School Improvement by Design: Lessons from a Study of Comprehensive School Reform Programs1

Handbook of Education Policy Research

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 637-651

  Rowan, Brian P ^a   Correnti, Richard J ^b   Miller, Robert J ^a   Camburn, Eric M ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

^c Department of Curriculum and Instruction   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85145848963     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203880968-55     Document Type: Chapter

References (40)

1. 143 Cong. Rec. S97-100, H6849-H6890. (September 4, 1997) (statement of David Obey). Retrieved July 29, 2008, from http://frwebgate3.access. gpo.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate.cgi?WAISdocID=3583079271+2+0+ 0&WAISaction=retrieve
2. Basken, P. (2006, March 29). States have more schools falling behind.
3. Washington Post. Retrieved July 28, 2008, from http://www.washingtonpost. com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/28/AR2006032801794. html
4. Berends, M., Bodilly, S., & Kirby, S. (2002). Facing the challenges of whole school reform: New American schools after a decade. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
5. Berends, M., & King, B. (1994). A description of restructuring in nationally nominated schools: Legacy of the iron cage? Educational Policy, 8, 28-50.
6. Berman, P. (1978). Designing implementation to match policy situation:A contingency analysis of programmed and adaptive implementation. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
7. Bodilly, S. (1996). Lessons from New American Schools Development Corporation’s demonstration phase. Santa Monica: RAND.
8. Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2001). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
9. Bonett, D., & Seier, E. (2006). Confidence interval for a coefficient of dispersion in nonnormal distributions. Biometrical Journal, 48, 144-148.
10. Borman, G. D., Hewes, G. M., Overman, L. T., & Brown, S. (2003). Comprehensive school reform and achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 73, 125-230.
11. Camburn, E., Rowan, B., & Taylor, J. (2003). Distributed leadership in schools: The case of elementary schools adopting comprehensive school reform models. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25, 347-373.
12. Cohen, D. K., & Hill, H. C. (2001). Learning policy: When state educational reform works. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
13. Cohen, D., McLaughlin, M. W., & Talbert, J. (Eds.). (1993). Teaching for understanding: Challenges for policy and practice. San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
14. Cooperative Research Act of 1954, Pub. L. No. 83-531, 83rd Cong., 2d Sess. (1954).
15. Correnti, R., & Rowan, B. (2007). Opening up the black box: Literacy instruction in schools participating in three comprehensive school reform programs. American Educational Research Journal, 44, 298-338.
16. Darling-Hammond, L., & Snyder, J. (1992). Curriculum studies and traditions of inquiry: The scientific tradition. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp.41-77). New York: Mac-Millan.
17. Desimone, L. (2002). How can comprehensive school reform models be implemented? Review of Educational Research, 72, 433-480.
18. Desimone, L., Porter, A., Garet, M., Yoon, K., & Birman, B. (2002). Effects of professional development on teachers’ instruction: Results from a three-year longitudinal study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24, 81-112.
19. Elmore, R. (1996). Getting to scale with good educational practice. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 1-26.
20. Elmore, R., & Burney, D. (1997). Investing in teacher learning: Staff development and instructional improvement in school district #2, New York City. Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education and the National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future.
21. Fennema, E., Carpenter, T., Franke, M., Levi, L., Jacobs, V., & Empson, S. (1996). A longitudinal study of learning to use children’s thinking in mathematics instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27, 403-434.
22. Gersten, R. (1984). Follow Through revisited: Reflections on the site variability issue. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 6, 411-423.
23. House, E., Glass, G., McLean, L., & Walker, D. (1978). No simple answer:Critique of the follow-through evaluation. Harvard Educational Review, 48, 128-160.
24. Huberman, A., & Miles, M. (1984). Innovation up close: How school improvement works. New York: Plenum.
25. Loucks, S., Cox, P., Miles, M., & Huberman, M. (1982). People, policies and practices: Examining the chain of school improvement, Vol. 2:Portraits of the changes, the players and the contexts. A study of the dissemination efforts supporting school improvement. Andover, MA:Network of Innovative Schools.
26. McLaughlin, M., & Marsh, D. (1978). Staff development and school change. Teachers College Record, 80, 69-94.
27. Miller, R. J., & Rowan, B. (2006). Effects of organic management on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 43, 219-253.
28. Mirel, J. (1994). The evolution of the New American Schools: From revolution to mainstream. New York: Fordham Foundation.
29. Nunnery, J. (1998). Reform ideology and the locus of development problem in educational restructuring. Education and Urban Society, 30, 277-295.
30. Rivlin, A. M., & Timpane, P. M. (Eds.). (1975). Planned variation in education: Should we give up or try harder? Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
31. Rowan, B. (2001). The ecology of school improvement. Journal of Educational Change, 3, 283-314.
32. Rowan, B., Camburn, E., & Barnes, C. (2004). Benefiting from comprehensive school reform: A review of research on CSR implementation. In C. Cross (Ed.), Putting the pieces together: Lessons from comprehensive school reform research (pp.1-52). Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Comprehensive School Reform.
33. Rowan, B., Camburn, E., & Correnti, R. (2004). Using teacher logs to measure the enacted curriculum in large-scale surveys: Insights from the Study of Instructional Improvement. Elementary School Journal, 105, 75-102.
34. Rowan, B., & Correnti, R. (2006, April). Interventions to improve instruction:How implementation strategies affect instructional change. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
35. Rowan, B., & Miller, R. J. (2007). Organizing strategies for promoting instructional change: Implementation dynamics in schools working with comprehensive school reform providers. American Educational Research Journal, 44, 252-297.
36. Stecher, B., Le, V-N., Hamilton, L., Ryan, G., Robyn, A., & Lockwood, J. R. (2006). Using structured classroom vignettes to measure instructional practices in mathematics. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 28, 101-130.
37. Stringfield, S., & Datnow, A. (1998). Scaling up school restructuring designs in urban schools. Education and Urban Society, 30, 269-276.
38. Wayne, A. J., & Youngs, P. (2003). Teacher characteristics and student achievement gains: A review. Review of Educational Research, 73, 89-122.
39. Welch, W. W. (1969). Curriculum evaluation. Review of Educational Research, 39(4), 429-443.
40. Whitehurst, G. (2002, June 25). Statement before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions. Retrieved July 28, 2008, from http://ies.ed.gov/director/speeches2002/06_25/2002_06_25.asp