**STEPPING UP TO THE CHALLENGE:**

**Case Studies of Educational Improvement and Title I in Secondary
Schools**

Michael C. Rubenstein

Jessica K. Wodatch

Policy Studies Associates, Inc.

Washington, D.C.

Prepared for:

U.S. Department of Education

Office of the Under Secretary

2000

Research conducted by Policy Studies Associates, Inc.,

in collaboration with Manpower Demonstration Research Corp.

Glee Ivory Holton, team leader.

This report was prepared for the U. S. Department of Education under
Contract No. EA 94053001.

The views expressed herein are those of the contractor. No official
endorsement by the U. S. Department of Education is intended or should
be inferred.

**U. S. Department of Education**

Richard W. Riley

*Secretary*

**Office of the Under Secretary**

Judith A. Winston

*Under Secretary (A)*

**Planning and Evaluation Service**

Alan L. Ginsburg

*Director*

**Elementary and Secondary Education Division**

Ricky T. Takai

*Director*

June 2000

This report is in the public domain. Authorization to reproduce it in
whole or in part is granted. While permission to reprint thus
publication is not necessary, the citation should be: U. S. Department
of Education, Office of the Under Secretary, Planning and Evaluation
Service, Elementary and Secondary Education Division, *Stepping up to
the Challenge: Case Studies of Educational Improvement and Title I in
Secondary Schools,* Washington, D.C., 2000.

To order copies of this report, write:

ED Pubs

Editorial Publications Center

U. S. Department of Education

P. O. Box 1398

Jessup, MD 20794-1398;

via fax, dial (301) 470‑1244;

or via electronic mail, send your request to:

edpubs@inet.ed.gov.

You may also call toll-free: 1-877-433-7827 (1-877-4-ED-PUBS). If 877
service is not yet available in your area, call 1-800-872-5327
(1-800-USA-LEARN). Those who use a telecommunications device for the
deaf (TDD) or a teletypewriter (TTY), should call 1-800-437-0833.

To order online, point your Internet browser to:
www.ed.gov/pubs/edpubs.html.

This report is also available on the Department\'s Web site at:
www.ed.gov/offices/OUS/eval/elem.html.

On request, thus publication is available in alternative formats, such
as Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette. For more
information, please contact the Department\'s Alternate Format Center
(202) 260-9895 or (202) 205-8113.

**Contents**

**[Page]{.underline}**

**Executive Summary** [v](#__RefHeading___Toc478458965)

**Chapter I. Overview of This Study** [1](#__RefHeading___Toc478458966)

Purposes of the Study [1](#__RefHeading___Toc478458967)

Study Design [3](#__RefHeading___Toc478458968)

Relevant Research on Secondary Schools [9](#__RefHeading___Toc478458969)

Organization of the Report [11](#__RefHeading___Toc478458970)

**Chapter II. Teaching and Learning to High Standards**
[13](#__RefHeading___Toc478458971)

Strategies for Promoting Effective Instruction
[14](#__RefHeading___Toc478458972)

Examples of Strategies Used to Promote Effective Instruction 18

Barriers to Effective Instruction [21](#__RefHeading___Toc478458974)

Helping All Students Reach High Standards
[22](#__RefHeading___Toc478458975)

Ability Grouping [25](#__RefHeading___Toc478458976)

The Role of Title I [27](#__RefHeading___Toc478458977)

**Chapter III. Noninstructional Services That Support Student
Achievement** [31](#__RefHeading___Toc478458978)

Learning Communities [32](#__RefHeading___Toc478458979)

Building Student Engagement [34](#refheading___toc478458980)

Support Services [36](#__RefHeading___Toc478458981)

Career Awareness [39](#__RefHeading___Toc478458982)

Parent Involvement [40](#__RefHeading___Toc478458983)

Community Partnerships 44

**Chapter IV. Policy Implications** [45](#__RefHeading___Toc478458985)

Implications for Federal Policy [45](#__RefHeading___Toc478458986)

Implications for State Policy [46](#__RefHeading___Toc478458987)

Implications for Local Policy [47](#__RefHeading___Toc478458988)

Conclusions [48](#__RefHeading___Toc478458989)

**References** [49](#__RefHeading___Toc478458990)

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc478458965 .anchor}Executive Summary

This study examines the role of Title I in 18 secondary schools (nine
intermediate and nine high schools) that serve disadvantaged student
populations, are engaged in comprehensive school improvement efforts,
and, for the most part, have consistently high or improving student
achievement. It is intended to describe school improvement and the role
of Title I in secondary schools that are engaged in comprehensive reform
efforts and to examine whether Title I is motivating, supporting, or
hindering these efforts. The study was prompted by the changes to Title
I incorporated in the 1994 Improving America's Schools Act, which
refocused Title I on supporting schoolwide efforts to raise academic
standards and student performance. The 1994 changes have also resulted
in more high-poverty secondary schools receiving Title I funds,
prompting an examination of secondary schools serving concentrations of
disadvantaged students.

The purposes of the study were to:

-   describe practices in improving or high-performing secondary schools
    that serve disadvantaged students,

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   determine the function of Title I in these schools, and

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   identify issues related to improvement in secondary schools with
    concentrations of disadvantaged students.

Schools included in the study were selected after a search that included
reviewing files of recent Title I Distinguished Schools and National
Blue Ribbon Schools and asking reform networks, researchers familiar
with secondary schools, and organizations representing secondary schools
to recommend schools that met these three criteria:

-   engagement in a comprehensive school improvement effort---with
    elements supported by research---to raise student achievement,

-   enrollment of a significant proportion of low-income students, and

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   improving or consistently high student achievement, as demonstrated
    by objective measures.

The schools reflect geographic and racial or ethnic diversity and use
varied approaches to school improvement. Among these are:

-   use of alternative instruction and assessment that is meaningful to
    students outside the school context,

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   integration of academic and vocational instruction to prepare
    students for challenging careers or postsecondary education,

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   establishment of rigorous content standards and realignment of
    curriculum, instruction, professional development, and assessment to
    help students reach the standards,

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   use of interdisciplinary, integrated curricula that help students
    understand the interrelationship and practical applications of what
    they are learning, and

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   systematic use of up-to-date student outcome data to analyze
    educational needs, identify educational strategies that respond to
    those needs, and continually reassess and adjust those strategies
    based on objective measures of their success.

Data collection for the study consisted of three-day visits to each of
the 18 schools during the spring and summer of 1998. During the site
visits, experienced researchers interviewed key administrative and
instructional staff, reviewed documents, observed classroom instruction,
and followed students during the school day. Analysis of the results
drew on findings and recommendations from previous research on secondary
schools, including an earlier study of Title I in high-poverty secondary
schools. The results summarized here reflect the experiences of only
these 18 schools; it is not known to what extent the practices
highlighted in this report are also found in similar schools that are
not engaged in comprehensive reform or that have not experienced
consistently high or improving levels of student achievement.

Teaching and Learning

The schools in the study relied on three major strategies to improve and
maintain the quality of teaching in their classrooms, which were:

-   providing teachers with multiple opportunities to expand their
    professional expertise,

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   instituting school accountability systems that require students to
    demonstrate their intellectual growth, and

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   using data collection and analysis to guide all of the school's
    decisions.

***Professional development at many of the schools provided sustained
opportunities for teachers to collaborate with their peers and explore
different solutions to problems they experienced in their classrooms.***
Teachers were more likely to report that professional development had
positive influences on their practice when it addressed a limited set of
objectives in great depth and when it addressed particular needs
identified by school staff. Also, based on teachers' comments, the most
effective professional development activities were those that provided
them with sustained assistance in addressing schoolwide goals and
objectives, instead of discrete needs identified by individual teachers.
In most cases, professional development focused on enhancing teachers'
pedagogical skills rather than their mastery of content.

***Strong state and local accountability systems, when present, exerted
tremendous influence on teaching and learning in these schools, and many
schools also devised supplemental internal accountability systems***.
Schools in states such as Texas and Kentucky, which impose sanctions on
low-performing schools and give cash awards or other recognition to
high-performing schools, geared their instruction to the content on the
states' assessments. In the absence of strong state accountability
systems, local accountability systems, such as those in two districts in
California, also exerted strong influences on schools' curricula.
Schools operating without strong accountability systems adopted student
accountability measures, such as graduation exhibitions for students or
career ladders for teachers, to maintain a focus on schoolwide goals and
objectives.

***Systematic collection and analysis of timely data helped the schools
in the study to assess programs and reforms, and eliminate activities
that did not yield improved achievement.*** In these schools, all staff
were involved in collecting and analyzing data and in making decisions
based on the results. With the help of these data, staff in some schools
made informed decisions to adopt block schedules, eliminate tracking,
select reading materials, and adopt other innovations. Moreover, the use
of data did not end with adoption; rather, schools continued to collect
and review results from their innovations to assess whether they
contributed to improved outcomes.

***Schools in this study exhibited and experienced numerous obstacles to
improving teaching and learning.*** Among the most prominent obstacles
were:

1.  Ability Grouping.

> Most of the 18 schools employed some form of ability grouping that
> restricted low-performing students' access to challenging content and
> the best teachers.

2.  Lack of Focus on Improving Teachers' Knowledge of Subject Matter.

> Although most content standards call for teachers to teach more
> challenging material, most professional development in the sample
> schools concentrated on pedagogy, rather than on upgrading the content
> of classroom instruction.

3.  Insufficient Time for Teachers to Plan and Develop Challenging
    Lessons.

> Upgrading curricula to conform with state and local standards requires
> significant time and effort; however, most schools did not set aside
> enough time for all teachers to engage in that process.

4.  Conflicting Priorities between School-Based Reforms and State or
    Local Standards-Based Reforms.

> In a few cases, efforts to integrate content areas through thematic
> units ran afoul of state or local efforts to devise and employ
> subject-specific content standards.

Noninstructional Services That Support Student Achievement

Virtually all of the schools in the study provided noninstructional
services to foster an environment that was conducive to student
learning. Although they were unwilling to serve as social service
agencies, schools nonetheless saw the value in helping students overcome
some nonacademic barriers to their success. The goals of these services
were to:

-   increase student attendance at school,

-   address students' noninstructional needs,

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   give students opportunities for relationships with caring adults,
    and

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   foster connections between schools, families, and the community.

***All of the larger middle schools and almost half of the high schools
in the study created smaller learning communities---also called teams or
houses---to combat the impersonality of many large schools.*** These
learning communities typically included about 100 students and four to
eight teachers who stayed together for at least two years, giving
students a sense of continuity and teachers an opportunity to get to
know their students' academic and personal strengths and weaknesses.
Block scheduling within each community gave teachers flexibility in
arranging the academic day; it also minimized the amount of time that
students spent in transition between classes. Team leaders, who were
exempt from most or all teaching duties, often helped coordinate team
activities.

***Schools in the study also sought to increase student attendance by
engaging students in the life of the school.*** In several schools,
students could select from varied extracurricular clubs and activities.
In others, they could take part in community service projects. Students
served as peer mediators in several schools, helping their fellow
students resolve disputes peacefully. These opportunities allowed
students to gain self-confidence, experience workplace environments, and
establish links between the school and their community.

***For students with personal or emotional problems that interfered with
learning, schools offered access to support services that included
academic, social, and career counseling and health services.*** Academic
counselors helped students choose courses of study; develop personal,
academic, and career goals; and prepare college applications. Support
groups allowed students with related problems (for example, drug and
alcohol abuse or emotional scars due to physical or sexual abuse) to
seek help and understanding from each other and from trained
professionals. Several schools had their own medical clinics for
students from uninsured families; these clinics offered immunizations,
physical exams, primary health care, and mental health counseling.

***Schools in the study made strong efforts to communicate with parents
and worked hard to keep parents involved with the school***. To combat
the drop-off in parent involvement in upper grades, schools adjusted the
time and location of parent functions to increase attendance. They also
communicated positive news about the school and individual students,
rather than calling parents only when students misbehaved. Some schools
provided services to parents, such as parent resource rooms at the
school and field trips to cultural events around the city.

Role of Title I

The 1994 reauthorization of Title I authorized a new focus for the
program: supporting state and local efforts to help all students achieve
high academic standards. Through the expansion in the number of
schoolwide programs, Title I could help support comprehensive school
reform, enhance the professional expertise of classroom teachers,
provide supplemental support to students who were struggling to reach
the higher content and performance standards, and promote higher levels
of parent involvement. This vision contrasted sharply with the version
of Title I (then Chapter 1) observed in earlier research on secondary
schools, in which Title I operated apart from the regular academic
program and often had lower standards for its students.

***In the schools in this study, Title I provided valuable academic
assistance that helped students succeed in their regular classes.***
Schools used Title I to provide low-achieving students with extra
instruction during and beyond the school day, through the use of
in-class assistants, before- and after-school tutoring, summer programs,
and computer labs that helped students complete class assignments. Title
I also helped reduce student-to-teacher ratios in some schools, enabling
teachers to craft individual lessons for their lowest-achieving
students. Title I also paid for additional instructional materials and
technology that would not have otherwise been available.

***Title I played a limited role in supporting other elements of
schoolwide improvement efforts in the sample schools, yet did not impede
these efforts.*** In these 18 schools, Title I funds were not supporting
extensive professional development related to standards, nor were
schools using Title I to assist in comprehensive school reform efforts
or to increase parent involvement. However, most schools had
incorporated Title I into their improvement efforts. These schools used
Title I to support low-achieving students in the ways described above.

***District Title I coordinators exerted minimal control over the
schools' use of Title I resources, making it difficult for the district
to use Title I to leverage change at the school level.*** School
principals and their designees, not district Title I directors, made
most decisions about the use of Title I funds. Unlike elementary
schools, many of the 18 schools had school-based Title I coordinators
who were responsible for the operation of Title I in the school,
including monitoring the allocation of funds, supervising Title I
teachers, and evaluating program quality. In schools without such
coordinators, principals were more responsible for the operation of the
Title I program, including the selection of Title I staff, than were
district Title I coordinators.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc478458966 .anchor}Chapter I. Overview of This
Study

The 1994 Improving America's Schools Act (IASA) changed the way that
local education agencies (LEAs) select the schools that receive Title I
funds, resulting in an increase in the number of high-poverty secondary
schools receiving funds. LEAs can elect to set grade-level priorities in
allocating funds only after they serve all schools with at least 75
percent poverty rates, regardless of the grade levels they serve. As a
result, more high-poverty secondary schools are receiving Title I funds.
In 1993-94, only 61 percent of the highest-poverty secondary schools
received funds, whereas 93 percent did in 1997-98 (Stullich, Donly, &
Stolzberg, Jan. 1999). In addition, the IASA lowered the poverty
threshold required for schoolwide program status, thus enabling more
secondary schools---which typically have under-reported poverty
levels---to become schoolwide programs. This program model gives schools
greater flexibility in their use of federal resources, allowing them to
focus on schoolwide improvements that benefit all students within
high-poverty schools, including their lowest-performing students.
Finally, IASA refocused Title I on supporting broader school improvement
efforts, stating:

> \[W\]hile Title I and other programs funded under this Act contribute
> to narrowing the achievement gap between children in high-poverty and
> low-poverty schools, such programs need to become even more effective
> in improving schools in order to enable all children to achieve high
> standards (Title I, Sec. 1001).

The combination of greater numbers of high-poverty secondary schools
receiving Title I and changes to the program\'s scope and focus has
stimulated new interest among policy-makers in the role that Title I
plays in secondary schools.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc478458967 .anchor}Purposes of the Study

This study examines school improvement and the role of Title I in 18
secondary schools (nine intermediate and nine high schools) that serve
disadvantaged student populations, are engaged in comprehensive school
improvement efforts, and, for the most part, have improving or
consistently high student achievement. It is intended to describe school
improvement efforts and the role of Title I in secondary schools that
are engaged in comprehensive reform efforts, and to examine whether
Title I is motivating, supporting, or hindering these efforts. The study
was prompted by the changes to Title I incorporated in the 1994
Improving America's Schools Act, which refocused Title I on supporting
schoolwide efforts to raise academic standards and student performance.
The 1994 changes have also resulted in more high-poverty secondary
schools receiving Title I funds, prompting an examination of secondary
schools serving concentrations of disadvantaged students.

The purposes of the study were to:

-   describe practices in improving or high-performing secondary schools
    that serve disadvantaged students,

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   determine the function of Title I in these schools, and

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   identify issues related to improvement in secondary schools with
    concentrations of disadvantaged students.

Title I secondary schools warrant the special attention paid by this
study because the forces that shape them are different from the forces
that affect elementary schools. As a result, secondary schools'
comprehensive reform efforts are likely to be different than the efforts
underway in elementary schools.

Secondary schools differ from elementary schools with respect to the
developmental status of their students, the administrative structure of
the school, and the goals and objectives of the educational program.
Unlike elementary school students, who identify closely with and rely on
their parents, students in intermediate and high schools are struggling
to establish their own identity and often identify more closely with
their peer groups than with their parents. Some students have already
experienced failure in elementary school and have lost their confidence
that they can succeed in school. Another difference between elementary
and secondary schools is that secondary schools tend to be larger---and
therefore more bureaucratic---institutions. Compared with elementary
schools, secondary schools can have three or more times the number of
teachers and administrators, who often are divided into grade level or
interdisciplinary teams, academic departments, tracks, and programs.
Thus, decision-making authority is often more fragmented in secondary
schools.

Finally, senior high schools establish more explicit graduation
standards than elementary schools, and those standards are determined
largely by institutions external to the school. The number of credits
that each student must earn to graduate is typically dictated by a
combination of statewide minimum requirements and admissions standards
for postsecondary institutions. Only certain courses meeting specific
criteria qualify for academic credit toward graduation; courses that
provide supplementary or remedial assistance for students do not count
in meeting graduation requirements in core academic subjects.

The implications of these differences for intermediate and senior high
schools are profound. First, secondary school students may view with
disdain or embarrassment any attempt to separate or distinguish them
from their peers, especially for remedial instruction. Second, schools
are much more concerned with issues surrounding school safety and order,
especially as students test the limits of authority. Third, efforts to
make whole-school reforms can run up against a staff with divided
loyalties and overlapping bureaucratic structures.

Finally, high schools don't have the flexibility they need to modify a
student's schedule to provide supplementary academic assistance, because
they are understandably reluctant to disrupt a student's progress toward
completing the required number of credits. In many secondary schools,
therefore, matters pertaining to teaching and learning sometimes are
overshadowed by bureaucratic obstacles and a concern with maintaining
discipline and high attendance.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc478458968 .anchor}Study Design

With this context and set of purposes in mind, the authors of this study
adopted a design intended to generate rich descriptive information on
Title I and secondary schools.

Site Selection

The study consisted of case studies of nine intermediate schools and
nine senior high schools that met the following criteria:

-   engagement in a comprehensive school improvement effort---with
    elements supported by research---to raise student achievement,

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   enrollment of a significant proportion of low-income students,
    primarily indicated by receipt of Title I funding, and

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   for most schools in the study, improving or consistently high
    student achievement, as demonstrated by objective measures.

The process of identifying potential sites for the study began with
staff from the study team contacting a variety of organizations, reform
networks, and researchers familiar with secondary schools to obtain
their recommendations for schools that might meet the criteria listed
above. These included, among others:

-   National Association of Secondary School Principals,

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   National Middle School Association,

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Council of Great City Schools,

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Coalition of Essential Schools,

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Southern Regional Educational Board's High Schools That Work
    Program,

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   National Staff Development Council,

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Education Commission of the States,

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Clemson University Dropout Prevention Center, and

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Council of Chief State School Officers' Middle Grade School
    Initiative.

In addition, we obtained and reviewed the most recent lists of Title I
Distinguished Schools, Blue Ribbon Schools, and New American High
Schools recognized by the U.S. Department of Education. We also
contacted Title I directors in all 48 contiguous states for additional
recommendations and to determine which of the schools recommended by
other sources received Title I funds. After narrowing the list of
potential sites based on those conversations, we contacted principals at
the sites still under consideration to introduce them to the study,
confirm the basic characteristics of their school improvement efforts,
obtain student achievement data, and probe their preliminary interest in
participating in the study.

The final list of sites included nine intermediate and nine senior high
schools, along with five alternate sites. Of the original 18 schools,
six opted not to participate, typically because the proposed timing of
the site visits to the schools conflicted with other school priorities.
Those six sites were replaced by alternate sites that satisfied the same
criteria. During or just prior to the site visits, two schools (East
Hartford and Pine Bluff) were found to not be Title I schools; we
learned that state or district administrators had relied on outdated
information in answering queries about the schools' Title I status.
However, both of those schools remained in the study because they
satisfied the other criteria; one of the two---East Hartford High
School---receives state compensatory education funds. Several of the
schools are schools of choice (e.g., Fritsche, Ysleta, Timilty), but
none of them have admissions criteria for their students.

More than a year after data collection for the study was completed, the
Ysleta Independent School District (YISD) voluntarily admitted to the
state that some of its high schools---including Ysleta High School---had
been underreporting their dropout rates. The underreporting appears to
be attributable to the absence of clear standards for tracking students'
enrollment status and identifying dropouts, not an attempt to conceal a
higher dropout rate. The district's reporting of student achievement
scores has not been challenged. YISD has put forth a plan to resolve its
data quality issues and to reduce the number of students dropping out of
school. In the meantime, the state has rated the district as
"unacceptable" because of its problems with data quality.

The 18 schools chosen for the study were:

-   Agua Fria High School, Avondale, Arizona,

-   Blanco Middle School, Langlois, Oregon,

-   Eisenhower High School, Blue Island, Illinois,

-   East Hartford High School, East Hartford, Connecticut,

-   Fairdale High School, Fairdale, Kentucky,

-   Fritsche Middle School, Milwaukee, Wisconsin,

-   Hambrick Middle School, Houston, Texas,

-   Highland High School, Bakersfield, California,

-   Hoover High School, San Diego, California,

-   Iroquois Middle School, Louisville, Kentucky,

-   Madison High School, Portland, Oregon,

-   Marshall Middle School, Chicago, Illinois,

-   Minnesota Center (middle school), Cambridge, Minnesota,

-   Peoples Academy (middle school), Morrisville, Vermont,

-   Pine Bluff High School, Pine Bluff, Arkansas,

-   Timilty Middle School, Boston, Massachusetts,

-   Vidrine School, Ville Platte, Louisiana, and

-   Ysleta High School, El Paso, Texas.

As a group, the schools reflect educational and geographic diversity.
School improvement efforts at the 18 schools fell into several
categories, including:

-   use of alternative instruction and assessment that is meaningful
    outside the school context,

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   integration of academic and vocational instruction to prepare
    students for challenging careers or postsecondary education,

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   establishment of rigorous content standards and realignment of
    curriculum, instruction, professional development, and assessment to
    help students reach the standards,

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   use of interdisciplinary, integrated curricula that help students
    understand the interrelationship and practical applications of what
    they are learning, and

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   systematic use of up-to-date student outcome data to analyze
    educational needs, identify educational strategies that respond to
    those needs, and continually reassess and adjust those strategies
    based on objective measures of their success.

The schools, which represent 17 different school districts in 13 states
from every geographic region of the country, are located in urban,
suburban, and rural communities. Virtually all of the schools have
demographically diverse student bodies. Key characteristics of the 18
schools are presented in the following table (only data available at the
time the schools were selected are included).

**Table 1: Characteristics of the 18 Schools in the Study**

+-----------+-----+----+----------+-------+--------------------------+
| *         | **  | *  | **       | **Ur  | **Student Performance**  |
| *School** | Enr | *P | Race/Eth | banic |                          |
|           | oll | ov | nicity** | ity** |                          |
| **City,   | men | er |          |       |                          |
| State**   | t** | ty |          |       |                          |
|           |     | L  |          |       |                          |
|           |     | ev |          |       |                          |
|           |     | el |          |       |                          |
|           |     | ** |          |       |                          |
+===========+=====+====+==========+=======+==========================+
| Agua Fria | 1,  | 2  | 52%      | Sub   | In 1997, ninth- and      |
| High      | 704 | 8% | white    | urban | tenth-graders met or     |
| School    |     |    |          |       | exceeded the state       |
| Avondale, |     |    | 39%      |       | averages in all subjects |
| Arizona   |     |    | Hispanic |       | on the Stanford          |
|           |     |    |          |       | Achievement Test-Ninth   |
|           |     |    | 6%       |       | Edition (SAT-9), except  |
|           |     |    | African  |       | for tenth-grade math.    |
|           |     |    | American |       |                          |
+-----------+-----+----+----------+-------+--------------------------+
| Blanco    | 125 | 5  | 96%      | Rural | In 1997, the percentage  |
| Middle    |     | 6% | white    |       | of Blanco eighth-graders |
| School    |     |    |          |       | who met or exceeded      |
| Langlois, |     |    |          |       | state standards in       |
| Oregon    |     |    |          |       | reading and math         |
|           |     |    |          |       | exceeded the state       |
|           |     |    |          |       | averages by substantial  |
|           |     |    |          |       | margins.                 |
+-----------+-----+----+----------+-------+--------------------------+
| E         | 1,  | 3  | 35%      | Sub   | Eisenhower was named a   |
| isenhower | 162 | 9% | white    | urban | Title I Distinguished    |
| High      |     |    |          |       | School in 1997. From     |
| School    |     |    | 32%      |       | 1996 to 1997,            |
| Blue      |     |    | Hispanic |       | 10th-graders' reading    |
| Island,   |     |    |          |       | scores improved from a   |
| Illinois  |     |    | 32%      |       | 7.9 grade equivalent to  |
|           |     |    | African  |       | a 9.2 grade equivalent.  |
|           |     |    | American |       | Scores in writing and    |
|           |     |    |          |       | math made similar        |
|           |     |    |          |       | improvements.            |
+-----------+-----+----+----------+-------+--------------------------+
| East      | 1,  | 2  | 48%      | Urba  | From 1995 to 1997, East  |
| Hartford  | 753 | 0% | white    | n/Sub | Hartford's scores on the |
| High      |     |    |          | urban | Connecticut Academic     |
| School    |     |    | 27%      |       | Performance Test (CAPT)  |
| East      |     |    | African  |       | increased by 10 percent  |
| Hartford, |     |    | American |       | in math and 21 percent   |
| Co        |     |    |          |       | in language arts. In     |
| nnecticut |     |    | 20%      |       | 1997, the percentage of  |
|           |     |    | Hispanic |       | 10th-graders achieving   |
|           |     |    |          |       | mastery in language arts |
|           |     |    |          |       | exceeded the state       |
|           |     |    |          |       | average.                 |
+-----------+-----+----+----------+-------+--------------------------+
| Fairdale  | 1,  | 5  | 73%      | Urba  | From 1995 to 1997,       |
| High      | 050 | 2% | white    | n/Sub | Fairdale's performance   |
| School    |     |    |          | urban | on the Kentucky          |
|           |     |    | 27%      |       | Instructional Results    |
| Fairdale, |     |    | African  |       | Information System       |
| Kentucky  |     |    | American |       | (KIRIS) tests steadily   |
|           |     |    |          |       | improved. Rated as a     |
|           |     |    |          |       | school "in decline" in   |
|           |     |    |          |       | 1995, Fairdale earned a  |
|           |     |    |          |       | financial reward under   |
|           |     |    |          |       | the state's              |
|           |     |    |          |       | accountability system    |
|           |     |    |          |       | three years later.       |
+-----------+-----+----+----------+-------+--------------------------+
| Fritsche  | 1,  | 6  | 45%      | Urban | On the state's 1997      |
| Middle    | 010 | 6% | African  |       | Knowledge and Concepts   |
| School    |     |    | American |       | Examinations, Fritsche   |
| M         |     |    |          |       | 8^th^ graders exceeded   |
| ilwaukee, |     |    | 44%      |       | district averages in     |
| Wisconsin |     |    | white    |       | reading, math, and       |
|           |     |    |          |       | language arts.           |
|           |     |    | 8%       |       |                          |
|           |     |    | Hispanic |       |                          |
+-----------+-----+----+----------+-------+--------------------------+
| Hambrick  | 962 | 7  | 42%      | Urban | Hambrick's performance   |
| Middle    |     | 8% | Hispanic |       | on the Texas Assessment  |
| School    |     |    |          |       | of Academic Skills       |
| Houston,  |     |    | 36%      |       | (TAAS) have earned it    |
| Texas     |     |    | African  |       | the second-highest       |
|           |     |    | American |       | rating "recognized"      |
|           |     |    |          |       | under the state's        |
|           |     |    | 18%      |       | accountability system    |
|           |     |    | white    |       |                          |
+-----------+-----+----+----------+-------+--------------------------+
| Highland  | 1,  | 3  | 50%      | Urba  | Highland has twice been  |
| High      | 990 | 9% | Hispanic | n/Sub | named a Blue Ribbon      |
| School    |     |    |          | urban | School by the U.S.       |
| Bak       |     |    | 36%      |       | Department of Education, |
| ersfield, |     |    | white    |       | in 1989 and 1996. In     |
| C         |     |    |          |       | 1996, the school's math  |
| alifornia |     |    | 8%       |       | scores on the SAT-9 were |
|           |     |    | African  |       | the highest in the       |
|           |     |    | American |       | district, and its        |
|           |     |    |          |       | combined scores exceeded |
|           |     |    |          |       | the state and district   |
|           |     |    |          |       | averages in 1996 and     |
|           |     |    |          |       | 1997.                    |
+-----------+-----+----+----------+-------+--------------------------+
| Hoover    | 1,  | 9  | 52%      | Urban | A Title I Distinguished  |
| High      | 634 | 5% | Hispanic |       | School in 1997, Hoover   |
| School    |     |    |          |       | experienced steady       |
|           |     |    | 22%      |       | improvements in student  |
| San       |     |    | African  |       | performance on the SAT-9 |
| Diego,    |     |    | American |       | since 1995; from 1995 to |
| C         |     |    |          |       | 1996, reading scores     |
| alifornia |     |    | 19%      |       | improved in every grade. |
|           |     |    | Asian    |       | The annual dropout rate  |
|           |     |    |          |       | has declined from more   |
|           |     |    |          |       | than 12 percent to less  |
|           |     |    |          |       | than 3 percent.          |
+-----------+-----+----+----------+-------+--------------------------+
| Iroquois  | 850 | 6  | 67%      | Urban | Iroquois earned a        |
| Middle    |     | 6% | white    |       | financial reward under   |
| School    |     |    |          |       | the state's              |
| Lo        |     |    | 29%      |       | accountability system.   |
| uisville, |     |    | African  |       |                          |
| Kentucky  |     |    | American |       |                          |
+-----------+-----+----+----------+-------+--------------------------+
| Madison   | 1,  | 3  | 63%      | Urban | Madison scored higher    |
| High      | 042 | 7% | white    |       | than two-thirds of the   |
| School    |     |    |          |       | state's high schools on  |
| Portland, |     |    | 16%      |       | the state writing        |
| Oregon    |     |    | Asian    |       | assessment in 1995.      |
|           |     |    |          |       |                          |
|           |     |    | 11%      |       |                          |
|           |     |    | African  |       |                          |
|           |     |    | American |       |                          |
|           |     |    |          |       |                          |
|           |     |    | 8%       |       |                          |
|           |     |    | Hispanic |       |                          |
+-----------+-----+----+----------+-------+--------------------------+
| Marshall  | 690 | 8  | 68%      | Urban | Marshall's seventh- and  |
| Middle    |     | 6% | Hispanic |       | eighth-grade reading     |
| School    |     |    |          |       | scores on the Iowa Test  |
| Chicago,  |     |    | 20%      |       | of Basic Skills (ITBS)   |
| Illinois  |     |    | white    |       | improved steadily from   |
|           |     |    |          |       | 1995 to 1997, equaling   |
|           |     |    | 7%       |       | or exceeding district    |
|           |     |    | African  |       | averages in each of the  |
|           |     |    | American |       | last two years.          |
+-----------+-----+----+----------+-------+--------------------------+
| Minnesota | 155 | 2  | 95%      | Rural | During the 1997-98       |
| Center    |     | 8% | white    |       | school year, the         |
|           |     |    |          |       | percentage of students   |
| (middle   |     |    |          |       | meeting the state        |
| school)   |     |    |          |       | standard in reading      |
|           |     |    |          |       | equaled the state        |
| C         |     |    |          |       | average, even though     |
| ambridge, |     |    |          |       | Minnesota Center has a   |
| Minnesota |     |    |          |       | more disadvantaged       |
|           |     |    |          |       | student population than  |
|           |     |    |          |       | the average district.    |
+-----------+-----+----+----------+-------+--------------------------+
| Peoples   | 536 | 3  | 96%      | Rural | In 1997, the percentage  |
| Academy   |     | 2% | white    |       | of eighth-graders        |
|           |     |    |          |       | meeting or exceeding the |
| (middle   |     |    |          |       | state standard in        |
| school)   |     |    |          |       | reading exceeded the     |
|           |     |    |          |       | state average. Student   |
| Mor       |     |    |          |       | performance in math      |
| risville, |     |    |          |       | skills exceeded the      |
| Vermont   |     |    |          |       | state average in 1996,   |
|           |     |    |          |       | the most recent data     |
|           |     |    |          |       | available at the time of |
|           |     |    |          |       | site selection.          |
+-----------+-----+----+----------+-------+--------------------------+
| Pine      | 1,  | 4  | 75%      | Rural | According to data        |
| Bluff     | 475 | 3% | African  |       | reported by the High     |
| High      |     |    | American |       | Schools That Work        |
| School    |     |    |          |       | network, Pine Bluff's    |
| Pine      |     |    | 24%      |       | performance on the       |
| Bluff,    |     |    | white    |       | National Assessment of   |
| Arkansas  |     |    |          |       | Educational Progress     |
|           |     |    |          |       | (NAEP) has improved in   |
|           |     |    |          |       | all areas. For instance, |
|           |     |    |          |       | the percentage of Pine   |
|           |     |    |          |       | Bluff students achieving |
|           |     |    |          |       | at the proficient level  |
|           |     |    |          |       | in math increased from   |
|           |     |    |          |       | 18 percent in 1993 to 41 |
|           |     |    |          |       | percent in 1996.         |
+-----------+-----+----+----------+-------+--------------------------+
| Timilty   | 600 | 8  | 46%      | Urban | Timilty's reading and    |
| Middle    |     | 3% | African  |       | math scores on the SAT-9 |
| School    |     |    | American |       | exceeded district        |
| Boston,   |     |    | 39%      |       | averages, and rose       |
| Mass      |     |    | Hispanic |       | substantially from 1996  |
| achusetts |     |    |          |       | to 1997. They also rose  |
|           |     |    | 9% white |       | from 97 to 98.           |
+-----------+-----+----+----------+-------+--------------------------+
| Vidrine   | 564 | 5  | 81%      | Rural | In 1997, passing rates   |
| School    |     | 8% | white    |       | on the Louisiana         |
|           |     |    |          |       | Educational Assessment   |
| (Pre-K    |     |    | 17%      |       | Program (LEAP) in        |
| through   |     |    | African  |       | reading and math         |
| 12 but    |     |    | American |       | exceeded district and    |
| only      |     |    |          |       | state averages.          |
| middle    |     |    |          |       |                          |
| school    |     |    |          |       |                          |
| studied)  |     |    |          |       |                          |
|           |     |    |          |       |                          |
| Ville     |     |    |          |       |                          |
| Platte,   |     |    |          |       |                          |
| Louisiana |     |    |          |       |                          |
+-----------+-----+----+----------+-------+--------------------------+
| Ysleta    | 1,  | 9  | 94%      | Urban | From 1996 to 1997, the   |
| High      | 797 | 0% | Hispanic |       | percentage of            |
| School    |     |    |          |       | 10th-graders passing the |
|           |     |    |          |       | reading portion of TAAS  |
| El Paso,  |     |    |          |       | increased from 79        |
| Texas     |     |    |          |       | percent to 85 percent;   |
|           |     |    |          |       | passing rates in math    |
|           |     |    |          |       | improved from 63 percent |
|           |     |    |          |       | to 66 percent.           |
+-----------+-----+----+----------+-------+--------------------------+

Data Collection

A team of two experienced researchers visited each site for three days
during spring of 1998, with one year-round school visited during summer
of 1998. During each visit, the team interviewed the principal, other
school administrators, counselors, parents and community partners, and
the district\'s Title I coordinator using semi-structured interview
protocols. In addition, they conducted focus groups with at least two
groups of teachers (including all or most Title I instructional staff)
and one group of students, and observed a minimum of six classes.
Finally, each visitor spent half a day observing a low-achieving student
during school hours to observe his or her classes and interactions with
adults in the school. For both the student focus groups and the student
observations, Title I targeted assistance schools were asked to select
Title I students from different genders and races. In Title I schoolwide
programs, schools were asked to select students who were low-achieving.

After returning from the visit, site visitors wrote case studies of each
school, which were incorporated in this report. Principals at each
school had the opportunity to review the case studies for accuracy and
completeness, but the descriptions and conclusions in the case studies
are entirely those of the site visitors.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc478458969 .anchor}Relevant Research on Secondary
Schools

Available research on secondary schools played a key role in the process
of selecting schools for the study and in framing the study's research
questions and data collection methods. This section reviews some of the
findings that helped guide data collection.

During the 1980s, secondary schools were the subject of several major
studies (Bottoms, Presson & Johnson, 1992; Boyer, 1983; Carnegie Council
on Adolescent Development, 1989, 1990; Hill, Foster, & Gendler, 1990;
Louis & Miles, 1990; Sizer, 1984). In their examinations of intermediate
and senior high schools, these studies highlighted problems, efforts
already underway in some schools to address those problems, and
additional steps necessary to improve secondary schools. Beyond finding
schools with either improving or above average student achievement, we
sought schools that reflected what that research found to be key
ingredients in successful secondary schools.

What is perhaps most remarkable about these and other studies that have
taken a careful look at secondary schools is the extent to which they
generally agreed about the traits that characterize successful secondary
schools. Although they differed on some of the details, most agreed that
successful secondary schools are those that:

-   have "clear and simple missions focus\[ed\] on students" (Hill et
    al., 1990, p. 56),

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   are concerned primarily with results rather than process,

-   hold all students to high standards, exposing them all to
    challenging curricula by minimizing or eliminating ability grouping,

-   work to improve classroom instruction so that it challenges and
    motivates students to strive for excellence, and

-   seek and obtain parental and community support for and involvement
    with the school.

To achieve its goal of highlighting effective practices in high-poverty
secondary schools, the current study sought out and selected schools
that met these criteria. Although few of the selected schools rate
highly on all or even most of these criteria, all of the schools excel
in at least one of these areas, and they are making efforts to achieve
the other standards for success.

To further guide the development of research questions for the current
study, we reviewed the findings from the only other study that has
focused exclusively on the role and operation of Title I in secondary
schools (see Zeldin, Rubenstein, Bogart, Tashjian, & McCollum, 1991).
Using a case study design similar to this study's, the earlier study
identified 20 Title I (then Chapter 1) secondary schools that had
exhibited large gains in student performance on standardized tests
compared with other Title I secondary schools in their states. In
addition to documenting the contribution of Title I in these schools,
the report also examined the extent to which Title I and dropout
prevention services overlapped in the schools.

Key findings from Zeldin et al. (1991) revealed that secondary schools
with high-performing

Title I programs did not necessarily possess the traits of effective
secondary schools identified by the research. In particular:

-   Title I often operated as a distinct program that did little to help
    students succeed in their core academic classes. Title I staff
    rarely collaborated with regular classroom teachers or with dropout
    prevention program staff, even though they often served many of the
    same students.

-   Title I programs made frequent use of the "replacement" model, which
    allowed them to substitute students' core academic classes with
    Title I classes that often had lower standards and expectations than
    non-Title I classes. These classes sometimes were tailored to the
    particular needs of low-performing students.

-   Schoolwide programs were not widely used among the secondary schools
    in the study. Only one of the 20 schools in the study operated a
    schoolwide program. Schools attributed the lack of schoolwide
    programs to the 75 percent poverty threshold, which was widely
    deemed to be too high for most secondary schools.

Zeldin et al. (1991) concluded with several suggestions for improving
the operation of Title I in secondary schools, including:

-   To minimize the stigma that students experience when they are
    singled out for remediation, secondary schools should do more to
    integrate Title I services with regular instruction.

-   Title I staff should work more closely with staff in other programs
    (dropout prevention, health, parent outreach, and education) that
    address the needs of their students.

-   To maximize students' motivation and interest in school, Title I
    instruction should help them improve their skills by using
    challenging content and age-appropriate materials;\
    Title I teachers should also give their students extensive
    opportunities to apply what they learn in a practical way and to
    express themselves verbally and in writing.

# 

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc478458970 .anchor}Organization of the Report

This report presents our findings across all 18 schools, including the
traits that contribute to their success, the schools' use of Title I
funds and ways in which the program does or does not contribute to their
success, and policy conclusions based on these schools\' experiences.
Following this introductory chapter, Chapter II discusses the case study
schools' approaches to teaching and learning, focusing on the strategies
they use to maintain high standards for all of their students. Chapter
III describes the schools' efforts to provide students with
noninstructional support that creates a comfortable and safe learning
environment and that helps students overcome barriers to learning.
Chapter IV offers conclusions about Title I's role in these schools.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc478458971 .anchor}Chapter II. Teaching and
Learning to High Standards

Research and everyday experience confirm that good teaching, especially
in schools serving large numbers of disadvantaged students, makes a
difference. Virtually every successful adult can point to at least one
teacher whose intellect, enthusiasm, and faith inspired him or her to
excel.

In their efforts to improve student achievement, administrators have
designed more complex courses and more stringent accountability systems.
If students fail to master the new content, they may not earn their high
school diplomas, and their teachers and principals may suffer additional
consequences. To help their students succeed in this environment of
higher expectations, diverse student populations, and intense
accountability, teachers must be able to (1) understand and be able to
teach more challenging content, (2) use a wider repertoire of
instructional strategies, and (3) administer and interpret results from
more complex assessments.

For many, good teaching is easier to recognize than to define, and
standards for good teaching vary by grade level and subject area.
However, one group of scholars (Newmann & Wehlege, 1995) has developed
standards for instruction that, when carried out in classrooms, have
measurably improved student achievement. Their research was based on
findings from 24 schools involved in restructuring as well as reanalysis
of data from the National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988
(NELS:88). Their four standards for effective instruction were:

-   Students engage in higher-order thinking by synthesizing and
    explaining information and reaching their own conclusions about the
    topics they study.

-   Teachers introduce students to established branches of
    learning---accepted facts, concepts, and theories---with enough
    depth that students develop a complex understanding of the subject
    matter, including alternative explanations for different phenomena.

-   Students interact with the teacher and each other to expand their
    understanding of existing branches of learning.

-   Classroom learning has value beyond the classroom, enabling students
    to make connections between what they learn and their lives outside
    of school.

This chapter explores the efforts of the 18 schools in this study sample
to translate these principles into effective teaching.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc478458972 .anchor}Strategies for Promoting
Effective Instruction

***As a group, the schools included in this study maintain a focus on
promoting and supporting the type of teaching reflected in the Newmann
and Wehlege standards.*** They recognize that teaching represents
schools' core function, and they allocate time and resources to so that
effective teachers can maintain their high expectations and less
effective teachers can improve their practice. They have invested in
efforts to align their curricula with the state or local standards that
their students are expected to master, and they have used regular
professional development to address the areas that need the most
improvement. These schools have used three different approaches to
continue their commitment to good teaching, which are:

-   providing teachers with multiple opportunities to expand their
    professional expertise,

-   instituting school accountability systems that require students to
    demonstrate their intellectual growth, and

-   using data collection and analysis to guide all of the school's
    decisions.

Professional Development

***In many of the schools visited for this study, professional
development enables teachers to explore issues in depth and develop
effective solutions that are consistent with their day-to-day
experience.*** In this way, professional development "engage\[s\]
teachers in the pursuit of genuine questions, problems, and curiosities,
over time, in ways that leave a mark on perspective, policy, and
practice" (Little, 1993, p. 133). Thus, these schools apply the same
standards of effective teaching in both their classrooms and their
professional development programs. School leaders encourage teachers to
conduct their own research, expand their knowledge of pedagogy, and
reflect on their practice with their peers, all with a focus on
improving their performance in the classroom. Professional development
strategies that teachers identified as being the most beneficial to them
were those that provided sustained support toward achieving a limited
set of objectives identified by school staff. Teachers in these schools
determine priorities for professional development collectively, ensuring
that they address the teachers' professional needs and the school's
reform agenda. With this approach, teachers develop the expertise and
judgment to translate broad standards and curriculum guidelines into
daily lessons that work for their students.

In some schools, outside experts make significant contributions to
teachers' professional growth, not as instructors but as resources. At
Houston\'s **Hambrick Middle School**, a team of university professors
collaborates with 20 teachers to develop and refine new lessons that
promote higher-order thinking by students and incorporate state
standards. One professor holds monthly sessions to provide guidance as
teachers develop their units, and another visits each classroom once a
month to provide reactions as teachers use the lessons. To communicate
the importance of these and other opportunities for professional growth,
the principal includes ratings of teachers' use of new knowledge and
skills from professional development in her annual evaluations. A
partnership between **East Hartford High School** and the University of
Connecticut gives the high school access to professors and well-trained
teacher candidates. The professors participate in curriculum development
efforts, but the biggest resource has been the teacher-candidates. Not
only have the candidates received valuable hands-on experience while
helping to improve teacher-student ratios, but they in turn also have
shared their training to spark changes throughout the school. Explaining
his transformation from "a sage on the stage" to a more interactive
style of teaching, one science teacher said, "The way I did that was
through student teachers. The student teacher got students into a group,
and I thought that was cheating. But it works."

Other schools in this study have relied strictly on their own staff to
foster a collegial atmosphere conducive to professional growth. In
Kentucky, **Fairdale High School's** Critical Friends Group brings
together teachers from all disciplines to discuss and give their
thoughts and ideas on lesson plans. Three staff members received
training in moderating these discussions, and they maintain a supportive
environment in which to address issues central to teaching. At each
meeting, as many as 30 teachers gather to raise issues about classroom
management or instruction that have come up in their classes, or they
submit lesson plans that they believe did not work well in class. The
group focuses on providing constructive professional reactions, adhering
to their motto: "Don't work on the teacher, work on the work." Several
teachers reported that the group discussions helped them refine lesson
plans so that students produced higher quality work. The strength of
this approach is that it addresses practical concerns associated with
day-to-day teaching while engaging teachers in a dialogue about the
larger purposes of their work.

***Competing priorities and lack of resources prevented some schools
from effectively using professional development to spur school
improvement.*** Whereas the examples above reflect schoolwide dedication
to certain priorities to be addressed by professional development (for
example, developing more challenging lessons), other schools in our
sample were not able to establish clear priorities, so professional
development contributed little to school improvement. In these schools,
professional development resources were spread thinly across departments
or programs, all with separate priorities, thereby rendering
professional development ineffective. In a few schools, this meant that
there were no resources available to carry out school or district
priorities. For instance, in one school, the district wanted teachers to
use the theory of multiple intelligences as a guiding principle in
developing instructional units, but teachers complained that they lacked
the planning time necessary to work with the theory's implications for
teaching and learning and develop new lessons.

Assessment and Accountability

***State and local accountability systems that are based on high
standards and either impose strong sanctions or mete out meaningful
rewards prompted many of the schools to upgrade and align their
curricula with state or local standards.*** In Texas and Kentucky, where
low-performing schools are subject to sanctions and high-performing
schools receive financial rewards, the four schools in those states all
adapted their curriculum to keep it aligned with state content
standards. Decision-making in these schools tended to be driven by
results of the assessments. Also, ability grouping was less prevalent in
these schools than in schools that were not held accountable for
teaching specified content. For schools in states like California and
Illinois that have weak or nonexistent accountability systems, local
standards and assessments carried significantly more weight. For
example, freshmen English classes at **Highland High School** in
Bakersfield, Calif., were geared toward helping students pass the
district's writing competency test, which is required for graduation.

***A few of the schools in this study have developed their own
assessments and accountability systems to induce more challenging
instruction.*** While the external assessments and accountability
systems mandated by states or districts exert tremendous influence on
these schools' curricula, the standards and assessments provide
virtually no guidance about how content should be taught or how teachers
can help students understand the content of the curriculum. State
assessments and accountability systems, in short, provide only targets
that schools must figure out how to reach on their own. Some of these
schools have chosen, therefore, to develop their own assessments that
offer more guidance to teachers about organizing their instruction in
ways that cultivate students' intellectual growth. In developing the
assessments, teachers draw from state and district content standards so
that the assessments measure the extent to which students have mastered
the content required by those standards.

**Hoover High School** in San Diego has turned to portfolios and public
presentations to promote active learning in all classrooms. Every six
weeks**,** students submit a portfolio consisting of samples of work
they have completed. Teachers assess portfolio contents against the
school's own learning outcomes to make sure that course work is
promoting independent learning. To graduate, each student must
successfully present and defend a senior exhibition of original work to
a panel of two community members and a teacher. During the 45-minute
presentation, the student must explain how the exhibition demonstrates
Hoover's learning outcomes, including the ability to conduct research,
use technology, organize data, communicate clearly, and work with
others. "Business people are blown away \[by the exhibitions\]," the
principal said.

At the time of our visit, **Agua Fria** was the only high school
district in Arizona to voluntarily participate in that state\'s career
ladder program for teachers. Career ladder is a performance-based
incentive and professional development program that rewards teachers
based on their instructional performance and the academic progress of
their students. According to a program coordinator, \"It focuses on
student achievement instead of \[teachers\'\] participation in staff
development. . . . We focus more on changes in what happened with
students in the classroom.\" Teachers wishing to join the program attend
a two-day orientation session, and then participate in additional
professional development activities. To advance to the next level on the
ladder, teachers must design and carry out a six-week instructional unit
that is evaluated by a three-member peer review team; many units undergo
several revisions before being approved. Student achievement in their
classrooms is also a factor for teachers in determining advancement up
the career ladder. As teachers advance on the career ladder, they earn
higher salaries.

Analysis of Data

***Several of the schools visited for this study have learned that
basing their decisions on a systematic analysis of data about their
schools enables teachers to employ practices that improve students'
performance and discard those that do not.*** The importance of data as
the basis for decisions, now widely recognized in the corporate world
with the emergence of "continuous improvement" management strategies,
has not been absorbed by most schools. Certainly, schools administer
frequent assessments, but many closely guard the results and rarely
analyze them in any formal way. Moreover, they almost never explore
other sources of data beyond test scores. By contrast, in several of the
schools we visited, leaders do not make decisions before the school
community has had a chance to look at a range of data and decide the
next course of action.

Since 1991, **Fritsche Middle School** in Milwaukee has based its
decision-making on the central question: How do you know what you've
achieved unless you measure it? School staff regularly collect data from
annual surveys of the entire school community (including former
students), telephone calls, attendance sheets, discipline referrals, and
other sources. Data collection is not random; each time the school
adopts a new program or strategy, it determines ahead of time what data
it needs to make critical decisions about whether or not to continue it.
Faculty committees review results regularly and use them to justify new
programs as well as to change or cancel existing programs. To track the
data it needs, Fritsche developed its own record-keeping system that
lets it disaggregate the data based on its needs. Using this system,
Fritsche has used data to institute several new programs that have
yielded improved student outcomes (see box, right).

**The Vidrine School** in Louisiana reserves two faculty meetings each
month to give staff the opportunity to review data about the school and
its students. Based on those analyses and a comprehensive needs
assessment, the school adopted changes such as more consistent classroom
management policies, a new reading program, and a study skills class to
help students prepare for college admissions and high school equivalency
tests.

Examples of Strategies Used to Promote Effective Instruction

The commitment of schools in the study to promoting high-quality
teaching has yielded some outstanding lessons and units. Visitors found
examples of these lessons in classes representing different subject
areas, grade levels, and teaching styles. Among the characteristics
shared by these lessons are:

-   subject matter that reflects challenging state or local content
    standards,

-   instructional strategies that both reinforce and build on what
    students already know,

-   opportunities for students to learn and apply new skills while
    solving complex or real-life problems,

-   teams of students working together on a common assignment, and

-   final products that require students to synthesize what they have
    learned.

Strategies to promote effective instruction fell into three categories:
(1) instruction that integrates vocational and academic content, (2)
interdisciplinary instruction, and (3) experiential learning. Here we
offer examples of each type.

Integrating Vocational and Academic Content

Integrating vocational and academic content \"enables students to make a
connection between abstract academic studies and actual problems, tasks,
and situation encountered in the workplace\" (Bottoms et al., 1992, p.
5). This finding is consistent with Newmann and Wehlege's fourth
principle that classroom learning should have value beyond the
classroom. The High Schools That Work network of schools has shown that
schools that employ this strategy demonstrate dramatic gains in student
achievement (Bottoms et al., 1992). Also, infusing academic course work
into vocational education helps raise the standards in those classes and
avoids stigmatizing vocational students.

At **Pine Bluff High School** in Arkansas, the Advanced Integrated Model
(AIM) project gave academic and vocational teaching staff shared
planning time to develop integrated units and review information about
effective practices. Supported in part by the High Schools That Work
network of schools, a core team of teachers that included the head of
the English department and three others from vocational departments met
weekly to brainstorm ideas for integrated units. An example of a past
project was the Romantic Landscapes Project, which combined English,
horticulture, and computer-assisted design (CAD) classes. Students read
and compared neo-classical and Romantic literature. They then used a
computerized landscaping software program to design a garden influenced
by Romantic design concepts. Teachers evaluated the final designs based
on their use of those concepts.

Interdisciplinary Instruction

Interdisciplinary instruction breaks down many of the artificial
barriers between content areas, giving students the opportunity to study
a subject from different perspectives***.*** By permitting students to
see how different disciplines relate to each other, they achieve the
depth of understanding of the topics they study that Newmann and
Wehlege's research shows to be important.

Social studies classes at **Marshall Middle School** in Chicago
incorporate some math concepts into their Perfect City Project, which
requires students to design a perfect city. Among other assignments,
teams of students must draw a map of their city to scale, justify the
location for their city in writing, and construct graphs and charts
depicting demographic information about their city. A parallel project
in math requires students to use mathematical concepts to design and
build a bridge using toothpicks and other building supplies. Each team
of students is given a budget and checking account with which to
purchase their building materials. To encourage teams to use their time
efficiently, the prices of building supplies increase each day. Part of
the assignment requires students to incorporate their bridge into their
design for a perfect city.

An aeronautics unit designed by a Title I teacher and a special
education teacher at **Blanco Middle School** in Oregon combined math,
reading, language arts, science, and geography. Students read a novel
about Amelia Earhart in reading, and, for language arts, they kept a
journal about flying. In science they learned about the physics of
flying, and they used math to calculate distances on scale maps, which
were also used to study geography. The unit culminated with students
taking 25-minute flights in pairs at a local airport and then completing
a simulated air race to four different airports in which students had to
overcome obstacles such as thunderstorms. The winners received prizes
and certificates.

Experiential Learning

Experiential learning takes students outside of the classroom to learn
by doing original work or research. More than traditional field trips,
where students spend most of their time listening to others, these
experiences assign students real responsibilities for completing an
important task or collecting and analyzing data to be used for other
purposes. This approach, like integrating vocational and academic
content, makes classroom learning relevant beyond the school walls.

The Blanco Environmental Enhancement Project (BEEP) at **Blanco Middle
School** is a seven-acre plot that teachers use for a comprehensive
science curriculum. Students spend 27 weeks learning about watersheds,
soils, plants, and wildlife at BEEP. At the end of their time in BEEP,
students develop a land use proposal with the knowledge they have
gained. A partnership with the state parks and the fish and wildlife
bureaus gives students even more opportunities for outdoor learning.
Students have helped staff from these agencies with river restoration
projects, tree planting to prevent erosion, salinity testing of rivers
to measure the effects on frogs, and soil studies. Speaking for other
students, one student said, \"We like these things because it\'s
hands-on, you get to be outdoors. It helps you remember what you
learned.\"

**Madison High School** students embarked on a stern-wheeler trip
sponsored by United Grain, during which they learned about the
company\'s operation, the history of the Portland, Ore., waterfront, and
processes for mixing and selling grain. Several groups of students then
developed emergency evacuation plans for the company and presented their
proposals to the company\'s chief executive officer, who selected the
plan that best met the evacuation criteria.

For an eighth-grade science unit on caves at Louisville's **Iroquois
Middle School**, students spent a day working with an earth scientist in
a cave. The scientist conducted a hands-on science lesson with students
and then helped them collect information on the climate and geology of
the cave. Back at school, students used what they had learned to
transform their classroom into a cave, complete with climate control and
stalactites and stalagmites.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc478458974 .anchor}Barriers to Effective
Instruction

Most of the schools in the study encountered some form of barrier to
effective instruction. Some barriers were surmountable, but others
continue to vex efforts to use effective classroom practices.

Lack of Focus on Improving Teachers' Content Knowledge

None of the schools in this study had a strong, consistent focus on
upgrading teachers' abilities with the content they are responsible for
teaching. Many of the new content standards require teachers to teach
new or more challenging content, yet many teachers are not familiar
enough with that content to develop adequate lessons. Rather than
addressing those deficiencies, professional development opportunities in
these schools typically set aside time for teachers to develop
integrated instructional units and enhance their pedagogical skills, not
their mastery of content. Certainly, many teachers in these schools have
strong backgrounds in their content areas, which was reflected in some
of the instruction we observed. However, most of them developed that
expertise on their own, not at the school's or district's initiative.
While virtually all of the schools expended time and money on aligning
their curriculum with state and local standards, there was not usually
an accompanying focus on expanding teachers' knowledge of the content,
so they could develop more challenging or interesting units.

Insufficient Time Available to Plan and Implement Challenging Lessons

In some of the schools, teachers receive only a handful of professional
development days, and the agendas for some of those days are determined
by the district. One team of Title I teachers all but stopped developing
interdisciplinary units because funding cuts forced the school to cancel
the team\'s weekly planning sessions. To give teachers additional time,
some schools have resorted to redesigning their school day. **Timilty
Middle School** in Boston received a waiver from the school system to
extend its school days on Monday through Thursday so that it can send
students home early on Fridays, giving teachers time to plan together
and attend workshops presented by school staff. Chicago's **Marshall
Middle School** takes a similar approach, opening its doors ten minutes
early every day so that once a month it can dismiss students early and
give teachers a half day for professional development. These early
release days at Marshall are used for four different activities: house
planning, departmental meetings, schoolwide workshops related to its
professional development priorities, and development of the school
improvement plan.

Conflicting Priorities

Most of the schools we visited have adapted well to standards-based
reform efforts originating in their states or districts. They have
reviewed the new standards and taken steps to align their curriculum
with those standards. Staff at a small number of schools, however, said
that content-based standards conflict with the school\'s efforts to
integrate content across disciplines. A principal at one school where
staff invested substantial time in developing integrated units before
the district issued content-based standards said, \"It\'s like giving
birth and then having to give up your child.\" Another school virtually
abandoned its efforts at cross-departmental collaboration after the
state released content-based standards, citing the pressure to \"cover\"
all of the content in standards documents for each discipline. At the
same time, standards can encourage teachers to focus on areas that
students will need to master rather than attempting to cover all topics
in cursory fashion.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc478458975 .anchor}Helping All Students Reach High
Standards

Maintaining high standards with a content-rich curriculum usually means
that some students will struggle to learn the material and need extra
academic support to achieve the standards. The 18 schools in this study
are helping these students through the use of systematic strategies,
most of which blend into students' regular school schedule. The two most
common approaches to providing this extra assistance---each used by
seven schools in the study---both involve providing extra instruction to
low-achieving students during the school day. They are: hiring certified
teachers or instructional aides to provide in-class assistance to
low-performing students and establishing a computer or reading lab that
is available to students on a drop-in basis or as a regular part of
their course schedule (often in place of a study hall). Other popular
approaches include reducing class sizes, extending learning time beyond
the normal school year or day, and offering alternative educational
programs. Virtually all of these efforts are funded in part or in full
by Title I or other compensatory education funds. The ultimate objective
for all schools is to keep students from falling behind or to help them
catch up after having fallen behind in earlier grades.

Extra Instruction during the School Day

***A common strategy that these schools use to help low-achievers is
setting aside time during the school day to provide extra
instruction.*** Much of this supplementary instruction revolves around
helping students meet state or local performance standards on
standardized tests or succeed in their regular classes. More than
tutoring, these sessions introduce new material or provide new learning
opportunities for students. The basic message for students in these
classes is that failure is not acceptable.

The Title I teacher at Oregon's **Blanco Middle School** pre-teaches
accelerated math to low-achieving students to prepare them for their
regular math classes. Students miss computer science, math, or physical
education classes to attend sessions with fewer than 10 students to
learn the math skills they will be expected to know later in their
regular math classes. According to one student, the classes "help us
plug holes in our math skills" before they fall behind in class. In El
Paso, Texas, **Ysleta High School\'s** Academic Enrichment course for
tenth-graders prepares students to pass the Texas Assessment of Academic
Skills, which is required for graduation. All tenth-graders, except the
top 15 percent of the class, rotate through three three-week sessions
preparing them for the math, writing, and reading portions of the test,
respectively. The academic top 15 percent of tenth-graders attend an
advanced reading and math rotation. According to students, "They \[the
teachers\] keep at you until you get it. If the kids don\'t learn, it\'s
their fault, not the teachers."

***Study schools also use resources dedicated to helping low-achieving
students for in-school tutoring.*** The **Vidrine School** in Louisiana
reduces class time on Fridays to create time for a weekly 45-minute
activity period that the school uses for tutoring, make-up tests, and
visits to the library. The principal groups students that need help in
each academic area (as determined by their teachers) and assigns groups
to teachers for tutoring during the activity period. This approach has
virtually eliminated course failures attributed to missing tests,
because students can use this time to make up missed tests. The Tutorial
Assistance Program (TAP) lab at Illinois's **Eisenhower High School**
gives Title I students access to one-on-one assistance with course work,
aided by information resources and technology. At least three teachers
or aides staff the lab continuously, working with the Title I students
who come in during their study hall periods to get help with their class
assignments and homework. The lab houses 15 multimedia computers and an
extensive collection of instructional and reference software and
materials to help students produce reports and find information they
need.

Arizona's **Agua Fria High School** takes a multi-faceted approach to
providing in-school assistance. Title I students performing in the
bottom quartile take a reading class, which is offered as an elective.
The curriculum is "aligned with state academic standards," but one Title
I teacher said, "It's been difficult finding materials. . . . \[A lot
of\] materials are outdated and low level." As a result, some teachers
have been working with a professor from Arizona State University to
develop standards-based materials. Title I students who do not need to
attend the direct instruction reading class receive other services. Most
students in this group receive Title I tutorial services, which are
offered during the school day and before and after school. Some Title I
freshmen participate in SMART (Students Making A Real Try), which
includes one-on-one tutoring during their study hall period.

Small Classes

***Many of the teachers in these secondary schools believe that small
class sizes benefit low-achieving students because teachers can spend
more time working with them one-on-one or in small groups.*** According
to one study (Pate-Bain, Achilles, Boyd-Zaharias, & McKenna, 1992), in
addition to the benefits for low-achievers, small classes can also help
teachers to:

-   find more opportunities to cover the curriculum in greater depth,

-   spend less time on administrative functions, leaving more time for
    teaching, and

-   improve their monitoring of student behavior.

Unfortunately, most of the research on the benefits of small class sizes
has focused on the primary grades, so little is known about whether they
are beneficial in secondary schools. In spite of the lack of evidence
for secondary schools, teachers in this study cited the same benefits as
have been found in the elementary grades, especially the advantages for
low-performing students who need more attention from teachers. As a
result, several schools, including Chicago's **Marshall Middle School,**
Boston's **Timilty Middle School,** and El Paso's **Ysleta High
School**, have made reducing class size a priority and use compensatory
education funds to reduce class sizes in core subjects.

Extended Learning Time

***Other schools have chosen to extend learning time beyond the
traditional school year***. To help students make the transition from
middle to high school, both Illinois's **Eisenhower** and Connecticut's
**East Hartford high schools** offer summer transition programs for
incoming ninth-graders at risk of performing poorly in high school.
These programs are designed to help ease students' anxiety about
entering large high schools. Eisenhower\'s Title I summer program
piggybacks on the district\'s summer program but uses short hands-on
interdisciplinary units that introduce students to high school-level
content. Each of three week-long units explores a single topic or theme
in-depth. East Hartford\'s program also lasts for three weeks, during
which at-risk eighth-graders review the study and academic skills they
will need to succeed in high school. Faculty tutors assigned to each
participating student continue to mentor and tutor the students during
the school year.

As part of its year-round schedule, the **Minnesota Center** middle
school offers week-long intersession programs during school vacations.
Teachers identify and recommend six to eight students from each grade
who need extra instruction during the intersession periods. The goal of
the intersessions, which are funded through Title I, is to help students
catch up at key points in the school year, instead of waiting until it
is too late to help them. Teachers work with students individually or in
small groups during the intersessions.

Alternative Schooling

***Finally, many of the schools house self-contained alternative
education programs for students who have not succeeded in traditional
school settings.*** These programs are designed for students who have
either dropped out or fallen far behind in earning graduation credits,
often because they have job or family responsibilities that keep them
from attending school regularly. The programs allow students to earn
credits at their own pace, either in an accelerated fashion or
intermittently as their schedules permit.

**Hoover High School\'s** Pathways Program in San Diego is open every
school day from 2:30 to 6:30 p.m. and serves about 70 students every
year. Students can earn up to three credits every six weeks by
completing assignments from an Individualized Learning Plan and
conducting two hours of independent study outside of class. Students
prepare dinner every night. During this time they have open discussions,
view presentations of student work, or listen to guest speakers.
\"We\'ve saved a lot of kids through the program,\" noted the principal.
The Quality Credit Union (QCU) at **Ysleta High School** in El Paso
targets seniors who need additional credits to graduate and other
students who have fallen behind because of suspensions, illnesses, or
other reasons. Its computer-based curriculum allows students to complete
assignments at their own pace. The program has expanded its appeal,
however, and now most Ysleta graduates have earned at least one credit
from QCU.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc478458976 .anchor}Ability Grouping

Most research suggests that grouping students according to their ability
restricts the access of students in lower-level classes to challenging
content and the best teachers (for example, Oakes, 1990), hampering
their ability to reach high academic standards. In middle and high
schools, ability grouping traditionally has taken the form of tracking,
with students assigned to specific course sequences based on their past
performance. In many cases, classes for low-achieving students teach
only low-level skills and require little effort by students. Pressure on
schools to eliminate ability grouping in favor of more equitable
strategies for educating students who achieve at different levels has
had some success, but the practice continues, often in subtler fashion.
In a 1993 survey, more than half of all secondary schools reported that
they were moving away from tracking, and only 15 percent still had
traditional tracking arrangements in place (Carey, Farris, & Carpenter,
1994, as cited in Burnett, 1995). At the same time, 86 percent of
schools in the same study still were assigning high- and low-achievers
to different core classes. Clearly, the pressures that have promoted
ability grouping for decades have been slow to dissipate.

Use of Ability Grouping

***Most of the schools in this study employ some form of ability
grouping, in many cases prompted by district policies.*** Reasons for
using ability grouping or tracking varied among the schools that used
it. One high school principal cited the fourth- and fifth-grade reading
levels of some of the incoming freshmen as the reason for placing them
in lower-level courses. Another principal explained that his school had
to offer an honors level track to compete with several top private
schools in the area.

Some of the schools maintain traditional tracks for students in
different ability groups, while others employ heterogeneous grouping in
some areas and ability grouping in others. For instance, in a middle
school in our sample, most students are heterogeneously grouped for all
of their core classes, except for students with limited English
proficiency (LEP) who are assigned to separate teams. Despite efforts to
use the same core curriculum with LEP students, several teachers
expressed the belief that classes for LEP students have lower standards.
In accordance with a district mandate, another middle school had two
\"advanced work\"sixth-grade homerooms for students planning to apply
to the district\'s high schools with competitive admissions policies.

Ability grouping at the high school level is typically more overt. At
one school in the study, freshmen select either a college-prep
curriculum that begins with Algebra I and proceeds to upper-level math
classes, or a parallel curriculum that begins with pre-algebra and
proceeds to an algebra survey course. Another high school assigns
students to different math, English, and social studies levels based on
their performance in the eighth grade. Students can be assigned to
lower-level classes in one subject and upper-level classes in another,
depending on their strengths and weaknesses.

***Among the schools that employ ability grouping, many have made
strides to raise standards for classes enrolling their lowest-performing
students, but expectations in some classes have not been raised high
enough.*** The first high school mentioned above eliminated its general
track, in which the math sequence began with consumer math. However,
because the pre-algebra-to-algebra-survey sequence fulfills the
district\'s two-year math requirement for graduation, many students
graduate without any upper-level math classes. Even though Algebra I is
widely recognized as a prerequisite for college admission, several other
high schools also lacked an Algebra I requirement. At the second high
school, classroom observations revealed significant differences between
math and social studies classes serving high- and low-achieving
students. Students in an upper-level freshman math class were using
graphing calculators to study algebraic functions, but students in the
lower-level class were learning about means and medians. In social
studies, students in the lower-level class were filling out a worksheet
on World War I (for example, How many casualties were there during the
war?), while the upper-level class had an engaging discussion on the
effectiveness of Gandhi's nonviolent methods in India.

Alternatives to Ability Grouping

***Several schools have found that heterogeneous grouping benefits all
students regardless of their past performance.*** When the staff of
**Fritsche Middle School** in Milwaukee looked at the performance of
their graduates, they found that students in the Program for the
Academically Talented (PAT) fared well in high school, but other
students struggled. They experimented with a few teams using the
advanced PAT curriculum in heterogeneous classrooms; after a brief
period of adjustment, passing rates in Algebra I for students in the
pilot classrooms had tripled. Now \"everybody is PAT.\" Kentucky's
**Fairdale** and San Diego's **Hoover** high schools also employ
heterogeneous grouping but with a twist. Core classes enroll students of
all abilities so that they are responsible for the same material and can
learn from each other. However, the schools allow any students wishing
to earn honors credit the opportunity to complete additional assignments
for a class. Teachers and students acknowledged the difficulties in
working with mixed-ability groups, while they recognized the
technique\'s educational value. Many teachers take time after school to
help those students needing additional support.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc478458977 .anchor}The Role of Title I

When Congress reauthorized Title I in 1994, it envisioned that the
program would not only continue to provide supplementary assistance for
disadvantaged students but also play a greater role in improving
teaching and learning and raising standards for all students. Moreover,
Congress changed\
Title I\'s traditional supplementary role, giving it a new emphasis on
helping students achieve state standards in their core classes rather
than master discrete basic skills. Congress also expanded Title I's
contribution to professional development.

The Title I programs in these 18 schools operate in marked contrast to
the programs described by Zeldin et al., but they have not yet achieved
the vision set forth by Congress in 1994. First, these Title I programs
operate in tandem with regular classroom instruction, supporting
students\' efforts to master state or local content standards. Second,
the lower poverty thresholds for schoolwide programs have prompted many
of these schools to adopt schoolwide programs since 1994; more than half
of the schools we examined operate Title I schoolwide programs, in
contrast to the one school included in the earlier study. Finally, most
schools in this study have found ways to minimize or eliminate the
stigma associated with student participation in Title I. Supplementary
assistance for Title I students is often incorporated into their regular
schedules. At the same time, school and district officials did not
report and the research team did not observe that Title I had made a
substantial contribution to raising standards in these schools or had
contributed to comprehensive school reform. Title I's influence, if any,
may have been on the broader policy context that gave rise to new state
assessments aligned with challenging content standards.

Important Source of Supplementary Assistance

***Among the schools in our sample, Title I provides supplementary
academic assistance that helps students succeed in core subject
classes.*** In contrast with the findings from Zeldin, et al., Title I
in these 18 schools does not operate distinct from the regular program;
instead, it supports and reinforces the goals of regular classroom
instruction. In schoolwide programs, Title I is most often used to hire
additional teachers to reduce class sizes and to purchase computer
equipment and instructional materials that help students complete class
assignments. Principals and teachers expressed strong convictions that
smaller class sizes give teachers the opportunity to provide
low-achieving students with the attention they need to perform at a
higher level. In schools with Title I targeted assistance programs,
Title I plays a central role in helping eligible students succeed in
their core classes. A prime example of the way many targeted assistance
schools structured their Title I program is the TAP lab at Illinois's
**Eisenhower High School**, which provides one-on-one tutoring,
technology, and informational resources that are all designed to help
students complete their regular coursework.

Limited Role in Schoolwide Improvement

***Among most of the schools included in this study, Title I plays a
supportive and often complementary role in the implementation of other
elements of schoolwide improvement efforts, but it is neither a central
player in these efforts nor an impediment to them.*** At both schoolwide
and targeted assistance schools, Title I is valued because it allows
schools to purchase materials and staff that support school improvement
efforts. As one principal commented, \"Everyone wants it. . . more
materials, more money.\" Yet, schools with a strong emphasis on parent
involvement or professional development rarely turn to Title I to
provide significant support for their efforts. For instance, Chicago's
**Marshall Middle School** applied for a grant instead of using Title I
to establish its parent center. Several of the schoolwide programs spend
less than 2 percent of their Title I allocation on professional
development, and only one spends more than 15 percent (Louisiana's
**Vidrine**). Among targeted assistance schools with major reform
efforts underway (for example, the Coalition of Essential Schools at
Kentucky's **Fairdale** and the academies at California's **Highland**),
none is using Title I to support the principles or components of their
reform efforts.

***In two schools, Title I plays a more central role in school
improvement efforts that seek to raise standards for all students.***
The Title I coordinator for Oregon's **Madison High School** oversees a
data-driven tracking and accountability system that directs her
attention to students who need additional academic support. Her database
tracks at-risk students\' performance in math classes and on annual
diagnostic tests in math. When a student\'s performance begins to drop,
she discusses possible interventions with the student's teachers and
parents. The Title I computer lab\'s network maintains files on each
student that include all of their class assignments. This allows the
Title I staff to monitor students\' completion and performance on each
assignment. The system also administers tests that indicate whether a
student is prepared to take the district\'s Graduation Standards Test or
requires additional assistance before taking the test. After students
attend Oregon's **Blanco Middle School's** Title I accelerated math
classes (described earlier), math teachers can cover more advanced
material in their classes, with the knowledge that students who are most
likely to struggle with the material have already been exposed to it.

***School principals and their designees, not district Title I
directors, were most responsible for the operation of Title I programs
in their schools.*** Unlike elementary schools, many of the schools in
the study had school-based Title I coordinators who had primary
responsibility for the operation of Title I in the school; these
administrators, who manage Title I funds and oversee Title I staff and
programming, typically were accountable to their principals. In schools
without such coordinators, principals exerted more influence on the
program than district Title I coordinators. According to both school
staff and the district Title I directors, the role of the district Title
I office is to keep schools informed of changing requirements and
opportunities, but they rarely exert any influence over policy or
personnel in these secondary schools. This gives schools the flexibility
they need to serve their unique student population, but makes it
difficult for the district to use Title I to leverage change at the
school level because the district has little authority to coordinate the
activity of Title I teachers across the district.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc478458978 .anchor}Chapter III. Noninstructional
Services That Support Student Achievement

Although schools should educate students and not work as human service
agencies, secondary schools are increasingly being called on to provide
noninstructional services to support student learning. More than ever
before, students are faced with problems that detract from their ability
to succeed in school. Many students come to school hungry, tired, sick,
or alienated from family and friends. Some live in families and
communities in which they are in physical danger and are affected by
substance abuse, teen pregnancy, and violence. Often, secondary school
students must work as well as attend school, which causes conflicts of
time and interest for them. Also, as students who have experienced
failure in school for many years enter secondary school, they are at
greater risk of dropping out.

In an effort to help students address these needs, the secondary schools
in our study offer many noninstructional services to support student
achievement. These services share four main goals:

-   ***To increase student attendance at school.*** Students who need
    human services often have poor school attendance, which results in
    poor academic achievement. Efforts to increase school attendance lay
    the groundwork for better teaching and learning.

-   ***To address students\' basic human needs.*** By providing mental
    and physical health care services, schools enable students to come
    to school prepared to learn. Until these basic needs are met,
    students often are unable to focus on learning.

-   ***To give students opportunities for meaningful relationships with
    caring adults and with groups of peers.*** Most educators agree that
    students need at least one adult at school with whom they can share
    concerns and successes and to whom they can turn in times of need.
    Students who have a meaningful relationship with a caring adult and
    with peers at their school are more likely to attend school and to
    seek help before a potential problem interferes with their academic
    progress.

-   ***To foster connections between schools, families, and the
    community.*** Students need to believe that by attending school they
    gain membership in a larger community that will support them upon
    graduation. Students whose parents are involved in their education
    have greater academic success.

This chapter describes how schools have used noninstructional services
to foster an environment in which students can focus on learning. It is
organized around the central strategies that the schools in our sample
use for this purpose.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc478458979 .anchor}Learning Communities

To increase student success, all of the middle schools in our study with
more than 200 students, and almost half of the high schools in our
study, create an environment that is conducive to learning by creating a
series of small learning communities---also called teams or
houses---within the schools. Learning communities strive to alleviate
the problems described by the Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development
(1990, p. 10):

Many middle-grade schools are large, impersonal institutions. Schedules
typically place students in six to seven different classes each day,
each with different classmates and a different teacher. The subject
matter of one class typically has nothing to do with the next, which
creates a fragmented learning experience for students. Opportunities for
teachers to develop sustained personal relationships with students,
essential to teaching them well, and to provide guidance during the
at-times turbulent period of early adolescence are often nonexistent.

Learning communities, which the Carnegie Council recommends, generally
contain about 100 students and four to eight teachers. Students take
their core classes (language arts, math, science, social studies) with
students and teachers from their team, lessening the alienation and
isolation that students at large schools may feel. In most schools with
learning communities, staff and students stay together for at least two
years, giving students a sense of consistency and teachers the
opportunity to get to know their students\' needs and abilities.

Small learning communities can increase student achievement. First, by
creating conditions in which students want to attend school, learning
communities set the stage for teaching and learning. Second, because
students have close relationships with a small group of students and
teachers, they are more easily held accountable for their academic
performance. Finally, as the Carnegie report said, \"\[T\]eaming creates
the kind of learning environment that encourages students to grapple
with ideas that may span several disciplines and to create solutions to
problems that reflect understanding, not memorization\" (Carnegie
Council on Adolescent Development, 1990, p. 40).

Strategies Used in Learning Communities

***Schools have adopted block scheduling in conjunction with the
formation of learning communities***. Though block schedules vary, all
organize a part of the school day into larger blocks of time than the
traditional 45-60 minute period. This allows teachers more flexibility
and often leads to a \"decreased reliance on the standard
lecture-discussion-seatwork pattern and an increase in creative teaching
strategies\" (Irmsher, 1996, p. 2). Because block scheduling gives
teachers more time with students, teachers have a chance to provide more
individual instruction, ensuring that students with special needs are
less likely to fall through the cracks. Block scheduling has been linked
with increased mastery and retention of material and a reduction in
suspension and dropout rates (Carroll, 1994, as cited by Irmsher, 1996,
p. 2).

***Teams reduce teachers\' sense of isolation from their peers by giving
them increased and shared responsibility for students, curriculum,
instruction, and environment.*** Increased responsibility, along with
more opportunities to collaborate, fosters a more collegial environment
for teachers. According to the principal of Connecticut's **East
Hartford High School,** \"Teams are very positive for new teachers.
They\'ve become uplifting. It\'s a built-in support system.\" One
teacher noted, \"\[During\] my first year on a team, I learned how a
math teacher teaches, how a science teacher teaches, how an English
teacher teaches. That was one of the best learning experiences.\"

***Several schools have a team leader who works with each team***. The
Carnegie Council (1990, p. 40) recommends that schools should have team
leaders who are \"responsible for creating an environment conducive to
team teaching\" and who \"work with teams to develop ideas, to obtain
resources, and to solve problems.\" At Boston's **Timilty Middle
School** a cluster leader works with all teams at a specific grade
level. The cluster leader has his or her own office; is the first
administrator whom teachers turn to for help with curriculum,
instruction, resources, discipline, or support; and is held accountable
for the performance of teachers and students on his or her team. The
cluster leader meets with each team daily, serving as a link between all
teams on a grade level, which enhances horizontal communication and
alignment.

Opportunities for Relationships with Caring Adults

> \[Adolescents\] really need to be able to talk to adults they know.
> Even in a big school, all children ought to have a friend on the
> faculty who sees them every day, who knows their name, and who can
> observe them closely. If you have seven classes a day and 200
> students, you\'re just not going to notice that some kid comes in with
> a bruise on his arm. But if it\'s your job to check on a child every
> day, eventually you\'re going to catch on to something like that and
> be able to intervene (Psychologist Mary Pipher as quoted by Scherer,
> 1998, p. 10).

As Mary Pipher describes in the preceding passage, students need to have
meaningful relationships with caring adults at school. Staff members who
have relationships with students notice when those students don\'t come
to school, when they are not succeeding academically, and when their
basic physical needs are not met. Through conversations, staff members
are able to learn about students\' academic and noninstructional
problems and to leverage resources to address those problems. Staff
members are also able to reinforce good behavior, ensuring that
students\' academic achievements don\'t go unnoticed. These
relationships provide students with adult role models who are
responsible, successful, and caring. When many aspects of students\'
lives are constantly changing, relationships with caring adults give
students stability and continuity.

Although some schools in the study sample rely on learning communities
to give students the opportunity to form meaningful relationships with
caring adults, others establish formal programs to meet this need.
Approaches differ based on school resources and staff and student
interests. Several schools work to structure their Title I program to
meet this need, while others focus noninstructional services in that
direction, often establishing advisory or mentor programs.

At Arkansas's **Pine Bluff High School**, the Teachers-as-Advisors
program matches 20 students with each teacher. The students and their
advisor have monthly meetings during which students receive guidance on
career paths, skills for employment, help in problem solving and goal
setting, and instruction in study skills. The advisory program also
holds a college information night, a financial aid workshop, and a study
skills seminar to involve parents in their children\'s postgraduation
plans. Students and teachers continue their advisory partnership for all
three years of high school.

Students at Boston's **Timilty Middle School** participate in a
12-year-old mentoring program called Promising Pals. The program is
designed to \"enhance literacy and writing skills \[and\] provide an
opportunity for \[students\] to meet positive role models, share
interests, and realize their own responsibilities in making positive and
lasting contributions to the world.\" Through the program, students are
paired with adults in the community with whom they exchange letters. At
the end of the school year, the schools hosts a Promising Pals
celebration for all participants. In 1998, the celebration drew a
gathering of 600, including the mayor, lieutenant governor, state
attorney general, and state commissioner of education.

A partnership between **Madison High School** and the Oregon Council for
Hispanic Achievement has led to Projecto Adelante, an after-school
program for Hispanic students that provides academic and social support
and fosters connections with parents. The program has two full-time
staff members who each have a caseload of students with whom they
develop supportive relationships. Staff help students apply for college
and scholarships, plan for their next school year, and organize trips
and social events, including an end-of-the-year Hispanic Banquet.
Projecto Adelante also works to connect students with programs and
opportunities outside the school.

[]{#refheading___toc478458980 .anchor}Building Student Engagement

Extracurricular Activities

***Several schools in the study emphasize student participation in
school-related activities as a way to increase student achievement***.
Extracurricular activities can produce positive results, such as
increased attendance, self-esteem, and interest in academics. Through
extracurricular activities, students can establish friendships, refine
their skills in a specific area, and develop a relationship with a coach
or sponsor who cares about their academic and social progress. Students
can thus become more connected to the school and more interested in
attending school. They also get to know more teachers to ask for help
when necessary. These relationships can translate into greater student
interest in academics. A study of after-school activities for poor urban
students found that students who participate in after-school programs
have higher achievement in math, reading, and other subjects (Posner &
Vandell, 1994, as cited in U.S. Department of Education and U.S.
Department of Justice, 1998, p. 13).

According to the director of student activities at El Paso's **Ysleta**
**High School**, almost all of the school\'s students are involved in at
least one after-school club. Students can choose from more than 54
clubs, 16 sports activities, and 9 performing arts activities. Every
year the student council sponsors a fair to introduce students to the
clubs and organizations.

Community Service

***Several schools encourage students to perform community service to***
***promote academic achievement and self-confidence, obtain experience
in a work environment, and develop links with their community.***
According to one study, "the infusion of community service into the
curriculum leads to an increase in student achievement and a
significant decrease in rates of truancy and vandalism\'\"
(Massachusetts Department of Education, 1986, as cited in Garman, 1995,
p. 2). Students at the **Minnesota Center** middle school regularly
engage in community service, in part to repay the community for the
services it provides to the school. Students have planted trees at the
local high school, washed fire trucks, and helped the local historical
society record newspaper clippings. Besides fostering a spirit of
community and volunteerism, teachers view the school's participation in
community service as active learning opportunities to teach specific
content. For example, in preparation for the tree planting, biology
classes studied trees.

For the past five years, **East Hartford High School** has been
recognized for the most community service hours logged by any high
school in Connecticut. This year, students earned a J.C. Penney Youth
Award for operating a bowling league for persons with disabilities.
Other student efforts include a walk against hunger, a fair at the
Hartford Civic Center for disadvantaged children, blood drives, food
drives, a rabies clinic, and an annual senior citizens prom. The latter
activity prompted students to organize ballroom dancing lessons for
themselves so that they could learn how to dance the steps that the
senior citizens liked to dance. A local tuxedo rental company provided
free tuxedos for all of the boys participating in the event, and a
floral company provided corsages and boutonnieres. A local civic group
prepared dinner for everyone, and students served it. The prom, which is
in its ninth year, is organized by students under the supervision of the
activities coordinator.

Cross-Cutting Priorities

***Although not all schools offer a wide variety of activities and
clubs, several schools in our study have worked to embed particular
activities into the life of the school.*** For example, the peer
mediation program at Milwaukee's **Fritsche Middle School** ties into
the school\'s mission to \"build peace\" and is considered a cornerstone
of student growth. Every year, approximately 60 students serve as peer
mediators, conducting close to 500 resolved mediations annually.
Mediators, who are selected based on strong leadership skills (not
grades) and who must reflect the diversity of the student body, receive
two full days of conflict resolution training. Students may be referred
for mediation by students, teachers, administrators, security guards,
and parents. Mediations are conducted by a team of two mediators in a
private setting. The school has numerous events that emphasize the
importance of peace and thus, by extension, mediation. During the 1998
school year, the school held a peace fair, a peace month, and a summer
institute on nonviolence.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc478458981 .anchor}Support Services

In addition to restructuring the school environment and offering
students opportunities to become involved in school-related activities,
the schools in the study offer support services from licensed
practitioners and other experts. The services, which range from academic
counseling to health care, are intended to help students handle stresses
that interfere with their ability to succeed in school.

Academic Counseling

***Most schools in our study employ counselors on staff who provide
academic and social guidance***. The counselors are generally
responsible for helping students choose their classes, informing them of
academic programs available to them, ensuring that seniors have met
graduation requirements, and assisting students in making postgraduation
plans.

At several schools in our study, counseling departments work with
students to develop academic plans. At **Highland High School**,
students comply with a California law that requires every sophomore to
explore career goals and develop an academic plan to meet these goals.
Counselors review students\' performances during the ninth grade and
help them understand what they need to do to reach their career goals.
For example, they explain college entrance requirements and financial
aid opportunities. In succeeding years, counselors refer to the plan
regularly to make sure that students are on track to graduate and pursue
their postsecondary plans.

All students at the **Minnesota Center** middle school meet with their
parents and teachers at the beginning of the school year to set academic
and personal goals. Although parents and teachers aid students in
setting goals, students are chiefly responsible for setting their own
personal goals and articulating them at the conference. Students
reported a range of personal goals---from home-related issues such as
keeping their rooms clean or watching less television---to goals more
closely associated with academics such as reading a greater variety of
books. Teachers keep copies of students' goals and remind students of
them periodically during the year.

At San Diego's **Hoover High School**, a national program known as AVID
(Advancement Via Individual Determination) gives extra support in the
college application process to students from populations traditionally
underrepresented in college. Teachers and advisors meet with students in
the AVID program for one class period every day to help with college and
financial aid applications, college essay writing, and preparation for
college entrance exams. The program also includes field trips to
universities.

**[Support Programs]{.underline}**

Among the services offered at our study\'s schools are special programs
designed to support particular groups of students. Several schools have
programs aimed at meeting the needs of teen mothers, a population at
high risk of dropping out of school. In addition, several schools in our
study (at both the high- and middle-school levels) offer varied support
groups for students. These groups, led by graduate students, social
workers, or licensed counselors, allow students to meet formally with a
trained adult and other students who have similar problems or
experiences.

At Illinois's **Eisenhower High School**, a school support team develops
comprehensive intervention strategies for troubled students. The team,
composed of an administrator, social worker, counselors, and school
psychologist, meets once a week to discuss students referred to them by
any member of the school staff or by a parent. A referred student and
his or her parents are invited to the meeting where the team discusses
the reasons for the students\' problems and develops a plan to address
those problems. At each meeting, the team reviews about 10 cases; about
100 students at any time are involved in a team-devised intervention.

School-Based Health and Human Service Centers

Many adolescents do not succeed in school because of unaddressed health
problems. Chronic illness, poor eyesight and hearing, and mental health
problems often go unaddressed because students do not have access to
health care. Several schools in our study address this situation through
on-site health and social service centers. Most centers are
collaborative ventures between the school and local health care
providers, who often staff the centers. Two centers in our study have
professional personnel, including a doctor, a dentist, a nurse
practitioner, medical assistants, social workers, and counselors. All
have partnerships with local service providers; partners include
hospitals, departments of public health, corporations, foundations,
mental health agencies, police departments, businesses, universities,
youth service organizations, community-based social service agencies,
juvenile and divorce courts, and community ministries. Most of the
centers are available for family and community use as well as student
use.

All of the centers at high schools offer a range of health services,
including immunizations, physical exams, and medical care for poor
eyesight, hearing problems, diabetes, asthma, and other primary health
conditions. They also offer mental health counseling and support groups.
All make referrals for services not available at the clinic. Several
also offer reproductive health services, including family planning,
pregnancy tests, and diagnosis and treatment of sexually transmitted
diseases. Kentucky's **Fairdale High School\'s** Youth Services Center
also offers a 24-hour teen crisis hotline.

Staff, students, and parents report great satisfaction with the centers,
which are used often. Approximately 50 students a day receive free
confidential services at San Diego's **Hoover High School**. The center
at Connecticut's **East Hartford High School**, along with a center at a
local middle school, logs 3,600 visits annually, serving 3,000 students.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc478458982 .anchor}Career Awareness

To augment the integration of vocational and academic content in the
curriculum, many schools offer career awareness programs. These programs
are designed to inform students about career opportunities and help them
apply their secondary education to get on the right path to reaching
their career goals through career assessments, academic planning,
workshops, job-site observations, and internships.

**[Career Counseling]{.underline}**

***Operating at both the middle- and high-school levels, several schools
have fairly comprehensive career counseling opportunities***. At
Milwaukee's **Fritsche Middle School**, students construct a career
portfolio. The portfolio, which is started in sixth grade and maintained
throughout middle school, contains an interest inventory, descriptions
of report card progress, essays on trips to local businesses, and
worksheet assignments. School counselors distribute materials to
teachers about careers and make presentations to students about career
exploration. Eighth-graders at Louisville's **Iroquois Middle School**
complete a career assessment that matches their expressed interests with
specific careers. With the help of parents, teachers, and the class
dean, students use their assessment to develop transition plans that
outline the course work needed to prepare for a career. Iroquois hosts a
guest speaker each month who discusses the educational background
necessary in their career, the nature of tasks in their job, and
employer expectations.

Job Observations and Internships

***Some high schools in the study extend opportunities to students for
job observations, internships, and cooperative apprenticeships.***
Approximately one-quarter of twelfth-grade students at San Diego's
**Hoover High School** participated in its internship program for a
semester or a summer during the 1997-98 school year. Students are
awarded academic credit for internships, which are generally unpaid and
consist of at least 25 hours of work. Students are required to keep a
weekly journal and complete self-evaluations and reflective writing
assignments at the end of the experience. The school also has
coordinators to set up job observations. Students are encouraged to
observe at least two different jobs for approximately two to eight
hours, after which they are required to write an analysis of the
experience.

Connecticut's **East Hartford High School** has a Career Services Center
open to all students. The center has a full-time aide, numerous
reference books, and several computers that provide access to
interactive career and college advising. The center maintains career
portfolios for all students that contain a career interest inventory,
career objectives, and the high school courses needed to reach those
objectives. Each student visits the center in tenth grade to make plans
around specific career preparation options that are open to each
11th-grader. The center also schedules job observations and organizes
presentations by alumni about their careers.

The school counselor at Louisiana's **Vidrine School** administers a
career interest survey to all eighth-graders to stimulate their thinking
about potential careers. She then helps students identify careers they
would like to explore and sets up job observation opportunities for
students. Students observe jobs for three-quarters of a day and return
to school to meet and share their experiences. Following the
observations, the counselor helps students align their coursework with
their career by developing a five-year plan with each student.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc478458983 .anchor}Parent Involvement

Research suggests that involving parents and family members in their
child\'s education is important because students whose parents are
involved in their education \"achieve higher grades and test scores,
have better attendance at school, complete more homework, demonstrate
more positive attitudes and behavior, graduate at higher rates, and have
greater enrollment in higher education\" (Henderson & Berla, 1994, and
Becher, 1984, as cited in U.S. Department of Education, 1994, p. 5). One
study found that 27 percent of students whose parents were involved in
their high school education completed college, compared with 8 percent
of students whose parents were not involved (Eagle, 1989, as cited in
Center for Workforce Preparation, 1994, p. 2).

Despite the value of involving parents and families, it is a challenge
for most schools. Across all grades, parents often do not have enough
time to be involved in school, are uncertain about how they can be
positively involved, and may not speak English. Unfortunately, barriers
increase as students proceed through school, with parent involvement
declining in the upper grades (U.S. Department of Education, 1996, p.
41).

***All of the schools in our study noted the importance of parent
involvement as well as the difficulties in achieving and maintaining
it.*** All of the schools work to establish regular contact through
written communication and attempt to provide opportunities for parents
to participate in activities at the school. Some schools have
established parent liaisons or parent resource centers; others ask
parents to participate in decision-making groups.

Communication

***Research shows a clear link between parents who stay informed of
their children\'s progress in school and high student achievement***
(U.S. Department of Education, 1996, p. 11). Most schools in our study
have adopted varied communication strategies to keep parents informed of
school activities and their child\'s progress. Parent-teacher
conferences are standard practice at most schools; however, many staff
complain that they do not see the parents they most need to talk with at
these meetings. To reach parents, **Fairdale High School** faculty
members in Kentucky take a bus to meet with parents in a community
center located in a housing project where many students live. Similarly,
**Fritsche Middle School**, which draws students from all over the city
of Milwaukee, hosts parent conference nights at a high school and a
community center to accommodate parents who do not live near the school.

Most schools send newsletters, calendars, and other information home to
keep parents informed. At **Peoples Academy** in Vermont, teachers
e-mail homework reminders and weekly progress reports to parents.
Louisiana's **Vidrine Middle School** has a monthly newsletter that
contains articles written by students about classes they are taking.
Teachers at Houston's **Hambrick Middle School** and the **Minnesota
Center** middle school send \"good news\" postcards to parents with
positive comments about their students\' academic achievement, improved
behavior, or other accomplishments, such as showing kindness to a fellow
student. About the postcards, a parent noted, "It makes me feel good
when I receive a \[positive\] note. Even though my child may have
behavior problems, there\'s something good going on, and I hear about
it."

Several parents at rural schools noted that parent involvement in their
schools is inevitable because of the schools' size and prominence in the
community. One parent at **Vidrine Middle School** said, "I never doubt
that I\'ll find out about what\'s going on. I see my kid\'s teachers at
the bank and at the grocery store, and I\'ll probably see \[the
principal\] in church." A student at **Peoples Academy** noted, "Oh my
gosh, my dad is always here, \[he\] always knows what I am doing."

Community Liaisons

***Some schools have parent coordinators that work collaboratively with
a core group of parents***. At California's **Highland High School**, a
full-time community counselor (assigned by the district because of the
school\'s high concentration of at-risk students) works to keep parents
in touch with the school. The counselor focuses on bringing Hispanic
parents who don\'t speak English into the school to participate in
school affairs. The counselor often arranges transportation for parents
who want to come to the school. Milwaukee's **Fritsche Middle School**
also has a full-time parent coordinator who expands opportunities for
parents to become familiar and involved with the school. Candidates for
Fritsche\'s parent coordinator were identified and interviewed by
parents. The coordinator recently submitted a proposal to a private
foundation requesting support to establish a parent center at the
school.

Parent Involvement in Decision Making

***At several schools in our study, state or district policy mandates
parent involvement in school decision making***. Under the Chicago
school reform legislation enacted in 1989, parents in **Marshall Middle
School** have a majority of seats on the local school council, which
selects the school\'s principal and approves the school budget and
school improvement plan. Kentucky\'s Education Reform Act (KERA)
mandates that each school have a site-based decision-making council with
at least two parents. One Kentucky school in our study goes beyond the
requirements of the law: **Fairdale High School** has eight parent
members on its site-based decision-making council.

Although not all of the schools have governing bodies that include
parents, most of them take parent perspectives into consideration in
decision making. Oregon's **Madison High School** published a parent
survey in its February 1998 parent newsletter that asked parents to
comment on instructional issues. Faced with difficult decisions because
of budget cuts, Madison asked parents questions such as, \"If we are
forced to make additional staffing cuts, do you prefer that we cut
elective programs to have smaller class sizes in required courses?. . .
or maintain the few remaining electives and have larger class sizes
overall?\"

**[Activities for Parents]{.underline}**

***The schools in our study offer varied activities in which parents
participate or observe. They attempt to involve parents socially as well
as academically in the education of their children***. For example,
during the 1997-98 school year, Milwaukee's **Fritsche Middle School**
hosted an annual parent-student breakfast, which included a hot
breakfast buffet, entertainment, door prizes, and information on the
school's educational program and the district\'s new proficiency
standards. One hundred students and their parents attended. The school
also hosted a multicultural fashion show (which the superintendent
attended) and a health fair. At California's **Highland High School**,
parent showcases allow parents to become involved in their children\'s
learning. The showcases, which are sponsored by the Title I and English
as a Second Language programs, are held in the school library twice a
year. There, students perform skits, readings, and presentations about
the work they have done that semester. All presentations are bilingual
in English and Spanish so that all parents can understand them.

In addition to offering special activities and events for parents, some
schools have regular parent volunteers. California's **Hambrick Middle
School** reports one of the highest number of parent volunteer hours for
schools in their district. Parents are involved in fundraising, the
daily operation of a school snack bar, the library, and classrooms. They
are encouraged not only to volunteer but also to attend classes and
observe their children. According to one parent, the attitude of staff
and administration is notable. She reports, \"At other places, teachers
don't want you around much. . . it makes it harder for them. At other
places they want you seen and not heard. Here, they want you heard.\" At
Oregon's **Blanco Middle School**, a senior citizen organized reading
partners to read once a week with a small group of students. **Peoples
Academy** in Vermont has a volunteer coordinator who advertises
volunteer opportunities in the town newspaper.

Some schools address the needs of parents through training and
workshops. Louisiana's **Vidrine School** offers parents training on the
phonics program used at the school, on preparing students for the state
tests, on developing computer literacy, and on working with students who
have attention deficit disorder. The school also has a parent resource
room, supervised by the Title I curriculum coordinator, which houses a
lending library of materials for parents to help their children learn at
home. The library includes parenting videotapes.

Community Partnerships

Recognizing the community's stake in well-educated citizens and the
school\'s stake in a supportive community, many of the schools in our
study nurture partnerships with businesses and community organizations.
As discussed earlier, several schools collaborate extensively with
social service agencies to provide support services to students and
their families. In addition, schools work with community partners to
enhance the school\'s instructional program. At Milwaukee's **Fritsche
Middle School**, local business partners have helped enrich the
school\'s school-to-work program. Partners, which include United
Airlines, MCI, and Bank One Corporation, provide guest speakers for
classes as well as opportunities for job observations and field trips.
The school\'s business partners are enhancing the development of a new
industrial technology, multi-communications lab. As these partnerships
continue to grow, Fritsche plans to have each of the school\'s academic
teams establish a meaningful relationship with one business partner.

Connecticut's **East Hartford High School** has a partnership with the
local police department. In an effort to prevent problems before they
occur, a senior police officer in the community policing program
assigned officers to be present in the school from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m.
every day in order to establish a friendly presence. He said, \"My
philosophy is, my officers view the school as their school.\" The
officers, three of whom are women, work with the principal and the
school security team to enforce the principal\'s zero-tolerance policy
on crime.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc478458985 .anchor}Chapter IV. Policy Implications

The findings presented in the preceding two chapters suggest avenues for
federal, state, and local leaders to improve the performance of
secondary schools serving large concentrations of disadvantaged
students. At the federal level, these findings indicate that, if federal
policy makers want Title I to play a prominent role in promoting higher
standards and improved achievement in secondary schools, they will have
to find ways to give the program more leverage in those schools. At the
state level, these schools' experience indicates that states should lend
more direct support to teachers' efforts to develop high-interest
lessons that reflect the state's high content standards. At the local
level, study findings suggest that districts should reexamine their
policies of assigning students to core classes based on their previous
performance. They can also promote more effective teaching by providing
more focused professional development opportunities for teachers, using
data to guide decision making, and developing assessments that help
guide instruction. Above all, however, these schools demonstrate that
all middle and high school students, regardless of their past
performance, can learn challenging content when their schools provide
them with high academic standards, a rich curriculum, well-prepared
teachers, and both instructional and noninstructional support services.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc478458986 .anchor}Implications for Federal Policy

Findings

***Teachers and administrators in the schools and districts in this
study did not view Title I as a central vehicle for raising academic
standards and promoting effective teaching in these secondary
schools.*** In most of the schools we visited, Title I is a small
component of the school's instructional program. Even in the schools
included in this study, with their strong school improvement activities,
most did not use Title I for professional development, comprehensive
school reform, alternatives to ability grouping, or other uses that
would have had broad effects on their operations. Instead, other than
reduced class sizes in schoolwide programs, Title I provided services
that amounted to only a small portion of a student's school day. Title I
may have had a more indirect role in promoting comprehensive reform by
engendering or supporting the emergence of states' standards-based
accountability systems, which directly influenced district- and
school-level decision-making. Establishing the degree of Title I\'s
influence on those statewide systems, however, is beyond the scope of
this study, which focused on district- and school-level decision making.

***In schools operating in a standards-based reform context, the
services that Title I provides play an important role in helping
low-achieving students meet the standards set for all students.***
Although Title I has not played a direct role in raising standards in
these schools, it does give students the support and resources they need
to meet the standards that are in place. Schools in this study use Title
I to help students successfully complete class assignments and satisfy
accountability requirements to a much greater extent than was reported
in Zeldin et al. (1991), which emphasized Title I's role in students'
acquisition of basic skills. In schools that established high standards
and expectations for all students, Title I played a crucial role in
enabling low-achieving students to reach those standards; in other
schools, Title I assistance reinforced low standards and expectations
for low-achieving students. Current academic support services provided
with Title I resources include tutoring, access to technology and
information, pre-teaching of content from students' core classes, and
monitoring of students' progress in their core classes.

***Title I does not pose any obstacles to these schools' efforts to
improve the performance of low-achieving students.*** School
administrators and teachers frequently cited the flexibility that Title
I gives them to address the academic and nonacademic needs of their
students. This was equally true in targeted assistance schools and in
schoolwide programs. School staff attribute Title I's close alignment
with the core curriculum as the major reason that it does not pose any
obstacles to their efforts to help their students meet state or local
performance standards. Because these schools offer virtually no
replacement classes, as did the schools in the 1991 study, the content
that students learn in Title I classes does not conflict with the
content they learn in their core classes.

***In schools that group students according to their ability, students
in low-level classes often have restricted access to challenging content
and the best teachers.*** With a few exceptions, most classes that serve
only low-achieving students tend to teach lower-level content and have
low expectations for what students can do. For instance, in one school,
students in a lower-level English class read only excerpts of *Romeo and
Juliet* and watched the movie, while the regular English class read the
whole play. In another school, students in an upper-level freshman math
class were using graphing calculators to study functions, but students
in the lower-level class were learning about means and medians.
Heterogeneously grouped classes give low-achieving students more
opportunities to tackle and master more difficult content. However,
low-achieving students in heterogeneous classes may require additional
instructional support.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc478458987 .anchor}Implications for State Policy

Findings

***State standards and accountability mechanisms exert the greatest
influence on how these schools structured their Title I services.*** In
states with the strongest accountability systems (for example, Texas,
Kentucky), schools included in this study use Title I to help all of
their students fulfill the requirements imposed by the state systems.
Title I instruction, like other instruction in these schools, focuses on
the material assessed on the state tests, and it targets students who
have performed poorly on those assessments in the past.

***Strong standards-based reform environments can, in some cases, narrow
teachers' opportunities to use effective teaching practices.*** When
states issue separate standards for each content area, they tend to
promote teaching that focuses on one subject area at a time rather than
teaching that integrates related content. Subject-specific instruction
goes against some of the principles of effective teaching highlighted
earlier in this study, which promote cross-curricular integration. Most
of the schools in this study have adapted easily to content-based
standards, but some reported that these standards have stifled
innovative and effective teaching practices. Although states should
expect teachers to cover the content delineated in their standards, they
should at the same time foster opportunities for teachers to present
that content in ways that engage students.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc478458988 .anchor}Implications for Local Policy

Findings

***Systematic analysis of student outcome data, focused professional
development, and school-based assessment and accountability systems
contribute to improved instructional practices***. Systematic data
analysis by an entire school staff can yield consensus on schoolwide
strengths and weaknesses. This consensus in turn makes it easier to gain
the support of the entire school community. Professional development
that offers sustained assistance can help teachers address their
weaknesses and improve their instruction. School-based assessments and
accountability systems can establish benchmarks leading up to state
performance standards and can offer guidance to teachers on appropriate
instructional strategies to use.

***Noninstructional services provided by these schools play an important
role in helping disadvantaged students succeed in school during what is
often a difficult time in their lives.*** Smaller learning units give
students the opportunity to become attached to caring adults and peers.
In-school and out-of-school enrichment and counseling activities also
promote student engagement with school. Partnerships with government
agencies, businesses, and nonprofit organizations can help expand the
services available at or through the school.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc478458989 .anchor}Conclusions

The picture of Title I and educational improvement painted by the 18
schools in our study is encouraging, although efforts to improve student
performance are still in progress. Title I in these schools is
increasingly integrated with core curricula, which in turn are becoming
more challenging because of states\' efforts to raise standards for all
students. Title I is helping students meet the more challenging
standards expected of them, opening up new opportunities from which they
may have been excluded in the past. Although it has not played a major
role in promoting other elements of comprehensive school reform in these
18 schools, such as professional development, Title I is not a barrier
to the promising reform efforts underway in these places, and it has
supported some noninstructional services that are playing a major role
in keeping students in school and engaged with their schoolwork.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc478458990 .anchor}References

Bottoms, G., Presson, A., & Johnson, M. (1992). *Making high schools
work.* Atlanta: Southern Regional Education Board.

Boyer, E. L. (1983). *High school: A report on secondary education in
America.* New York: Harper Colophon Books.

Burnett, G. (1995). *Alternatives to ability grouping: Still unanswered
questions* (ERIC Digest #111). New York: ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban
Education.

Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development. (1989, June). *Turning
points: Preparing American youth for the 21st century.* Washington,
D.C.: Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development.

Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development. (1990, January). *Turning
points: Preparing American youth for the 21st century* (abridged
version). Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development.

Center for Workforce Preparation. (1994). *On target: Effective parent
involvement programs*. Washington, D.C.: Center for Workforce
Preparation.

Garman, B. (1995). *Civic education through service learning* (ERIC
Digest, ED390720).

Hill, P. T., Foster, G. E., & Gendler, T. (1990). *High schools with
character*. Santa Monica, Calif.: Rand Corp.

Irmsher, K. (1996). *Block scheduling* (ERIC Digest, Number 104,
ED393156).

Little, J. W. (1993, Summer). \"Teachers\' professional development in a
climate of educational reform.\" *Educatonal Evaluation and Policy
Analysis*, 15(2), pp. 129-151.

Louis, K. S., & Miles, M. B. (1990). *Improving the urban high school:
What works and why.* New York: Teachers College Press.

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

Oakes, J. (1990). *Multiplying inequalities: The effects of race, social
class, and tracking on opportunities to learn mathematics and science*.
Santa Monica, Calif.: Rand Corp.

Pate-Bain, H., Achilles, C. M., Boyd-Zaharias, J., & McKenna, B. (1992).
\"Class size does make a difference.\" *Phi Delta Kappan.* 74(3),
253-256.

Scherer, M. (1998). \"The shelter of each other: A conversation with
Mary Pipher.\" *Educational Leadership*, 55, 6-11.

Sizer, T. R. (1984). *Horace's compromise: The dilemma of the American
high school.* Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Stullich, S., Donly, B., & Stolzberg, S. (1999, January).
*Within-district targeting of Title I funds.* Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Education, p.12.

U.S. Department of Education. (1996). *Reaching all families: Creating
family-friendly schools.* Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Education.

U.S. Department of Education. (1994). *Strong families, strong schools*.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.

U.S. Department of Education & U.S. Department of Justice. (1998). *Safe
and smart: Making after-school hours work for kids.* Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Department of Education.

Zeldin, S., Rubenstein, M. C., Bogart, J., Tashjian, M. D., & McCollum,
H. (1991). *Chapter 1 beyond the elementary grades: A report on project
design and instruction*. Washington, D.C.: Policy Studies Associates.
Prepared for the U.S. Department of Education.