This article examines four models for secondary education (magnet schools, school reform models, small high schools, and Catholic high schools) and their impact on student achievement in the urban setting. Numerous references to educational studies on the topic provide abundant opportunity for readers to engage in further study.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adler, M. (1982). The Paideia proposal: An educational manifesto. New York: Macmillan.
2.
Alexander, K. L., & Pallas, A. M. (1983). Private schools and public policy: New evidence on cognitive achievement in public and private schools. Sociology of Education, 56, 170-181.
3.
Alves, M., & Willie, C. (1987). Controlled choice assignments: A new and more effective approach to school desegregation. Urban Review, 19, 67-88.
4.
American Institutes for Research. (1999). An educator's guide to schoolwide reform. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service.
5.
Ancess, J., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2003). Beating the odds: High schools as communities of commitment. New York: Teachers College Press.
6.
Anyon, J., & Wilson, W. J. (1997). Ghetto schooling: A political economy of urban educational reform. New York: Teachers College Press.
7.
Archbald, D. A. (1991). Magnet schools and issues of public school desegregation, quality and choice. Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes for Research.
8.
Bempechat, J. (1998). Against the odds: How “at-risk” students exceed expectations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Benson, P. L., Yeager, R. J., Wood, P. K., Guerra, M. J., & Manno, B. V. (1986). Catholic high schools: Their impact on low-income students. Washington, DC: National Catholic Educational Association.
11.
Berends, M., Bodilly, S., & Kirby, S. (2002). Facing the challenge of whole-school reform: New American schools after a decade. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
12.
Bodilly, S. J. (1998). Lessons from new American schools scale-up phase. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
13.
Bottoms, G. (1997). The 1996 high schools that work assessment: Good news, bad news and hope. Atlanta: Southern Regional Education Board.
14.
Brooks, R. G., Stein, J. S., Waldrip, D., & Hale, P. D. (1999). Definitive studies of magnet schools: Voices of public school choice. Washington, DC: Magnet Schools of America.
15.
Clinchy, E. (1985). Let magnet schools guide the way to education reform—and diversity. American School Board Journal, 172, 43.
16.
Clinchy, E. (2000). Creating new schools: How small schools are changing American education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Coleman, J., & Hoffer, T. (1987). Public and private schools: The impacts of communities.New York: Basic Books.
19.
Coleman, J., Hoffer, T., & Kilgore, S. (1982). High school achievement: Public, Catholic, and private schools compared. New York: Basic Books.
20.
Coleman, J., Kilgore, S., & Hoffer, T. (1981). Public and private schools. Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics.
21.
Coleman, J. S. (1988). 'Social capital” and schools: One reason for higher private school achievement. Education Digest, 53, 6-9.
22.
Conant, J. B. (1955). The American high school today. New York: McGraw-Hill.
23.
Cotton, K. (1996). Affective and social benefits of small-scale schooling. Charleston, WV: Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools.
24.
Cotton, K. (1997). School size, school climate, and student performance. Portland, OR: NW Regional Lab.
25.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). The right to learn: A blueprint for creating schools that work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
26.
Davis, W. F. (2002). School choice and vouchers. Washington, DC: National Catholic Educational Association.
27.
Devine, J. (1996). Maximum security: The culture of violence in inner city schools. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
28.
Estes, N., Levine, D. U., & Waldrip, D. R. (1990). Magnet schools: Recent developments and perspectives. Austin: Morgan Printing and Publishing.
29.
Evans, R. (2001). The human side of school change: Reform, resistance, and the real-life problems of innovation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
30.
Evans, W., & Schwab, R. (1995). Finishing high school and starting college: Do Catholic schools make a difference? Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110, 947-974.
31.
Farkas, S., & Johnson, J. (1998). Looking at the schools: Public agenda asks African-American and White parents about their aspirations and their fears. American Educator, 22, 5, 30-33, 38-39.
32.
Fashola, O. S., & Slavin, R. E. (1998). Schoolwide reform models: What works. Phi Delta Kappan, 79(5), 370-379.
33.
Figlio, D. N., & Stone, J. A. (1997). School choice and student performance: Are private schools really better (Discussion Paper No. 1141-97). Madison, WI: Institute for Research on Poverty.
34.
Fine, M., & Sommerville, J. (1998). Small schools, big imaginations: A creative look at urban public schools. Chicago: Cross-City Campaign for Urban School Reform.
35.
Finn, C. E., Manno, B. V., & Vanourek, G. (2000). Charter schools in action: Renewing public education. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
36.
Fullan, M. (2000). The return of large-scale reform. Journal of Educational Change, 1, 1-25.
37.
Gales, W. G., & Park, J. R. (2000). Brookings-Wharton papers on urban affairs. Washington, DC: Brooking.
38.
Gamoran, A. (1996). Student achievement in public magnet, public comprehensive, and private city high schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 18, 1-18.
39.
Glickman, C. D. (1998). Renewing America's schools: A guide for school-based action. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
40.
Goodlad, J. I. (1984). A place called school: Prospects for the future. New York: McGraw-Hill.
41.
Greeley, A. W. (1982). Catholic high schools and minority students. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
42.
Hill, P. T. (1996). The educational consequences of choice. Phi Delta Kappan, 77, 671-675.
43.
Hill, P. T., Foster, G. E., & Gendler, T. (1990a). High schools with character. Santa Monica CA: RAND.
44.
Hill, P. T., Foster, G. E., & Gendler, T. (1990b). Magnet schools: Recent developments and perspectives. Austin: Morgan Printing and Publishing.
45.
Howley, C. B., & Bickel, R. (2000). Results of four-state study: Smaller schools reduce harmful impact of poverty on student achievement. Retrieved June 8, 2003, from http://www.ruraledu.org/nat_sum.html
46.
Johnson, J., & Immerwahr, J. (1994). First things first: What Americans expect from the public schools. New York: Public Agenda Foundation.
47.
Joseph, K., & Bailey, K. (1999). The role of social capital in youth development, the case of “I have a dream” programs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21, 353-354.
48.
Keltner, B. R. (1998). Funding comprehensive school reform. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
49.
Klein, S., Medrich, E., & Perez-Ferreiro, V. (1996). Fitting the pieces: Education reform that works. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
50.
Lee, V. E., & Smith, J. B. (1997). High school size: Which works best, and for whom? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19, 205-227.
51.
Legters, N., Balfanz, R., Jordan, W., & McPartland, J. (2002). Comprehensive reform for urban high schools: A talent development approach. Cambridge: Teachers College Press.
52.
Levin, H. M. (1998). Educational vouchers: Effectiveness, choice, and costs. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 17, 373-392.
53.
Lowery, J., et al. (1983). Survey of magnet schools: Analyzing a model for quality integrated education. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Budget, and Evaluation.
54.
Marsh, D. D., & Codding, J. B. (1998). New American high school. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.
55.
McChesney, J., & Hertling, E. (2000). The path to comprehensive school reform. Educational Leadership, 57, 10-15.
56.
McDonnell, L. M. (1989). Restructuring American schools: The promise and pitfalls. New York: Teachers College, National Center on Education and Employment.
57.
Meier, D. (1995). The power of their ideas: Lessons for America from a small school in Harlem. Boston: Beacon.
58.
Mirel, J. (1999). The rise and fall of an urban school system: Detroit, 1907-81. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
59.
Mortimer, P., Rutter, M., Maugham, B., & Ouston, J. (1979). Fifteen thousand hours: Secondary schools and their effects on children. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Peterson, P. E., & Walberg, H. J. (2002). Countering the negative effect of poverty on learning. Chicago: The Heartland Institute.
69.
Pittman, R. B., & Haughwout, P. (1987). Influence of high school size on dropout rate. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9, 337-343.
70.
Powell, A., Farrar, E., & Cohen, D. (1985). The shopping mall high school: Winners and losers in the educational marketplace. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
71.
Raywid, M. A. (1996). Taking stock: The movement to create mini-schools, schools-within-schools, and separate small schools. New York: ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education.
72.
Riley, R. W. (1996). Promoting involvement in learning. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 27, 3-4.
73.
Ross, S., Troutman, A., Horgan, D., Maxwell, S., Laitinen, R., & Lowther, D. (1997). The success of schools in implementing eight structuring designs: A synthesis of first year evaluation outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 8, 1.
74.
Russo, C. J., & Mawdsley, R. D. (2003). The Supreme Court and vouchers: An overview for educators in Catholic schools. Catholic Education: A Journal of Inquiry and Practice, 6(3), 318-327.
75.
Sizer, T. (1984). Horace's compromise: The dilemma of the American high school. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
76.
Southern Regional Education Board. (2003). High schools that work. Retrieved June 3, 2003, from the Southern Regional Education Board Web site: http://www.sreb.org/programs/hstw/hstwindex.asp
77.
Steel, L., & Eaton, M. (1996). Reducing, eliminating, and preventing minority isolation in American schools: The impact of the magnet schools assistance program. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Planning and Evaluation Service.
78.
Steel, L., & Levine, R. (1994). Educational innovation in multi-racial context: The growth of magnets in American education. Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes for Research.
79.
Steinberg, A. (1992). Catholic schools: Do they offer lessons for public school reform? The Harvard Education Letter, 111, 3.
80.
Steinberg, L. D., Brown, B. B., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1996). Beyond the classroom: Why school reform has failed and what parents need to do. New York: Simon & Schuster.
81.
Stiefel, L., Berne, R., Iatarola, P., & Fruchter, N. (2000). High school size: Effects on budgets and performance in New York City. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22, 22-39.
82.
Tyack, D. B., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering toward utopia: A century of public school reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
U.S. Department of Education. (1998). The comprehensive school reform demonstration program. Washington, DC: Office of Elementary and Secondary Education.
85.
Vander Ark, T. (2002). The case for small high schools. Educational Leadership, 59, 55-59.
86.
Wasley, P., Fine, M., Gladden, M., Holland, N. E., King, S. P., Moasak, E., et al. (2000). Small schools: Great strides: A study of new small schools in Chicago. New York: Bank Street College of Education.
87.
Wasley, P., Hampel, R., & Clark, R. (1997). The puzzle of whole school change. Phi Delta Kappan, 78(9), 690-698.
88.
Willms, J. D. (1985). Catholic school effects on academic achievement: New evidence from the high school and beyond follow-up study. Sociology of Education, 58, 98-114.
89.
Zehr, M. A. (2003, May 21). Catholic school closures on increase. Education Week, pp. 1, 13.
