![[Table of Contents]](/icons/up.gif){kind=icon}
A number of themes regarding desired innovations in these areas can be found in the literature (e.g., Cohen, McLaughlin, & Talbert, 1993; Fuhrman, 1993; Newmann, 1991; Porter, Kirst, Osthoff, Smithson, & Schneider, 1993; Smith & O'Day, 1991):
In this phase of our research, we assessed the extent to which a set of actively restructuring schools (different from those that were included in the first phase of the research) had implemented reforms in these four categories. We focused on these particular reforms not only because they have received attention in the literature, but because these were the types of innovations that we found were being implemented frequently in the actively restructuring schools in the first phase of our research. In this prior phase, the distinction between actively restructuring schools and struggling schools was assessed by district administrators and coordinators, self-reported by the principals, and verified through interview questions that elicited brief descriptions of changes in their instructional approaches. However, we did not focus in any detail on the nature of the changes and the extent of change. A key emphasis in the second phase of the research was to explicitly investigate new practices in curriculum and instruction.
The primary purpose of assessing these reforms was to investigate how their implementation is linked to the use of school-based management as a form of school governance. We wanted to identify more precisely the conditions that facilitate or inhibit SBM schools' utilization of their increased authority to implement major curriculum and instructional innovations in the four areas described above. We built on the findings from our earlier research; however, rather than adopting an exploratory stance as in the previous phase, this second phase entailed a closer examination of specific features associated with each of these factors. The factors we focused on again include the four elements of the high-involvement model -- power, knowledge and skills, information, and rewards -- as well as the existence of an instructional guidance system and the leadership role enacted at the school. In addition, we included an assessment of the importance of outside resources as a factor influencing the reform process at a school.
Generally speaking, we hypothesized that schools are more likely to implement reforms in curriculum and instruction to the extent that supporting conditions associated with seven factors are present. In particular, the possibility for meaningful reforms consistent with the four innovations discussed above is enhanced when:
These various factors together serve as an interconnected set of conditions that provide a systemic design in which innovation is more likely to occur. They are interconnected in the sense that they support and reinforce each other toward the objective of developing a learning community at the school that facilitates the process through which new practices can be identified, introduced, and institutionalized. This notion is consistent with literature from the field of organizational change, which points out the need to achieve congruency among a variety of system characteristics in order to generate desired practices and outcomes (e.g., Beer, 1980; Mohrman, Mohrman, & Ledford, 1991; Nadler & Tushman, 1977; Porras & Robertson, 1992). Therefore, our basic hypothesis was that the extent to which reforms are introduced at a school will be positively related to the number of these supporting conditions that are in place at the school.20
While our primary emphasis was on the set of supporting conditions as a whole, we also tentatively explored the existence of specific linkages between individual factors and particular types of reforms. A number of such relationships might be expected. For example, mechanisms for generating interaction among staff and for making decisions across internal boundaries should facilitate the use of team teaching and the development of interdisciplinary curricula. The acquisition of external sources of funding may be necessary to invest in the technology required to teach students how to effectively use these tools, and teachers may need professional development to prepare them to teach these skills. Accurate information regarding student performance will enable teachers to develop more effective individualized instruction so as to better meet the educational needs of all students. External integration with the community to enhance the educational process will depend on the establishment of appropriate mechanisms for communicating with these constituents. While certainly not a comprehensive list, these examples point to how particular factors identified above can increase the likelihood that schools will be able to generate desirable curriculum and instructional changes.
To summarize, then, this study focused on the relationships between a set of factors previously found to be related to effective use of school-based management as a governance mechanism and four general types of curriculum and instructional reform. Data from a set of schools that have been successfully using SBM for a number of years were analyzed to assess the extent to which these elements serve as supporting conditions to facilitate the implementation of meaningful reforms in these areas. The methods used to collect and analyze the data are described next.
[Part 4: Methodology]