The literacy improvement efforts of New York City's Community School District #2 serve as the locus of a study into the relationship between educational policy and practice. Based on 100 observations of classroom literacy instruction, a review of documentation related to the district's Balanced Literacy Program, and interviews with teachers, staff developers, and district leaders the investigators found strong parallels between how the district children learn to read and district teachers learn to teach. These parallels are due in part to the ways in which District #2's professional development system is anchored in the Balanced Literacy Program. They also stem from District #2 leaders’ beliefs in authentic and social forms of learning, beliefs that researchers found to have resonance with sociocultural theories of how individuals develop complex knowledge and skills. The result is a coherent system in which district policy regarding student learning is consistent with that of teacher learning.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BredoE., & McDermottR. P. (1992, June–July). Teaching, relating, and learning [Review of books The construction zone and Rousing minds to life]. Educational Researcher, 31–35.
2.
BrownA. L., & CampioneJ. C. (1994). Guided discovery in a community of learners. In McGillyK. (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 229–270). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press/Bradford Books.
3.
BrownJ. S., CollinsA., & DuguidP. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.
4.
BrunerJ. A. (1983). Child's talk: Learning to use language.New York: Norton.
5.
BrunerJ. S. (1973). Organization of early skilled action. Child Development, 44, 1–11.
6.
BurtonR. R., BrownJ. S., & FischerG. (1984). Skiing as a model of instruction. In RogoffB., & LaveJ. (Eds.), Everyday cognition (pp. 139–150). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
7.
CambourneB. (1995). Toward an educationally relevant theory of literacy learning: Twenty years of inquiry. The Reading Teacher, 182–190.
8.
ClayM. (1987). Implementing educational Reading Recovery: Systematic adaptations to an educational innovation. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 22, 351–358.
9.
CohenD. K., & BallD. (1990). Policy and practice: An overview. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(3), 347–353.
10.
Community School District #2 (1997). Extended school year 1997: Staff developer's guide.New York: Author.
11.
D'AmicoL., HarwellM., SteinM. K., & van den HeuvelJ. (2001). Examining the implementation and effectiveness of a district-wide instructional improvement effort. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
12.
DruryD. W. (1999). Reinventing school-based management.Washington, DC: National School Boards Association.
13.
ElmoreR. F. (1996). Getting to scale with good educational practice. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 1–26.
14.
ElmoreR. F., & BurneyD. (1999). Investing in teacher learning: Staff development and instructional improvement. In Darling-HammongL., & SykesG. (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
15.
FountasI. C., & PinnellG. S. (1995). Guided reading: Good first teaching for all children.Portsmouth, NH: Heinmann
16.
GlaserR. (1984). Education and thinking: The role of knowledge. American Psychologist, 39, 93–104.
17.
GoldsmithL. T., & SchifterD. (1993). Characteristics of a model for the development of mathematics teaching.Newton, MA: Education Development Center.
18.
HarwellM., D'AmicoL., SteinM. K., & GattiG. (2000). Professional development and the achievement gap in Community School District #2 [OERI contract deliverable]. Pittsburgh, PA: High Performance Learning Communities Project, Learning Research and Development Center, University of Pittsburgh.
19.
HubermanM. (1993). The model of an independent artisan in teachers’ professional relations. In LittleJ., & McLaughlinM. (Eds.), Teachers’ Work.New York: Teachers College Press.
20.
JordanB. (1989). Cosmopolitical obstetrics: Some insights from the training of traditional midwives. Social Science and Medicine, 28(9), 925–944.
21.
KennedyM. (1998). Form and substance in inservice teacher education.Madison, WI: National Institute for Science Education.
LeithwoodK., & MenziesT. (1998). Forms and effects of school-based management: A review. Educational Policy, 12(3), 325–346.
24.
LittleJ. W. (1993). Teachers’ professional development in a climate of educational reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15(2), 129–151.
25.
MarshallH. (1972). Structural constraints on learning. In GeerB. (Ed.), Learning to work.Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
26.
New Zealand Ministry of Education. (1996). Reading for life: The learner as a reader.Wellington: Learning Media.
27.
PinnellG. S. (1989). Reading Recovery: Helping at-risk children learn to read. The Elementary School Journal, 90, 161–183.
28.
ResnickL. B. (1989). Introduction. In ResnickL. B. (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 1–24). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
29.
ResnickL. B., & FurmanS. (1998). Education policy and learning: The case for a new research alliance.Pittsburgh, PA: Learning Research and Development Center.
30.
ResnickL. B., & HarwellM. (1998). High performance learning communities: District #2 achievement [OERI contract deliverable]. Pittsburgh, PA: High Performance Learning Communities Project, Learning Research and Development Center, University of Pittsburgh.
31.
RogoffB. (1994). Developing understanding of the idea of communities of learners. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 1, 209–229.
32.
SlavinR. E., MaddenN. A., DolanL. J., & WasikB. A. (1996). Every child every school: Success for all.Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
33.
SteinM. K., & D'AmicoL. (1998). Content-driven instructional reform in Community School District #2 [OERI contract deliverable]. Pittsburgh, PA: High Performance Learning Communities Project, Learning Research and Development Center, University of Pittsburgh.
34.
SteinM. K., HarwellM., & D'AmicoL. (1999). Toward closing the gap in literacy achievement: District #2 achievement in year two [OERI contract deliverable].Pittsburgh, PA: High Performance Learning Communities Project, Learning Research and Development Center, University of Pittsburgh.
35.
SteinM. K., SilverE. A., & SmithM. S. (1998). Mathematics reform and teacher development: A community of practice perspective. In GreenoJ., & GoldmanS. (Eds.), Thinking practices in mathematics and science learning (pp. 17–52). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
36.
TharpR., & GallimoreR. (1988). Rousing minds to life: Teaching, learning, and schooling in social context.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
37.
ThompsonC. L., & ZeuliJ. S. (1999). The frame and the tapestry: Standards-based reform and professional development. In Darling-HammondL., & SykesG. (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
38.
U. S. Department of Education. (1999). Teacher quality: A report on the preparation and qualifications of public school teachers.National Center for Education Statistics.
39.
VygotskyL. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds. & Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
40.
WengerE. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
41.
WertschJ. V. (1985). Culture, communication, and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives.London: Cambridge University Press.
