A Multifaceted Study of Change in Seven Inner-City Schools

innovation (often by means of teacher selfreport): "Studies of school change typically considered degree of use of a new program or practice in the classroom as the definition of the dependent variable. These studies did not attempt to link such use to improved student outcomes ..." (p. 315). This situation has begun to change. Good and Grouws (1979) demonstrate how concerted training in an empirically based model of teaching can have a significant impact on both teacher performance and student achievement in mathematics; Anderson, Evertson, and Brophy (1979) and Stallings (1980) found similar effects in reading. All these studies include a comprehensive assessment of implementation and empirical evidence of the relationship between model implementation and student learning. Examining attempts to improve the quality of urban schools over about the past 15 years, Fullan (1983) concludes that successful change requires a thorough under-

[1]  W. Becker.  The National Evaluation of Follow Through , 1978 .

[2]  Richard C. Anderson,et al.  Reading Education: Foundations for a Literate America , 1986 .

[3]  Jane A. Stallings.  Allocated Academic Learning Time Revisited, or Beyond Time on Task , 1980 .

[4]  D. J. Montgomery,et al.  The Role of the Elementary School Principal in Program Improvement , 1982 .

[5]  T. Guskey.  The Influence of Change in Instructional Effectiveness Upon the Affective Characteristics of Teachers , 1984 .

[6]  Carolyn M. Evertson,et al.  An Experimental Study of Effective Teaching in First-Grade Reading Groups , 1979, The Elementary School Journal.

[7]  Michael Fullan,et al.  Research on Curriculum and Instruction Implementation , 1977 .

[8]  Gene E. Hall,et al.  A Developmental Model for Determining Whether the Treatment is Actually Implemented , 1977 .

[9]  M. Mclaughlin,et al.  Federal Programs Supporting Educational Change , 1975 .

[10]  C. Evertson,et al.  Learning from Teaching: A Developmental Perspective , 1976 .

[11]  H. Walberg,et al.  Staff, School, and Workshop Influences on Knowledge Use in Educational Improvement Efforts. , 1982 .

[12]  Decker Walker,et al.  No Simple Answer: Critique of the Follow Through Evaluation , 1978 .

[13]  Quinn McNemar,et al.  Statistical Analysis in Psychology and Education. , 1967 .

[14]  T. Good,et al.  Changing teacher and student behavior: An empirical investigation. , 1974 .

[15]  B. Joyce.  The Structure of School Improvement. , 1983 .

[16]  Gene E. Hall,et al.  Teacher Concerns as a Basis for Facilitating and Personalizing Staff Development , 1978, Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education.

[17]  Linda A. Meyer,et al.  Direct Instruction: A Project Follow Through Success Story in an Inner-City School , 1983, The Elementary School Journal.

[18]  B. J. Winer.  Statistical Analysis in Psychology and Education. 3rd ed. , 1972 .

[19]  D. Berliner,et al.  Academic engaged time , 1978 .

[20]  Russell Gersten,et al.  The Principal as Instructional Leader: A Second Look. , 1982 .

[21]  M. Mclaughlin,et al.  Federal Programs Supporting Educational Change, Vol. 4: The Findings in Review. , 1975 .

[22]  Gaea Leinhardt,et al.  The Instructional Dimensions Study , 1980 .

[23]  N. Gross,et al.  The Dynamics of Planned Educational Change: Case Studies and Analyses. , 1981 .

[24]  M. Fullan,et al.  The Meaning of Educational Change , 1984 .

[25]  Mary M. Kennedy,et al.  Findings from the Follow Through Planned Variation Study , 1978 .