Skip over navigation

Journal Issue: America's High Schools Volume 19 Number 1 Spring 2009

Improving Low-Performing High Schools: Searching for Evidence of Promise
Authors: Steve Fleischman Jessica Heppen

Endnotes

  1. Alan R. Sadovnik and others, "Sociological Perspectives on NCLB and Federal Involvement in Education," in No Child Left Behind and the Reduction of the Achievement Gap: Sociological Perspectives on Federal Education Policy, edited by Alan R. Sadovnik and others (New York and London: Routledge, 2008), p. 361.
  2. Center on Education Policy, Managing More than One Thousand Remodeling Projects: School Restructuring in California (Washington: Center on Education Policy, February 2008).
  3. See, for example, Comprehensive School Reform Quality Center, Works in Progress: A Report on Middle and High School Improvement Programs (Washington: Comprehensive School Reform Quality Center, American Institutes for Research, January 2005); and Chris Dolejs and others, Report on Key Practices and Policies of Consistently Higher Performing High Schools (Washington: National High School Center, American Institutes for Research, October 2006).
  4. James J. Kemple, Career Academies: Long-Term Impacts on Labor Market Outcomes, Educational Attainment, and Transitions to Adulthood (New York: MDRC, June 2008).
  5. Comprehensive School Reform Quality Center, CSRQ Center Report on Middle and High School CSR Models (Washington: Comprehensive School Reform Quality Center, American Institutes for Research, October 2006).
  6. "Dropout Prevention" section of the What Works Clearinghouse (ies.ed.gov/ncee/WWC/reports/topic.aspx?tid=06 [accessed March 3, 2008]).
  7. Comprehensive School Reform Quality Center, CSRQ Center Report on Middle and High School CSR Models (see note 5).
  8. Janet Quint, Meeting Five Critical Challenges of High School Reform: Lessons from Research on Three Reform Models (MDRC, May 2006). This framework and the number of models used to develop it were further expanded by MDRC researchers in a brief produced for the National High School Center. Corinne M. Herlihy and Janet Quint, Emerging Evidence on Improving High School Student Achievement and Graduation Rates: The Effects of Four Popular Improvement Programs (Washington: National High School Center, American Institutes for Research, November, 2006). Many of the same challenges were identified by the CSRQ Center; see CSRQ Center, Works in Progress (see note 3).
  9. See for example, CASEL Update, "The Benefits of School-Based Social and Emotional Learning Programs: Highlights from a Forthcoming CASEL Report" (Chicago: Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning, December 2007).
  10. CSRQ Center, Works in Progress (see note 3), pp. 45–49.
  11. Jennifer O'Day, "NCLB and the Complexity of School Improvement," in No Child Left Behind and the Reduction of the Achievement Gap, edited by Sadovnik and others (New York and London: Routledge, 2008), pp. 27, 40, 46.
  12. American Institutes for Research, Research Retrospective: Teacher Quality Research in 2007 (Washington: American Institutes for Research, n.d.), pp. 2, 5. Tricia Coulter, "Implementing NCLB: State Plans to Implement the Challenge of Equitable Distribution of Effective Teachers," in America's Challenge: Effective Teachers for At-Risk Schools and Students, edited by Carol A. Dwyer (Washington: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality, Learning Point Associates, 2007), pp. 55–70. R. M. Ingersoll, Out-of-Field Teaching, Educational Inequality, and the Organization of Schools: An Exploratory Analysis (Seattle: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, 2002).
  13. See for example, C. Rouse, "Labor Market Consequences of an Inadequate Education," paper presented at the Symposium on the Social Costs of Inadequate Education, Teachers College at Columbia University, September 2005. Available at: http://devweb.tc.columbia.edu/manager/symposium/Files/77_Rouse_paper.pdf [July 28, 2008].
  14. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, "Annual Averages—Household Data: Employment Status of the Civilian Noninstitutional Population 25 Years and Over by Educational Attainment, Sex, Race, and Hispanic or Latino Ethnicity," Employment and Earnings 52 (2005): 204; U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, "Usual Weekly Earnings of Wage and Salary Workers: The Second Quarter 2008" (Washington: Bureau of Labor Statistics, July 2008); Thomas J. Kane and Cecelia E. Rouse, "Comment on W. Norton Grubb: ‘The Varied Economic Returns to Postsecondary Education: New Evidence from the Class of 1972,'" Journal of Human Resources 30, no. 1 (Winter 1995): 205–21.
  15. The term "comprehensive school reform" (CSR) is often used interchangeably with "whole school reform." For further background on comprehensive school reform, see: www.csrq.org/aboutcsr.asp [July 28 2008].
  16. CSRQ Center Report on Middle and High School CSR Models (see note 5), pp. 25–26.
  17. It is interesting to note that, despite their comprehensiveness, none of four CSR programs (ATLAS Communities, First Things First, High Schools That Work, Talent Development High Schools) reviewed by the CSRQ Center in its report on programmatic responses to key "hot topic" issues in high schools featured a formal violence-reduction component. CSRQ Center, Works in Progress (see note 3), p. 79.
  18. The CSRQ Center Report on Middle and High School CSR Models, cited above (see note 5), provides detailed reviews of each of the models mentioned in this chapter. In addition to rating their evidence of effectiveness in five key outcome domains of interest to policymakers, the report provides a thorough summary of the program's mission, goals, costs, organization and operation, and key considerations regarding its implementation. These reports are available online at www.csrq.org/MSHSreport.asp [July 28, 2008].
  19. CSRQ Center Report on Middle and High School CSR Models (see note 5), p. 51.
  20. Ibid., p. 68.
  21. Quint, Meeting Five Critical Challenges of High School Reform (see note 8), pp. 10, 30–32.
  22. CSRQ Center Report on Middle and High School CSR Models (see note 5), pp. 53–54.
  23. Ibid., pp. 52–54.
  24. Overall statements are made difficult because of the wide array of individual CSR programs that take different approaches to improvement, because the evidence of effectiveness for the overall CSR approach is often provided for grades K–12 without differentiating the high school outcomes, and because no meta-analysis has been undertaken of outcomes for all schools using high school CSR programs.
  25. G. D. Borman and others, Comprehensive School Reform and Student Achievement: A Meta-Analysis (Baltimore: Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed at Risk, Johns Hopkins University, 2002), p. 34. Another recent large-scale study of CSR, conducted at the elementary school and middle school levels, also concluded that, when well implemented, CSR models experience higher academic achievement gains than comparison schools. D. K. Aladjem and others, Models Matter: The Final Report of the National Longitudinal Evaluation of Comprehensive School Reform (Washington: American Institutes for Research, September 2006), p. 6.
  26. To arrive at its ratings, the center weighed the strength and quality of a program's evidence of effectiveness and the size of the overall impact as computed from the studies that met the center's standards. For more on the center's approach to program rating, see the CSRQ Center Report on Middle and High School CSR Models (see note 5), pp. 17–20.
  27. Ibid., pp. 20–21.
  28. M. M. Karp and others, State Dual Enrollment Policies: Addressing Access and Quality (Washington: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Vocational and Adult Education, 2004).
  29. Ibid.
  30. B. Kleiner and L. Lewis for National Center for Education Statistics, Dual Enrollment of High School Students at Postsecondary Institutions: 2002–03, NCES 2005–08 (Washington: U.S. Department of Education, 2005).
  31. C. Krueger, Dual Enrollment: Policy Issues Confronting State Policymakers (Denver: Education Commission of the States, 2006).
  32. M. Martinez and S. Klopott, The Link between High School Reform and College Access and Success for Low-Income and Minority Youth (Washington: American Youth Policy Forum and Pathways to College Network, 2005).
  33. A. Berger and others, Early College High School Initiative: 2003–05 Evaluation Report (Washington: American Institutes for Research and SRI International, 2006).
  34. A. Berger and others, 2003–07 Early College High School Initiative: Emerging Patterns and Relationships (Washington: American Institutes for Research and SRI International, 2008).
  35. N. Hoffman, Add and Subtract: Dual Enrollment as a State Strategy to Increase Postsecondary Success for Underrepresented Students (Boston: Jobs for the Future, 2005); National High School Center, Findings from the Early College High Schools Initiative: A Look at Best Practices and Lessons Learned Regarding a Dual Enrollment Program (Washington: American Institutes for Research, 2006).
  36. Krueger, Dual Enrollment (see note 31).
  37. U.S. Department of Education, Principal Indicators of Student Academic Histories in Postsecondary Education 1972–2000 (Washington: U.S. Department of Education, 2004).
  38. M. Dynarski and others, Impacts of Dropout Prevention Programs: Final Report, A Research Report from the School Dropout Prevention Demonstration Assistance Program Evaluation (Princeton, N.J.: Mathematica Policy Research, 1998).
  39. Ibid.
  40. A. Berger and others, Evaluation of the Early College High School Initiative: Select Topics on Implementation (Washington: American Institutes for Research and SRI International, 2007).
  41. Berger and others, Early College High School Initiative: 2003–05 (see note 33); Berger and others, 2003–07 Early College High School Initiative: Emerging Patterns and Relationships (see note 34).
  42. Berger and others, 2003–07 Early College High School Initiative: Emerging Patterns and Relationships (see note 34).
  43. Ibid.
  44. Martinez and Klopott, The Link between High School Reform and College Access and Success (see note 32).
  45. L. Bernstein and others, Implementation Study of Smaller Learning Communities: Final Report (Cambridge, Mass.: Abt Associates for U.S. Department of Education Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development, Policy and Program Studies Service, 2008).
  46. Ibid.
  47. K. Cotton, School Size, School Climate, and Student Performance (Portland, Ore.: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory, 1996); K. Cotton, New Small Learning Communities: Findings from Recent Literature (Portland, Ore.: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory, 2001); L. Page and others, National Evaluation of Smaller Learning Communities, Literature Review, Executive Summary (Cambridge, Mass.: Abt Associates, 2002); V. E. Lee and others, "Inside Large and Small High Schools: Curriculum and Social Relations," Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 22 (2000): 147–71.
  48. Bernstein and others, Implementation Study of Smaller Learning Communities (see note 45).
  49. V. E. Lee and J. B. Smith, "High School Size: Which Works Best and for Whom?" Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 19 (1997): 205–27.
  50. J. Kahne and others, Small High Schools on a Larger Scale: The First Three Years of the Chicago High School Redesign Initiative (Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research, 2006); D. Rhodes and others, Getting Results: Student Outcomes in New and Redesigned High Schools (Washington: American Institutes for Research and SRI International, 2005); B. Smerdon and J. Cohen, Baltimore City's High School Reform Initiative: Schools, Students, and Outcomes (Washington: Urban Institute, 2007); S. James-Burdumy, I. Perez-Johnson, and S. Vartivarian, High School Reform in Boston Public Schools: The Effect of Focus on High Schools on Student Academic Outcomes (Princeton, N.J.: Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., 2008); E. M. Foley, A. Klinge, and E. R. Reisner, Evaluation of New Century High Schools: Profile of an Initiative to Create and Sustain Small, Successful High Schools (Washington: Policy Studies Associates, Inc., 2007).
  51. Foley and others, Evaluation of New Century High Schools (see note 50).
  52. James-Burdumy and others, High School Reform in Boston Public Schools (see note 50).
  53. American Institutes for Research and SRI International, Evaluation of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation's High School Grants Initiative: 2001–05. Final Report (Washington: American Institutes for Research and SRI International, 2006).
  54. Smerdon and Cohen, Baltimore City's High School Reform Initiative (see note 50).
  55. American Institutes for Research and SRI International, Evaluation of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation's High School Grants Initiative: 2001–05 (see note 53).
  56. J. T. Fouts and others, Leading the Conversion Process: Lessons Learned and Recommendations for Converting to Small Learning Communities, prepared for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (Fouts and Associates, L.L.C., 2006).
  57. V. E. Lee, D. D. Ready, and D. J. Johnson, "The Difficulty of Identifying Rare Samples to Study: The Case of High Schools Divided into Schools-Within-Schools," Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 23, no. 4 (2001): 365–79; Bernstein and others, Implementation Study of Smaller Learning Communities (see note 45).
  58. Quint, Meeting Five Critical Challenges of High School Reform: Lessons from Research on Three Reform Models (see note 8).
  59. D. Stern and others, "Learning by Doing Career Academies," in Improving School-to-Work Transition, edited by D. Neumark (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2007), pp. 134–68.
  60. D. Stern and others, "Benefits and Costs of Dropout Prevention in a High School Program Combining Academic and Vocational Education: Third-Year Results from Replications of the California Partnership Academies," Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 11 (1989): 405–16.
  61. M. N. Elliott, L. M. Hanser, and C. L. Gilroy, Evidence of Positive Student Outcomes in JROTC Career Academies (Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND Corporation, 2000).
  62. N. L. Maxwell and V. Rubin, High School Career Academies: A Pathway to Educational Reform in Urban Schools? (Kalamazoo, Mich.: W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, 2000); N. L. Maxwell, "Step to College: Moving from the High School Career Academy through the Four-Year University," Evaluation Review 25, no. 6 (2001): 619–54.
  63. Kemple, Career Academies (see note 4).
  64. Ibid.
  65. See the What Works Clearinghouse report on Career Academies (http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/reports/drop out/career_academic/ [July 28, 2008]).
  66. Center for Education Reform, "Charter Schools by the Numbers: Research Fact Sheet" (Washington: Center for Education Reform, 2007) (www.edreform.com/charter_directory/charters-by-number.pdf [July 28, 2008]). Also note that another 860 charter schools combine middle school and high school grades.
  67. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Innovation and Improvement, Charter High Schools: Closing the Achievement Gap (Washington: U.S. Department of Education, 2006).
  68. Comprehensive School Reform Quality Center, CSRQ Center Report on Education Service Providers (Washington: American Institutes for Research, 2006).
  69. Ibid.
  70. U.S. Department of Education, Charter High Schools (see note 67).
  71. Berger and others, Early College High School Initiative (see note 33).
  72. B. Edwards and others, California's Charter Schools: 2008 Performance Update (Mountain View, Calif.: EdSource, 2008.
  73. U.S. Department of Education, Charter High Schools (see note 67).
  74. It should be noted that on June 30, 2008, Edison Schools became EdisonLearning. It is not clear at the time of publication whether EdisonLearning will continue to offer EMO services. The information regarding the effectiveness of the Edison model is included in this article to illustrate the potential that may be offered by the EMO approach to school improvement.
  75. B. P. Gill and others, Inspiration, Perspiration, and Time: Operations and Achievement in Edison Schools (Arlington, Va.: RAND Corporation, 2005).
  76. D. L. Fixsen and others, Implementation Research: A Synthesis of the Literature, FMHI Publication 231 (Tampa: University of South Florida, Louis de la Partner Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network, 2005).
  77. Ibid., p. 12.
  78. Aladjem and others, Models Matter (see note 25), p. 6.
  79. Ibid.
  80. A. Datnow and S. Stringfield, "Working Together for Reliable School Reform," Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk 5, no. 1 (2000): 183–204.