College preparatory curriculum for all: Academic consequences of requiring algebra and english I for ninth graders in Chicago

Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis

Volumn 31, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 367-391

  Allensworth, Elaine ^a   Nomi, Takako ^a   Montgomery, Nicholas ^a   Lee, Valerie E ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

^b University of Michigan's Institute for Social Research   (United States)

Author keywords

Algebra; College preparatory; Curriculum; High school; Ninth grade; Tracking

Indexed keywords

EID: 72749088458     PISSN: 01623737     EISSN: 19351062     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3102/0162373709343471     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Achieve. (2007). Closing the expectations gap 2007: An annual 50-state progress report on the alignment of high school policies with the demands of college and work. Retrieved February 15, 2008, from http://www.achieve.org/node/844.
2. ACT. (2004). Crisis at the core: Preparing all students for college and work. Iowa City, IA: Author.
3. ACT. (2007). Benefits of a high school core curriculum for students in urban high schools. Retrieved February 15, 2008, from http://www.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/core_curriculum.pdf.
4. Adelman, C. (1995). The new college course map and transcript files: Changes in course-taking and achievement, 1972-1993 (No. PE-95-8001). Washington, DC: National Institute on Postsecondary Education, Libraries, and Lifelong Learning.
5. Allensworth, E., & Easton, J.Q. (2007). What matters for staying on-track and graduating in Chicago public high schools: A close look at course grades, failures and attendance in the freshman year. Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research.
6. American Diploma Project. (2004). Ready or not: Creating a high school diploma that counts. Washington, DC: Achieve.
7. Angus, D., & Mirel, J. (1999). The failed promise of the American high school, 1890-1995. New York: Teachers College Press.
8. Argys, L.M., Rees, D.I., & Brewer, D.J. (1996). Detracking America's schools: Equity at zero cost? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 15(4), 623-645.
9. Attewell, P., & Domina, T. (2008). Raising the bar: Curricular intensity and academic performance. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30, 51-71.
10. Barr, R, & Dreeben, R. (1983). How schools work. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
11. Boaler, J. (1997). Setting, social class, and survival of the quickest. British Educational Research Journal, 23(5), 575-595.
12. Boaler, J., & Staples, M. (2008). Creating mathematical futures through an equitable teaching approach: The case of Railside School. Teachers College Record, 110(3), 608-645.
13. Bryk, A.S., Lee, V.E., & Holland, P.B. (1993). Catholic schools and the common good. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
14. Chaney, B., Burgdorf, K., & Atash, N. (1997). Influencing achievement through high school graduation requirements. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19, 229-244.
15. Clune, W.H., & White, P.A. (1992). Education reform in the trenches: Increased academic course taking in high schools with lower achieving students in states with higher graduation requirements. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14, 2-20.
16. Cremin, L.A. (1961). The transformation of the school: Progressivism in American education. New York: Knopf.
17. Debray, E. (2005). A comprehensive high school and a shift in New York State policy: A study of early implementation. The High School Journal, 89(1), 18-45.
18. Gamoran, A., & Hannigan, E.C. (2000). Algebra for everyone? Benefits of college-preparatory mathematics for students with diverse abilities in early secondary school. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22, 241-254.
19. Gamoran, A., & Mare, R.D. (1989). Secondary school tracking and educational inequality: Compensation, reinforcement, or neutrality? American Journal of Sociology, 94, 1146-1183.
20. Gamoran, A., Nystrand, M., Berends, M., & LePore, P.C. (1995). An organizatinal analysis of the effects of ability grouping. American Educational Research Journal, 32(4), 687-715.
21. Gamoran, A., & Weinstein, M. (1998). Differentiation and opportunity in restructured schools. American Journal of Education, 106, 385-415.
22. Hallinan, M. (1994). Tracking: From theory to practice. Sociology of Education, 67(2), 79-84.
23. Hoffer, T.B. (1997). High school graduation requirements: Effects of dropping out and student achievement. Teachers College Record, 98, 584-607.
24. Horn, L., & Kojaku, L.K. (2001). High school academic curriculum and the persistence path through college: Persistence and transfer behavior of undergraduates 3 years after entering 4-year institutions. Education Statistics Quarterly, 3(3), 65-72.
25. Kliebard, H.M. (1995). The struggle for the American curriculum 1893-1958. New York: Routledge.
26. Lee, V.E. (2002). Restructuring high schools for equity and excellence: What works. New York: Teachers College Press.
27. Lee, V.E., & Bryk, A.S. (1988). Curriculum tracking as mediating the social distribution of high school achievement. Sociology of Education, 61, 78-94.
28. Lee, V.E., & Bryk, A.S. (1989). A multilevel model of the social distribution of high school achievement. Sociology of Education, 62, 172-192.
29. Lee, V.E., Burkam, D.T., Chow-Hoy, T., Smerdon, B.A., & Geverdt, D. (1998). High school curriculum structure: Effects of course-taking and achievement in mathematics for high school graduates. An examination of data from the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (Working Paper No. 98-09). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Development, National Center for Educational Statistics.
30. Lee, V.E., Croninger, R.G., & Smith, J.B. (1997). Course-taking, equity, and mathematics learning: Testing the constrained curriculum hypothesis in U.S. secondary schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19, 99-121.
31. Lee, V.E., & Ready, D.D. (2007). Schools within schools: Possibilities and pitfalls of high school reform. New York: Teachers College Press.
32. Lee, V.E., & Smith, J.B. (1995). Effects of high school restructuring and size on early gains in achievement and engagement. Sociology of Education, 68, 241-270.
33. Lee, V.E., Smith, J.B., & Croninger, R.G. (1997). How high school organization influences the equitable distribution of learning in mathematics and science. Sociology of Education, 70, 128-150.
34. Lieberman, A.E. (1995). The work of restructuring schools: Building from the ground up. New York: Teachers College Press.
35. Loveless, T. (1999). The tracking wars: State reform meets school policy. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
36. Lucas, S.R. (1999). Tracking inequality: Stratification and mobility in American high schools. New York: Teachers College Press.
37. Miller, S.R., & Allensworth, E.M. (2002). Progress and problems: Student performance in CPS high schools, 1993 to 2000. In V. Lee (Ed.), Reforming Chicago's high schools: Research perspectives on school and system level change (pp. 51-87). Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research.
38. National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
39. National Governors Association. (2005). Getting it done: Ten steps to a state action agenda. Retrieved November 8, 2005, from http://www.nga.org/Files/pdf/05warnerguide.pdf.
40. Newmann, F. & Associates. (1996). Authentic achievement: Restructuring schools for intellectual quality. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
41. Nomi, Takako and Elaine Allensworth. (2009). Double-Dose Algebra as an Alternative Strategy to Remediation: Effects on Students' Academic Outcomes. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2, 111-148.
42. Oakes, J. (1985). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
43. Oakes, J. (1994). More than misapplied technology: A normative and political response to Hallinan on tracking. Sociology of Education, 67(2), 84-91.
44. Oakes, J. (2005). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality (2nd ed.). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
45. Oakes, J. & Wells, A. (1996). Beyond the technicalities of school reform: Policy lessons from detracking schools. Los Angeles, CA: Research for Democratic School Communities, University of California, Los Angeles Graduate School of Education and Information Studies.
46. Powell, A.G., Farrar, E., & Cohen, D.K. (1985). The shopping mall high school: Winners and losers in the educational marketplace. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
47. Rosenbaum, J.E. (1976). Making inequality: The hidden curriculum of high school tracking. New York: Wiley.
48. Rosenbaum, J.E. (1999). If tracking is bad, is detracking better? American Educator, 23(4), 24-29, 47.
49. Rubin, B.C. (2008). Detracking in context: How local constructions of ability complicate equity. Teachers College Record, 110(3), 646-699.
50. Sipple, J.W., Killeen, K., & Monk, D.H. (2004). Adoption and adaptation: School district responses to state imposed learning and graduation requirements. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26, 143-168.
51. St John,. E.P., Musoba, G.D., Gross, J.P.K., & Chung, D.G. (2004). Academic preparation and college success: Analyses of Indiana's 2000 high school class (No. 04-03). Indianapolis, IN: Lumina Foundation and Indiana Commission for Higher Education.
52. Teitelbaum, P. (2003). The influence of high school graduation requirement policies in mathematics and science on student course-taking patterns and achievement. Education Evaulation and Policy Analysis, 25, 31-57.
53. Wells, A.S., & Oakes, J. (1996). Potential pitfalls of systemic reform: Early lessons from research on detracking. Sociology of Education, 69 (Special issue), 135-143.
54. Yonezawa, S., Wells, A.S., & Serna, I. (2002). Choosing tracks: Freedom of choice in detracking schools. American Educational Research Journal, 39(1), 37-67.