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

Background

The Office of Planning, Budget and Evaluation (PES) participated in an international study on children and youth at risk of school failure with the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The purpose of this joint study was to identify strategies that have the potential for improving the delivery of services to students at risk of academic failure and their families and that have the potential for being replicated in other countries.

The report is an examination of programs that have been identified as holding promise for reducing the risk of school failure. Six different models are examined in 12 sites. The models studied were categorized as being curriculum-based reforms (i.e., projects to revamp curriculum) and governance-based reforms (i.e., projects to restructure school organizations). The curriculum-based reforms included Marie Clay's Reading Recovery, Robert Slavin's Success for All, and the Academy model. The governance-based reforms included Henry Levin's Accelerated Schools model, James Comer's School Development Program, and school-based management programs.

The report also compares the benefits derived from curriculum-based reforms with those derived from governance-based reforms. In addition, the report examines how to successfully replicate reform in other sites and identifies the preconditions needed for effective adaptation of models.

Selected Findings

• The broader the scope of the intervention, the more the implementation is dependent on context rather than content. For example, curriculum-based reforms, in general, require a change in the delivery of instruction by a teacher but do not require a change by the school. Thus, the implementation of curriculum-based reforms are quite predictable and look the same across sites. On the other hand, the implementation of governance-based reforms vary greatly according to the political and cultural characteristics of the school.

• The impact on student learning is more predictable and immediate from successful implementation of curriculum-based reforms; in governance-based reform sites, expectations of increases in student achievement are less concrete in the initial years of the new system, as the goals of governance reforms are long-range and constantly evolving.

• Curriculum-based reforms depend on the motivation and skills of individual teachers and proficient management. Governance-based reforms depend on group dynamics and expert leadership to promote a common vision.

• Successfully implemented reform efforts that become institutionalized require sufficient time before adoption, during implementation, and after being institutionalized.

• The type of commitment required by a district depends on the scope of the reform. Curriculum- based reforms generally require financial support only, while governance-based reforms may require the district office to shift from a monitoring role to one of providing guidance.

• School reform initiatives are expensive; however, the costs of the curriculum-based reforms can be more accurately predicted.

• There is a correlation between the amount of problem-solving effort required of teachers in the different models and the nature of learning opportunities offered to students.

• Involving parents in reform initiatives is often extremely challenging, even when changes offer parents decision-making roles. In the sites visited, despite the fact that all schools had made gains in this area, the parent role on governing committees was still a token one. Differences in race, ethnicity, and class between school staff and parents presented frustrating barriers to collaborative work.

Conclusions

• The local setting and existing school culture are important considerations when implementing school reforms, particularly those that are governance-based.

• Curriculum-based reforms need a realistic timetable for implementation, ongoing technical assistance, and competent management.

• Governance reforms, in general, need several years for planning, gradual implementation, and flexible assessment mechanisms to monitor progress.

• Early adoption of curriculum frameworks or instructional objectives help schools to maintain a focus when implementing school-based management reforms.

• Increased professional opportunities for teachers and enhanced decision making contribute to increasing the chances of reforms, regardless of the type, of becoming institutionalized.

Individual case studies of the projects are contained in Volume 2, Promising Practices for Children and Youth at Risk of School Failure which is available from the Planning and Evaluation Service, Office of the Undersecretary, Room 4163, 600 Independence Ave., SW, Washington, DC 20202.

-###-

Return to Elementary and Secondary Education Page

mail to esed@ed.gov

Last update September 1996 (swz).