The Influence of School Reform on Classroom Instruction in Diverse Schools: Findings from an Observational Study of <span class='italic'>Success for All</span>

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511616419.010

10 - The Influence of School Reform on Classroom Instruction in Diverse Schools: Findings from an Observational Study of Success for All

Findings from an Observational Study of Success for All

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 November 2009

Marisa Castellano and

Edited by

Roland G. Tharp and

Marisa Castellano: Affiliation:
Center for Social Organization of Schools, Johns Hopkins University
Amanda Datnow: Affiliation:
Rossier School of Education, University of Southern California
Hersh C. Waxman: Affiliation:
University of Houston
Roland G. Tharp: Affiliation:
University of California, Santa Cruz
R. Soleste Hilberg: Affiliation:
University of California, Santa Cruz

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Improving teaching and learning, especially for culturally and linguistically diverse students, has been a constant goal of the education community. We have learned much over the past few decades, and every new reform addresses some aspect of schooling thought to affect outcomes for students. In many states and districts, standards have been raised, teacher professional development has been expanded, and changes in school governance have given more decision-making authority to educators at the school level. But as Elmore (1996) and others have noted, for a school reform to have results, it must affect what goes on in the classroom. The classroom is the locus of teaching and learning, and yet we do not know much about what school reform looks like at the classroom level. Systematic, guided observation is the best way to explore what happens in classrooms, and whether reforms result in changes in instruction and increased student engagement and learning.

This study illustrates the use of both qualitative and quantitative classroom observation methods in a study of one model of school reform, Success for All (SFA), that is being implemented in hundreds of elementary schools across the United States and abroad. As will be described, SFA reorganizes time and resources to provide rich reading instruction for all children. In this chapter, we use our dual methodological approach to explore what that reorganization and a new reading curriculum mean for teachers and students: how teachers' practices change and whether those changes result in improved student engagement and learning.

Type: Chapter
Information: Observational Research in U.S. Classrooms
New Approaches for Understanding Cultural and Linguistic Diversity
, pp. 231 - 265

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511616419.010 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abrahams, R. D., & Troike, R. C. (1972). Language and cultural diversity in American education. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall

Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (1976). Schooling in capitalist America: Educational reform and the contradictions of economic life. New York: Basic Books

Brophy, J. E. (1988). Research on teacher effects: Uses and abuses. Elementary School Journal, 89, 3–22CrossRef Google Scholar

Brophy, J. E., & Good, T. L. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 328–375). New York: Macmillan

Cazden, C. (1988). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann

Cooper, R. (1998a). Socio-cultural and within-school factors that affect the quality of implementation of school-wide programs (Report No. 28). Baltimore: Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed at Risk, Johns Hopkins University

Cooper, R. (1998b). Success for All: Improving the quality of implementation of whole school change through local and national support networks. Education and Urban Society, 30(3), 385–408CrossRef Google Scholar

Cooper, R., Slavin, R. E., & Madden, N. A. (1997). Success for All: Exploring the technical, normative, political, and socio-cultural dimensions of scaling up (Report No. 16). Baltimore: Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed at Risk, Johns Hopkins University

Cummins, J. (1989). Empowering minority students. Sacramento: California Association of Bilingual Education

Datnow, A., & Castellano, M. (2000a). An “inside” look at Success for All: A qualitative study of implementation and teaching and learning (Report No. 45). Baltimore: Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed at Risk, Johns Hopkins University and Howard University

Datnow, A., & Castellano, M. (2000b). Teachers' responses to Success for All: How beliefs, experiences, and adaptations shape implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 37(3), 775–799CrossRef Google Scholar

Datnow, A., & Castellano, M. (2001). Managing and guiding school reform: Leadership in Success for All schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 37(2), 219–249CrossRef Google Scholar

Elmore, R. (1996). Getting to scale with good educational practice. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 1–26CrossRef Google Scholar

Evertson, C., & Green, J. L. (1986). Observation as inquiry and method. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 162–207). New York: Macmillan

Fillmore, L. W. (1990). Latino families and schools. Sacramento, CA: Remarks prepared for the Seminar on California's Changing Face of Race Relations: New Ethics in the 1990s

Foley, D. E. (1991). Reconsidering anthropological explanations of ethnic school failure. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 22(1), 60–86CrossRef Google Scholar

Franklin, E. A. (1986). Literacy instruction for LES children. Language Arts, 63(1), 51–60Google Scholar

Gilmore, P., & Glatthorn, A. (1982). Children in and out of school: Ethnography and education. Washington, DC: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich and the Center for Applied Linguistics

Good, T., & Brophy, J. (1987). Looking in classrooms (4th ed.). New York: Harper & Row

Heath, S. B. (1983). Ways with words: Language, life, and work in communities and classrooms. New York: Cambridge University Press

Herman, R. (1999). An educators' guide to schoolwide reform. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service

Johnston, W. B., & Packer, A. B. (1987). Workplace 2000: Work and workers for the 21st century. Indianapolis, IN: Hudson Institute

Knapp, M. S., & Adelman, N. E. (1995). Teaching for meaning in high-poverty classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press

Macleod, J. (1987). Ain't no makin' it: Leveled aspirations in a low income neighborhood. Boulder, CO: Westview Press

Madden, N., Livingston, M., & Cummings, N. (1998). Success for All: Roots and Wings principal's and facilitator's manual. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University

Mehan, H. (1992). Understanding inequality in schools: The contribution of interpretive studies. Sociology of Education, 65(1), 1–20CrossRef Google Scholar

Michaels, K. (1988). Caution: Second-wave reform taking place. Educational Leadership, 45(5), 3Google Scholar

National Center on Education and the Economy. (1990). America's choice: High skills or low wages! (The report of the Commission on the Skills of the American Work Force). Rochester, NY: Author

National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office

Newmann, F. M., & Wehlage, G. (1995). Successful school restructuring. Madison, WI: Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools

Nunnery, J., Slavin, R. E., Madden, N. A., Ross, S. M., Smith, L. J., Hunter, P., & Stubbs, J. (1997). Effects of full and partial implementation of Success for All on student reading achievement in English and Spanish. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago

Padrón, Y. (1992). Instructional programs that improve the reading comprehension of students at risk. In H. C. Waxman, J. de Felix, J. Anderson, & J. Baptiste (Eds.), Students at risk in at-risk schools (pp. 222–232). Newbury Park, CA: Corwin

Philips, S. (1972). Participant structures and communicative competence: Warm Springs children in community and classroom. In C. Cazden, V. John, & D. Hymes (Eds.), Functions of language in the classroom (pp. 370–394). New York: Teachers College Press

Ross, S. M., Smith, L. J., Lohr, L. L., & McNelis, M. J. (1994). Math and reading instruction in tracked first-grade classes. The Elementary School Journal, 95(1), 105–109CrossRef Google Scholar

Slavin, R. E., & Madden, N. A. (1996). Scaling up: Lessons learned in the dissemination of Success for All (Report No. 6). Baltimore: Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed at Risk

Slavin, R. E., & Madden, N. A. (1999). Effects of bilingual and second language adaptations of Success for All on the reading achievement of students acquiring English. Journal of Education for Students Placed At Risk, 4(4), 393–416CrossRef Google Scholar

Slavin, R. E., Madden, N. A., Dolan, L. J., & Wasik, B. A. (1996). Every child, every school: Success for All. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin

Slavin, R. E., Madden, N. A., Dolan, L. J., Wasik, B. A., Ross, S. M., Smith, L. J., & Dianda, M. (1996). Success for All: A summary of research. Journal of Education for Students Placed At Risk, 1(1), 41–76CrossRef Google Scholar

Slavin, R. E., Madden, N. A., Karweit, N., Dolan, L. J., & Wasik, B. A. (1992). Success for All: A relentless approach to prevention and early intervention in elementary schools. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service

Spindler, G. D. (1982). Doing the ethnography of schooling. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston

Stallings, J. A. (1980). Allocated academic learning time revisited, or beyond time on task. Educational Researcher, 9(11), 11–16CrossRef Google Scholar

Stringfield, S., Datnow, A., Borman, G., & Rachuba, L. (1999). National evaluation of Core Knowledge Sequence implementation: Final report. Baltimore: Center for Social Organization of Schools, Johns Hopkins University

Stringfield, S., Millsap, M., Yoder, N., Schaffer, E., Nesselrodt, P., Gamse, B., Brigham, N., Moss, M., Herman, R., & Bedinger, S. (1997). Special strategies studies final report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education

Stringfield, S., & Teddlie, C.(1991). Observers as predictors of schools' multiyear outlier status on achievement tests. The Elementary School Journal, 91(4), 357–376CrossRef Google Scholar

Teddlie, C., Kirby, P., & Stringfield, S.(1989). Effective vs. ineffective schools: Observable differences in the classroom. American Journal of Education, 97(3), 221–236CrossRef Google Scholar

Tharp, R. G. (1997). From at-risk to excellence: Research, theory, and principles for practice (Research Report No. 1). Santa Cruz: Center for Research on Education, Diversity & Excellence, University of California

Valdes, G. (1996). Con respeto: Bridging the distances between culturally diverse families and schools, an ethnographic portrait. New York: Teachers College Press

Yin, R. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage