Improving School Improvement

PREFACEIn opening this volume, you might be thinking:Is another book on school improvement really needed?Clearly our answer is yes. Our analyses of prevailing school improvement legislation, planning, and literature indicates fundamental deficiencies, especially with respect to enhancing equity of opportunity and closing the achievement gap.Here is what our work uniquely brings to policy and planning tables:(1) An expanded framework for school improvement – We highlight that moving from a two- to a three-component policy and practice framework is essential for closing the opportunity and achievement gaps. (That is, expanding from focusing primarily on instruction and management/government concerns by establishing a third primary component to improve how schools address barriers to learning and teaching.)(2) An emphasis on integrating a deep understanding of motivation – We underscore that concerns about engagement, management of behavior, school climate, equity of opportunity, and student outcomes require an up-to-date grasp of motivation and especially intrinsic motivation.(3) Clarification of the nature and scope of personalized teaching – We define personalization as the process of matching learner motivation and capabilities and stress that it is the learner's perception that determines whether the match is a good one.(4) A reframing of remediation and special education – We formulate these processes as personalized special assistance that is applied in and out of classrooms and practiced in a sequential and hierarchical manner.(5) A prototype for transforming student and learning supports – We provide a framework for a unified, comprehensive, and equitable system designed to address barriers to learning and teaching and re-engage disconnected students and families.(6) A reworking of the leadership structure for whole school improvement --We outline how the operational infrastructure can and must be realigned in keeping with a three component school improvement framework.(7) A systemic approach to enhancing school-community collaboration – We delineate a leadership role for schools in outreaching to communities in order to work on shared concerns through a formal collaborative operational infrastructure that enables weaving together resources to advance the work.(8) An expanded framework for school accountability – We reframe school accountability to ensure a balanced approach that accounts for a shift to a three component school improvement policy.(9) Guidance for substantive, scalable, and sustainable systemic changes –We frame mechanisms and discuss lessons learned related to facilitating fundamental systemic changes and replicating and sustaining them across a district.The frameworks and practices presented are based on our many years of work in schools and from efforts to enhance school-community collaboration. We incorporate insights from various theories and the large body of relevant research and from lessons learned and shared by many school leaders and staff who strive everyday to do their best for children.Our emphasis on new directions in no way is meant to demean current efforts. We know that the demands placed on those working in schools go well beyond what anyone should be asked to do. Given the current working conditions in many schools, our intent is to help make the hard work generate better results. To this end, we highlight new directions and systemic pathways for improving school outcomes.Some of what we propose is difficult to accomplish. Hopefully, the fact that there are schools, districts, and state agencies already trailblazing the way will engender a sense of hope and encouragement to those committed to innovation.It will be obvious that our work owes much to many. We are especially grateful to those who are pioneering major systemic changes across the country. These leaders and so many in the field have generously offered their insights and wisdom. And, of course, we are indebted to hundreds of scholars whose research and writing is a shared treasure. As always, we take this opportunity to thank Perry Nelson and the host of graduate and undergraduate students at UCLA who contribute so much to our work each day, and to the many young people and their families who continue to teach us all.Respectfully submitted for your consideration,Howard Adelman & Linda Taylo

Addressing barriers to learning: In the classroom and schoolwide.

IntroductionPublic education is at a crossroads. Moving in new directions is imperative. Just tweaking and tinkering with old ideas is a recipe for disaster.Continuing challenges confronting public education highlight why moving school improvement policy and practice in new directions is imperative. With a view to enhancing graduation rates and successful transitions to post-secondary opportunities and well-being, pressing challenges include:Increasing equity of opportunity for every student to succeed, narrowing the achievement gap, and countering the school to prison pipeline Reducing unnecessary referrals for special assistance and special education; Improving school climate and retaining good teachers Reducing the number of low performing schools.As education leaders well know, meeting these challenges requires making sustainable progress inimproving supports for specific subgroups (e.g., English Learners, immigrant newcomers, lagging minorities, homeless students, students with disabilities) increasing the number of disconnected students who re-engage in classroom learning and thus improving attendance, reducing disruptive behaviors (e.g., including bullying and sexual harassment), and decreasing suspensions and dropouts increasing family and community engagement with schools responding effectively when schools experience crises events and preventing crises whenever possible.In some schools, continuous progress related to these concerns is being made. For many districts, however, sustainable progress remains elusive – and will continue to be so as long as the focus of school improvement policy and practice is mainly on improving instruction. Efforts to expand the use of instructional technology, develop new curriculum standards, make teachers more accountable, and improve teacher preparation and licensing all have merit; but they are insufficient for addressing the many everyday barriers to learning and teaching that interfere with effective student engagement in classroom instruction.Most policy makers and administrators know that good instruction delivered by highly qualified teachers cannot ensure that all students have an equal opportunity to succeed at school.Even the best teacher can’t do the job alone. Teachers need student and learning supports in the classroom and schoolwide in order to personalize instruction and provide special assistance when students manifest learning, behavior, and emotional problems. Unfortunately, school improvement plans continue to give short shrift to these critical matters.We recognize, as did a Carnegie Task Force on Education, that school systems are not responsible for meeting every need of their students. But as the task force stressed: when the need directly affects learning, the school must meet the challenge.The most pressing challenge is to enhance equity of opportunity by fundamentally improving how schools address barriers to learning and teaching. The future of public education depends on moving in new directions to accomplish this.Now is the time to fundamentally transform how schools address factors that keep too many students from doing well at school. And while transformation is never easy, pioneering work across the country is showing the way. Trailblazers are redeploying existing funds allocated for addressing barriers to learning and weaving these together with the invaluable resources that can be garnered by collaboration with other agencies and with community stakeholders, family members, and students themselves.The first step in moving forward is to escape old ideas. The second step is to incorporate a new vision in school improvement planning for addressing barriers to learning and teaching and re-engaging disconnected students. Our analyses envision a plan that designs and develops a unified, comprehensive, and equitable system of student and learning supports. The third step is to develop a strategic plan for systemic change, scale-up, and sustainability.This book highlights each of these matters. We invite you to join us in the quest to enhance equity of opportunity for all students to succeed at school and beyond. And we look forward to hearing from you about moving schools forward to make the rhetoric of the Every Student Succeeds Act a reality

Journalism in the Community Classroom A Curriculum Model for Cultural Journalism in Oklahoma

This paper introduces the medium of cultural journalism as an effective means of intensified basic communication training and community involvement. Part one contains a report of a needs assessment and a subsequent pilot project on cultural journalism that was conducted at an Oklahoma high school. The needs assessment also reports on similar projects conducted in and around the Oklahoma region, the attitudes of community members toward such a project, the problems and possibilities associated with such curriculum development, and advice from other proponents of experience based education. The report on the pilot project that resulted from the needs assessment--a 36-page magazine produced within the regular newspaper journalism class--includes responses from both students and members of the community. The second part of the paper focuses on the development of a curriculum model designed to expand on the pilot project. This section contains general information about organizing cultural journalism projects, including planning the project, implementing the program, designing basic curriculum modules (ten are outlined), and evaluating the program. A selected bibliography and appendixes of data and material used in the needs assessment and the pilot project are also provided

RFID Technology in the Library Environment

The article focuses on the use of radio frequency identification (RFID) technology in libraries. It states that RFID offers libraries many advantages and disadvantages such as the benefit of saving time and money, nonprovision of fail-safe security, high cost, and lack of standards. It enumerates the factors that must be considered by librarians about RFID including workflow issues and return on investment (ROI)

Retirees Look Back on the Years

Professors Howard Leichter, Linda Olds and Kareen Sturgeon share memories of their years at Linfield

Encouraging Physician-Attorney Collaboration through More Explicit Professional Standards

In this age of multi-layered global problem solving, the skill of working with other disciplines is a necessary tool for any professional. Societal ills can no longer be solved by narrow approaches learned in graduate training but call for interdisciplinary collaboration. Effective collaboration of this nature requires the professions to understand the differences in professional cultures and to bridge the communication gap caused by these differences. Legal and medical training offer useful, but often conflicting, approaches to problem solving, thus, potentially impeding our abilities to understand and communicate with others regarding a shared issue or problem. Though each profession has created standards that may hint at the further collaboration of the professions, we believe the standards do not go far enough. To provide context for our position, the first section of this essay offers a theoretical perspective on fundamental components to interdisciplinary collaboration. Section II describes the current support for collaborative skills in each profession\u27s operational standards, and suggests alterations and additions to lend further support to interdisciplinary problem solving

Encouraging Physician-Attorney Collaboration through More Explicit Professional Standards

In this age of multi-layered global problem solving, the skill of working with other disciplines is a necessary tool for any professional. Societal ills can no longer be solved by narrow approaches learned in graduate training but call for interdisciplinary collaboration. Effective collaboration of this nature requires the professions to understand the differences in professional cultures and to bridge the communication gap caused by these differences. Legal and medical training offer useful, but often conflicting, approaches to problem solving, thus, potentially impeding our abilities to understand and communicate with others regarding a shared issue or problem. Though each profession has created standards that may hint at the further collaboration of the professions, we believe the standards do not go far enough. To provide context for our position, the first section of this essay offers a theoretical perspective on fundamental components to interdisciplinary collaboration. Section II describes the current support for collaborative skills in each profession\u27s operational standards, and suggests alterations and additions to lend further support to interdisciplinary problem solving

Teaching Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Theory, Practice, and Assessment

In this article, we offer our own theory-based methodology for teaching interprofessional collaboration to law students and we present our preliminary data on its effectiveness. Part I explicates the definition and development of interdisciplinary collaboration. Part II describes how we have grounded our course in current theory, and Part III explains the extent to which our efforts have been successful. Finally, in Part IV, we offer additional thoughts regarding the teaching of interdisciplinary collaboration and pose questions and ideas for future data collection

Using Parameter Constraints to Choose State Structures in Cost-Effectiveness Modelling.

BACKGROUND: This article addresses the choice of state structure in a cost-effectiveness multi-state model. Key model outputs, such as treatment recommendations and prioritisation of future research, may be sensitive to state structure choice. For example, it may be uncertain whether to consider similar disease severities or similar clinical events as the same state or as separate states. Standard statistical methods for comparing models require a common reference dataset but merging states in a model aggregates the data, rendering these methods invalid. METHODS: We propose a method that involves re-expressing a model with merged states as a model on the larger state space in which particular transition probabilities, costs and utilities are constrained to be equal between states. This produces a model that gives identical estimates of cost effectiveness to the model with merged states, while leaving the data unchanged. The comparison of state structures can be achieved by comparing maximised likelihoods or information criteria between constrained and unconstrained models. We can thus test whether the costs and/or health consequences for a patient in two states are the same, and hence if the states can be merged. We note that different structures can be used for rates, costs and utilities, as appropriate. APPLICATION: We illustrate our method with applications to two recent models evaluating the cost effectiveness of prescribing anti-depressant medications by depression severity and the cost effectiveness of diagnostic tests for coronary artery disease. CONCLUSIONS: State structures in cost-effectiveness models can be compared using standard methods to compare constrained and unconstrained models