Small high schools on a larger scale: The impact of school conversions in Chicago

Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis

Volumn 30, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 281-315

  Kahne, Joseph E ^a   Sporte, Susan E ^b   De La Torre, Marisa ^b   Easton, John Q ^b  

^a MILLS COLLEGE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

Evaluation; High school reform; Small schools

Indexed keywords

EID: 51749101484     PISSN: 01623737     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3102/0162373708319184     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Aiken, J., & Hage, M. (1966). Organizational alienation: A comparative analysis. American Sociological Review, 31, 497-507.
2. Allensworth, E. M. (2005). Graduation and dropout trends in Chicago: A look at cohorts of students from 1991 through 2004. Chicago: University of Chicago, Consortium, on Chicago School Research.
3. Allensworth, E. M. (2006). Update to: From high school to the future: A first look at Chicago Public School graduates' college enrollment, college preparation, and graduation from four-year colleges. Chicago: University of Chicago, Consortium on Chicago School Research.
4. Allensworth, E. M., & Easton, J. Q. (2005). The on-track indicator as a predictor of high school graduation. Chicago: University of Chicago, Consortium on Chicago School Research.
5. Allensworth, E. M., & Easton, J. Q. (2007). What matters for staying on-track and graduating in Chicago Public Schools. Chicago: University of Chicago, Consortium on Chicago School Research.
6. American Diploma Project. (2004). Ready or not: Creating a high school diploma that counts. Washington, DC: Achieve. Retrieved April 22, 2008, from, http://www.achieve.org/node/552
7. American Institutes for Research & SRI International. (2004). The National School District and Network Grants Program: Year 2 evaluation report. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.
8. Berman, P., & McLaughlin, M. W. (1978). Federal programs supporting educational change: Vol. 8. Implementing and sustaining innovations. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
9. Big Picture Company. (2007). School organization. Retrieved December 7, 2007, retrieved http://www.bigpictu.re.org/aboutus/distinguishers/ schoolorganization.html
10. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. (2006). Recent education grants. Retrieved April 22, 2008, from http://www.gatesfoundati.on.org/ UnitedStates/Education/Grants/default.htm.?showYear=2006
11. Blau, P., & Schoenherr, R. (1971). The structure of organizations. New York: Basic Books.
12. Bryk, A. S., Lee, V. E., & Holland, P. B. (1993). Catholic schools and the common good. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13. Chen, H.-T. (1990). Theory-driven evaluations. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
14. Chicago Public Schools (n.d.). CPS at a glance. Retrieved September 12, 2006, at http://www.cps.k12.il.us/AtAGlance.html
15. Chicago Public Schools, Office of Small Schools, (n.d.). Small schools grants. Retrieved December 7, 2007, from http://www.smal.lschools.cps.k12. il.us/grants.html
16. Connell, J. P., Kubisch, A. C., Schorr, L. B., & Weiss, C. H. (Eds.). (1995). New approaches to evaluating community initiatives: Concepts, methods and contexts. Washington, DC: Aspen Institute.
17. Cotton, K. (1996). School size, school climate, and student performance. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. Retrieved April 22, 2008, from http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/10/c020.html
18. Daniels, H., Bizar, M., & Zemelman, S. (2001). Rethinking high school: Best practice in teaching, learning, and leadership. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
19. Darling-Hammond, L., Ancess, J., & Ort, S. W (2002). Reinventing high school: Outcomes of the Coalition Campus Schools Project. American Educational Research Journal, 39(3), 639-673.
20. Gates, B. (2005, February). Prepared remarks to the National Education Summit on High Schools, Washington, DC. Retrieved April 22, 2008, from http://www.gatesfoundat.ion.org/MediaCenter/Speeches/Co-ChairSpeeches/ BillgSpeeches/BGSpeechNGA-050226.htm
21. Greene, J. P., & Winters, M. A. (2005). Public high school graduation and college-readiness rates 1991-2002 (Education Working Paper No. 8). New York: Manhattan Institute, Center for Civic Innovation. Retrieved April 22, 2008, from http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/ewp_08.htm
22. Hall, G., & Hord, S. (2006). Implementing change: Patterns, principles, and potholes. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
23. Haller, E. J., Monk, D. H., & Tien, L. T. (1993). Small schools and higher-order thinking skills. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 9(2), 66-73.
24. Harvey, J., & Housman, N. (2004). Crisis or possibility: Conversations about the American high school. Washington, DC: Institute for Educational Leadership.
25. Hess, G. A., & Cytrynbaum, S. (2002). The effort to redesign Chicago high schools: Effects on schools and achievement. In V. Lee (Ed.), Reforming Chicago's high schools: Research perspectives on school, and system level change (pp. 19-49). Chicago: University of Chicago, Consortium on Chicago School Research.
26. Holland, N. E. (2002). Small schools: Transforming teacher and student experiences in urban high schools. In V. Lee (Ed.), Reforming Chicago's high schools: Research perspectives on school and system level change (pp. 89-123). Chicago: University of Chicago, Consortium on Chicago School Research.
27. Howley, C. B. (1989). Synthesis of the effects of school and district size: What research says about achievement in small schools and school districts. Journal of Rural and Small Schools, 4(1), 2-12.
28. Husbands, J., & Beese, S. (2001, July). Review of selected high school reform strategies. Paper prepared for the Aspen Program on Education, Workshop on High School Transformation, Aspen, CO.
29. Kahne, J. E., Sporte, S. E., & Easton, J. Q. (2005). Creating small schools in Chicago: An early look at implementation and impact. Improving Schools, 8(1), 7-22.
30. Kemple, J. J. (2004). Career academies: Impacts on labor market outcomes and educational attainment. New York: MDRC.
31. Kemple, J. J., Herlihy, C. H., & Smith, T. J. (2005). Making progress toward graduation: Evidence from the talent development high school, model. New York: MDRC.
32. Kirsch, I., Braun, H., Yamamoto, K., & Sum, A. (2007). America's perfect storm: Three forces changing our nation's future. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
33. Lee, V. E. (2002). Setting Chicago high school reform within the national context. In V. Lee (Ed.), Reforming Chicago's high schools: Research perspectives on school and system level change (pp. 7-17). Chicago: University of Chicago, Consortium, on Chicago School Research.
34. Lee, V. E., & Ready, D. (2007). Schools within schools: Possibilities and pitfalls of high school reform. New York: Teachers College Press.
35. Lee, V. E., & Smith, J. B. (1995). Effects of high school restructuring and size gains in achievement and engagement for early secondary school students. Sociology of Education, 68(4), 241-270.
36. Lee, V. E., & Smith, J. B. (1997). Which works best, and for whom? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19(3), 205-227.
37. Meier, D. (1995). The power of their ideas: Lessons for America from a small school in Harlem. Boston: Beacon Press.
38. Mitchell, K., Shkolnik, J., Song, M., Uekawa, K., Murphy, R., Garet, M., et al. (2005). Rigor, relevance, and results: The quality of teacher assignments and student work in new and conventional high schools. Washington, DC: American. Institutes for Research; Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
39. Newmann, F. M., Smith, B., Allensworth, E. M., & Bryk, A. S. (2001). School instructional program coherence: Benefits and challenges. Chicago: University of Chicago, Consortium on Chicago School Research.
40. Newmann, F. M., & Wehlage, G. G. (1995). Successful school restructuring. Madison, WI: Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools, Wisconsin Center for Education Research.
41. Noddings, N. (1992). The challenge to care in schools: An alternative approach to education. New York: Teachers College Press.
42. Pittman, R. B., & Haughwout, P. (1987). Influence of high school size on dropout rate. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9(4), 337-343.
43. Ponisciak, S. M. (2005). Understanding the Prairie State Achievement Exam: A descriptive report with analysis of student performance. Chicago: University of Chicago, Consortium on Chicago School Research.
44. Quint, J. (2006). Meeting five critical challenges of high school reform: Lessons for research on three reform models. New York: MDRC.
45. Quint, J., Bloom, W. S., Black, A. R., & Stephens, L. (2005). The challenge of scaling up educational reform: Findings and lessons from First Things First. New York: MDRC.
46. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
47. Raywid, M.A., & Schmerler, G. (2003). Not so easy going: The policy environments of small urban schools and schools within schools. Charleston, WV: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools.
48. Rhodes, D., Smerdon, B., Burt, W., Evan, A., Martinez, B., & Means, B. (2005). Getting to results: Student outcomes in new and redesigned high schools. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research; Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
49. Roderick, M., Nagaoka, J., & Allensworth, E. (2006). From high school to the future: A first look at Chicago Public School graduates' college enrollment, college preparation, and graduation from four-year colleges. Chicago: University of Chicago, Consortium, on Chicago School Research.
50. Sebring, P. B., Allensworth, E., Bryk, A. S., Easton, J. Q., Luppescu, S. (2006). The essential supports for school improvement. Chicago: University of Chicago, Consortium on Chicago School Research.
51. Sebring, P. B., & Bryk, A. S. (2000). School leadership and the bottom line. Chicago: University of Chicago, Consortium, on Chicago School Research.
52. Shear, L., Song, M., House, A., Martinez, B., Means, B., & Smerdon, B. (2005). Creating cultures for learning: Supportive relationships in new and redesigned high schools. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research; Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
53. Small Schools Workshop. (2007). Info center. Retrieved December 7, 2007, from http://www.smallschoolsworkshop.org/inf01.html
54. Sporte, S. E. (forthcoming). Relationship between survey measures and student outcomes. Chicago: Consortium, on Chicago School Research.
55. Sporte, S. E., Correa, M., Kahne, J. (with Easton, J. Q.). (2003). Chicago High School Redesign Initiative: A snapshot of the first year of implementation. Chicago: University of Chicago, Consortium on Chicago School Research.
56. Sporte, S. E., Kahne, J. E., & Correa, M. (2004). Research data brief: Notes from the ground: Teachers, principals and students' perspectives on the Chicago High School Redesign Initiative, year two. Chicago: University of Chicago, Consortium on Chicago School Research.
57. Stevens, W D. (with Kahne, J.). (2006). Professional communities and instructional improvement practices: A study of small high schools in Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago, Consortium on Chicago School. Research.
58. Stevens, W. D. (2008). If small is not enough? The characteristics of successful small schools in Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago, Consortium on Chicago School. Research.
59. Stevens, W. D., & Kahne, J. E. (2005, April). The challenge of instructional change in small schools. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
60. Supovitz, J. A., & Christman, J. B. (2003). Developing communities of instructional practice: Lessons from Cincinnati and Philadelphia. Philadelphia: Consortium, on Policy Research in Education.
61. Thompson, B. (2002). What future quantitative social science research could look like: Confidence intervals for effect sizes. Educational Researcher, 31(3), 25-32.
62. Wasley, P., Fine, M., Gladden, M., Holland, N. E., King, S. P., Mosak, E., et al. (2000). Small schools: Great strides: A study of new small schools in Chicago. New York: Bank Street College of Education.
63. Wehlage, G., Rutter, R., & Smith, G. (1989). Reducing the risk: Schools as communities of support. New York: Falmer Press.
64. Weiss, C. H. (1995). Nothing as practical as good theory: Exploring theory-based evaluation, for comprehensive community initiatives for children and families. In J. P. Connell, A. C. Kubish, L. B. Schorr, & C. H. Weiss (Eds.), New approaches to evaluating community initiatives: Vol. 1. Concepts, methods, and contexts (pp. 1-16). Washington, DC: Aspen Institute.
65. Wright, B. D., & Masters, G. N. (1982). Rating scale analysis: Rasch measurement. Chicago: MESA Press.