ED 376 795

TITLEINSTITUTIONSPONS AGENCY

REPORT NOPUB DATENOTEAVAILABLE FROM

PUB TYPE

JOURNAL CIT

EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

DOCUMENT RESUME

IR 016 893

Systemic Education Reform.ACCESS ERIC, Rockville, MD.Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED),Washington, DC.ERIC-94-5042; ISSN-1065-11609433p.; For the previous issue, see ED 369 389.ACCESS ERIC, 1600 Research Boulevard, Rockville, MD20850-3166 (Subscription free; obtain back issuesfrom EDRS).Collected Works Serials (022) InformationAnalyses ERIC Clearinghouse Products (071)Reference Materials Bibliographies (131)ERIC Review; v3 n2 Fall 1994

MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage.Annotated Bibliographies; *Change Strategies;*Educational Change; Educational Cooperation;Educational Policy; Elementary Secondary Education;Federal Programs; *Government Role; StateLegislation

IDENTIFIERS *Educational Restructuring; ERIC; *Goals 2000;Kentucky

ABSTRACT"The ERIC Review" is published three times a year and

announces research results, publications, and new programs relevantto each issue's theme topic. This issue explores systemic educationreform via an overview of systemic reform, a description of theKentucky example, and an article, "Roadmap to Restructuring" (DavidT. Conley). In addition, there are features on "Federal Initiativesto Support Systemic Reform"; "What Goals 2000 Means for You";"Education Reform Resource Organizations List"; "Education ReformReading List"; "News from the ERIC System"; and "New Titles inEducation." (DGM)

***********************************************************************

Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made *

from the original document.***********************************************************************

Vol. 3 I.-,sue 2, Fall 1994

U.S. Department of EducationOffice of Educational Research and improvementEducational Resources Information Center

S:stemic Education ReformFile Edit View Select . Help

Instruction

Curriculum

U S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION(Mice or Educational RSirch and ImprovementEDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION

CENTER (ERIC)

This document has been reproduced asreCeived from the person or organizationoriginating itr Minor changes have been made to improvereproductron Quality

Points of view or ()prawn! Stated .n thrsdOCurnent do not necessarily represent ofricusiOE RI DOSibon or poboy

ResourceOrganizations

ReadingList

AssessmentO

1 ProfessionalDevelopment

ArticlesSystemic Reform Overview

The Kentucky Example

Roadmap to Restructuring

NuiemailieP'

FederalInitiatives

IIIINIMIll

ERIC SystemDevelopments

2 BEST COPY AVAILABLE

Important Message to Our Readers

Systemic education reform is a comprehensive effort to improve education simultaneously from the "bottomup" and from the "top down" through coordinated state policies that support change at the local level.Systemic reform is grounded in systems thinkingno one aspect of education should be changed in isola-tion because the component parts need to be coherent if the system is to improve dramatically.

Systemic reform is based on the assumptions that all students can learn challenging content and that curricu-lum, assessment, instruction, and professional development must be aligned, or made consistent with eachother, to ensure that students achieve high standards. Under systemic reform, school districts and states,with input from teachers, help define curriculum standards, coordinate policy with expected outcomes, anddevelop accountability measures. States and school districts support local schools in their efforts to changeby providing resources, helping them build capacity for improvement, and eliminating bureaucratic con-straints so that schools have more flexibility to develop instructional strategies that will help studentsachieve high standards.

Central to the success of systemic reform is the development of a strong vision and a set of goals that areshared by education professionals and all others concerned about education in America. This vision be-comes the organizing principle for ng the necessary steps for reform. To spark creativity and innovationat the school level, leadership must come from teachers, principals, and parents in individual schools, whoare working in concert with policymakers at the local, state, and national levels. Neither top-down norbottom-up reform alone is sufficient; both "ends" must work on what it means for students to learn andachieve at high levels.

This issue of The ERIC Review views systemic education reform through the prism of national, state, andlocal activities to change schools through standards and incentives. Some of the major themes associatedwith systemic reform are introduced in a question-and-answer format starting on page 2. "Systemic Reform:The Kentucky Example" provides an overview of one state's efforts to coordinate curriculum, governance,and teacher development policies for its schools, using school finance as a starting point for systemicreform. Other short pieces address federal initiatives to further systemic reform, including GOALS 2000and support for standards developed by professional associations and curriculum frameworks developed bystates. To explore education improvement at the local level, an excerpt from Roadmap to Restructuring byDavid T. Conley is included that describes why improving student outcomes, curriculum, instruction, andassessment must be at the core of school-level change. Also included in this issue are reading and resourceorganization lists to enable interested individuals to further explore education reform.

The materials in this journal are in the public domain and may be reproduced and disseminatedfreely. If you need additional information on what the Educational Resources Information Center has tooffer, details on how to access the ERIC database at a library or with a personal computer and modem, or areferral to one of the 16 subject-specific ERIC Clearinghouses, please call 1-800LETERIC.

U.S. Department of Education

Richard W. RileySecretary

Office of Educational Research andImprovement

Sharon P. RobinsonAssistant Secretary

Office of Research

Joseph ConatyActing Director

Educational Resourcesinformation Center

ContentsSystemic Education Reform: Questions and Answers

Systemic Reform: The Kentucky Example

Federal Initiatives To Support Systemic Reform

What GOALS 2000 Means for You

Roadmap to RestructuringDavid T. Conley

Education Reform Resource Organizations List 18

Education Reform Reading List 22

News From the ERIC System 26

New Titles in Education 28

2

5

8

10

12

Editorial BoardBob Stonehill, ERIC Director, U.S. Department of Education. Office of Educational Research andImprovement

Pat Coulter, ERIC Proeram Staff, U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Researchand Improvement

Craig B. Howley, Directa, ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools

Sandra Kerka, Assistant Director, ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult. Career, and Vocational Education

Stuart Smith, Associate Director for Publications. ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management

Garry Walz, Director. ERIC Clearinghouse on Counseling and Student Services

The ERIC Review, published by ACCESSERIC with support from the U.S. Departmentof Education's Office of EducationalResearch and Improvement (0ER1),announces research results. publications, andnew programs. It also contains informationon the Educational Resources InformationCenter (ERIC). its subject-specificclearinghouses, and support components. Theideas and opinions expressed in thispublication do not necessarily reflect the

positions or policies of the Department ofEducation or OERI.

For more information about ERIC or a freesubscription to The ERIC' Review, callACCESS ERIC toll free at 1-8(X1-LET-ERIC.

ACCESS ERIC Director: Lynn SmartsManaging Editor: Carol Laseski BostonGrapiics Designer: David L. SchmidtCopy Editor: Caroline S.A. Baker

ISSN 1065-1160

4

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

ERICYour Education

Information NetworkThe Educational Resources Informa-tion Center is a nationwide informa-tion service designed to makeeducation literature readily accessible.

The ERIC system consists of 16subject-specific clearinghouses;several adjunct clearinghouses;and support components, includingACCESS ERIC. At the heart ofERIC is the largest educationdatabase in the worldcontaining850,000 abstracts of documents andjournal articles. Curriculum materials,papers, conference proceedings. andliterature reviews, along withabstracts of articles from nearly 800education-related journals, can befound in the ERIC database.

You can access ERIC at about 3,000locations around the world. Typi-cally, university, state, and large citypublic libraries offer access to ERICthrough their microfiche collectionsand online or CD-ROM searches. TheERIC database is also accessiblethrough some computer networks.

In addition, documents selectedfor the database are abstracted andannounced in ERIC's monthlyjournal, Resources in Education.The full text of most documentsannounced in ERIC is available inmicrofiche or paper copy from theERIC Document ReproductionService, 1-800 '113-ERIC. ERICannounces journal literature in aseparate monthly publication, CurrentIndex to Journals in Education.

ACCESS ERIC reference staff cananswer questions about the ERICsystem and its services and products,and refer you to the clearinghouses,which contain vast subject expertisein various fields of education.

Gain entry to a world of educationinformation. Call 1-800-LET-ERIC,Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to5:15 p.m. (eastern time). Requestscan also be made by writing:

ACCESS ERIC, 1600 ResearchBoulevard, Rockville, MD 20850.

Internet: acceric@inet.ed.gov

" 1:47* r

SYSTEMIC EDUCATION REFORM:

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

What's systemiceducation reform?

Systemic education reform is an ambi-tious movement to improve educationfrom "top down" and "bottom up"through state policies that supportchange at the local level. It involvescoordinated change in the whole educa-tion system, particularly in four areas:standards, curriculum, performanceassessment, and teacher development.

Systemic reform calls on states todevelop a vision of what schools shouldbe like for all students as well ascoherent policies that encourage andsupport school-level change. Accordingto Marshall S. Smith and Jennifer A.O'Day', state activities should focus ondeveloping consensus about learninggoals, crafting policies that reflect andreinforce the goals, and providingsupport to schools in reaching thegoals. School-level personnel shoulddevelop specific curricula, programs,and instructional strategies to achievethese goals.

How is systemic reformdifferent from what'shappened before?

Some people compare pieceme,ireform efforts of the past to applying abandage to schools when what isneeded is major surgery. Systemicreform is unique in emphasizing thatchange in one aspect of educationrequires coordinated change in all theother aspects. If we agree that all

4.

1.11111 ERIC Review

students should master a more chal-lenging curriculum, for example,teachers also must use more effectiveinstructional strategies and have betterways to assess students' problem-solving and thinking skills than tradi-tional pencil-and-paper tests. Preserviceand inservice teachers will requireadditional professional developmentto respond skillfully to these changesin curriculum, instruction, andassessment.

The scope of change envisioned undersystemic reform requires coherentpolicy and action among all players:individual teachers, administrators,students, parents, and communitymembers; local schools; school dis-tricts; school boards; teacher educationprograms; and state and federal govern-ments. It's not enough to focus onimproving individual schools withoutchanging the overarching policy struc-ture. A school-by-school approachalone just isn't likely to result in thesubstantial change needed in mostschools.

How can I tell if my state isinvolved in systemicreform?

Chances are, it is. As many as 45 statesare already involved in a reform move-ment focusing on ambitious studentstandards; coordinated curriculum,assessment, and teacher developmentpolicies; and support for school-levelchange. Many states are working inconjunction with districts to develop

high-quality curriculum frameworksbased on high standards. State leadersare trying to determine how to give alldistricts access to the most promisingcurricular materials, learning technolo-gies, professional development oppor-tunities, and information about reform.

With the passage of the GOALS 2000:Educate America Act, states havealready begun to apply to the U.S.Department of Education for funding todevelop long-range improvement plans.Each state improvement plan willinclude customized strategies forensuring that reform is promoted fromthe bottom up in communities, schools,and local education agencies. Statesystemic reform strategies will provideflexibility to individual schools andlocal education agencies to adapt andintegrate state content standards;schools and districts may also receivewaivers from state rules and regulationsthat hinder local improvement plans.States that participate in GOALS 2000will be required to pass at least 60percent of their first-year fundsand90 percent in subsequent yearstolocal education agencies, which willdevelop or refine their own improve-ment plans and work with highereducation and other organizations toimprove teacher training and profes-sional development.

' Smith. Marshall S., and Jennifer A.O'Day (1991). "Systemic School Reform."In Susan H. Fuhnnan and Betty Maim.editors, The Polities of Curriculum andTesting. Bristol. PA: Falmer Press.

What are examples ofpromising systemic reformstrategies and programs?

California has been developing statecurriculum frameworks in mathematics,science, English, and other subjectswith help from grassroots educators.California has also developed a newassessment system tied to these curricu-lum frameworks. Statewide networkssuch as the Elementary Alliance, theCalifornia League of Middle Schools,and the One Hundred High SchoolsNetwork provide professional develop-ment to members and support schoolimprovement.

South Carolina built grassrootssupport and involvement in educationreform through regional forums, toll-free numbers, speakers bureaus,opinion polling, and ad campaigns.The Center for School Leadership atWinthrop University in South Caro-lina has formed a restructuringnetwork (:)' more than 100 SouthCarolina schools that share a commit-ment to new methods of decisionmaking and instruction. Participatingschools receive onsite help as well aselectronic access to a network of8,000 educators.

The Vermont Board of Educationrecently approved a "Common Coreof Learning" that lists "vital results"that all students need to achieve inthe areas of communication, reason-ing and problem solving, personaldevelopment, and social responsibil-ity. Vermont has also pioneered astate assessment system that includesportfolio assessment as a tool to gaugestudent achievement.

How does systemic reformaffect teachers? principals?

Systemic reform by its very natureleads to far-reaching changes in teach-ing and learning. Teachers wil' bechallenged as never before to help allstudents master a content-rich curricu-lum and develop thinking and problem-solving skills. Teachers are alreadybeginning to use new forms of instruc-tion and assessment and will be calledon to grow continuously as profession-als through training and professionaldevelopment activities.

based management structure, theemphasis is on empowering and foster-ing creativity in others rather thantrying to control them; principals andteachers share responsibility for manyeducational, administrative, and leader-ship functions. School-based decisionmaking can be an important ingredientin bottom-up reform; however, in andof itself, it is not likely to lead to ameaningful and sustained change inteaching and learning without thepolicy changes described earlier.

What role do super-intendents and schoolboards play in systemicreform?

"A New Compact for Learning,"adopted by the New York State Regentsin 1991, sets statewide goals; promoteslocal initiative; offers resources, incen-tives, and assistance to local districts;assesses results; and provides rewardsfor success and remedies for failures,including help from a group of teachersand supervisors, and statewide dissemi-nation of information on effectiveeducation programs and practices.

Under systemic reform, the primary jobof teachers and principals is to developa stimulating, supportive, and creativeenvironment to maximize studentachievement. Schools need sufficientautonomy to shape their programs tomeet local conditions and studentneeds. That's why schools should selecttheir own staff, inservice strategies,curriculum (within the state guide-lines), and instructional strategies.

Many definitions of systemic reformmake reference to school-based deci-sion making, which gives those closestto the learning process more input intohow learning takes place. In a school-

6

Systemic change is sometimesconsidered a challenge to the au-tonomy of superintendents andschool boards; however, they canhave an important role to play insystemic reform. Superintendents canhelp to promote the educationalvision and mission, plan and coordi-nate activities to provide resourcesand a supportive environment toindividual schools, communicatewith stakeholders, resolve conflicts,and improve organizational effi-ciency. School boards can overseepolicy implementation, supportchanges in curriculum and instruc-tional practices, and evaluate pro-gram and student progress.

How can I become moreinvolved in systemicreform?

'This issue of The ERIC Review intro-duces the subject of systemic reform.After reading it, consider contactingsome of the resource organizationslisted on page 18 and researching someof the additional material described inthe reading list on page 22. Contactyour district or state department ofeducation for information about hcwyour school can contribute to statewideefforts to establish challenging contentstandards and align curriculum, assess-ment, and professional developmentwith them. You may be asked to serveon committees and task forces, com-ment on draft materials, and submitmaterials and suggestions to groups

Vol. 3 Issue 2, Fall 19943

4

working on statewide reform. Inputfrom parents, community members,teachers, and administrators will benecessary to shape statewide reformpolicies.

Here are a few more suggestions abouthow teachers, administrators, andparents or community members cansupport systemic reform.

Teachers can:

Consider what can be done in theclassroom to help every studentmaster challenging content anddevelop thinking and problem-solving skills.

III Find out about and help shape thecurriculum frameworks and standardsbeing developed by the state orprofessional association.

Use materials and technologyaligned to state standards.

Learn how to designperformance-based assessmentsand make instructional and assess-ment methods consistent.

Collect and use information aboutstudents' achievement to improveteaching and learning in the classroom.

Participate in the school's improve-ment efforts.

Administrators can:

Offer input about the policychanges being considered in the stateand district to improve teaching andlearning.

Involve teachers, parents, andcommunity members in establishinglocal priorities for improvement consis-tent with these policies.

sions based on candidates' ability toengage all students in their subjects andto keep growing professionally.

Collect and use student achieve-ment data to improve teaching andlearning in the school.

Parents or community memberscan:

Input from parents,community members,teachers, and adminis-trators will be necessaryto shape statewide re-form policies.55

Examine all school practices,including grouping, to see vil-...2ther theycontribute to success for all students.

Provide inservice opportunities incurriculum, instruction, technology,and assessment and make hiring deci-

III Help craft and implement state,community, and school action plansfor school improvement.

Commit resources to help allstudents, including those with specialneeds, meet the education goals.

Work with children to help themmaster challenging content anddevelop thinking and problem-solving skills.

Help motivate and guide youngpeople to be active, lifelong learners.

Change is never easy. As we rethinkthe structure of the education system,however, we v Il help schoolsbecome better able to meet the needs

of our children and communities.

Ifyou need help finding the best wayto use ERIC, call ACCESS ERIC at

l-800- LET -ERIC

ERIC Review

SYSTEMIC REFORM: THE

KENTUCKY EXAMPLE

Why Reform?

The Kentucky Education Reform Act(KERA) of 1990 provides lessons onenacting systemic reform forpolicymakers and educators in otherstates. The reform began with a con-sensus among leaders in 66 ruralschool districts that their districts hadbeen denied equal educational opportu-nities due to Kentucky's system offinancing public schools. The districtstogether filed a suit that challenged thestate's funding formula for placing toomuch emphasis on local resources.resulting in "inadequacies, inequities,and inequalities throughout the state."The Kentucky Supreme Court eventu-ally ruled the entire state system ofeducation to be unconstitutional.

In June 1989, Kentucky's GeneralAssembly began to restructure thestate's system of public schooling. TheGeneral Assembly formed a task forceon education reform that includedprominent legislators and representa-tives of the governor's office. The taskforce was further subdivided intocurriculum, governance, and financecommittees.

Nine months later, KERA was adoptedby the General Assembly. The legisla-tion called for massive changes in thecurriculum, governance, and financingof Kentucky's schools to instill a newphilosophy that all children can learnand that educators can prepare them tofunction well in society. KERA wasalso designed to rid the system of

political influences and achieve equityin funding among districts.

Provisions of the KentuckyEducation Reform Act

The reforms target a full spectrum ofeducational issues and concerns, ad-dressing adequate and equitable fund-ing, curriculum, professionaldevelopment, support for at-risk stu-dents, and governance. In keeping withthe top-down and bottom-up nature ofsystemic reform, KERA establishedgoals that encompass high levels ofachievement for all students, decentral-izing decision making, and treatingteachers as professionals. It assumesthat all students can achieve at highlevels, that schools should be account-able for student outcomes, and thatthere should be no curriculum man-dates. Rather, individual schools shoulddecide how students will reach specifiedoutcomes and demonstrate themthrough practical applications of skills.

Some of KERA's key implications forschool curriculum, governance. andfinancing are outlined below.

Curriculum:

Performance standards have beenestablished for all students.

Performance-based assessmentshave replaced the traditional testingprogram.

II An accountability system has beenestablished. Schools in which achieve-ment levels improve will receivefinancial rewards; schools that maintainor decline in performance will besubject to sanctions. (Before schoolsare sanctioned, however, they willreceive assistance from consultants andimprovement grants.)

The state has developed and fundedprograms to eliminate school failure,including preschool programs for at-risk 4-year-olds and handicapped S-and 4-year-olds, family resource cen-ters and youth services centers inschools in which 20 percent or more ofstudents are at risk, expanded technol-ogy in schools, nongraded primaryprograms, and extended educationalservices for students who need extratime to meet the mandated outcomes.

Teachers attend professional devel-opment sessions devoted to provisionsof KERA, and districts are required tojoin consortia to plan professionaldevelopment activities.

Governance:

An office of education accountabil-ity, attached to the legislature, monitorseducation reform.

Almost all schools will becomeself-governing by adopting school-based decision making. Each schoolwill have a council made up of oneadministrator, three teachers, and twoparents to set policy. The councilstructure is largely optional until 1996,

Vol. 3 Issue 2; Fall 19945

6

when it will become mandatory for allschools in each district. (Until thattime, only one school in each districtmust have a school council, althoughmany more have one already.)

Teachers will be certified by anEducation Professional StandardsBoard composed of a majority ofclassroom teachers, which establishescertification requirements, sets stan-dards for teacher preparation programs,and has the authority to issue andrevoke teaching certificates.

An alternative certificationprogram is available for prospectiveteachers skilled in a subject area butwithout a degree from a teachereducation program.

Regional service centers havebeen established to assist with theprofessional development of schooldistrict employees. KERA alsorequires principals and superinten-dents to successfully complete a newtraining and assessment process.

School Financing:

A "Support Education Excellencein Kentucky" (SEEK) formula hasbeen established to give each districta guaranteed amount of money perpupil, with extra funds available foreducating at-risk and exceptionalchildren and transporting students.

Local districts are expected tocontribute a fair share by taxing at aspecified minimum rate. They alsomay raise additional local funds, withmatching state funds provided insome situations.

until 1996. Another change will involveassessing students as juniors rather thanas seniors. To provide continuity inlocal leadership, members of school-based decision-making councils willhave the option of serving 2-year termsrather than 1-year terms. The law nowallows school councils to determinehon, to spend professional developmentfunds.

Appalachia Educational Laboratory(AEL) is studying the ways KERA has

Successful implementation of school-based decision making appears to beaided by a supportive principal, recog-nition of the council's authority bydistrict administrators and schoolboards, a sense of trust, public knowl-edge of and access to council meetings,and council training.

As the AEL researchers note:

State funding has been provided forall mandated programs in the areas ofcurriculum and governance.

KERA Implementation

Now that KERA has been in place for anumber of years, educators and legisla-tors are proposing changes. In early1994, Commissioner of EducationThomas C. Boysen proposed to changeKentucky's school reform law so thatschools with declining test scoreswould not be designated as "schools incrisis," and thus subject to sanctions,

ERIC Review

been implemented in four rural schooldistricts. In a recent article on school-based decision making, researchersnoted that only one of seven schoolcouncils studied practiced balanceddecision making, in which the princi-pal, three teachers, and two parentsparticipated as equals in discussionsand decisions. In three other councils,teachers and principals dominated thedecision making, with parents some-what on the periphery; in the threeremaining councils, the principal wasthe key decision maker and the othercouncil members performed an advi-sory function.

9

SBDM [school-based decisionmaking] is a complex reform thatrequires radical changes in partici-pants' roles and in their ways ofthinking about decision making. Itappears to us that SBDM has beenimplemented most successfully atthe four schools where participantsrecognize that radical change isrequired and are making an effortto bring about this change....

Even at schools where decisionmaking is shared, includingparents as equal partners has oftenbeen problematic. If parents are toparticipate fully in SBDM, educa-tors must learn to share theirexpertise, and parents must asserttheir right to the knowledge theyneed for full participation.

. .. the one factor that seems mostcritical in overcoming barriers toshared decision making is trainingfor everyone involved. Adminis-trators should not bear sole re-sponsibility for instituting aculture of shared decision makingand for knowing everything thereis to know about SBDM.

. . . parents, teachers, principals,superintendents, central officeadministrators, school boardmembers, and others need tounderstand their roles in changingtl,e decision-making culture. Thisawareness is not likely to occurthrough participation in one-shotworkshops but must be builtthrough ongoing, collegialeducation (Notes front the Field,December 1993).

Following Up on KERA

While the Kentucky legislature was acritical force behind the enactment andimplementation of the state's ambitiousreform, private citizens have alsoplayed important roles. The PrichardCommittee for Academic Excel-lence, a nonprofit volunteer groupthat includes former governors,business and community leaders, andparents, monitors and supportsKERA implementation. With fund-ing from corporations and founda-tions, the Prichard Committeeperforms the following functions:

I keeps the general public in-formed about KERA through reports,primers, and media work;

develops community committeesthat support and monitor local reformefforts and develop local leadership;

provides parents with trainingand information; and

evaluates and reports state progresson KERA.

KERA is not without opposition, but asSusan Fuhrman (1994) notes,Kentucky's success in establishingambitious education goals and coordi-nated policies stems from the reform'sappeal to broad constituencies, includ-ing business interests. Indeed, a groupof business and education leaders,known as the Partnership for Kentucky

1%.

!!)

School Reform, has made a 10-yearcommitment to support reform.

Writing for the National Governors'Association, Jane L. David (1993)notes five challenges facing Kentucky

.1f-tippractice of .

bred-.tucky=proves egtral toiteoroolsoi:.:. 9.0similar magnitude inother states troy be-come a certainty.

The events in Kentucky tell us some-thing about the force of educationreform nationally. Restructuring entirestate systemseven to the point ofdisestablishment and reestablishmentis possible. New funding mechanisms,

new systems of support for families,a new approach to early childhoodeducation, and new roles for both thestate and local education agencies areamong the precursors of a system ofaccountability that might makesense. if the practice of broad reformin Kentucky proves equal to itspromise, efforts of similar magnitudein other states may become acertainty.

.1111.16

now that KERA implementation is wellunder way. These include buildingcapacity for change among teachersand administrators; timing and se-quencing changes, since all changescannot be accomplished at once; avoid-ing the temptation to recreate bun. I-cratic ways of operating; maintainingbroad support; and using feedback tomake needed adjustments.

Sources

Coe, Pamelia, and Patricia Kannapel(1991). Systemic Reform in Six RuralDistricts: A Case Study of FirstReactions to the Kennicky EducationReform Act of 1990. Charleston, WV:Appalachia Educational Laboratory andERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Educationand Small Schools. ED 336 238.

David, Jane L. (1993). Redesigning anEducation System: Early Observations fromKentucky. Washington, DC: NationalGovernors' Association.

Fuhrman. Susan (1994). "Politics andSystemic Education Reform." CPRE PolicyBriefs. New Brunswick, NJ: Consortium forPolicy Research in Education, Rutgers, TheState University of New Jersey.

Notes from the Field: Education Reform inRural Kentucky (December t993). Vol. 3.No. 2. Charleston, WV: AppalachiaEducational Laboratory.

10 7Vol. 3 Issue 2, Fall 1994 MEI

8

I

FEDERAL INITIATIVES ToSUPPORT SYSTEMIC REFORM

Unlike some past reformsin which outposts ofexcellence were estab-

lished in a few schools, the GOALS2000: Educate America Act is intendedto stimulate and support reformthroughout each state's educationsystem. This new wave of educationreform is promising because for thefirst time it brings together the techni-cal knowledge needed for improvementwith a systemic education strategy.Through the GOALS 2000 initiative,state leadership teams will be encour-aged to:

Organize a statewide effort to helpeducators, parents, and citizens under-stand the need to make dramatic im-provements in student learning and toreach the National Education Goalsand to elicit their ideas and support tomake this happen.

Create and communicate an actionplan for the improved educationsystem.

P Align every element of state policyto support and reward achievement ofthe action plan.

Commit resources to assisting localeducators, parents, and business andcommunity leaders in moving fromoutstanding achievement in a fewclassrooms and schools to outstandingachievement in many more.

GOALS 2000 will offer participatingstates financial support to develop their

ERIC Review

own comprehensive, long-term plans toimprove all features of schooling.These improvement plans will includecontent and performance standards andvalid assessments aligned with thestandards. Over time, funds will bechanneled to school districts andschools to develop and pursue theirown comprehensive continuous im-provement plans. State and localeducation agencies will be encouragedto involve higher education to improveteacher training and professionaldevelopment.

The U.S. Department of Educationsupports standards-based reformthrough the development of modelstandards projects that include contentand performance standards and new,more effective approaches to assess theextent to which standards are met incore curriculum areas. The professionaland scholarly organizations shown infigure 1 are developing model stand-ards with input from educators, admin-istrators, parents, and communitymembers. Most of these standards willbe ready by 1995. Mathematics stand-ards, developed independently by theNational Council of Teachers of Math-ematics, and arts standards are alreadyavailable.

Model standards in various subjectswill provide benchmarks that state andlocal school districts can use for guid-ance as they develop their own stand-ards and curricula. State standards orcurriculum frameworks will guide theselection of classroom materials and

lessons and reflect local needs. Suchstandards will also establish guidelinesfor effective teacher preparation,professional development, and certifi-cation. OERI has given grants to 23states to develop standards and curricu-lum frameworks in various subjectareas.

The reauthorization of the Elementaryand Secondary Education Act (ESEA)offers additional support for helpingschools, particularly those that servedisadvantaged children, reach theNational Education Goals. ESEA, alsocalled the Improving America'sSchools Act, provides federal resourcesfor upgrading instruction, professionaldevelopment, and accountability andaligning these elements with highstandards. It includes technical assis-tance and technology support forschools serving many low-incomestudents and promotes compacts be-tween home and school to help eachchild reach high standards.

ESEA also encourages districts andschools to develop comprehensive,communitywide plans for preventingviolence and drug abuse and for coordi-nating with other community programsand agencies that provide health andsocial services. More Title I (formerlyChapter 1) funds will be concentratedon school districts where poverty is thehighest, rather than spread thinly acro.tslarger numbers of schools. Schools

11

(continued on page 10)

Figure 1. Model Standards Projects

Arts*Music Educators National ConferencePublications Sales1806 Robert Fulton DriveReston, VA 22091(703) 860-4000

To order National Standards for ArtsEducation: What Every Young Ameri-can Should Know and Be Able To Doin the Arts, request item number 1605.The cost is $15. Developed in coordi-nation with the American Alliance forTheatre and Education, the NationalArt Education Association, and theNational Dance Association.

Civics and Government*Center for Civic Education5146 Douglas Fir RoadCalabasas, CA 91302-1467(818) 591-9321

Foreign Languages*American Council on the Teaching

of Foreign Languages, Inc.6 Executive PlazaYonkers, NY 10701-6801(914) 963-8830

In collaboration with the AmericanAssociation of Teachers of French, theAmerican Association of Teachers ofGerman, and the American Associa-tion of Teachers of Spanish andPortuguese.

Geo,, aphy*National Council for

Geographic EducationGeography Standards Project1600 M Street NWWashington, DC 20036(202) 775-7832

In coordination with the Association ofAmerican Geographers, the NationalGeographic Society, and the AmericanGeographical Society.

History*National Center for History

in the SchoolsUniversity of California at

Los Angeles231 Moore Hall, 405 HilgardAvenueLos Angeles, CA 90024(310) 825-4'7)2

MathematicsThe National Council of Teachers

of MathematicsOrder Processing1906 Association DriveReston, VA 22091(703) 620-9840

To order Curriculum and Evalua-tion Standards for School Math-ematics, request item number398E1, ISBN 0-87353-273-2. Thecost is $25 (discounts for bulkorders).

Physical EducationNational Association for Sport

and Physical Education1900 Association DriveReston, VA 22091(703) 476-3461

Science*National Academy of SciencesNational Research Council2101 Constitution Avenue NWWashington, DC 20418(202) 334-1399

Social StudiesNational Task Force forSocial Studies Standards

National Council for theSocial Studies

3501 Newark Street NWWashington, DC 20016-3167(202) 966-7840

* Denotes projects that have received funding from the U.S. Department ofEducation's Office of Educational Research and Improvement. The Department alsomay sponsor model standards projects in economics and Englisn.

12

The NationalEducation Goals

By the year 2000:

All children in America willstart school ready to learn.

The high school graduationrate will increase to at least 90percent.

All students will leave grades4, 8, and 12 having demonstratedcompetency in challengingsubject matter including English,mathematics, science, foreignlanguages, civics and government,economics, arts, history, andgeography, and every school inAmerica will ensure that allstudents learn to use their mindswell, so they may be prepared forresponsible citizenship, furtherlearning, and productive employ-ment in our nation's moderneconomy.

U.S. students will be first inthe world in mathematics andscience achievement.

Every adult American will beliterate and will possess theknowledge and skills necessary tocompete in a global economy andexercise the rights and responsi-bilities of citizenship.

Every school in the UnitedStates will be free of drugs,violence, and the unauthorizedpresence of firearms and alcoholand will offer a disciplinedenvironment conducive tolearning.

The nation's teaching forcewill have access to programs forthe continued improvement oftheir professional skills and theopportunity to acquire the knowl-edge and skills needed to instructand prepare all American studentsfor the next century.

111 Every school will promotepartnerships that will increaseparental involvement and partici-pation in promoting the social,emotional, and academic growthof children.

BEST COPY AVAILABLEVol. 3 Issue 2, Fall 1994

9

(conitnued front page 8)

making good progress may be able toreceive financial incentives from stateTitle I funds. In addition, the Secretaryof Education will have the authority towaive federal regulations that stand inthe way of community reforms aimedat high standards and integrated ser-

vices. ESEA targets resources toschools and children that have thefurthest to go and the most to gainby reaching world-class levels ofachievement.

To further support the achievement ofevery child, the U.S. Department of

Education's Office of Special Educa-tion and Rehabilitative Services fundsresearch on instruction for childrenwith disabilities as well as regionalresource centers that provide consulta-tion, technical assistance, and train-ing to state education agencies asrequested.

10

WHAT GOALS 2000

MEANS FOR You

0 n March 31, 1994, thePresident signed theGOALS 2000: Educate

America Act, which represents a broadconsensus on how American educationmust change if we're to reach theNational Education Goals and moveevery child toward meeting highstandards.

High standards serve as the North Starfor reform under GOALS 2000. Butwhat is meant by "high standards"? Ifyoungsters are moving toward highstandards, they are learning whatthey'll need to know and be able to doto succeed in today's society. They areengaged in academically challengingactivities that may include reading anddiscussing important ideas from historyand literature; using mathematics andscientific knowledge to design complexexperiments; learning a second lan-guage; navigating the databases on theInternet to solve problems; and devel-oping the habits of writing, communi-cating, and thinking clearly.

GOALS 2000 offers each stateandover time, each school district andschool"seed money" for developingits own plan to reach the NationalEducation Goals and to help everychild reach high standards. Not everyschool and school district will receiveGOALS 2000 funding in the first year.But with or without initial funding,

ERIC Review

your community may want to use theGOALS 2000 framework for schoolimprovement.

A Framework for Your Plan

Based on years of research and reform,the GOALS 2000 framework can helpyour schools and community redesigneverything -- curriculum and assess-ment, instruction and professionaldevelopment, parent and communityinvolvement, technology, and manage-mentaround clear, high standards.This is no small undertaking; nor will ithappen overnight. But it's necessary ifthe various "pieces" of education are toadd up to more than the sum of theparts and if every child is to reach highlevels of learning.

Presented below are the 10 GOALS2000 elements, along with a few ques-tions community members and schoolstaff should consider about each.

Teaching and learning, standardsand assessments. What is being doneto raise expectations for every child?Are we improving the curriculum,instructional materials, professionaldevelopment, student assessment, useof technology, and more? Is the statedeveloping high standards in coresubjects, and are improvements inteaching and learning directed athelping all children reach these high

13

GOALS2000

A World-Class Educationfor Every Child

standards? Are we creating time forteachers to share ideas?

Opportunity-to-learn standards orstrategies, program improvementand accountability. Are all our stu-dents getting quality instruction? Do allour teachers participate in'qualityprofessional development? Are all ourschools safe, disciplined, and drugfree? How do we help low-performingschools?

Technology. How are our teachers andstudents using technologies? What'sthe plan for helping them use technolo-gies more powerfully? Does the planprovide for teacher training and techni-cal assistance? Does it include busi-nesses and other partners in thecommunity? Is it aimed to extend thepower of technology to all children? Isthe technology plan integral to, andintegrated with, a comprehensive planto move all children toward highacademic standards?

Governance, accountability, andmanagement of schools. Does eachschool have the authority and capacityto make its own decisions about staff-ing, budgets, and other issues? Doeseach school have strong leadership?Does each school district have a coher-ent system for attracting, recruiting,preparing, licensing, evaluating. re-warding, retaining, and supportingteachers, administrators, and otherschool staff? Is this system tied to highacademic standards? Are students,teachers, and schools provided withincentives to work hard and reach highlevels of performance? Are schoolsencouraged to seek waivers from rulesand regulations that stand in the way ofexcellence?

Parent and community support andinvolvement. Are steps being taken tohelp families so that all children enterschool ready to learn? Are we improv-ing communication between school andhome? Are we creating a "wholecommunity" partnership to improveteaching and learning? Are partnersthroughout the communitygrandpar-ents and senior citizens, employers andvolunteer groups, libraries and commu-nity colleges, churches, the media,social service and law enforcementagencies, and othersbeing enlisted?

Making improvements systemwide.Are we encouraging innovationandregularly making time for planning itin every school? Are opportunitiesbeing provided for all teachers andscnool staff to learn and continuouslyimprove instruction? Are there vehiclessuch as newsletters, computer net-works, and conferences that enableteachers and principals to share ideasand models?

Promoting grassroots efforts. Doesthe comprehensive plan respond to theneeds and experiences of parents,teachers, students, business leaders, andother community members? Havestrategies been developed to get broadinput on the comprehensive plan? Arediscretionary resources being providedfor teachers and schools?

Dropout strategies. What is beingdone to help all schools become placeswhere learning is meaningful, andwhere all students feel they belong?Are there outreach activities aimed atstudents who have left school, and arethese students invited to earn theirdiplomas through a range of educationoptions?

Creating a coordinated educationand training system. Does the com-prehensive plan include programs tohelp students make the transition fromschool to work? Are these programsdesigned to move participating studentstoward high academic standards as wellas prepare them for careers? Are theseprograms built around a multiyearsequence of learning at worksites andschool learning that is connected andcoordinated?

Milestones and timelines. Havemilestones and timelines been devel-oped for each element we intend toimprove? Does everyone know whatthose milestones are? Is there a systemfor reporting on performance in relationto those milestones and for using thatinformation to improve performance?

Getting Started

A plan for changing all these featureswon't just materialize. It will take a

Herculean effort by a group of commit-ted, influential individuals. This is therole of the GOALS 2000 planningpanel. Each community may want toinclude at least the following on itsleadership panel: teachers and otherschool staff; parents, including parentsof children with special nee,.1s; second-ary school students; school administra-tors; business representatives; earlychildhood educators; and renresenta-tives of community-based organiza-tions. The panel will want to get inputon the plan from the beginning to buildcommunitywide and schoolwide com-mitment to carrying it out. To developthat ownership, each community maywant to use neighborhood and commu-nity town meetings, speakers bureausand seminars, pu: lic surveys andnewspaper inserts, toll-free hotlines,and computer networks.

Transforming a whole school or anentire school district is one of the greatchallenges we face together in this finaldecade of the 20th century. To assistyour community, the U.S. Departmentof Education will provide you with theCommunity Update newsletter, satellitetown meetings, and publications suchas the handbook, GOALS 2000: AnInvitation to Your Community. TheDepartment is also developing severalonline services, including a library thatis accessible through the Internet. Forinformation and assistance, call theGOALS 2000 Information & ResourceCenter at 1-800USALEARN.

(This piece was adapted from materialavailable on the U.S. Department ofEducation's Gopher site on the Internet,gopher.ed.gov.)

For information and assistance, call theGOALS 2000 Information & Resource

Center at 1 800 USA LEARN.

14 Vol. 3 Issue 2. Fall 1994I1

ROADMAP TO

RESTRUCTURING

. .

thraughont this issue;iC iefbitkinkilY0 oa pi'

'hen104:;40Merend otibrdinitedecInCatkinhingeht!ny..atens oftelathinitiantlariMii,Statei; with

imitators edn*tint and citizens,develop entientiintiperfcinnance

. ,stentlards.farcoreCurricalum.ari404.1**10e.kieakichoolisifitkfimtibilityand ineeitives toirnproYnin dieseitre*Slatesnxatfr,oin dsa,-"patidoyen"by,establiahing policiea'and allOcat-ing asiotices; local ic** workfrOM thelbottoiniety.,plittaingand,bhpleittentirig impronements.thatiarnconsinentivith Stalepolicies -,:yet 'sensitive inlocal

in standatiLS,'Curricu=lam.framMvOtks-iiiii'Materhas;

16/40P.O.*() anti,#.1i150.0010s,,4*.to*,5401'

reform experts asand Jennifer- 1

Otay titiCianistent theCentral variables of school reatruc-taringdeseribed in foliihVingarticle. We linclude this excerptfaottia RoacimOgiviReitructuring toproyide tenetters, admhistrators,and cimmtnity members withgeneral insight into the implica-tions of systemic refenn on thelocal level.

12ERIC Review

by David T. Conley

What Is Restructuring?

Restructuring activities change funda-mental assumptions, practices, andrelationships, both within the organiza-tion and between the organization andthe outside world, in ways that lead toimproved and varied student learningoutcomes for essentially all students.The important elements of this defini-tion are the idea that fundamentalassumptions must be challenged forchange to occur and the emphasis onstudent learning as the key variablebeing addressed. Learning here refersto student learning outcomes as identi-fied and defined by the state, district, orschool site. The conception of learningcontained in the terms improved andvaried is different from that held todayby many students, teachers, administra-tors, parents. and policymakers. Itimplies not just brief memorization offactual material, but the ability toretain, synthesize. and apply conceptu-ally complex information in meaningfulways, particularly as such applicationdemonstrates understanding of chal-lenging content, intricate concepts andsystems, sophisticated learning strate-gies, real-world problems, and naturalphenomena. It also draws attention tothe needs of all students attendingschool, not just those students who arecurrently succeeding.

15IASI COPY AVAILABLE

School Restructuring andSystemic Reform

Change has often meant a "projectmentality," a steady stream of episodicinnovations. These programs havetended to come and go without leavingmuch of a mark on schools. Fundamen-tal change must involve all the maincomponents of the system simulta-neously and must focus on culturealong with structure, policy, and regu-lations. Schools need to avoid ad hocinnovations and focus on a thoughtfulcombination of coordinated, integratedshort-, mid-, and long-term strategies.

It is important to be aware of theimportant role that state government islikely to play in restructuring. Whilemuch of the literature on restructuringfocuses on the school site and theschool district, there is evidence thatfor restructuring to succeed. there mustbe consistent education policy that isinitiated and coordinated at the statelevel. Smith and O'Day (1991) arguethat "what is needed is neither a solelytop-down nor bottom-up approach toreform, but a coherent systemic strategythat can combine the energy and pro-fessional involvement of the second

(This article was excerpted fromRoadmap to Restructuring: Policies,Practices and the Emerging Visions ofSchooling (1993) by David T. Conley.Eugene, Oregon: ERIC Clearinghouseon Educational Management.)

wave of reforms with a new and chal-lenging state structure to generalize thereforms to all schools within the state."They envision a more proactive role forthe states in the process of restnictur-inga role that "can set the conditionsfor change to take place not just in asmall handful of schools or for a fewchildren, but in the great majority" (pp.234-235).

Smith and O'Day assert that statesoccupy both the logical and the appro-priate position to support school-levelchange:

... during the past 20 years, moststates have gradually amassedgreater authority and responsibil-ity over their educational systemsas their share of the educationalbudget has risen, as the economyand productivity of the state havebeen seen to be more and moredependent on its educationalsystem, and as issues of equityand fairness in the distribution ofresources and services amongdistricts became an importantpart of the nation's agenda.

... the states are in a uniqueposition to provide coherentleadership, resources, and supportto the reform efforts in theschools. States not only have theconstitutional responsibility foreducation of our youth, but theyare the only level of the systemthat can influence all parts of theK-12 system: the curriculum andcurriculum materials, teachertraining and licensure, assess-ment and accountability (pp.245-246).

In the changing relationship amongsome states, school districts, and schoolsites, the state establishes standards andencourages innovation and experimen-tation. It creates accountability for theachievement of standards but allowsschools considerable freedom to decidehow best to meet the standards. En-hanced accountability through report-ing of school-by-school performance islikely to cause schools to demandgreater flexibility so that they can adapttheir program to the unique needs oftheir constituency and achieve greatersuccess.

Central Variables ofRestructuring

Figure 1 presents a framework de-signed to make sense of the multitudeof activities that schools call restructurLing. Learner outcomes, curriculum,instruction, and assessment comprisethe central variables of this framework.Changes in these areas are at the heartof teaching, what Elmore (1990)describes as the "core technology" ofteaching. These dimensions includeeverything teachers do that relates tothe instructional process: what theyteach, how they teach it, and how it ismeasured and evaluated. These activi-ties are, after all, supposedly the raisond' etre of public education.

As might be expected, change at thislevel is the most difficult to achieve.Examination of early restructuringstrategies (Lewis, 1991; David andothers, 1990: Lewis, 1989) reveals thatthey rarely reach these central vari-ables. If it is possible to bring aboutchange in these areas, then it will be

possible to say that education really isexperiencing fundamental change.

When educators identify learneroutcomes, they are determining what itis that students should be able to do asa result of the education they receive.Outcomes are statements that delineatebehaviors, knowledge, and skills mostvalued in the learning process. Theyindicate the goals that students andteachers should pursue and provide areference point against which studentperformance can be measured. Out-comes can be stated in terms of theexisting curriculum, or they can bephrased in the broader, more integratedterms of attaining higher cognitivelevels. Outcomes suggest a new rela-tionship of teacher to learner andlearner to learning; it is not enoughsimply to offer learning experiences ifthe learner cannot demonstrate theability to apply the learning at somepoint in a meaningful way.

Changes in curriculum call into ques-tion what is worth knowing and how

Figure 1. Dimensions of Restructuring

[Supporting Variables

Governance Teacher Leadership

cEnabling Variables

Personnel Working Relationships

16 Vol. 3 Issue 2, Fall 199413

knowledge should best be organized.Much of the structure and content ofthe traditional curriculum is beingclosely reexamined, from the nationallevel to the state and local levels. Manynational subject-matter organizationsand state departments of education areissuing new curriculum guidelines.Teachers are becoming more involvedas curriculum developers. There aresubstantial changes occurring in thegeneral education and vocational tracksof high schools. Even the traditionalcore curriculum for the college-boundis being reassessed.

The variable instruction includes all thestrategies used to engage students inlearning and the assumptions educatorshave regarding the relationship of thechild to the learning experience. In-structional strategies are beginning toinclude the learner to a greater degree.Learners construct meaning from theexperiences presented to them; noteveryone learns the same thing fromthe same experience. There is a greateremphasis on developing the ability tothink, reason, and solve problems,rather than simply memorizing infor-mation. Moreover, the unique needs ofat-risk students are being considered toa greater degree as instruction isreconceptualized.

14

Assessment encompasses the strategiesby which teacher and learner determinethe results of the learning process. Thegoal of assessment is to ascertain thestudent's performance in relation tooutcomes and to enable learners to takemore control over their learning. Thetrend is toward holistic, integratedforms of assessment that serve theprimary purpose of improving studentperformance and the secondary purpose(if at all) of passing a judgment onstudents or ranking them relative to oneanother. Assessment may be linked tooutcomes, so that everyone knows whatis expected of students in any givenlearning setting. By almost any mea-sure, the range of methods and tech-niques for assessment is increasingtremendously beyond traditional paper-and-pencil tests.

The central values of learner outcomes,curriculum, instruction, and assessmentare highly interrelated. Teachers willnot be able to restructure curriculumwithout the existence of standards and

ERIC Review

quality assessment strategies. Oncestandards and assessment strategies areidentified and agreed upon, the changesthat need to be made in the structure ofthe school and the content and organi-zation of the curriculum and instruc-tional program may become muchclearer. To have any realistic opportu-nity to succeed, teachers will need tooperate in a system that challengesthem to enable all students to mastercomplex content and to apply theirknowledge to real problems and situa-tions as a dimension of mastery.

Enabling Variables ofRestructuring

The ability to bring about changes inthe central variables often requires, oris aided by, alterations of other prac-tices closely related to instruction.These variables, called the enablingvariables, are learning environment,technology, school-community rela-tions, and time. In many cases it ap-pears that schools are limiting theirfocus to these enabling variables andhoping that changes here will ulti-mately lead to changes in the centralvariables. The assumption seems to bethat if these structural dimensionswithin which learning occurs arealtered, it will cause the methods andcontent of teaching to change as aresult. While this may, in fact, occur attimes, there is no guarantee that alter-ations in the structure and organizationof the school automatically translateinto changed behavior within class-rooms by individual teachers.

The learning environment encompassesways in which the relationship betweenlearner and teacher is structured, suchas the number of years an elementaryteacher remains with a class of stu-dents, the grouping of students byability or otherwise, the use of schools-within-schools, or the extension oflearning beyond the four walls of theschool. Teachers do not play a passiverole in constructing the learning envi-ronment. They must make many deci-sions and take responsibility forcreating the structure and content thatallow students to engage in learningsuccessfully.

. Technology is considered as a separatedimension, since it can be used in any

17

number of ways, some of which sup-port restructured learning, others ofwhich do not. Technology can enablerestructuring to occur if it is used inways that empower learners and en-hance the quality and quantity ofstudent learning. Technology is definedbroadly to include many differentforms of information devices. Some ofthese devices, such as computers andvideo equipment, are commonly associ-ated with restructuring, but others, suchas the telephone, are often overlooked.

School-community relations includesthe role parents have as partners in theeducational process, as well as theways the broader community generallyand the business community specifi-cally can be involved in the educationof young people. This dimension alsoencompasses the newly emergingcollaborative relationships betweenschools and social service agencies.

The dimension time refers to alteringthe school schedule in some way, eitherin terms of the way time is allocatedwithin the school day or in terms of thelength of the school day or year. Avariety of options and models havebeen proposed.

A great deal of energy is being devotedto programs focused on these variables.Programs in these dimensions can havethe appearance of being significantchanges without engendering thepolitical opposition that changes in thecentral variables tend to arouse. Insecondary schools in particular, chang-ing the scheduling of time is especiallypopular, but it is not necessarily accoin-panied by the changes in classroomteaching that must occur for any newschedule to affect student learning.Elementary schools may favor theintroduction of a computer lab todemonstrate that they are keeping upwith the times. Closer examination mayreveal that the lab is staffed by an aideand that teachers drop off their classesat the lab; because the technology hasnot penetrated the classroom, it has nothad an impact on the central variables.

Supporting Variables ofRestructuring

Supporting variables address organiza-tional conditions of teaching and

schooling. These variables are thefurthest removed from classroom life intheir immediate impact and are, para-doxically, being touted by some re-formers as the prerequisites to anychange in classroom behaviors. Thesevariables include governance, teacherleadership, personnel structures, andworking relationships.

All initiatives to decentralize decisionmaking in schools fall under the cat-egory of governance, including site-based management, participatorymanagement, school-based decisionmaking, or any variations on thistheme. Issues of choice in education arealso included in this category, includingchoice within a school, choice amongschools in a district, and choice be-tween public and nonpublic educationoptions.

Teachers want to be involved in deci-sions that they perceive as contributingto their ability to do their jobs moreeffectively. When teachers can be madeto feel more in contril of dr.: conditionsof their work environment, their senseof personal efficacy is enhanced (Fullerand others, 1982; Lanier and Sedlak,1989; Rosenholtz, 1989). For mostteachers, this sense of personal efficacyis a critically important contributor tothe decisions they make and the behav-iors they demonstrate. If teachers donot feel they can educate studentssuccessfully, they act one way; if theyfeel they can influence. the conditionsaffecting success, they act another way.

The evolving sense of teacher profes-sionalism has led to a proliferation ofnew programs of teacher leadership.Some of the new roles being createdare familiar, such as the role of mentorteacher; others, such as site team leaderor teacher researcher, are less familiar.Many schools are experimenting withroles for teachers such as teacher-as-reflective-practitioner, in-building staffdeveloper, lead teacher, or team leader.

The way personnel are employed tostaff schools is another dimensionalong which restructuring may occur.The current personnel structure has twocategories: professional or certificatedstaff, such as administrators and teach-ers; and classified staff, such as instruc-tional assistants, secretaries, custodians,and food service workers. Given a

future that seems to indicate no majorincreases in funding for public educa-tion, it seems likely that public schoolswill need to consider reallocatingexisting resources as part of any at-tempt to restructure.

The dimension working relationshipsrefers primarily to working relation-ships among teachers, administrators,and boards of education. True educa-tion improvement is much more diffi-cultsome would say impossibleifteachers do not participate in and takeownership of its goals and processes.Teachers must be involved, theiropinions respected, their power ac-knowledged. Changes in contracts cansupport change in classrooms andschools, but rarely cause it.

Education, like many other aspects ofpostindustrial society, has become toocomplex to be conducted successfullyby isolated specialists. The future liesdown the road of mutual interdepen-dence, of teamwork among adults andchildren, of human capital develop-ment, of enhanced interpersonal skills,of inclusive leadership approaches andstyles, and of organizations that re-semble living organisms more thaninert structures.

Getting Started

A fundamental question to be askedbefore restructuring activities begin iswhether the school is ready to attemptsuch a challenging, arduous process.Many times a highly motivated leaderor group of leaders within a school haspushed strongly for the school torestructure, in spite of the wishes ofmost staff and community members.The backlash in these cases can be sostrong that it delays serious self-exami-nation of a school's assumptions andpractices for several years or more.Such a backlash can even eliminate theword and concept "restructuring" fromthe school's collective vocabulary.Discussing the prerequisites to restruc-turing allows the faculty and commu-nity to explore the implications and toestablish the ground rules beforebeginning the process itself.

The following statements arc derivedfrom research on the restructuringprocess specifically, and on change in

18

organizations generally. They aredesigned to be presented to a faculty asa whole for consideration and adoptionbefore any comprehensive program forschool restructuring is initiated.

1. We commit to using data to makedecisions.

2. We commit to creating and sustain-ing a culture of continued self-exami-nation, extensive and continualprofessional development, and experi-mentation.

3. We commit to identifying deficien-cies in the learning environment andaccepting the challenge to help alllearners succeed.

4. We commit to viewing children ashumane beings first, students second.

5. We commit to learning and em-ploying a broad range of instructionalmethods and formats.

6. We commit to discarding whatdoesn't work or is no longer relevant.

7. We commit to viewing parents andcommunity members as equal partnersin the education of children.

8. We commit to creating opportuni-ties for broad-based staff involvementin decision making clearly focused onchange.

9. We commit to establishing a sharedvision of education within the school.

10. We commit to helping adults whoare threatened or challenged bychanges occurring in the school. Inreturn, all adults in the school agree tobe supportive or constructively critical;no obstructionists are allowed oncedecisions have been made openly.

Figure 2 provides examples of ques-tions schools might ask, dimensionsthey should consider, and principlesthey might discuss as they begin tothink about their vision of restructuring.It suggests areas where data might becollected regarding current practice, orwhere research on best available prac-tice might be focused. Schools under-taking restructuring must be willing tocreate a sense of urgency for change,both among faculty and community.

Vol. 3 Issue 2, Fall 199415

16

Figure 2: Key Questions To Frame Restructuring Efforts

OutcomesAre learner outcomes specified? Do they form the basis for

assessment?Are outcomes consistent with the vision and goals of the

school?N Were outcomes developed with broad community involvementand with reference to the skills students need to succeed in thefuture?

Are the outcomes a combination of intellectual processes, skills,and content knowledge that provide a clear framework withinwhich assessment can occur?

Are outcomes cumulative throughout a child's educationkindergarten through graduation? Are there benchmarks thatsuggest the acceptable range of performance at various ages?

CurriculumIs the content of all courses accurate and up to date?Does the curriculum prepare learners for the future or the past?Are facts and concepts balanced so mat students integrate and

apply information?N Is the required course of study consistent with the school'svision?

Do students have a role in determining what they learn?Do different social/ethnic/economic groups learn substantially

different content?

InstructionAre students active participants in classroom activities and in

choosing how they learn?II Are individualized learner goals developed?

Is factual information used as a tool to enhance conceptdevelopment, rather than as an end in itself?

Is information integrated across disciplines using systemsconcepts?

Do real-world problems serve as a focus for instruction?Is instruction designed so that all students can succeed?Do members of different social/ethnic/economic groups work

together cooperatively to solve problems and apply knowledge?

AssessmentIs assessment an integral part of !earning?is assessment holistic and integrative?Does assessment include public demonstration?Are students invGived in setting personal assessment goals and

selecting assessment activities?Does assessment provide formative as well as summative data?Does assessment involve the application of information to

solve real-world problems?Are a wide variety of assessment strategies employed?

Learning EnvironmentIs the learner being placed at the center of the learning

environment?Is the learning environment perceived as extending beyond the

classroom? the school? the community?Are conceptions of grouping and organization being examined

to determine their purpose and worth?Are personal relationships being stressed in the organization of

the learning environment?Are curriculum, instruction, and assessment changes consistent

with the learning environment?

The development of a vision helpspeople to understand why change isoccurring and toward what ends.Community members should be in-volved in the process of vision build-ing, and the vision should becommunicated regularly to parents atmeetings, through publications, and inface-to-face interchanges.

Teachers, administrators, and commu-nity members may look for models byvisiting other schools and by investigat-ing some representative visions ofrestructuring (see Education ReformResource Organizations and ReadingLists starting on pages 18 and 22).

Restructured schools are likely todemand teachers with high skill levels,positive attitudes toward change, andthe ability to work collaboratively.

ERIC Review

Candidates hired for vacant positionsshould match the philosophy of theschool in which they are to work,understand and believe in the vision, becommitted to demonstrating bothpersonal growth and flexibility, andunderstand that they may be asked toadapt their skil's and roles frequentlythroughout their teaching career.

Almost no program of restructuringallots adequate amounts of time to theexamination of deeply held, unques-tioned beliefs; to the painstakingdevelopment of new teaching skills andmaterials; or to the creation of newnetworks and interaction patterns.Some districts and schools have at-tempted to create additional timethrough a variety of strategies,including:

19

lengthening the school day by 5 to10 minutes on 4 days to allow for earlyrelease of students on 1 day, which willgive teachers an additional 20 to 40minutes to plan;

starting school later in the day;

establishing block scheduling;

using summer vacation; and

providing classroom release timefor teachers involved in restructuring.

Ultimately restructuring comes down tothe behaviors of individual teachers andprincipals in particular educationsettings. The success of restructuringdepends on their willingness, alongwith the willingness of administrators,boards of education, state education

TechnologyIs technology used both to transmit factual information in a

structured manner and to empower learners to take control of theirlearning?

Are teachers mastering technology?Is technology viewed broadly to include applications in addi-

tion to computers?Are there provisions for software and training when hardware is

purchased?Are curriculum and instructional design changed in tandem

with technology acquisitions?

School-Community RelationsAre parents being included as partners in the establishment of

goals for the learner?Are parents provided with enough information to participate as

partners?III Are the needs of parents considered in the organization of theschool and in the expectations held for parents?II IN the broader community invited to participate in specificways?

Is the community involved in and informed about changes inthe school?

TimeIs time being adapted to learning needs rather than vice versa?Is time structured to respond to needs and realities of students'

and parents' lives?Are staff and curriculum development preceding and accompa-

nying changes in time?Are the boundaries of time being reconceptualized?

GovernanceIs decision making participatory?Are decisions made in relation to a vision?

Are existing decision-making structures modified and newstructures added as necessary?

Are changes in governance viewed as means to ends, not asends in themselves?

Teacher LeadershipAre new opportunities for teacher leadership being developed?Is training in leadership and group process provided when

teachers need it?Are leadership opportunities offered to a wide range of

teachers?

PersonnelIs there an emphasis on excellence in the teaching staff, with

no acceptance of mediocrity or tolerance of incompetence?tJ Do the teachers want to be where they are? Are they excitedabout teaching and do they truly care about young people?

Are people other than certified teachers becoming involved inteaching or in supporting the instructional process?

Is the current distribution and allocation of staff within theschool consistent with the school vision and mission?

Working RelationshipsAre there efforts to include the professional association as a

partner in change?Is there exploration at the district level of alternative forms of

bargaining?Is there agreement to leave much of the restructuring program

out of the negotiated agreement, subject to specified guidelines?RI Are there good-faith efforts to redefine the role of the profes-sional association in a positive way?I Are a variety of strategies being implemented to create col-laborative working relationships throughout theorganization'?

agencies, legislatures. the federalgovernment, and especially communitymembers, parents, and students, toaccept chang... in the "deep structure"of schooling and in the goals of publiceducation. There are many ways to get"there" from "here."

ReferencesDavid, Jane L. and others (1990). StateActions To Restructure Schools: First Steps.Results in Education Series. Washington.DC: National Governors' Association. ED320 221.

Elmore, Richard F. and associates (1990).Restructuring Schools: The NextGeneration of Educational Reform. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.

Fullan, Michael G., and Matthew B. Miles(June 1992). "Getting Reform Right: What

Works and What Doesn't." Phi DeltaKappan, 73 (10): 744-752.

Fuller. Bruce, Ken Wood, Tamar Rapoport.and Sanford Dornbusch (Spring 1982)."The Organizational Context of IndividualEfficacy." Review of Educational Research,52 (1): 7-30.

Lanier, Judith, and Michael Sedlak (1989)."Teacher Efficacy and Quality Schooling."In Schooling for Tomorrow: DirectingReform to Issues That Count, edited byThomas F,rgiovanni and John Moore.Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Lewis. Anne C. (1991). Gaining Ground:The Highs and Lows of Urban MiddleSchool Wpm:. 1989-91. New York: EdnaMcConnell Clark Foundation. ED 341 742.

Lewis, Anne C. (1989). RestructuringAmerica's Schools. Arlington, VA:American Association of SchoolAdministrators. ED 314 820.

20

Rosenholtz. Susan J. (March 1989)."Workplace Conditions That AffectTeacher Quality and Commitment: Impli-cations for Teacher Induction Programs."The Elementary School Journal. 89 (4):421-439.

Smith, Marshall S., and Jennifer A. O'Day(1991). "Systemic School Reform." In The

Politics of Curriculum and Testing: The1990 Yearbook of the Politics of EducationAssociation, edited by Susan H. Fuhrmanand Betty Malen. Philadelphia: FalmerPress.

Vol. 3 Issue 2. Fall 199417

18

Education Reform Resource Organizations List

Systemic reform is a broad concept thatrefers to policy coordination at the statelevel in areas such as standards, cur-riculum, assessment, and teachereducation, which will in turn supportand encourage school-level change.This resource list is divided into twosections. Groups in the first sectionaddress education reform policy issues,including coordination; groups in thesecond section emphasize restructuringat the local level.

I. Systemwide Policy Issues

Annenberg Institute forSchool Reform

Brown UniversityBox 1969Providence, RI 02912(401) 863-7990

Directed by Theodore Sizer, chair ofthe Coalition of Essential Schools, thisnew institute will promote the idea thatall students should be expected toperform up to rigorous academicstandards. It will issue an annualprogress report on school reform andprovide seminars, telecommunicationsproducts, and publications. The insti-tute will form alliances with educatorsand kindred reform organizations. Itwill also track the progress of variousreform initiatives and develop critiques,designs, and examples to acceleratethese initiatives.

Center for Education Reform

1001 Connecticut Avenue NWSuite 920Washington, DC 20036(202) 822-9000

This clearinghouse provides informa-tion on school choice, accountability,and general education reform. It main-tains a database; publishes summarypapers on school choice, charterschools, standards, and testing; andsupports coalition-building efforts forschool choice on the state and districtlevels.

ERIC Review

Center for Leadership in SchoolReform (CLSR)

950 Breckenridge Lane, Suite 200Louisville, KY 40207(502) 895-1942

This nonprofit center, founded in 1988by Phillip Schlechty, works to supportsystemic restructuring by developingpartnerships with school districts toassist them in developing their capacityto support and sustain building-levelchange. CLSR advocates creatingconditions in which schools are orga-nized around students and the workthey are expected to do, and, in addi-tion, communities are organized toguarantee each child the supportneeded to be successful in school andin the community.

Center for Systemic SchoolReform (CSSR)

San Francisco State University221 Burk Hall, 1600 Holloway AvenueSan Francisco, CA 94132(415) 338-3059

This new organization, directed by BillHonig, former state superintendent ofCalifornia, will provide a link betweenpublic schools, state reform efforts, andreform networks focused on studentperformance and comprehensive, long-term changes in areas such as instruc-tion, organization, assessment,accountability, team building, staffdevelopment, parent involvementmethodologies, and the treatment of at-risk youngsters. CSSR has set threeinitial goals: (1) to identify and developtechniques to assist large numbers ofschools in changing their instructionalprograms to meet new content andperformance standards; (2) to train acore group of professionals to helppublic schools become world class; and(3) to refine the technology of assis-tance by providing full-service techni-cal support to 250 public schoolscommitted to becoming self-sustained,world-class institutions. CSSR willconduct research, hold conferences andseminars, interact with school reformleaders, and develop a resource centeron successful reform programs andmodel curricula. Educators and admin-istrators who would like to contribute

21

papers, model curricula, or otherinformation they have gained in theirschool reform efforts should sendmaterial to CSSR.

Center on Organization andRestructuring of Schools

University of Wisconsin1025 West Johnson StreetMadison, WI 53706(608) 263-7575

The Center on Organization and Re-structuring of Schools, a researchcenter funded by the U.S. Departmentof Education's Office of EducationalResearch and Improvement, studieshow the organizational features ofschools can be changed to increase theintellectual and social competence ofstudents. The center's research andanalysis is focused on restructuring infour areas: the experiences of studentsin school; the professional life ofteachers; the governance, management,and leadership of schools; and thecoordination of community resources tobetter serve educationally disadvan-taged students. To be placed on thecenter's mailing list, contact KarenPrager, Dissemination Coordinator.

Consortium for Policy Researchin Education (CPRE)

Carriage House at the EagletonInstitute of Politics

Rutgers University86 Clifton AvenueNew Brunswick, NJ 08901-1568(908) 932-1331

CPRE, a research center funded by theU.S. Department of Education's Officeof Educational Research and Improve-ment, unites researchers from Rutgers.Harvard, Stanford, the University ofMichigan, and the University of Wis-consin at Madison to improve studentlearning through research on educationpolicy and finance. CPRE examinesstate and local policies that promotehigh levels of learning for studentsfrom diverse social and economicbackgrounds and that lead to greatercoherence between state and localactions.

Education Reform Resource Organizations List

Council of Chief State SchoolOfficers (CCSSO)

One Massachusetts Avenue NWSuite 700Washington, DC 20001-1431(202) 408-5505

The council sponsors the State Leader-ship Project, in which information onwhat the states are doing to pursuecomprehensive changes in areas suchas student learning, assessment, teachertraining, finance, and governance iscompiled and exchanged. CCSSO isalso helping states reorganize theireducation departments in preparationfor developing and implementingsystemic reform plans under theGOALS 2000: Educate ^ r ; Nct.

Education Commission ofthe States (ECS)

707 17th Street, Suite 27(X)Denver, CO 80202-3427(303) 299-3600

ECS is a nationwide interstate compactformed in 1965 to help governors, statelegislators, state education officials,and others develop policies to improveeducation at all levels. ECS conductspolicy research, maintains an informa-tion clearinghouse, organizes forums,and provides technical assistance toleaders in 53 member states and territo-ries. It supports systemic reform, whichECS defines as "the alignment ofpolicy, practice, and people's roles andresponsibilities within the educationsystem and other interrelated systemsto achieve a new vision of teaching andlearning for all children."

ERIC Clearinghouse onEducational Management

University of Oregon1787 Agate StreetEugene. OR 97403-5207(800) 438-8841

This clearinghouse. one of 16 spon-sored by the U.S. Department ofEducation's ERIC program, abstractsand indexes journal articles and docu-

merits covering the leadership, manage-ment, and structure of public andprivate education organizations: schooladministrators and administration:organizational change: and educationfacilities management. The clearing-house also prepares research syntheses,bibliographies, literature reviews,monographs, and books in these subjectareas and maintains a listsery on theInternet for K-12 administrators.

Institute for EducationalLeadership (IEL)

1001 Connecticut Avenue NWSuite 310Washington, DC 20036(202) 822-8405

IEL is a nonprofit corporation thatpromotes the free exchange of ideas oncomplex issues in order to assist educa-tion professionals in making informeddecisions and policies. It conductsimpartial forums to link and informeducation policymakers and operatesprograms to develop education leader-ship. IEL also offers access to policyanalysis and expertise on criticaleducation issues.

National Alliance forRestructuring Education

700 Eleventh Street NWSuite 750Washington, DC 20005(202) 783-3668

This project of the National Center forEducation and the Economy supportspartnerships involving states, schooldistricts, foundations, corporations, andnonprofit organizations committed tosystemic change to improve learningfor all children. The alliance providesfunding, training, and technical assis-tance in five areas: standards andassessment, learning environments.community services and support, high-performance management, and publicengagement.

22

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

National Center on EducationalOutcomes for Students WithDisabilities

University of Minnesota350 Elliott Ilan75 East River RoadMinneapolis, MN 55455(612) 626-1530

This research center sponsored by theU.S. Department of Education's Officeof Special Education and RehabilitativeServices collects and evaluates infor-mation on how state assessments andnational standards affect students withdisabilities and studies how alternativetesting accommodations and adapta-tions can be made for these students.The center also works to build consen-sus among state directors, educators,and parents on what education out-comes are of importance to all students.

National Conference of StateLegislatures (NCSL)

1560 Broadway, Suite 700Denver, CO 80202(303) 830-2200

This organization for state legislatorsand legislative staff provides research.training, development, and publicationson a variety of policy areas, includingeducation. NCSL helps policymakerskeep up with education program devel-opments in other states through meet-ings and publications such asReinventing Education ($15), a newtitle in the Investing in People series.

National Education Goals Panel

1850 M Street NW, Suite 270Washington, DC 20036(202) 632-0952

The National Education Goals Panel,a bipartisan group of state governors,members of Congress, and administra-tion officials, was created in 1990 andcodified in the GOALS 2000: EducateAmerica Act to build public support forthe goals and to monitor the nation'sprogress. The National EducationGoals Panel will also review voluntarystandards submitted to the National

Vol. 3 Issue 2, Fall 1994

Education Reform Resource Organizations List

Education Standards and ImprovementCouncil. The panel prepares annualreports that summarize state and na-tional statistical data related to each ofthe goals.

National Governors'Association (NGA)

444 North Capitol Street, Suite 267Washington, DC 20001-1512(202) 624-5320

20

NGA operates a Restructuring SchoolsProject to help states redesign theirschool systems by rethinking the role ofteachers and administrators, changingaccountability systems, and sponsoringor encouraging innovation. NGA'sEducation Policy Studies staff workclosely with other education. political,and business groups, as wellpolicymakers, in every state to studyeducation reform. NGA offers publica-tions, conferences, and technicalassistance to help states implementeducation reforms.

National ScienceFoundeth-,r (NSF)

Office of Systemic Reform4201 Wilson BoulevardArlington, VA 22230(703) 306-1690

NSF sponsors the State SystemicInitiatives program, which promoteshigher achievement in science, math-ematics, engineering, and technologyeducation through changes in the stateeducation system in areas such ascurricula, materials, technology, assess-ment, teacher preparation, and decisionmaking. NSF also funds urban andrural systemic initiatives to coordinateefforts to improve science and math-ematics education in elementary andsecondary schools. The urban programfocuses on K-12 education in the 25American cities with the highest con-centrations of low-income children; itprovides assistance for changingpolicies, practices, and procedures overa 5-year period. The rural systemicinitiatives program funds regionalprojects to remove barriers to systemicand sustainable improvements in

ERIC Review

science, mathematics, and technologyeducation in low-income, rural areas.

New Standards Project

700 11th Street NW. Suite 750Washington, DC 20001(202) 783-3668

The New Standards Project is a jointprogram of the National Center onEducation and the Economy in Roches-ter, New York, and the LearningResearch and Development Center atthe University of Pittsburgh. A groupof states and local school districts thatwere designing and administeringperformance-based assessments havebecome partners in this effort to pro-duce performance- and portfolio-basedassessments linked with high nationalstandards. The partners include thestates of Arkansas, California, Colo-rado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida,Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Massachusetts,Missouri, New York, Oregon, Pennsyl-vania, South Carolina, Texas, Vermont,Virginia, and Washington and theschool districts in Fort Worth, NewYork City, Pittsburgh, Rochester, SanDiego, and White Plains.

Re:Learning

Education Commission of the States707 17th Street, Suite 2700Denver, CO 80202-3427(303) 299-3600

This partnership between the EducationCommission of the States and theCoalition for Essential Schools isdesigned to improve student learningby redesigning states' education sys-tems "from the schoolhouse to thestatehouse." Re:Learning does notpromote a specific model; instead, itprovioes a set of principles and pro-cesses for considering school and statereform. Participating schools agree toadopt the nine "Common Principl.!s"developed by the Coalition of EssentialSchools, while district and state leaderswork on changes in administration,governance, and policy in orderto stimulate and support schoolinnovation.

II. School RestructuringNetworks

Accelerated Schools Project

Stanford UniversityCERAS BuildingStanford, CA 94305-3084(415) 725-1676

This project, deveioped by Henry Levinand colleagues at the Center for Educa-tion Research at Stanford, emphasizesthe improvement of the academicperformance of disadvantaged studentsby acceleration rather than remediation.It proposes to eliminate achievementgaps by changing curriculum, instruc-tion, and school organization. TheAccelerated Schools Project waspiloted in elementary schools in Cali-fornia in 1986 and is now in operationin California, Connecticut, Illinois,Missouri, and other states.

Coalition of Essential Schools

Brown UniversityBox 1969Providence, RI 02912(401) 863-3384

Founded by Theodore Sizer in 1984,the Coalition of Essential Schoolssupports secondary schools, districts,and states in their efforts to focus onschools' primary purpose: to improvestudent learning. The coalition askspractitioners to work from a set ofideasthe nine "Common Prin-ciples"to restructure their ownschools based on the particular needs oftheir community. It publishes a news-letter, Horace, that covers activitiesunder way at coalition schools.

League of Schools Reaching Out

Boston University605 Commonwealth AvenueBoston, MA 02215(617) 353-3309

23

The League of Schools Reaching Out isa project of the Institute f yr ResponsiveEducation, a nonprofit public-interestorganization that promotes parent and

Education Reform Resource Organizations List711111111

citizen involvement in education with aspecial emphasis on equity issues. It isan international network of approxi-mately 90 schools with partnershipsinvolving families and communities.IRE provides some schools with facili-tators to help coordinate three keyproject components: a parent center,parent outreach workers, and teacherresearcher teams.

National Center for RestructuringEducation, Schools, andTeaching_

Teachers College, Columbia UniversityBox 110New York, NY 10027(212) 678-3434

Thi, membership organization isintended to connect individuals andorganizations working to build learner-centered schools. It offers publications.conferences, workshops, and technicalassistance. Linda Darling-Hammondand Ann Lieberman are the codirectors.Write or call for membership informa-tion and a publications list.

National Diffusion Network (NDN)

U.S. Department of Education555 New Jersey Avenue NWWashington, DC 20208-5645(202) 219-2134

Supported by the U.S. Department ofEducation's Office of EducationalResearch and Improvement, the Na-tional Diffusion Network helps informeducators about highly effective educa-tion programs from other schools anddistricts. These programs are validated,or examined for proof of effectiveness,by a Program Effectiveness Panel.Program information is compiled inannual editions of a catalog calledEducational Programs That Work.Facilitators are available in every state,the District of Columbia, and the U.S.territories to help local school districtsidentify programs that meet their needsand obtain the assistance needed toimplement these programs successfully.Developers of successful programs areavailable to train teachers in the adopt-ing schools.

National Network for EducationalRenewal

University of WashingtonCollege of Education313 Miller Hall, Mailstop DQ12Seattle, WA 98195(206) 543-6162

This network is composed of school-university partnerships committed tothe simultaneous renewal of schoolingand the education of educators. JohnGood lad's Center for EducationalRenewal serves as the hub of thenetwork. Approximately 25 collegesand universities, 100 school districts,and 250 partner schools in 14 states arelinked to the National Network forEducational Renewal. The networkemphasizes forming partnerships,strengthening liberal arts and profes-sional curricula, and developing asystem of rewards and incentives forfaculty members.

New American Schools Develop-ment Corporation (NASDC)

1000 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 2710Arlington, VA 22209(703) 908-9500

NASDC, a private, bipartisan, non-profit organization headed by DavidKearns, former Deputy Secretary ofEducation, was founded in 1991 bycorporate and foundation leaders tosupport the design and creation ofoutstanding public schools. NASDCselected 11 design and developmentteams from a pool of nearly 700 pro-posals and now supports 9 teams in theimplementation of their designs. Teamsinclude ATLAS Communities, AudreyCohen College, Community LearningCenters, Co-NECT Schools, Expedi-tionary Leaming/Outward Bound, LosAngeles Learning Centers, Modern RedSchoolhouse, National Alliance forRestructuring Education, and Roots andWings. The teams currently work with140 schools in 19 states. Followingrefinement of their designs, they willaid other interested communities inadapting and implementing theirprototypes for school reform. ContactNASDC for a brochure on the designteams.

24

School Development Program

Yale Child Study Center230 South Frontage Road,P.O. Box 3333New Haven, CT 06510

This program, founded it 1968 byJames Comer, is designed to improvethe academic performance and schoolsuccess of low-income minority stu-dents by building supportive bondsamong children, parents, and schoolstaff, and, thereby, promote a positiveschool climate. The Corner processemphasizes a no-fault atmosphere,collaborative working relationships,and decision making by consensus.Each school in this program establishesthe following teams: a school planningand management team that includesparents, teachers, administrators, andsupport staff; a mental health team thataddresses children's developmentalneeds; and a parent's group thatstrengthens the bond between homeand school.

Success for All

Center for Social Organizationof Schools

The Johns Hopkins University3505 North Charles StreetBaltimore, MD 21218(410) 516-0370

This program of the Center for Re-search on Effective Schooling forDisadvantaged Students emphasizes therestructuring of elementary schools andthe reconfiguring of the uses of Chapter1 and special education funds to em-phasize prevention and early interven-tion rather than remediation. Under thedirection Robert Slavin, Success forAll has expaided beyond Baltimore toabout 85 sch cols in 19 states. Its princi-pal features include reading tutors,direct instruction, and flexible groupingin reading, frequent assessment, en-riched preschool and kindergartenprograms, and family support teams.

Vol. 3 Issue 2, Fall 1994

22

EDUCATION REFORMREADING LIST

The following titles cover a range of issues related to education reform,particularly at the systemwide level. Ordering information is included at theend of each entry. In addition, publications with an ED number have beenabstracted and are included in the ERIC database. You may read them onmicrofiche at more than 3,000 locations worldwide or order microfiche orpaper copies from the ERIC Document Reproduction Service at 1- 800 -443ERIC (3742). For details, contact ACCESS ERIC at 1-800 LET ERIC(538-3742).

"The Best Path to Systemic Educational Policy:Standard/Centralized or Differentiated/Decentralized?"William H. Clune, Fall 1993

This article in Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis(Volume 15, Number 3, pp. 233-254) provides an alterna-tive view of a centralized strategy of mandatory curriculumframeworks, high-stakes student assessments, and coordi-nated teacher training. The author proposes instead a"practical, change-oriented system built from the bottomup" involving local choice of curricula consistent with thevarious curriculum networks, as well as capacity buildingthrough technical assistance and professional development.Check your library or order a reprint from UniversityMicrofilms International, 300 North Zeeb Road, AnnArbor, MI 48106-1346; 1-800-521-0600, extension 2786.

"Beyond Common Sense in Educational Restructuring:The Issues of Content and Linkage"Fred M. Newmann, March 1993

This article in Educational Researcher (Volume 22,Number 2, pp. 4-13, 22) describes an agenda of content forteacher commitment and competence, based on suchfactors as depth of understanding, success for all students,new teacher roles, and the concept of schools as moralcommunities. Problems related to organizational change,standards, local empowerment, funding, and social capitalare addressed. Check your library or order a reprint fromUniversity Microfilms International, 300 North Zeeb Road,Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346; 1-800-521-0600, extension2786.

Bringing Coherence to State Policy: Restructuring theEducation SystemEducation Commission of the States, 1992; ED 350 675

This report (SI-92-4) suggests that the key to majorimprovement of the education system lies in redefining the

policy area that should drive reform in a given state andlinking other policy areas to that effort. It outlines andgives examples of state progress in the areas of standardsand curriculum, assessment and accountability, gover-nance, professional development, higher education, fi-nance, cross-agency collaboration, and diversity/choiceoptions. $4 plus $2.50 postage and handling; discount forbulk quantities. Education Commission of the States, 70717th Street, Suite 2700, Denver, CO 80202-3427; (303)299-3600.

Designing Coherent Education Policy: Improvingthe SystemSusan H. Fuhmian, editor, 1993; ED 359 626

This 310-page hook provides an indepth look at systemicschool reform and offers ideas on how educators at thedistrict, state, and federal levels can coordinate the variouselements of policy infrastructure around a new set ofambitious, common goals for student achievement. $32.95.Jossey-Bass Publishers, 350 Sansome Street, San Fran-cisco, CA 94104; (415) 433-1767,

Educational Programs That WorkNational Diffusion Nowork, 1993

This annual catalog describes nearly 200 exemplary educa-tion programs on the elementary, secondary. and highereducation levels. These programs have been validated by aProgram Effectiveness Panel affiliated with the U.S.Department of Education's National Diffusion Network(NDN). Validation is based on convincing evidence thatthe program,: caused academic gains superior to those fromstandard school procedures. Each edition includes contactinformation for state NDN facilitators. $1 1.95 plus $3shipping and handling for first copy; add $1 for eachadditional copy. Sopris West Incorporated, 1140 BostonAvenue, Longmont, CO 80501; (303) 651-2829.

(continued)

ERIC Review25

From Risk To RenewalEditors of Education Week, 1993

This 300-page paperback addresses the major questionsthat confront U.S. educators and policymakers in the areasof school reorganization, student standards, accountability,teacher development, school finance, and educationchange. $12.95 per copy; discount for bulk quantities.Editorial Projects in Education, Inc., 4301 ConnecticutAvenue NW, Suite 432, Washington, DC 20008; (202)686-0800.

The Governance of CurriculumRichard F. Elmore and Susan H. Fuhrman, editors, 1994

In this yearbook, 11 scholars address federal, state, anddistrict roles in the development and implementation ofstandards and curriculum. The three-part book coversnational and state policy development, state curriculumreforms, and district and school roles in reform. $19.95plus $2.50 postage and handling. Association for Supervi-sion and Curriculum Development, 1250 North Pitt Street,Alexandria, VA 22314-1403; (703) 549-9110.

Introduction to Systemic Education Reform:Restructuring the Education SystemEducation Commission of the States, 1992; ED 350 677

This bulletin (SI-92-1) describes the coherent policyenvironment necessary for comprehensive educationreform to occur and suggests policies for states to supportin the areas of new academic standards, curriculum andassessment alignment, professional development, account-ability, and interagency cooperation. $3 plus $2.50 postageand handling; quantity discounts. Education Commissionof the States, 707 17th Street, Suite 2700, Denver, CO80202-3427: (303) 299-3600.

Issues and Strategies in Systemic ReformSusan H. Fuhrman and Diane Massell, 1992; ED 356 528

This paper highlights issues and strategies associated withsystemic reform, which pairs ambitious, coordinated statepolicies with professional discretion at the school site. Itcovers such topics as building political support for sys-temic reform, involving the public and school personnel inreform, and examining the equity implications and financ-ing of systemic reform strategies. $10. Consortium forPolicy Research in Education, Carriage House at theEagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers University, 86Clifton Avenue, New Brunswick, NJ 08901-1568; (908)932-1331.

Overcoming Barriers to Educational Restructuring: ACall for System. LiteracyGrady McGonagill, 1993; ED 357 512

This paper (Stock No. 21-00397) promotes "systemliteracy," or a deep understanding of how organizationsfunction, as a useful approach to creating support strategiesfor restructuring. Without system literacy, systemic reformmay lack a sense of urgency in school systems, in additionto lacking a strong partnership of support, a strategicdirection, and innovative methods. $2.50 plus $3.50 ship-ping and handling; bulk rates available. American Associa-tion of School Administrators, 1801 North Moore Street,Arlington, VA 22209; (703) 875-0730.

Putting the Pieces Together: Systemic School ReformConsortium for Policy Research in Education, 1991; ED343 215

This policy brief summarizes Marshall S. Smith's andJennifer O'Day's analytic essay, "Systemic School Re-form," which discusses research on the effectiveness ofcurrent education policies and policy system developmentin a number of states. The essay proposes a strategy forsystemic reform that would combine both top-down andbottom-up approaches and feature a unifying vision andgoals, coherent instructional guidance, and restructuredgovernance. Free. Consortium for Policy Research inEducation, Carriage House at the Eagleton Institute ofPolitics, Rutgers University, 86 Clifton Avenue, NewBrunswick, NJ 08901-1568; (908) 932-1331.

Reinventing Our SchoolsPhi Delta Kappa and the Association for InstructionalTechnology, 1993

This staff development videotape provides six 30-minuteinterviews with education reform leaders, including JamesCotner, M.D., professor of child psychiatry at the YaleChild Study Center; Linda Darling-Hammond, professor atthe Columbia University Teachers College and codirectorof the National Center for Restructuring Education,Schools, and Teaching; Howard Gardner, director ofProject Zero at the Harvard Graduate School of Education;Ann Lieberman, professor at the Columbia UniversityTeachers College, and codirector of the National Center forRestructuring Education, Schools, and Teaching; PhillipSchlechty, president of the Center for Leadership in SchoolReform; and Ted Sizer, chairman of the Brown UniversityDepartment of Education and founder of the Coalition ofEssential Schools. $495 plus $10 processing. Center forProfessional Development, Phi Delta Kappa, P.O. Box789, Bloomington, IN 47402-0789; 1-800-766-1156.

(continued)

26 BEST COPY AVAILABLE

Vol. 3 Issue 2, Fall 199423

2.'

EDUCATION REFORM READING LIST (continued)

Roadmap to RestructuringDavid T. Conley, 1993; ED 359 593

This 432-page handbook provides a synthesis of researchand practical knowledge on change and transformation inschools: It covers the historical background of and reasonsfor education restructuring; the roles of federal and stategovernments, school districts, parents, and the community;12 dimensions of restructuring, ranging from curriculumand learner outcomes to personnel issues and schoolgovernance; and the process of restructuring. $19.95. ERICClearinghouse on Educational Management, University ofOregon, 1787 Agate Street, Eugene, OR 97403-5207; 1-800- 438 -8841.

School Change Models and Processes: A Review andSynthesis of Research and PracticeMarshall Sashkin and John Egermeier, 1993; ED 351 757

This booklet describes three dominant perspectives oneducation change: the rational-scientific perspective thatposits that change is created by disseminating innovativetechniques; the political or "top-down" perspective inwhich change is generated from legislation and otherexternal directives; and the cultural or "bottom-up" per-spective that creates change by encouraging value changeswithin organizations. It investigates strategies used forschool change, including fixing the parts (curricula, teach-ing methods), fixing the people, fixing the schools, andfixing the system. Single copies free. Education Informa-tion Branch, Office of Educational Research and Improve-ment, 555 New Jersey Avenue NW, Washington, DC20208-5720; 1-800-424-1616.

Schools of Thought: How the Politics of Literacy ShapeThinking in the ClassroomRexford G. Brown, 1991; ED 331 151

This book is focused on the new, higher literacy, whichgoes beyond the requirements of a high school diplomaand includes capacities once demanded only of a college-bound elite. Chapters discuss a "literacy of thoughtfulness"in relation to education in rural America and the South, onan Indian reservation, in an urban school district, and atstate and district policy levels. $24.95. Jossey-Bass Pub-lishers, 350 Sansome Street, San Francisco, CA 94104;(415) 433-1767.

Standard Setting As Educational Reform: Trends andIssues Paper No. 8Gary Sykes and Peter Plastrik, 1993; ED 358 068

This paper examines the role of standard setting in threemodels of education reformthe systemic reform model,the professional model, and the reform network model. Itwas prepared to stimulate discussion within the NationalCouncil for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE)community, states, and other reform agencies. $17.50.ERIC Clearinghouse on Teaching and Teacher Education,One Dupont Circle NW, Suite 610, Washington, DC20036-1186; 1-800-822-9229.

The State's Role in Effecting Systemic Change:Northwest DepictionRex W. Hagans and others, 1992; ED 354 631

This program report describes five key dimensions foranalyzing initiatives resulting in systemic change:infusiveness, pervasiveness, potency, coherence, andsustainability. It analyzes two strategies that exemplifyeffective systemic changea school improvement andprofessional development bill in Oregon and an earlychildhood education and assistance program in Washing-ton. $12.30. Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory,101 Southwest Main Street, Suite 500, Portland, OR97204; (503) 275-9500.

Statewide Restructuring of Education:A Handbook for BusinessRobert M. Palaich and others, 1990; ED 346 594

This 24-page handbook (S1-90-8) offers practical infor-mation for business people who want to support fundarnen-tal, collaborative education change. It discusses ineffectiveapproaches and outlir: s effective strategies for businessinvolvement to ensure that all children learn. $5 plus $2.50handling. Education Commission of the States, 707 17thStreet, Suite 2700, Denver, CO 80202-3427; (303)299-3600.

(continued)

ERIC Review27

Systemic Education ReformJames Thompson, 1994

This ERIC-Digest (No. EDOEA-94-5) introduces themesfrom systemic education reform and explores the implica-tions for principals, superintendents, and school boardmembers. $3. ERIC Clearinghouse on EducationalManagement, University of Oregon, 1787 Agate Street,Eugene, OR 97403; 1-800-438-8841.

"Systemic Reform and Educational Opportunity"Jennifer A. O'Day and Marshall S. Smith, 1993;ED 359 626

This essay in Designing Coherent Education Policy:Improving the System, edited by Susan H. Fuhrman,advocates a systemic state approach in conjunction withgreater professional responsibility on the local level inorder to provide challenging content to all children. Itexplains how a coherent, coordinated approach can betterserve less advantaged children than school-by-schoolrestructuring. $32.95. Jossey-Bass Publishers, 350Sansome Street, San Francisco, CA 94104; (415)433-1767.

"Systemic School Reform"Marshall S. Smith and Jennifer A. O'Day, 1991

This ground-breaking essay in The Politics of Curriculumand Testing, edited by Susan Fuhrman and Betty Malen,outlines a design for a systemic state structure that supportsschool-site efforts to improve classroom instruction andlearning. Key components of the design are unifying visionand goals, a coherent instructional guidance system, and arestructured governance system. $25.50 Fulmer Press,1900 Frost Road, Suite 101, PA 19007-1598;(215) 785-5800. [A reprint of the chapter alone is avail-able for $4.5u trom CPRE, Carriage House at the EagletonInstitute of Politics, Rutgers University, 86 Clifton Av-enue, New Brunswick, NJ 08901-1568; (908) 932-1331.]

Ten Years of State Education Reform, 1983-1993:Overview with Four Case StudiesDiane Massell and Susan Fuhrman, 1994; ED 366 095

This 171-page report examines the state of educationreform and policymaking over the past 10 years, followingpublication of the landmark report, A Nation at Risk, in1983. It examines the players involved, the capacity of thesystem to undertake reform, and the major instruments ofreform, with case histories of activity in California,

Florida, Georgia, and Minnesota. Recent trends in content-based reform, professional development, and assessmentare explored. $15. CPRE, Carriage House at the EagletonInstitute of Politics, Rutgers University, 86 Clifton Av-enue, New Brunswick, NJ 08901-1568; (908) 932-1331.

Transforming Education: Overcoming BarriersJane L. David and Paul D. Goren, 1993

This report examines efforts to restructure education andways to counteract five barriers to school reform: lack ofclear direction, weak incentives for change, regulatory andcompliance mentality, limited learning opportunities foreducators, and poor communication. $15 plus $4.50 ship-ping. National Governors' Association Publications, P.O.Box 421, Annapolis Junction, MD 20701; (301) 498-3738.

When School Restructuring Meets SystemicCurriculum ReformFred M. Newmann and William H. Clune, 1992;ED 348 711

This brief for policymakers explores two educatiot im-provement initiativesschool restructuring, which focuseson process in schools; and curriculum reform, whichconcentrates more directly on content. School restructuringis viewed as a means to build a teaching/learning environ-ment that will support a high-quality curriculum. Free.Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools,University of Wisconsin, 1025 West Johnson Street,Madison, WI 53706; (608) 263-7575.

28Vol. 3 Issue 2, Fall 1994

26

News From the ERIC System

ERIC Clearinghouses To Collaborateon ASSESSMENT '95 Conference

ASSESSMENT 193Aiwk

In response to high levels of interest in new strategies and tools to assess K-12student learning and development, the Association for Assessment in Counsel-ing and the ERIC Clearinghouse on Counseling and Student Services willoffer a national training conference for mental health professionals. ASSESS-MENT '95 will be held in sunny Tucson, Arizona, from January 13 to 15,1995. Pre- and postsession training clinics will be held on January 12,13.and 16.

Among the outstanding speakers will be Dr. Lilian Katz, director of the ERIC Clearing-house on Elementary and Early Childhood Education, as well as James Popham, DavidCampbell, Roy Forbes, Nancy Cole, John Bremer, Alan Kaufman, Thomas Satterfield. Norman Gysbers, and JamesYsseldyke. The ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation and the ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities andGifted Education are 2 of the 14 professional organizations sponsoring this event.

Attendees may earn 22 contact hours of continuing education credit plus workshop and graduate course credit at thispractitioner-oriented conference. Extensive take-home resources will be provided. Early registration, available throughNovember 10, is $195. Advance registration (by December 20) is $225. After December 20, the registration fee is$250. Pre- and postconference training sessions are $75 (half day) and $125 (full day). Call 1-800-414-9769 or fax(910) 334-4116 for a flyer and further information.

Smithsonian Honors AskERIC

AskERIC, ERIC's online question-answering service forteachers and parents, recently was recognized by theSmithsonian Institution as part of the ComputerworldSmithsonian Awards for 1994. AskERIC was honored for"being the key that unlocks the Internet door, answeringe-mail queries personally, and helping teachers access awealth of current educational information."

Why not try it yourself? Send your education question bye-mail to askeric@ericir.syr.edu, and you will receive acustomized response within 48 hours. P AERIC staff drawon resources from the ERIC system and from the Internet torespond to information requests.

Research syntheses prepared by the ERIC Clearinghouses,as well as lesson plans, Internet guides, database searches,and answers to frequently asked questions about all aspectsof education are available through the AskERIC Gopher atericir.syr.edu. In the coming months, the AskERIC Gopherwill also be the site of an experiment to make the full text

ERIC Review

of selected ERIC database documents available online.AskERIC is sponsored by the ERIC Clearinghouse onInformation & Technology at Syracuse University.

National Parent Information Network AidsFamilies Through the Internet

Many parents have fewer family members close by thesedays to ask for advice on finding a preschool, working withtheir child's teachers, or helping their shy child makefriends. They need high-quality information from reliablesources, information that is now available on the "informa-tion superhighway" through the National Parent Informa-tion Network (NPIN). NPIN offers extensive, practicalresources on the development, care, and education ofchildren. Materials come from a variety of sources, includ-ing the National PTA, the National Urban League, and theCenter for Early Adolescence, as well as the ERIC Clear-inghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Educationand the ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education, whichare partners in building NPIN.

29

(continued on page 27)

(continued from page 26)

NPIN is currently located on Prairienet, the East CentralIllinois Freenet (gopher to gopher.prairienet.org). A Mosaicinterface to NPIN is under development. Thanks to a majorequipment grant from Apple Computer, Inc., NPIN willsoon be housed on a World-Wide Web server on theInternet that is specifically devoted to child development,care, and education, and to the parenting of children frombirth through early adolescence. The Apple equipment grantalso will be used to support discussion groups, forums, andPARENTS AskERIC.

NPIN will be a valuable resource for parents and individualswho work with parents and families in schools and libraries,parent centers, social service agencies, health clinics,parenting programs, and professional groups. The ERICClearinghouses on Urban Education and on Elementary andEarly Childhood Education are also working with low-income parents and members of minority groups to encour-age and support them in becoming full participants inelectronic networking. For more information, call 1 -800-583 -4135 or send e-mail to ericeece@uxl.cso.uiuc.edu.

Free ERIC Training Materials Available

Find out more about the ERIC database and clearinghousesby calling 1-800LETERIC to request two free publica-tions, A Pocket Guide to ERIC and All About ERIC. ThePocket Guide is an 18-page pamphlet that offers an over-view of ERIC products and services and contact informationfor the ERIC Clearinghouses. support components, onlineand CD-ROM vendors, and reprint services.

All About ERIC has been redesigned to includesections for new users and for staff of librariesand resource centers interested in providing accessto ERIC. The new All About ERIC offers basic tipsfor searching the database, as well as a reproduc-ible search worksheet and handout for educationstudents called "ERIC Tips for Teachers in Train-ing." The publication also describes how individu-als can contribute to the database and howorganizations can start their own ERIC collections.

Call today to receive your copies of A Pocket Guideto ERIC and All About ERIC. Bulk copies are avail-able for training.

Clearinghouses OperateToll-Free Numbers

The subject-specialty ERIC Clearinghouses now maintaintoll-free telephone lines to better serve you. The ERICClearinghouses:

NI acquire and process education literature for theERIC database;

answer questions and make referrals:

III offer search strategy consultation;

develop and distribute free and low-costpublications;

II provide workshops and presentations; and

work with related organizations.

Use the ERIC Directory located on the inside hack cover tocall a clearinghouse today!

namc Oat, a.

ERI,ERIC

30 Vol. 3 I ue 2. Fall 1994

28

Below is a sampling of the new publications available fromthe ERIC system. To order, use the ERIC Directory on theinside back cover to locate the relevant component's mailingaddress, phone number, or e-mail address.

1995 ERIC Calendar of Education-Related ConferencesLaurie E. Gronlund and Edward Pearce, editors, 1994

Includes information on more than 525 intemational, national, andregional education conferences as well as subject, sponsor, geographic,and ERIC participation indexes. $20 from ACCESS ERIC.

Classroom Assessment: Key to Reform inSecondary Science EducationJoseph L. Accongig and Rodney L. Doran, 1993, S-512

Focuses on improving assessment techniques used to measure andevaluate the outcomes of science instruction. Includes sawle assess-ment items. $14.90 from Science, Mathematics, and EnvironmentalEducation.

Connect! How To Get Your Kids To Talk to YouCarl B. Smith with Susan Moke and Marjorie R. Simic, 1994, AG49

Offers strategies to bring families closer and help parents support achild's academic and emotional development. $14.95 from Reading,English. and Communication.

Constitutional Rights of Juveniles and Students:Lessons on Sixteen Supreme Court CasesGerald P. Long, 1994

Provides lessons on constitutional principles, particularly the balancebetween individual rights and government power, for use in U.S. historyand government courses. $10 plus $2 shipping from Social Studies/Social Science Education.

Distinctions Between Self-Esteem and Narcissism:Implications for PracticeLilian G. Katz, 1993, Cat. #212

Suggests a rethinking of current strategies to foster children's self-esteem in order to focus on what really creates a sense of self-worth. $10from Elementary and Early Childhood Education.

Doing Our Homework: How Schools Can Engage HispanicCommunitiesAndrea Burmadez, 1994

Provides educators with research-based guidance on how to involveMexican American and other Hispanic parents in the schools. Discussesparent-teacher training, model partnerships. and collaborations withhigher education institutions. $12, from Rural Education and SmallSchools.

An Educator's Guide to Electronic Networking:Creating Virtual CommunitiesBarbara Kurshan and Marcia Harrington. revised and updated by PeterMilbury, 1994

Provides teachers and administrators with an introduction to the Internet,a comparison of 28 commercial and noncommercial network serviceproviders, and a glossary of more than 200 networking terms. $10 plus$2 shipping from Information & Technology.

Focus Schools: A Genre To ConsiderMary Anne Raywid, 1994, UDS #106

Explores how special-purpose magnet schools can promote studentachievement, particularly among disadvantaged youth. $10 from UrbanEducation.

Native Language Literacy Instruction for Adults:Patterns, Issues and PromisesNational Clearinghouse on Literacy Education, 1994

Examines the practice of adult bilingual education, specifically literacyinstruction, in the United States. Provides program profiles and ration-ales and suggests research directions. First in the series, Issues in ESLLiteracy Education. $4 from ESL Literacy Education.

Performance Assessment and Students with Disabilities MinilibraryVarious authors, 1994, P5062

Includes Connecting Performance Assessment to Instruction by Lynn S.Fuchs, Creating Meaningful Performance Assessments: FundamentalConcepts by Stephen N. Elliott, National and State Perspectives onPerformance Assessment and Students with Disabilities by MarthaThurlow, and Performance Assessments with Students with Disabilities:Usage in Outcomes-Based Accountability Systems by Margaret J.McLaughlin and Sandra Hopfengardner Warren. $32 for set ($8.90 pertitle) from Disabilities and Gifted Education.

Planning for Effective Staff Development:Six Research-Based ModelsMeredith D. Gall and Roseanne O'Brien Vojtek, 1994

Provides a convenient framework for selecting the objectives, models,and design features of a staff development program. $6.95 from Educa-tional Management.

"A Practical Guide To Conducting Customized Work ForceTraining," New Directions for Community CollegesSherrie L. Kantor, editor, 1994

Explores delivery of customized contract training to the work forces ofU.S. businesses and industry by community colleges. $16.95 fromJossey-Bass. 350 Sansome Street, San Francisco, CA 94104-1310;(415) 433-1740.

Reform in Student Affairs: A Critique of Student DevelopmentPaul A. Bloland, Louis C. Stamatakos, and Russell R. Rogers. 1994

Emphasizes the need for developing the whole student and the impor-tance of making student learning a central focus of student affairs.$16.95 plus shipping from Counseling and Student Services.

Selected Contemporary Work Force Reports: A Synthesis and CritiqueJames Weber, 1993, IN354

Compares recommendations about work force preparation and perfor-mance standards/measures in America 2000, Investing in People,America's Choice, and What Work Requires of Saools and contraststhem with Total Quality Management. Makes recommendations for aunified national policy on work force education and training. $6 plus$3.50 handling from Adult. Career, and Vocational Education.

Quality: Transforming Postsecondary EducationEllen Earle Chaffee and Lawrence A. Sher, 1992, ASHEERICReport 92-3

Discusses Total Quality Management ideas, including "design quality,""output quality," and "process quality" and examines methods ofdefining institutional quality and improving technical and administrativesystems. $17 plus $2.50 for shipping from Higher Education.

ERIC Review 31

ERIC. DirectoryEducational Resources Information Center(ERIC)U.S. Department of EducationOffice of Educational Research andImprovement (OERI)555 New Jersey Avenue NWWaShingtcin, DC 20208=5720Telephone: (202) 219-2289Internet: eric@lnet.ed.gov

ClearinghousesAdult, Career, and Vocational EducationThe Ohio State University1900 Kenny RoadColumbus, OH 43210-1090Toll Free: (800) 848-4815Telephone: (614) 292-4353Internet: ericacve@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu

Assessment and EvaluationThe Catholic University of America210 O'Boyle HallWashington, DC 20064Toll Free: (800) 464-3742Telephone: (202) 319-5120Internet: eric_ae@cua.eduGopher site available

Community CollegesUniversity of California at Los Angeles3051 Moore HallLos Angeles, CA 90024-1521Toll Free: (800) 832-8256Telephone: (310) 825-3931Internet: eeh3usc@mvs.oac.ucla.edu

Counseling and Student ServicesUniversity of North Carolina at GreensboroSchool of Education1000 Spring Garden StreetGreensboro, NC 27412-5001Toll Free: (800) 414-9769Telephone: (919) 334-4114Internet: ericcass@iris.uncg.edu

Disabilities and Gifted EducationCouncil for Exceptional Children1920 Association DriveReston, VA 22091-1589Toll Free: (800) 328-0272Telephone: (703) 264-9474Internet: ericec@inet.ed.gov

Educational ManagementUniversity of Oregon1787 Agate StreetEugene, CR 97403-5207Toll Free: (800) 438-8841Telephone: (503) 346-5043Internet: ppiele@oregon.uoregon.edu

Elementary and Early Childhood EducationUniversity of Illinois805 West Pennsylvania AvenueUrbana, IL 61801-4897Toll Free: (800) 583-4135Telephone: (217) 333-1386Internet: ericeece®uxl.cso.uiuc.edu

Higher EducationThe George Washington UniversityOne Dupont Circle NW, Suite 630Washington, DC 20036-1183Toll Free: (800) 773-3742Telephone: (202) 296-2597Internet: eriche@inet.ed.gov

Information & TechnologySyracuse University4-194 Center for Science and TechnologySyracuse, NY 13244-4100Toll Free: (800) 464-9107Telephone: (315) 443-3640Internet: eric@ericir.syr.eduAskERIC (Internet-based question-answeringservice): askeric@ericir.syr.edu

Languages and LinguisticsCenter for Applied Linguistics1118 22nd Street NWWashington, DC 20037-0037Toll Free: (800) 276-9834Telephone: (202) 429 -9292Internet: eric@cal.org

Reading, English, and CommunicationIndiana UniversitySmith Research Center, Suite 1502805 East 10th StreetBloomington, IN 47408-2698Toll Free: (800) 759-4723Telephone: (812) 855-5847Internet: ericcs@ucs.indiana.edu

Rural Education and Small SchoolsAppalachia Educational Laboratory1031 Quarrier StreetP.O. Box 1348Charleston, WV 25325-1348Toll Free: (800) 624-9120Telephone: (304) 347-0400Internet: u56el@wvnvm.wvnet.edu

Science, Mathematics, andEnvironmental EducationThe Ohio State University1929 Kenny RoadColumbus, OH 43210-1080Toll Free: (800) 276-0462Telephone: (614) 292-6717Internet: ericse@osu.eduGopher site available

Social Studies/Social Science EducationIndiana UniversitySocial Studies Development Center2805 East 10th Street, Suite 120Bloomington, IN 47408-2698Toll Free: (800) 266-3815Telephone: (812) 855-3838Internet: ericso@ucs.indiana.edu

Teaching and Teacher EducationAmerican Association of Colleges forTeacher EducationOne Dupont Circle NW, Suite 610Washington, DC20036-1186Toll Free: (800) 822-9229Telephone: (202) 293-2450Internet: ericsp@inet.ed.gov

Urban EducationTeachers College, Columbia UniversityInstitute for Urban and Minority EducationMain Hall, Room 303, Box 40525 West 120th StreetNew York, NY 10027-9998Toll Free: (800) 601-4868Telephone: (212) 678-3433If net: eric-sue@columbia.edu

Adjunct ClearinghousesArt EducationIndiana UniversitySocial Studies Development Center2805 East 10th Street, Suite 120Bloomington, IN 47408-2698Toll Free: (800) 266-3815Telephone: (812) 855-3838Internet: ericso@ucs.indiana.edu

Chapter 1 (Compensatory Education)Chapter 1 Technical Assistance CenterPRC, Inc.2601 Fortune Circle EastOne Park Fletcher Building, Suite 300-AIndianapolis, IN 46241-2237Toll Free: (800) 456-2380Telephone: (317) 244-8160

Clinical SchoolsAmerican Association of Colleges forTeacher EducationOne Dupont Circle NW, Suite 610Washington, DC 20036-1186Toll Free: (800) 822-9229Telephone: (202) 293-2450Internet: iabdalha@inet.ed.gov

Consumer EducationNational Institute for Consumer Education207 Rackham Building, West Circle DriveEastern Michigan UniversityYpsilanti, MI 48197-2237Toll Free: (800) 336-6423Telephone: (313) 487-2292Internet: cse_bonner@emunix.emich.edu

ESL Literacy EducationCenter for Applied Linguistics1118 22nd Street NWWashington, DC 20037Telephone: (202) 429-9292. Extension 200Internet: ncle@cal.org

Law-Related EducationIndiana UniversitySocial Studies Development Center2805 East 10th Street, Suite 120Bloomington, IN 47408-2698Toll Free: (800) 266-3815Telephone: (812) 855-3838Internet: ericso@ucs.indiana.edu

Test CollectionEducational Testing ServiceRosedale RoadPrinceton, NJ 08541Telephone: (609) 734-5737Internet: mhalpem@rosedale.org

U.S.-Japan StudiesIndiana UniversitySocial Studies Development Center2805 East 10th Street, Suite 120Bloomington, IN 47408-2698Toll Free: (800) 266-3815Telephone: (812) 855-3838Internet: eabrooks@ucs.indiana.edu

Support ComponentsACCESS ERIC1600 Research BoulevardRockville, MD 20850-3172Toll Free: (800) LET-ERIC (538-3742)Telephone: (301) 251-5264Internet: acceric@inet.ed.gov

ERIC Document Reproduction ServiceCBIS Federal Inc.7420 Fullerton Road, Suite 110Springfield, VA 22153-2852Toll Free: (800) 443 -ERIC (3742)Telephone: (703) 440-1400Internet: edrs@inet.ed.gov

ERIC Processing and Reference FacilityCSC Professional Services Group1301 Piccard Drive, Suite 300Rockville, MD 20850-4305Toll Free: (800) 799-ERIC (3742)Telephone: (301) 258-5500Internet: ericfac@inet.ed.gov

PublishersTo order the Thesaurus of ERICDescriptors or the Current Index toJournals in Education, contact:Oryx Press4041 North Central Avenue, Suite 700Phoenix, AZ 85012-3397Toll Free: (800) 279-ORYX (6799)Telephone: (602) 265-2651Fax: (800) 279-4663; (602) 265-6250Internet: info@oryxpress.com

To order Resources in Education, contact:

United States Government PrintingOffice (GPO)Superintendent of DocumentsP.O. Box 371954Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7454Telephone: (202) 783-3238Fax: (202) 512-2250

32 BEST COPY AVAILABLE

United StatesDepartment of Education

Washington, DC 20208-5720

Official BusinessPenalty for Private Use, $300

ERIC 94-5042

33

Postage and Fees PaidU.S. Department of Education

Permit No. G-17

THIRD CLASS