City; at the expansion sites, the processes of planning and capacity-building will be examined as well. Activities will include surveys, interviews, classroom observations, and analysis of school records on attendance, and academic performance.

MAKING SCHOOLS WORK (MSW) MODEL

Contractor: Southern Regional Education Board, 592 Tenth Street, NW, Atlanta, GA, 30318-5790
Project Director: Gene Bottoms, 404-875-9211, gene.bottoms@sreb.org
Funding: $11,639,999 over 5 years, beginning September 30, 1999
Population Served: Clusters of middle and high schools, with emphasis on rural and at-risk students
Primary Objectives:

• Connect isolated schools into a network.
• Assess and provide proven standards-based curriculum.
• Increase achievement for all students in middle grades and high schools.
• Improve the preparation of students for transition from middle grades into rigorous programs of study in high school.
• Expand the model to 100 clusters of middle and high schools, approximately 175 schools, by 2004.

Essential Components:

• Access for all students, particularly at-risk students, to an "advantaged core curriculum" that is based on high standards.
• Improved instruction and extra support services.
• Site-specific services through regional and national workshops, as well as technological methods, to accelerate change.
• Network of schools for isolated areas.
• Technical assistance process for each site and ongoing professional development tailored to specific clusters.

Evaluation Activities: Evaluation is focused on implementation of MSW and its impact on school and student outcomes. Instruments include school records, standardized tests, policy documents, site visits, and surveys of students and teachers. These activities are being conducted by the Research Triangle Institute.

SUCCESS FOR ALL MIDDLE SCHOOL MODEL

Contractor: Success for All Foundation, 200 W. Towson Town Blvd., Baltimore, MD 21204
Project Directors: Robert Slavin, 410-616-2310, rslavin@successforall.net
Principal Investigator: Robert Slavin and Nancy Madden
Total Funding: $12,272,741 over 5 years, beginning September 28, 1999
Population Served: Middle Schools, primarily at-risk students
Primary Objectives:

• Facilitate close connections between adolescents and their teachers through the organization of schools into multidisciplinary units called "houses," which provide smaller, more supportive learning environments in a large school setting.
• Help students succeed in rigorous coursework by improving the quality of curriculum and instruction, introducing extensive professional development and follow-up, and providing a variety of support services.
• Connect schools with children's families and communities.
• Expand full model into over 300 schools by 2006.

Essential Components:

• Smaller learning environments in which students are grouped heterogeneously and have multi-period humanities courses that integrate English, social studies, and reading into one course.
• A collection of standards-based curriculum and instructional practices that emphasizes cooperative learning, fast-paced and varied instruction, and explicit instruction in study skills and meta-cognitive strategies.
• Parent and community involvement support systems.
• Reading recovery program for students who are below the reading level as well as after-school enrichment and assistance programs.
• Professional development in which principals and facilitators receive leadership training and the entire staff receives hands-on training.

Evaluation Activities: Evaluation will focus on implementation and impact of the model. Research activities are sensitive to the changes that occur as the model is developed and refined and will document and accommodate such changes. Activities include site visits, surveys, interviews and documents review, as well as student record data analysis.

TALENT DEVELOPMENT MODEL

Contractor: Johns Hopkins University, 3003 North Charles St., Ste. 200, Baltimore, MD 21218
Project Directors: Douglas MacIver, 410-516-8829, dmaciver@csos.jhu.edu and James McPartland, 410-516-8803, jmcpartland@csos.jhu.edu
Total Funding: $11,640,000 over 5 years, beginning September 30, 1999
Population Served: Grades 5-12, with emphasis on middle and high school levels
Primary Objectives:

• Design a system to help schools replicate the Talent Development Model, including phase-in schedules and adaptations that meet local needs.
• Coordinate all aspects of the middle and high school Talent Development to ensure successful transitions for students.
• Adapt the model to different urban and rural locations through continuous technical assistance.

Essential Components:

• Small learning environments with limits on the number of teachers per student and number of different students per teacher.
• Interdisciplinary teams of teachers who share the same students, often fewer than 100.
• Mentor-advising and "looping," where some teachers, or the entire team, remain with the same students for multiple years.
• All students expected to master high-standards curriculum in math, reading and language arts, science, and social studies.
• Increased academic time that provides students with a double period of reading, English, and language arts, and extra instruction in math.
• Transition courses and extra support for students who are lagging in academics.
• Professional development and implementation strategies through organized planning times and at least 36 hours of curriculum and specific professional development per year.

Evaluation Activities: The evaluation will study impact on student achievement and other outcomes through pre-test and post-test student test data, surveys, historical data and interviews. These activities are being conducted by Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation (MDRC).