![[Table of Contents]](/icons/up.gif){kind=icon}
Teachers and administrators involved in schoolwide projects often describe their standards in terms of setting higher expectations and ambitious goals for all students. Chapter 1 programs traditionally served low-achieving students by separating them in pullout classes or in groups within their regular classrooms--an approach that too frequently stigmatized the students and offered them an inferior instructional program. Today, teachers in successful schoolwide projects combine lower- and higher-order learning activities and replace basal readers and traditional textbooks with more exciting, interdisciplinary curricula and projects. They teach academic content through problem solving, multicultural themes, and team activities; introduce cooperative learning, individual tutoring, and portfolio assessment; and remove the traditional emphasis on sequential learning.
These approaches stimulate children's thinking while helping them make meaning of the curriculum content. In mathematics, for example, students encounter new concepts as they wrestle with real- life problems; they represent what they know with their own words, diagrams, and symbols. In reading, students spend less time on drills and recall of facts and more on interpretation. Children use their natural learning strategies and curiosity as bridges to "hard academic content" (Porter, Archbald, & Tyree, 1991); they write about and discuss what they know and are learning and, through trial and error, make new discoveries and connections.
Educators in these schoolwide projects are fundamentally changing education by teaching for deeper understanding and expecting all students to achieve the new standards. Teachers expect children to learn more; they focus on how students think while tracking closely how their knowledge develops. Neither knowledge nor student is segmented into what Cohen and Grant (1993) called a "bits-and-pieces regime"; instead, content is integrated through cross-cutting themes and "uncovered" by multi-skilled groups of learners.
Systemic changes such as these are consistent with the reforms that education leaders suggest: an explicit framework for curriculum and instructional reforms for all schools and students; a better means of exposing and addressing educational inequality, in both instruction and administration; and opportunities for encouraging the local responsibility, flexibility, and discretion that lead to community and school-based reform (Cohen, McLaughlin, & Talbert, 1993; Levin, 1991; O'Day & Smith, 1993). Many schoolwide projects also foster the collegiality and high morale among teachers--and the close contact between teachers and students--that Cohen and Grant (1993) found to have "significant influence" on the effectiveness of instruction.
Chapter 1 reform--especially through schoolwide projects--is very much in transition. Some processes are still evolving, and neither educators nor administrators assume they have all the answers. What planners of schoolwide projects view as the best practices today may not necessarily be considered the best practices tomorrow. Research for this idea book focused on current schoolwide projects while keeping an eye to the future. We found that schoolwide Chapter 1 projects can lay the groundwork for widespread change in content and learning while setting higher expectations for all children.
Teachers at Balderas Elementary School in Fresno, California set high academic standards in core subjects. Students learn the concepts of literacy and numeracy in the context of daily story-telling and investigations in science and social studies, followed by related pencil-and-paper or computer work. Reading, writing, and mathematics are included in every appropriate interdisciplinary lesson. Multidimensional lessons--building on the language, skills, and concepts that students already know--allow teachers to provide learning opportunities that serve native English speakers and students with limited English proficiency equally well. Using the state and district curriculum guides, keyed to California's curriculum frameworks, teachers provide students with activities that promote language development in both English and primary languages and acquisition of grade-level knowledge and skills in other subjects. Beginning in the preschool years and continuing to grade 6, classes may regroup into same-language clusters, led by an assistant, to read and discuss in the students' primary language. Teaching assistants fluent in the students' primary languages rotate among classrooms. All students keep portfolios of their work, often including drawings, writing samples, and journals. Classroom activities promote cooperative learning, reflection, language development, and task engagement. To ensure that multi-language students have the academic support they need, students belong to triads--cross-age groups of students--that meet after school and at other times during the year to work together on homework and class projects. In these afterschool groups, each student works daily with two others who speak the same language and help them develop and apply their English fluency.
|
Children differ in the style and speed of their learning, and they develop basic skills more quickly in the context of higher-order skills than in isolation. When children are personally involved with meaningful ideas and challenging curriculum content, repetition of simple elements in lockstep or by rote is not necessary. Peers and mentors support student learning, affirming the value of culture, community, and family. In addition, the emphasis on community involvement in schoolwide projects demonstrates a new level of respect for the way that children's heritage and context influence learning. Members of the community establish and sustain the high common standards that grant disadvantaged youth meaningful opportunities for achievement.
Early results for schoolwide projects in the study of special strategies for educating disadvantaged children (Stringfield et al., 1992), one of the federal government's longitudinal evaluations of schoolwide projects, highlight four qualities that distinguish successful schoolwide: the school and district welcome change, and the site has the management, program, and budgetary autonomy needed to sustain the project through funding and organizational uncertainty; the principal is a strong manager and instructional leader who shares a vision with an experienced and committed staff--one that is empathetic to the students' needs and embraces diverse cultures and community traditions; the school has a clearly focused academic program grounded in a conceptual, research-based framework that has demonstrated success; and additional resources provide sufficient staff members to offer special services, coordinate programs, and reduce class size; support ongoing professional development; and purchase materials and equipment, especially technology, that enhance the core curriculum.
Together, the planning and integration of resources enable far more innovation than has traditionally been characteristic of Chapter 1 projects. Research demonstrates that planning is especially important because it helps change a school's culture-- its attitudes, expectations, and habits--and changing the culture is a first step to improving what happens in classrooms (Fullan, 1991).
Powerful schools for children in poverty are more attainable than many people believe. When we look for the best, we find it; often, it originates among dedicated and inventive Chapter 1 educators, working hand in hand with people and resources in their local communities. Such schools are not created easily or quickly, but--given the opportunity--they gain strength over time.
Leadership and Planning. Typically, a schoolwide project begins when a strong leader--a principal, a Chapter 1 coordinator, or a teacher--forms a committee to propose and devise the Chapter 1 schoolwide plan. Three-fourths of the respondents to the RMC Research Corporation's survey of schoolwide projects named the school principal or other school administrative staff as most influential in deciding to apply to become a schoolwide project; almost two-thirds also reported that the Chapter 1 coordinator was involved in the decision (Schenck & Beckstrom, 1993). A district-based director of federal programs cites the following keys to successful schoolwide projects in his district:
Astounding principals who are able to motivate staff, organize the school, and provide mechanisms for appropriate staff development...shared decision-making, involvement of staff and community, strong parent involvement...strong student recognition programs....[and] effective use of school staff.
In their review of schoolwide programs, the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) and the National Association of State Coordinators of Compensatory Education found that state education agencies (SEAs) were enthusiastic proponents of the schoolwide concept (CCSSO, 1992). They encouraged districts to take advantage of the schoolwide option through a number of initiatives: contacting eligible schools, holding schoolwide project conferences for potential participants, urging districts to participate in national conferences, and showcasing successful schoolwide projects at state meetings.
Schoolwide project plans are to be based on a comprehensive, school-generated needs assessment, and parents are required to be active contributors. The most useful schoolwide plans reflected the goals of the school community it served and detailed new strategies for coordinating programs and for serving diverse groups of students. These schools offered professionals the collaboration and continuing education they needed, and they invited parents and community members to participate in program planning and evaluation. Explicit procedures for measuring and reporting kept teachers, administrators, and parents informed about student progress (RMC Research Corporation, 1992). Appendix B includes samples of planning materials that schoolwide projects have found especially useful.
Academic Focus and Instructional Flexibility. Program flexibility makes it possible for teachers to increase their focus on how and what children are learning. In schoolwide projects, teachers can use Chapter 1 resources to concentrate on making curriculum, instruction, and pupil services more responsive. Schools also reported that greater flexibility in service delivery and instructional grouping meant that they could strengthen support for academic program quality through professional development and parent education. The RMC survey respondents indicated that more than 80 percent of schoolwide projects made two adjustments: They extended professional development and they introduced or enhanced parent education and involvement. In addition, more than half added computer-assisted instruction, coordinated and integrated the curriculum, added certified professional assistance for low- achieving students, or reduced class size (Schenck & Beckstrom, 1993).
Stringfield et al. (1992) observe that the best schoolwide projects change their curricula and instructional strategies so that teachers can capitalize on reduced class size and the added time available to individualize instruction. They introduce far more intensive instruction in reading and mathematics, and they reinforce reading and mathematics through social studies, sciences, and the arts. One Chapter 1 coordinator sees it this way:
The biggest change brought by our schoolwide project is a revised curriculum. In fact, the school staff are continually revising the curriculum to ensure its appropriateness for students...[The coordinator found] teachers working on Saturdays... revising the curriculum to make thematic instruction with an interdisciplinary approach completely effective.
Schoolwide projects are not simply add-on services or replications of standard models; they are planned adaptations of proven programs, changed to reflect local conditions and traditions. In the strongest schoolwide projects, teachers start with theory- and research-based instructional innovations such as Success for All, Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS), or Reading Recovery, among others, and they modify them to accommodate their students (Levin, 1988; McCollum, 1992; Slavin, Karweit, & Madden, 1989; Clay, 1972). When necessary, children receive extra help within class from specialists or tutors, or they attend after school or summer programs, extending and deepening the regular instruction they receive. Improved educational resources, aligned with updated academic standards, are essential; modern curricula, textbooks, computers, scientific and mathematical tools, and technology also are necessary (Millsap et al., 1992; Stringfield et al., 1992).
Accountability. By the end of three years, a schoolwide project must show that it has improved the achievement of educationally disadvantaged students more effectively than a traditional Chapter 1 program. Schools have two options for demonstrating success: Students who would qualify for Chapter 1 services under a conventional design must perform at a level higher than students in other Chapter 1 schools in the district, or they must achieve at a level higher than the school experienced before the schoolwide project began. Schools that do not meet the accountability standard must revert to a targeted Chapter 1 program.
The state education agency has the authority to approve or disapprove the applications of schoolwide projects after reviewing districts' plans and implementation strategies. Each state advances its own approach to designing and implementing schoolwides. California, Texas, and Oregon have actively promoted the potential of schoolwide projects, creating detailed planning guidelines and offering schools on-site technical assistance. Oregon Chapter 1 coordinator Don Ulrey describes his state's rationale for supporting schoolwide projects this way:
We looked at schoolwides as a real administrative challenge, but one that is very promising for children. A complete three-year plan is one way of ensuring a stronger focus on content from the start. All activities for three years are spelled out; the planning enables everyone on the school staff to improve on instruction; Oregon encourages alternative learning environments, so schoolwide programs within Oregon are connected not just to Chapter 1 but to the statewide program as well. Schoolwide Chapter 1 is not just a different place for children to go to learn, but learning occurs in the classroom all the time.
A facilitating state agency, like a facilitating local school administrator, is a strong asset to Chapter 1 schoolwide projects. It sets the tone and supports change with a clear mission of its own. The Compensatory Education Office in California sends supportive materials with its annual planning requirements that help districts create workable, sustainable plans. California's Schoolwide Project Guidelines are explicit about the opportunity schoolwides provide: "This is a unique opportunity to combine all resources, material, and staff efforts, to organize an effective school program for the students" (California Department of Education, 1992, p. 2).
In a cover memo to school districts, California Chapter 1 program manager Hanna Walker reminds staff across the state that schoolwide projects emphasize
the "different" practice that the school site will implement to upgrade the total school program for all students. While at the site there may be a number of schoolwide initiatives, such as school improvement, Economic Impact Aid and schoolwide, school-based coordinated restructuring; it is vitally important to align the essential elements of each in one comprehensive plan [emphasis in the original].
Walker also emphasizes that "the SWP [schoolwide project] summary plan is fluid and can be changed totally, or in part, when it no longer meets the needs of all students" (Walker, 1992; pp. 1-2).
This kind of close review holds schoolwide projects accountable to carefully thought out plans, and it avoids mistakes that come from poor planning. The process has ensured that principals and Chapter 1 coordinators--often on the advice of state or federal coordinators--make necessary adjustments before a project begins. Many schools have benefitted from technical assistance received during the application or program renewal phases.
-###-
[Chapter 3 - Promising Practices]